Get Ready for National Talk Like a Pirate Day

Jews get ready, repeat after me, “arrrrrgh, would it kill you to call your mother?”

American Jewish gangster books, move over: apparently lots of pirates were.. Jewish. Tomorrow is National Talk like a Pirate Day, so get ready to celebrate your Jewish pirate heritage.
..Tales of Jewish piracy, which stretch back thousands of years, aren’t in the public’s consciousness, and Hollywood even has been known to remove a pirate’s Jewish background. As a result, we’re stuck with portrayals of pirates as wayward English seamen on a murderous rampage. …

Kritzler has studied pirates for 40 years, and said that the public is fascinated with them because they’re “rugged individuals in a world of conformity. They carved their own identity, independent of the rules and strictures of society.”

But determining the exact number of Jewish pirates is difficult, Kritzler said, because many of them traveled as Conversos, or converts to Christianity, and practiced their Judaism in secret."

crossposted to Jewschool

Think she'll do something about the agunot?

From JTA breaking news First female Israeli High Court chief sworn in

The Israeli Supreme Court swore in its first female president. Dorit Beinisch was sworn in Thursday at a Knesset ceremony attended by Justice Aharon Barak — the court’s outgoing president — Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Interim Justice Minster Meir Sheetrit and Dalia Itzik, the country’s acting president. Crossposted to Jewschool

As long as you’ve got your health….

My colleague Arieh Lebowitz, at the Jewish Labor Committee posted the article below as a comment, but I think it should get a post of its own.
Here’s another article from Ha’aretz on the topic for a fuller picture.

It’s nice to know that the privatization monster is taking over this territory too. I wonder what else we can undermine by privatizing? Money, after all, should be our top priority when we consider our children’s health, on a national level. But hey, kids are hearty - who needs school nurses?

*******

Israel Public health nurses’ struggle against transfer of school health services to manpower company - more a struggle against sweeping privatization of health services than a battle over employment conditions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Privatization today, illness tomorrow
By Avirama Golan / Ha’aretz / September 13, 2006

The public health nurses’ struggle against the transfer of school health services to a manpower company can of course be described - as Finance Ministry officials are doing - as a battle over employment conditions. Not that that’s so terrible: After all, there seems to be some logic in a person’s desire to preserve job security. But in the case of the nurses, who in recent years began working under a private association and are not civil servants in any case - that is not the main thing. At the heart of the attempt to minimize the blow to these services lies a much more important struggle - against the sweeping privatization of the health services.

The case of the schools exposes privatization’s failure in preventive medicine in particular, and in the health services in general. Preventive medicine is the mainstay of a developed society. It is not by chance that the OECD countries decided preventive medicine is a condition for growth, and defined it as a threshold requirement for joining the organization. A World Bank paper states, “In places in the world where preventive medicine services have been transferred to competitive bodies, there has been a decline in immunization coverage and an increase in the extent of illnesses requiring immunization.”

Nobody in the treasury can claim not to know these things. What is also known is the simple calculation that shows, in black and white, that when hearing or vision problems, eating disorders, depression - or even abuse - of children are not diagnosed in time, these children soon become a heavy burden on the education, health and welfare systems. Even if they drop out of - or are dropped by - all the systems and fall ill or disabled, or turn to crime, they will cost society and the government much more than a nurse’s salary or pension.

But for years the treasury has been waging a stubborn and systemic war of attrition against the health services, a war whose most blatant symptom is the blow to preventive medicine. Every few months a focus of privatization erupts into public awareness. There was the transfer of the well-baby clinics to the health services organizations, thus eliminating - for reasons of economic feasibility - preventive treatment for remote, weak populations: small peripheral communities, the Bedouin, foreign workers without residence permits, et al. There was the plan to privatize the hospitals for the mentally ill, and now there are the school health services.

In all these cases, the direct victims are those who cannot afford the increasingly expensive health services, and worse, anyone who is unable - due to economic or geographic reasons, or simply due to a lack of awareness - to arrange diagnostic tests for himself and his children. Israel is justifiably proud of its hospital system, which in spite of overcrowding and budgetary problems entitles everyone to emergency treatments and complex operations. But these treatments are the last (and most expensive) stage, and should be rendered superfluous by preventive medicine, including diagnoses, inoculations and counseling.

Economically speaking, this is a big mistake. A comparison between Israel, where the health care privatization process is still moving slowly, and the United States, which has fulfilled the dream - reveals the infant mortality rate there is higher than here, and life expectancy is lower, despite the fact that the U.S. government spends far more on health care per person than the Israeli government. In every other respect - social, humanitarian, civil-democratic - this is a matter of dangerous neglect.

The percentage of children per capita in Israel is the highest in the western world. (38 percent of the population is 18 and under). Since 1997 the number of students in Israel has grown by 33 percent, whereas the budget for school health services (which in 1997 was transferred from the Education Ministry to the Health Ministry, by dint of a government health law) has declined steadily. Public health nurses visit not only the state schools but also churches and mosques where children study. The treasury, which is pleased about erasing expenditure items, may not be interested in who replaces them. They should know: In every Arab community where the state avoids its civic duties, it is replaced by charities of the Islamic Movement, which distances its members from the state and leads them to political radicalism.

The Arab periphery is only the most extreme example of the folly. A society where only the children of the rich receive inoculations and diagnostic tests, whose public health nurses - once the clear symbol of the system’s responsible, professional and human touch - speedily leaf through the files of thousands of children at record pace, while being tyrannized and exploited by manpower companies (see: security and caregiving firms) - is a society conducting its expenditure accounts blindly and obtusely, because it has apparently given up on tomorrow.

crossposted to Jewschool

“Tikkun Olam” -the new “kosher?”

English is an amazing language. It will chew up and digest anything. Here is the apparently latest gastronomic adventure of my native language: Tikkun Olam.

See the story here. As one poster on Jewschool noted, it is a better way to pander to Jewish voters than the usual pandering.

Crossposted to Jewschool

Hot in DC right now

Actually, temperature-wise it’s pretty moderate for September. Probably because of the rain. But there are a lot of events going on right now inthe Jewish community. Here’s a couple.

An article today in Express (the free Washington Post owned daily - really it’s just something to read while riding the metro. Unfortunately it doesn’t appear actually post online what appears in its pages. Sorry.) mentions the D.C. Labor Film Festival which takes place this weekend (largely on shabbat - sigh). GO, commiserate with the evils of bosses, and remember, “Don’t oppress your fellow, and don’t steal; don’t leave the worker’s hire with you until morning” (Vayikra 19:13); and “Don’t oppress the hire of the poor and needy from your brother or the proselyte in our land and gates; give him his hire the same day, don’t let the sun set on it, for he is poor and his soul is set on it; so that he should not call against you to HaShem, and it will considered a sin in you.” (Devarim 24:14-15.)

DCJCC is sponsoring the Jewish literary festival: The Annual Hyman S. and Freda Bernstein Jewish Literary Festival is September 10 - 20
“The Hyman S. and Freda Bernstein Jewish Literary Festival brings books to life each autumn by featuring the writers and personalities behind the pen. It offers our nation’s capital a unique glimpse at the year’s best in American and international Jewish letters, recognizing both emerging and well-established writers. ”

The International Spy Museum has a new exhibit starting this Sunday: The Secret History of History Moe Berg: Baseball’s Man of Mystery about Moe Berg an apparently mediocre baseball player who nevertheless played with five major league baseball teams (Including the Washington Senators), spoke five languages, and a photography hobbiest…. which after ending his baseball career, he turned into a career as a spy for the OSS.

Crossposted to Jewschool

A political statement for mature audiences only

This is ladies underwear with , along one leghole, a fringe of "hair" sewn in as a statement against shving pubic hair. Of course the question is to whom one is making the statement... after all, you don't need to buy these if you aren't shaving the hair already, and to whom are you showing them, anyway?
Of course, you could make a more public statement -if you're feeling European- with under arm hair shirts.

How could I have missed THIS?

Reader Becca pointed out that in my post on the delightfully obvious toy made from tampons, the tampon gun, I clearly neglected to surf the rest of the site from which this delight was culled. I have to admit, it never occurred to me that there might be additional Judaica found on this site, but nevertheless, here it is: the tampon menorah. Not to be missed. Thank you, Becca!

P.S. Please - no one write in to tell me about the earrings. *shudder*

"Hanukkah - festival of lights, now the festival of feminine
hygiene. Pull up on the "wicks" to light these menorah candles."

It's not just the meat!

I have no idea how I end up putting up all these meat-related posts. While I like a good burger as much as the next carnivore - I’m rarely a carnivore, since our house is dairy-kosher, nd there are desperately few kosher meat restaurants where I live (and truthfully, even fewer that I would consider palatable, let alone worth the money and the trip to get to them. Ah to be back in the kosher meat restaurant paradise of Los Angeles). Oh well. This note at least is about a bit more than just meat. As it points out, kashrut in general has been raised up to new levels of fences. From discussions that I, and colleagues of mine, have had with formerly mainstream mashgichim who are now considered unacceptable (except when most people don’t see the names out front - such as a certain individual whose hechsher is generally considered not acceptable, but whose supervision of certain here unspecified products in the USA is more or less hegemonous - and thus accepted) it seems clear that the business of hashgacha in the USA is in serious trouble in all sorts of ways.

Glatt Kosher Meat Is Not All It Is Cut Out To Be

Marc Shapiro | Fri. August 18, 2006

Due in no small part to the recent controversy at the AgriProcessors slaughterhouse in Postville, Iowa, there has been a lot of talk of late about how glatt kosher meat is produced. Yet for all the sensational headlines about whether the standards of kashrut are being met, little attention has been paid to how those standards are actually determined.
Article tools

In nearly every Orthodox community today, glatt kosher has come to stand for unquestionably kosher, with the result being that food carrying the regular kosher label is shunned.

This is more than simply an issue of certification. It is a significant transformation in the religious lifestyle of the Orthodox, a group that, ironically, claims to embody religious continuity.

Regular kosher might be okay if you’re in, say, Montana, and it’s the only meat available. Even then, though, you might want to think twice before bringing home such food. If you’re thinking of having a barbecue for Orthodox friends and throwing some regular kosher hot dogs on the grill, don’t be surprised if your guests suddenly develop a distaste for meat and profess that they’ve recently become vegetarians. You might as well be serving Oscar Mayer franks, because the reaction will be little different.

For hundreds of years, halachic authorities disagreed as to what exactly could be considered kosher. The “Shulhan Arukh” insisted on no adhesions — glatt means smooth, and refers to the fact that the lungs of animals slaughtered according to glatt kashrut do not have any adhesions. Rabbi Moses Isserles disagreed, and ruled that an animal could be declared kosher even with certain adhesions.

In the Ashkenazic lands, regular kosher was the standard, with glatt being reserved for the exceptionally pious, who were also willing to pay more. This is also how matters were in America until about 30 years ago.

Since then, the Orthodox have adopted a new standard in kashrut, one that defines only glatt kosher as acceptable. Regular kosher has been relegated to Conservative Jews and others who don’t take kashrut as seriously as the Orthodox.

Recognition of the change in kashrut standards has, by all indications, been picked up by the Jewish community at large. On numerous occasions I have been informed by non-Orthodox relatives or colleagues that I can eat the food that is being served since, they told me, it is glatt kosher, with the emphasis on glatt. This community-wide acceptance of glatt in the United States is quite significant, as things are rather different in Israel and Europe, where regular kosher is still very popular among the Orthodox.

In previous years, it wasn’t simply the masses who ate regular kosher. The great rabbis did as well. Many of them, including Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, even provided hashgachot, or kosher supervision, for non-glatt kosher meat.

So how did we reach this point in the United States where a practice that was basic to Orthodox society simply disappeared and came to be no longer regarded as acceptable? Much of the blame — or praise, depending on your outlook — falls on the Orthodox Union, which is considered the gold standard of kashrut supervision in the United States.

As part of its effort to achieve universal acceptance, even in the most right-wing circles, about 30 years ago the O.U. stopped providing supervision to non-glatt meat. Once the O.U. no longer recognized the validity of non-glatt, it soon became verboten for the average Orthodox Jew. The great irony here is that the leading Modern Orthodox organization is itself responsible for creating a situation where virtually all Orthodox Jews in this country, even the most liberal among them, would not dream of buying anything but glatt kosher. It is also impossible for a restaurant or hotel to attract an Orthodox clientele without being exclusively glatt.

The O.U.’s move to glatt is not the only example of the organization adopting policies that are not in line with the Modern Orthodox tradition of its founders. Many Forward readers, I am sure, have wondered about the Popsicles and other products that have absolutely no milk in them yet are still stamped “OU-D.” Or, for that matter, the yearly Passover guide that tells people that their candles and laundry detergent do not need a special Passover hashgachah, but do need a regular one.

It was the O.U.’s move to glatt, however, that had a truly momentous impact and changed the religious landscape of American Orthodoxy. Other hashgachot soon followed the O.U.’s path, leaving supervision over regular kosher in the hands of hashgachot that in many people’s minds were regarded as less reliable. Even if these hashgachot were, in truth, completely dependable, the fact that they agreed to certify meat that the O.U. and others would not reinforced the idea in people’s minds that there were problems with regular kosher. It took just a few years following the O.U.’s decision before regular kosher was no longer regarded as acceptable in American Orthodoxy.

Yet this is not all there is to the story, and here things get even more interesting. The very meaning of glatt kosher in the United States is not what most people think, namely, meat that has no adhesions. While this is indeed the original meaning of glatt and the meaning most people identify it with, the word as used today means something more expansive, depending on which kashrut organization you ask.

For some, it simply means that they hold themselves to a very high halachic standard in all areas of meat production. For others, it means that they permit only a couple of small, easily removed adhesions, a type of glatt that was actually quite common among Hasidim in prewar Europe. One thing that is certain is that glatt in the United States does not mean that an animal’s lung is completely smooth. Sephardim, who are supposed to eat only real glatt, are under normal circumstances not permitted to eat the typical “American glatt,” and they therefore have their own special “Beit Yosef glatt.”

While the kashrut organizations have not exactly hidden this information, and will tell you the truth if you ask, they have not been exactly forthcoming about it either. There is, for example, no explanation on the O.U. Web site as to what it means when it stamps a product glatt. The closest you get is an article titled the “The Kosher Primer,” which explains that real glatt is free of all adhesions on its lungs. The primer does acknowledge that, “Recently, the term ‘glatt kosher’ is increasingly used more broadly as a generic phrase, implying that the product is kosher without question.” Yet there is no clarification that the O.U.’s glatt falls into the second category — which also explains how the organization believes it appropriate to certify “glatt chickens.”

A great deal has been written about how the Orthodox have in recent years adopted new religious standards. The turn to glatt, however, is in its own category, because here the Orthodox have indeed adopted a new standard, but it is not what most people think it is. If they knew the facts, they might not be so attached to the glatt-only culture of contemporary Orthodoxy — which is something worth chewing over the next time you munch on a Hebrew National regular kosher salami.

Marc Shapiro is a professor of Judaic Studies at the University of Scranton
crossposted to Jewschool

Moving blues

well, I suppose I have officially settled in (Don't go back to...) Rockville. (See also)It's not that it's all that bad as suburbs go; it's just that it's a suburb. I really liked being able to walk to the corner and hop on the metro - here I have to walk minimum half an hour to get there. I've never really understood why anyone would want to move to the burbs. What the hell was wrong with people in the 50's, anyway?
SO, to be specific: we didn't have aback yard living in DC. But we did have two public parks within walking distance (more, really, but there were two that we used alot). One was about he same distance that the metro is now for us, and the other was about five or so blocks away. The parks were almost always full of kids - obviously there were ebbs and flows at naptime hours, but by and large, there were always a few kids at either of them, and often there were lots of kids.
Here in Rockville, there are - oh, I don't know, 10 parks within walking distance of our house, and there are no kids in any of them. Once I went to a park and there were three or four kids from a cooperative preschool playing there (it was the church parking lot, but they didn't mind my son's joining in) and once my spouse took the babe to a park and there was one child there, who was leaving as he arrived. And once we went to a neighborhood park and there were three kidsplaying there, desultorily. All significantly older. I'm guessing this is more of that overscheduing, playgroup sickness. move to the burbs, and you have to join a playgroup, because people no longer just take their kids to go play. Apprently, in the burbs, even the nannies don't do this.
Okay, well, that sucks, but whatver, we can walk half an hour to metro, then ride another half hour, then wlak to the parks at the other end, where boychik's little friends are. Butthen there's the grocery store dilemma. It isn't really just grocery stores. It's just that there isn't really anything around. A fifteen minute walk (not too bad) will bring me to the library and a grocery store. But to actually do anything else, it's really pretty necessary to get into your car and drive.
And the library! OK, this is too weird. In DC, all you ever hear about are how little money DC has, and how all its public facilities stink. but the Cleveland park library - run by the DC government- has a prettyt okay selection of books. It's kids section is actually decent. And it has several very pleasant librarians, who know my son by name, and like to hang out with him - more or less.
The Twinbrook library, has.. not much. It's a very nice building. Much newer and nicer than Cleveland Park's, but uh, there seems to be a lack of soemthing. Something one usually finds in libraries, something. . . it's on the tip of my tongue, uh, uh, uh.. books!
The kids section is sparse, the adults section is...streamlined. There are computers, but not all that many. The audio section... I don't even know how to say this. They have a box of CDs. They do seem to have some more stuff if you want to learn languages, that's good. But - I'm sorry, libraries are supposed to have books.
I'm feeling very whiny about all this, but it's just too much to have alibrary close by, relatively speaking, and have it be so... disappointing.

I know we're spending less money to get twice as much space here, but can someone please remind me why I agreed to this?
I just keep chanting to myself: One year lease, one year lease, one year lease, one year lease.

it's actually a very nice house, but... it's in the burbs.

The New IDF

My chaver sent me to this website, I share with you the newest inductees to Israel's military service:

The New IDF



A recent Israeli Supreme Court decision ruled that the deferment presently
available to the Charedi community is no longer valid. In response to this
decision, in an unprecedented show of solidarity, three hundred and fifty
thousand members of the Charedi community gathered in Jerusalem.

In what is now being called a minor slip up, one of the leaders of the rally
inadvertently read the part of the court ruling that repeated the Oath used
to induct soldiers into the army. The entire gathering, assuming it was part
of a new Sephardic tefilla, answered Amen and were duly sworn in as members
of the IDF.

THE NATURE OF THE FORCE

In keeping with the harmonious nature of Israeli politics, the IDF agreed
that there will have to be a few accommodations made to incorporate this new
fighting force into the army. The following is a list of proposed changes.

Reveille:
Because some of the new soldiers are used to davening at a later minyan,
wake up time will need to be changed from 5:00 am until 9:00 am on Mondays
and Thursdays and 9:15 on Sundays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Fridays when
there is no laining. Rosh Chodesh and Yom Tov reveille will be left to the
discretion of the division commanders.

Uniforms:
Black velvet steel reinforced yarmulkas will be standard issue. (White
yarmulkas for Yerushalmis are available but without the tassle.) Chasidic
soldiers will be required to wear olive green bekashas for dress conditions
and camouflage bekashas under battle conditions. Kevlar tzizis are presently
under development and will be made available when the engineers have resolved
how many black stripes are required. Payos protectors are obtainable upon
request and all soldiers will be issued the new light weight Borcelino combat
helmet with flak protecting brim.

Rank:
All new inductees will have the rank of captain. Rebbes with less than
10,000 chasidim will be Majors. Rebbes with more than 20,000 chasidim will
be one star generals. Rebbes with 30,000 chasidim will be two star generals.
Rebbes with 40,000 or more chasicism will be three star generals and get
their own mikvah (a specially adapted humvee with a shvitz and a mikvah).
Only live rebbes will be granted any rank.

Weaponry:
Every soldier will be equipped with an M16 rifle with detachable compartments
for both Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam tefillin. The standard issue gun belt with
three hundred rounds of ammunition and two grenades can also double as a
gartel. No soldier will be allowed his own tank until he passes the test,
which consists of driving through Meah Shearim, stopping for a falafel,
parking near Kikar Shabbat, all without hitting a stroller or the #1 bus.
Nuclear weapons will be available on a first come first served basis.

Training:
Traning will begin every midmorning after the Daf Yomi shiur depending on how
hard the blatt is (members of the Chofetz Chaim division will still not be
required to learn more than two lines a day). Training will consist of the
proper use of military equipment and tactics and will be taught in a mixture
of Yiddish, Hebrew, and Aramaic (commonly referred to as Yeshivish). The
instructors will be highly qualified personnel from Hesder Yeshivos who will
attempt by Talmudic logic to teach the soldiers proper military procedures.
Because most of the inductees never had to take any tests, all exams will be
open book and the instructors will encourage the soldiers to discuss the
questions with their chavrusas and come up with a consensus opinion. After
minchah and an afternoon nap, soldiers will be required to perform twenty
minutes of strenuous exercise consisting of precision shukaling, bais medrash
pacing, and minyan hopping. No smoking will be allowed during exercise periods.

Food:
All provisions will be required to have at least six reliable hechsharim and
the star K. There will be separate kitchens for each different chasidish sect
and every chicken will be walked around the camp and then schechted
simultaneously by a minimim of three different schochtim. All the vegetables
will be checked for bugs by an electron microscope, the milk will be yoshon,
and the bread will be baked by a bas yisroel. Arbos and beer will be
available every Shabbos and the division with the poorest performance record
each week will be required to sponsor a cholent kiddush for the entire camp.
Because most of the provisions are acquired from Sheva Mile Makolet, no
chometz will be available from a week before Purim until after Pesach.

Leave Policy:
All non-married personnel will be entitled to the standard yeshiva leave
policy consisting of two days before the date to prepare, one day for the date,
and one day to recover and be debriefed by his parents. All other soldiers will
have regular leave every sixth Shabbos unless there is a tish that Friday night.
Solders will be entitled to switch their weekend passes upon proof of severe
hardship, or if their in-laws are visiting that Shabbos.

Inspections:
The barracks will be inspected every erev Shabbos and showers are required even
if it is not Rosh Chodesh. A very comprehensive inspection will take place on
the thirteenth of Nisan.

New recruits:
New recruits will be allowed to have their mothers assist in cleaning the
barracks and with the laundry, but soldiers will still be required to field
strip and maintain their own weapons.

Military police:
Once the troops have completed their training a special police force will be
established, preferable from the Gur division. It will be their job to protect
the Friday night cholent pot from marauding troops and to deal with rioting
left-wingers who are protesting the charedi takeover of the army and the closing
of theaters on Shabbos.

Tour of duty:
Soldiers will be expected to complete at least eight Mesechtas with Rashi and
Tosefos and to fire six rounds of ammunition without injuring themselves.
Officer training will require a working knowledge of Yoreh Daya, Choshen
Mishpat, and the F16 Split Wing attack fighter. After active duty soldiers
will have the option to report to the reserves for the two weeks prior to
Pesach for refresher courses. In a further concession to the charedi community,
Chief Justice Barak and the other justices have agreed to take up their Jewish
education where they left off and are now attending third grade at a Chinuch
Atzmoi school.

Moshiach will need an army. Come take your place among the few, the proud,
the all Charedi army!

Just go watch it

Okay, it's completely puerile. That didn't stop me from laughing out loud. Thankfully, I wasn't in a library at the time. Hilarious short movie

Sex matters

In this article from Neva Chonin in the San Francisco Chronicle the author says what many have said before, butstill doesn't seem to be getting the message to us. I think she says it quite nicely for herself, so I include the article below. The only comment: I keep reading in supposedly hip - even feminist- magazines all about sex positive movements - pro-prostitution, pro-stripping, etc. And every time, I can't help but think, "what is wrong with you people?"
It's not liberating or positive to take off your clothes for men. That isn't power - it's the lack of power. These are only positive choices in a society where other positive choices are lacking. If you want power, storm the Bastille: insist on equal pay for equal work, demand that womnen be hired for high level, high paying jobs, elect more women legislators, and make sure there are more women on high-court benches. And make sure that we have the power to control our own reproduction. Put abusers in jail. Make sure laws are enforced,and where lacking, pass them. That's power. Taking off your clothes isn't power, it's pathetic.

Oh, yeah, and Claire, what he did was assault. Press charges.
*****************************************************

He Hit Me (and It Felt Like a Dis)
- Neva Chonin
Sunday, August 20, 2006

A few weeks ago, the Los Angeles Times published a profile of "Girls Gone Wild" creator Joe Francis ("Baby, Give Me a Kiss") that dropped jaws from Poughkeepsie to Chino. Oh, the clatter. It started with a line that applied to a specific act of physical intimidation by Francis against Times writer Claire Hoffman, but I suspect it resonated for many women who long for an invisibility cloak or chador in an era of "show us your tits" sexploitation. Hoffman began her piece by saying, "Joe Francis, the founder of the 'Girls Gone Wild' empire, is humiliating me."

I felt her pain. Not the physical pain of being slammed against a car by a cable-TV honcho gone wild, but the mental ache of channel surfing into "Girls Gone Wild" and suddenly feeling embarrassed to be female. Heck, "Girls Gone Wild" makes me embarrassed to be human. The show is a carnival staffed with exploitation freaks, from the guys behind the cameras to the women struggling out of their tiny T's to the viewers who gobble it up with an order of stupid on the side.

It's not the program's sexuality that bothers me but the fact that, in a country rife with vestigial puritanism, it views sexuality through a leering lens. Continental Europeans see far more nudity on their televisions and in their daily lives than we do. They don't bat an eye because, you know, human bodies. We all have them. Ah, but America. Marked by repression on the one hand (magazines condemned for cover images of breast-feeding babies and nude expectant mothers) and masturbatory excess on the other ("Girls Gone Wild" and any men's magazine that isn't GQ or Esquire), we are forever looping between scolding and ogling. We are never at peace.

Contemplating the hoopla about showing breast feeding and pregnant mamas in magazines, I begin to suspect that a simple principle might be at play: A woman's body has no right being bared unless it is for the purpose of arousing a man. I'd bet lunch at Chez Panisse that many of the guys who like strip clubs and read Maxim would be appalled to see a woman nursing in a restaurant. I'd throw in dinner at the French Laundry if the doods who so enjoy watching girl-on-girl action in porn flicks didn't find real lesbians -- the ones whose sex lives aren't simply warm-up acts for straight men -- disgusting and, yeah, threatening.

In last week's column, I suggested that, in today's cult of the leer, "girls have actually grown tamer rather than wilder. Sure, they flash their breasts more readily, just like monkeys perform tricks for peanuts at the San Francisco Zoo. But neither act symbolizes freedom." To those who think it does, and that these budding sexbots are liberated while I'm oh-so-old-school, I can only offer this: America might be the land of liberty, but it's also the land where freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose. And when he's done molesting journalists, Joe Francis is laughing all the way to the bank, your dough in one hand and your freewheelin' girl's mammary in the other. Oh, America, my America. We truly enjoy an embarrassment of riches.

---

While Joe Francis was abusing Claire Hoffman in Los Angeles, Britain's Daily Mail was running an article by Nirpal Dhaliwal titled "How Feminism Destroyed Real Men." In it, he bemoans the "feminization of men" instigated by the women's movement. He laments that women are now "lumped with flabby he invertebrates, little more than doormats, whom they secretly despise." Deep down, he adds, women want "men who will look them in the eye and tell them to shut up when their hormonal bickering has become too much."

It gets better. Dhaliwal writes, "People might call me a sexist pig, but I am the opposite. I love women." Let us now hopscotch across the Atlantic to the L.A. Times, where Hoffman observes that the "Girls Gone Wild" creator destined to physically assault her "says he loves women, is crazy about them. But sometimes it doesn't sound as though he is."

A warning sound should be going off in the reader's head about now, and the reader should listen. Because at the close of his Daily Mail editorial, Dhaliwal starts preparing an assault of his own. "The female orgasm is the natural mechanism by which men assert dominion over women," he writes, before going on to relate, fairly graphically, how he asserted dominion over his wife after she discovered he was cheating. In sum, he "made strong, passionate love to her," giving "a manful bravura performance" that culminated with the demand, "Who's the boss?"

Dhaliwal's wife happens to be Daily Mail columnist Liz Jones. His essay is illustrated by a picture of the happy couple, looking happy. By the way? The same day her husband's essay ran, Jones offered her own little self-assessment in her regular column: "I am a middle-aged anorexic. I don't know which of those two epithets I found harder to say -- that I am middle-aged, or that I still suffer from an eating disorder. The two, for me, are inextricably linked. I have a fear of growing old, and a fear of growing fat."

Forgive me, America! Stupidity is indeed universal. OK, yes, I'll say it, baby, stop pulling my hair: You're the boss.

Tell Neva to shut up with her hormonal bickering at nchonin@sfchronicle.com.

Page PK - 16
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/08/20/PKGDOIM3471.DTL

Feeling lucky, punk?

Ever since I was...well pretty much since I was old enough to use them, I've thought that tampons look remarkably bullet-like, and considered the idea of making a tampon holder that looked like a little gun of some sort. Of course, who has time to actually do something like that. I mean, it's a cute idea - and it would be a great storage container - until you pull it out of your bag by accident in the wrong neighborhood and some trigger-happy loon shoots you, thinking that you've pulled out a real weapon.

Well, okay, someone decided that actually this would make not a good storage idea, but an actual, uh, toy, I guess. Well, I still think it's funny, although the bandolier is a little too obvious for me, and the uh, gun part is not really useful for concealing your ...weapons. It might, however, be a good warning about PMS.
Only question... Why is a guy modeling this?

The Power of Words - Mattot-Maasei

There’s a spectacularly interesting review in this week’s nation by Martha Nussbaum on Catherine Mackinnon’s new book Are Women Human? And Other International Dialogues.

I’m not going to say much about either the review or the book, because I think you should go read the review yourselves, but the reason I mention it is because the first thing that popped into my head -no, really- was this week’s parsha. The beginning of parshat Mattot jumps into a set of commandments about what happens when people take oaths, but most of its focus is set squarely upon what happens when women take oaths. And the answer is not exactly pretty.

The Torah tells us that if a woman who is underage makes an oath, if the father acts immediately, he has the power to revoke the oath. Similarly, when a woman gets married, as soon as he hears about any oath she has made for herself, if he says something on that day, the husband can revoke it. Only a woman who is single - either divorced, or a widow- has ultimate power over her own vows. Of course this is nothing quite new. There are all sorts of ways in which the Torah makes quite clear that a woman is not a full agent, unless she has “acquired herself” through death or divorce.
in Parshat kedoshim on Vayikra 19:3
אִישׁ אִמּוֹ וְאָבִיו תִּירָאוּ וְאֶת־שַׁבְּתֹתַי תִּשְׁמֹרוּ אֲנִי יְהוָֹה אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶֽם:
Every man his mother and father you shall fear and My sabbaths you shall observe.I am Adonai your God.
Rashi comments:
אין לי אלא איש, אשה מנין, כשהוא אומר תיראו הרי כאן שנים, ד א”כ למה נאמר איש, שהאיש סיפק בידו לעשות, אבל אשה רשות ה אחרים עליה:

I [know this] of a man, from where [do I know this of] a woman? When it says: “You shall fear,” this is two. If so, why is “man” mentioned? For it is in a man’s power to do, but a woman is under the control of others.
As Sifra explains, (Sifra Kedoshim, par. 1, 3) A woman must consult her husband about her activities outside the house.

This is only the very beginning of skimming through many texts where it is quite clear that women are not considered to be agents, nor have they the power to make themselves such. According to the commentators, even the power to obey commandments expressly given to them by God are mediated through the lesser social status of gender.
This is why the review of MacKinnon’s book reminded me of this week’s portion: here it is one of the places where women’s lesser status is made clear.

Vows - words- are a form of reality - God speaks and the world comes into being. In Judaism, unlike other religions, words are not transferrable. Any language isn’t as good as any other in all things: Hebrew is the holy language, and as soon as one translates, one loses something. Words aren’t symbols, they are, themselves, power.To say that one person can revoke another’s vows is to make literal one’s power over another - it is saying that one has the power to erase another’s speech, and in so doing, erase their deeds and their power, as well.

Is there an out? Yes - the out is that when women are free of others - widows or single adult women, others have no power over them, even biblically. In these days, we must recognize that speech reifies - it is not, in Judaism, simply sound waves that disappear like ripples in a pond. It is the movement of oceans - equaivalent both to the dripping of water on stones that wear them smooth, to the destructive force of tsunamis. When God speaks, the world comes into being. So, too when we speak. This is why the rabbis felt so strongly about vows.

The Talmud, in Nedarim 77b, states: “Rav Dimi, the brother of Rav Safra, learnt: He who vows, even though he fulfils it, is designated a sinner.” This isn’t the only position of the rabbis of course: others held that if one made a vow and fulfilled it, that was praiseworthy - but what all the rabbis shared was a deep respect for vows, and a horror of making vow that might not be fulfilled.

How can we understand the underlying meaning of these verses. Does the Torah really intend to tell women that the power of words is not for us? Are we really to be stripped of our humanity, only subject to others, always the silent servants in the room?

Of course, we shouldn’t forget that the Torah does leave an out: the woman who is no longer under the authority of her father or husband. This seems to imply that today, when we expect men and womento be equals in marriage, the ability to annul vows is not in effect: rather we should understand not just that women are always subject to men, but the reverse as well. What the Torah means is that in a house where there are two, they must take one another into account when speaking, when shaping the reality of their lives. It also means that we understand that silencing another person is in essence equivalent to murder: because if words are power, preventing speech stops not only their tongue, but their hands.

The Chofetz Chaim, commenting on a verse from this week’s portion, says, (31:8)
And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi…they also slew Balaam the son of Beor with the sword:
He came to Israel and changed his tools of trade for theirs, for the Jews are only saved by their mouths and by their prayers and entreaties, while he came and used their belief, by cursing them with his mouth. They too changed their tools of trade for his, for the other nations come with the sword as it states, “By your sword you shall live.” (Rashi) From this we see that the tool of the trade of the Jewish people is speech, and with it they can create worlds, both material and spiritual, as it states, (Isa. 51:16), “I have put My words in your mouth…to plant the heavenes and lay the foundations of the earth,” therefore a Jew must be very careful not to harm the tools if his trade, i.e. his tongue, by speaking that which is forbidden, but must utilize these tools for Torah and prayer.

What does it mean to be human? To be human, one must be heard, and one must have the power to carry out one’s intentions. Martha Nussbaum makes a very interesting comment in the review, in which she summarizes Mackinnon’s central theme as, ” the hypocrisy of the international system when it faces up to some crimes against humanity but fails to confront similar harms when they happen to women…There is a category of torture, and we think we know how to define it. We think we know what it does: It uses violence to control and intimidate. And yet when violence is used to control and intimidate women ‘in homes in Nebraska…rather than prison cells in Chile,’ we don’t call it torture, and we somehow think it is not the same thing. Torture in Chile is not explained away as the work of isolated sick individuals…”
Aside from the fact that only too often, we do rationalize torture as the work of isolated sick individuals (take for example the US government’s reaction to the exposure of methods of torture by American soldiers - in all sorts of places, but just for specificity’s sake, let’s focus on Abu Ghraib) let’s ask what’s really the point: that these women are treated in a way which undermines their status as human beings. The Torah of course isn’t advocating that women ought to be tortured: chas v’shalom! But it does lay the groundwork, when we read these commandments without subtlety, for women to be in situations where they cannot escape from being treated this way.

For generations - and even today, in some places- shalom bayit, peace in the home- was used as a bludgeon against abused women to prevent them from leaving, to place the blame on them for violence against them. Again, the Torah is not advocating this, but its words, used poorly, bolster those who would be naval bir’shut hatorah - villains within the boundary of Torah (or with the permission of Torah) and so abuse it. And so, ultimately, it is up to us to make sure that the Torah’s words are not made into a way to silence the powerless, but rather used as God intended, as a way to protect the powerless. But we have to be careful, because often, systems which have at their heart the desire to protect, reinforce systems in which people remain in need of protection, rather than fixing the actual problem, it perpetuates it.

We can read the verses on vows in many ways: focusing on the way that society was in those days, in which the Torah protected women, by giving them a way to not be held liable for their inability to fulfil their obligations; or we can focus upon the future, in which the Torah tells us that a woman who is a full agent has the power to carry out her vows. This shouldn’t make us wanton with our power: we should always take care to make sure that our actions don’t adversely affect those around us - we shoud take care with our power- but ultimately, we must be free to act, in order to use the tools of our trade.

Crossposted to Radical Torah

Pinchas - Tools of Power

This weeks thought - why does Pinchas contain both the story of the slaying of Kozbi and Zimri by Pinchas, and also the story of the daughters of Tzelophchad? Is there a relationship?

Our commentators understand that what Kozbi and Zimri, who are given names -as well as titles- during this week’s portion, were doing was actually fornicating (how often do I get to use that word) in front of the entire community, as well as Moshe, and it was for this reason that Pinchas slew them.

But let’s look a little closer at what was actually described. It is true that chapter 25 of Bamidbar begins by saying that the Israelites started mixing sexually with the Midianites, but that doesn’t actually seem to be what annoys God. In fact, according to the text, God gets mad when? After the Israelites slide into genuine idol-worship attaching themselves to the Baal -Peor (not when they have sex with the Midianites) and before Kozbi and Zimri show up on the scene. That’s when God really loses it and tells Moshe to get things under control. It’s at that point that an unnamed man and woman

בָּא וַיַּקְרֵב אֶל־אֶחָיו אֶת־הַמִּדְיָנִית לְעֵינֵי מֹשֶׁה וּלְעֵינֵי כָּל־עֲדַת בְּנֵֽי־יִשְֹרָאֵל וְהֵמָּה בֹכִים פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵֽד

“come and draw near to his brethren… and before the eyes of Moshe and all of Israel….and they were weeping at the entrance to the tent of meeting ”

This week, we get some additional information: Kozbi and Zimri aren’t just any old Israelite and Midianite! Verse 14 and 15 tell us: 14. And the name of the Israelite who was slain, who was slain with the Midianite woman, was Zimri, the son of Salu, a prince of a father’s house among the Simeonites. 15. And the name of the Midianite woman who was slain was Cozbi, the daughter of Zur; he was chief over the people of a father’s house in Midian. This tells us two things: first, they’re of equal rank - Kozbi is the daughter of a tribal leader, Zimri is himself a tribal leader. Second: They aren’t just Joe Israelite and Jane Midianite - they’re important people. And the Torah makes a point of telling us this.

This immediately reminded me of the story of Korach, which we read just two weeks ago, in which Korach, a Levite accused Moshe and Aaron of arrogance, because they had “taken” the “important” positions, when all of Israel is holy, but revealed in the course of the rebellion that he wasn’t really worried about all of Israel, but about getting more power for himself.

So let’s go back to the strangely ambiguous comment from last week’s parshah about the crying. When we read, it actually isn’t quite clear who is doing the weeping here, whether it is Israel, or whether it is Zimri and Kozbi.
Later on in our portion there’s another story involving women which is quite different, the story of Tzlophchad’s daughters, which we’ll get to in a few minutes. Regarding that story, there is an interesting comment in the talmud to the effect that women cry easily - and it makes all sorts of hay out of this pronouncement - to which the Avnei Ezer comments that tears are a form of bribery by word.

Even though this comment was regarding the section about the daughters of Tzelophchad, perhaps it more properly belongs here, regarding Zimri and Kozbi. What we have here is a situation in which Israel is suffering from a horrible plague in which people are dying left and right. Moses’ response is to say that God told him to kill everyone who worships Baal with the Moabites. And there’s one more piece: At the end of the chapter on Pinchas, the Torah comments that the reason we are to harrass the Midianites (not, mind you, the Moabites!) is because the Midianites harrassed you

בנכליהם אשר נכלו לכם

- tough to translate, but more or less, “in their conspiracy of villainy that they conspired (or were villians) about the matter of Peor and Kozbi” -one translation is possibly, “they did the same to you with beguilement about the matter of Kozbi.”

The implication is that there was a political move going on here. Maybe sex is a kindof gateway drug to idolatry at most - but what Kozbi was doing was using this plague as an opportunity to seduce people over to Baal worship, and Zimri was involved in this intrigue. The crying is a technique, bribery, as the Avnei Ezer puts it, not real tears, but a show. It seems to me that what angered Pinchas was not this couple -as the commentators suggest- having sex, but that a local power player went to someone of equal rank amongst the Midianites and brought her there to stir up the crowds against Moshe during this moment of great panic and fear. That makes this an episode much more like that of Korach than a rant about intermarriage. That’s why the Torah is so careful to go back and tell us the name and rank of this slain man and woman, when it didn’t before, in last week’s portion, when the incident actually happened.

No matter how we understand what Zimri and Kozbi were doing, they are using some very specific kinds of tools to get power. And these tools are illegitimate. To the contrary, Tzelophchad’s daughters were no one special, their father was no one special, they didn’t have any special priveleges. Yet, instead of playing at power games, they were completely forthright. And Godself answered through Moses, saying that they were right.
And the reason that all of this is wrapped up here in this parshah is because there is a third piece here that talks about leadership: God tells Moses to take Joshua and bring him in front of the people and put his hands on him and commanded him (Bamidbar 27: 19 & 23) which he does.
ultimately, what can we draw from this? Joshua and the daughters of Tzelopchad represent two diferent stations of people, and how they can appropriately gain authority: the rabbis valorize the daughters of Tzlopchad (Bava Batra 119b) as

חכמניות הן, דרשניות הן, צדקניות הן

wise women, they were exegetes, they were virtuous. Anyone can legitimately wield power by pursuing justice and learning, but once you have the power of authority by some other means, one has to be very careful. Korach and Zimri, both people who had heriditary standing in the community - positions that they had come by only because of an accident of birth, are not forgiven for abusing that power. The Torah juxtaposes Joshua to them to show that the highest authority is one remains commanded - that is, someone who does things not because of hisown benefit, but because he is obligated to keep in mind his care for the community. That’s what made Moshe such a great leader; the Torah is very careful to say that Moses was the humblest of men -it was not for his own benefit that he led Israel, but because he combined the leadership qualities of the daughters of Tzlophchad and Joshua - he had a keen sense of justice, which he felt obligated to pursue, even when it menat he had to flee his home; and he was commanded - he maintained authority only in order to do the work that he must.

What’s the difference between Tzelophchad’s daughters and Kozbi? Kozbi gets up and starts acting like a stereotypical female - we don’t even know what it is that she and Zimri want, except that it clearly has to do with the Midianites and some sort of conspiracy to woo the Israelites away to worship their Gods. She is using sex to win Israel over. It’s a neat trick - and we all know, sex works.

But

שקר החן והבל היפי

- grace is false and beauty vain (Mishlei 31:30). In the end , the Torah sees the sexual antics of the Moabite women and Kozbi’s tears as two of a variety of different tactics - here they’re all about sex, but Korach as well numbers among these strategists - the fault is misusing the rules, rather tan changing them to make them better.
To the contrary, Tzelophchad’s daughters, who not only were women like Kozbi, but weren’t even powerful women - their father was no one special, they didn’t have any special priveleges. Yet, despite being powerless, they had the gumption to go before Moses, Elazar the Kohen, and the leaders and the whole assembly of Israel and speak out. They didn’t cry, and they didn’t use a man to make their case for them. They simply presented a rational case and hoped that despite living in a society in which they had little power, their argument would be enough. One might answer that they ran a pretty big risk - what if Moshe hadn’t brought their complaint to God? The answer is that it wasn’t going before Moshe that got God’s response. Not since Abraham, did someone think to go to the top and challenge, not the individual preference, but the rule. Everyone else challenges not God, but Moshe! (Think of Korach, which opens with Korach and his followers staniding before Moshe and Aaron and accusing them of being arrogant). The daughters of Tzelophchad were not after a personailty contest. Moreover, their challenge was not a challenge only for themselves and their personal status, but one which was brought for women as a whole - any woman who had no brothers was affected by their plaint.

The point we bring here is not that one should follow channels (as they say, Chas v’shalom!), but rather that there are legitimate and non-legitimate ways to acquire power. Even the powerless have choices. No matter how powerless an individual is, they have the ability to find a way to change society and make it right, rather than simply exploiting the tools which are already there to benefit themselves.

crossposted to RadicalTorah.org

Another beef with kashrut in the news

IN 2004, Agriprocessors (Rubashkin’s and Aaron’s), one of the largest of the kosher slaughtering facilities in the US, got caught skeezing like crazy: first, the Justice Department and the Environmental Protection Agency joined a civil suit against them for violating the Clean Water Act. Then they were caught engaging in inhumane killing practices -incidentally bringing to the fore the question of whether tzaar baalei chayim - suffering of animals- actually makes meat unkosher, or whether it merely means that we shouldn’t do business with the companies that engage in it because they’re violating other halachot. Uh, yeah. Then last month, The Forward reported that AgriProcessors was mistreating its largely Latino employees.

Wait, that’s just the wind-up. Now Agriprocessor -and several other major kosher meat suppliers- have been served with federal subpoenas in connection with a criminal antitrust investigation according to The Jewish Week . Which other suppliers have also been served is not clear, but let’s be honest, is this shocking to those of us who keep kosher? While it is unclear whether Agriprocessors is the focus of the investigation or simply being consulted to help in the investigation of the market, don’t we hear all the time about kosher practices which are not quite cricket?

The current state of kashrut in this country is appalling. The stakes (steaks?) are about to be very high - for those who eat meat, the problems are racking up - of course there’s no reason to assume that Jewish business people are more moral than those of other religions - but they should be. As a traditional Jew myself, I find it enormously painful to have to revisit over and over again the open evidence of the startling lack of ethical behavior in the Jewish community. And although I can’t say this makes it worse, but it is at least a bit niggling (it would be just as bad to cheat anyone. It is not acceptable to rip off non-Jews!), this particular nastiness can’t even be attributed by the somewhat insular communities that occasionally say this sort of thing as, well, it’s only forbidden to cheat other Jews- well, this is other Jews who are being cheated.

I could console myself with my dairy kitchen, but I have to say that it’s a very small consolation for me. Where is the mussar (traditional ethics) movement for our day? I do not want to hear a single person saying that they won’t condemn these aveirot (sins) because if they tell people that the meat isn’t kosher, people who now keep kosher might start buying non-kosher meat. Let them eat seitan!

At least, where are our leaders who should be publicly condemning these practices instead of sweeping them under the rug in the hope that no one will notice? The Jewish community is now mired in the practices of don’t let the non-Jews know… guess what? - they know. It won’t go away if we ignore it. It is not an application of avoiding chillul hashem (desecration of God’s name) to pretend that everything is okay.

Crossposted to Jewschool

Korach - The Salt of the Earth

Although this week’s parsha, named for what appears to be its main character, begins with Moshe and Korach, it actually ends with Aaron and the establishment of the eternal priesthood. Why does this shift take place? Perhaps the explanation lies in a small detail that appears in Bamidbar 18:19. God tells Aaron that in place of an inheritance of land to support themselves, the Levites are to be given everything that is set aside for tithing forever, and it is a brit melach olam, an eternal covenant of salt. This brit melach is mentioned only three times in the Torah: in Vayikra 2:13, in which the meal offering is first explained as not being offered with honey or leavening, and then continues, “And every sacrifice of your meal offering shall you season with salt; nor shall you allow the brit melach of your God to be lacking from your meal offering; with all your offerings you shall offer salt.” The second mention is from this week’s parsha, “All the offerings of the holy things, which the people of Israel offer to the Lord, have I given you, and your sons and your daughters with you, by a statute forever; it is a brit melach forever before the Lord to you and to your seed with you,” and the third mention is from Divrei Hayamim 13:5, “Ought you not to know that the Lord God of Israel gave the kingdom over Israel to David forever, to him and to his children by a brit melach?”

What is the connection between these three things? The brit melach is eternal – it is a covenant that does not fade over time, it cannot be undone or superceded. Salt comes to symbolize eternality because of its preservative properties. In Vayikra, melach is opposed to chametz: chametz, leavening, is temporary: one’s fortunes are a wheel in the world that turns (T. Bavli Shabbat 151b). Salt, to the contrary, is a constant. It does not ferment; it is stable and preserves food against rot.

But the preserving properties of salt have other symbolism, as well. Salt, unlike leaven, and honey, doesn’t have any obvious effects. Honey sweetens, leaven puffs bread up with air. Our sages note, that salt, however, disappears into that which it is used on – you can’t see it. Moreover, in itself, it doesn’t taste like much, but it makes that to which it is added tasty. It is therefore a symbol of humility and service. In this way, salt is contrasted in particular to leaven, chametz, which symbolizes haughtiness – as we might say today, someone who is “puffed up with their own importance.”

But one of the most powerful statements about salt appears in the Talmud (Berachot 5a) which states, “The word ‘covenant’ is mentioned in connection with salt, and the word ‘covenant’ is mentioned in connection with sufferings: the word ‘covenant’ is mentioned in connection with salt, as it is written: Neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be lacking. And the word ‘covenant’ is mentioned in connection with sufferings, as it is written: These are the words of the covenant. Even as in the covenant mentioned in connection with salt, the salt lends a sweet taste to the meat, so also in the covenant mentioned in connection with sufferings, the sufferings wash away all the sins of a man.”

It is instructive to notice that in fact, Aaron seems to exemplify precisely what the Talmud is telling us. Aaron not long ago lost two of his sons, and yet not bitter, but of all the characters of the Torah, he is known primarily for his sweetness. The rabbis called him “peacemaker,” and the midrash reiterates over and over his gentleness and kindness. Avot d’ rabbi Natan (12:3) says, “When Aaron went on his way and a wicked person encountered him, Aaron greeted him. The next day, that man wanted to commit a sin, but thought, “Woe is to me! How will I raise my eyes afterwards and look at Aaron? I am ashamed before him, for he greeted me.” It continues, “When two people quarreled Aaron went and sat down with one of them and said to him, “My son, know that your friend has said, ‘I am ashamed before him because I have sinned against him.’ ” Aaron would sit with him until he had dispelled the ill feeling from his heart. Then Aaron would go and sit with the other one and say to him, “Know that your friend is saying, ‘Woe is to me! How shall I raise my eyes and look at my friend? I am ashamed before him because I have sinned against him.’ ” Aaron would sit with him until he had dispelled the ill feeling from his heart. When the two friends later met, they embraced and kissed each other. Because of this, when Aaron died, it says: “All of Israel cried over Aaron for 30 days.”

While many commentators focus on the difference between Moshe and Korach: Moshe’s humility compared to the haughtiness of Korach, only a few notice that in fact, Moshe may well also have had some small blame against him – a few note that he did tshuvah (notice that when Korach accuses him, he falls on his face, an act of contrition, or at least appeasement). But even granted Moshe’s lesser level of haughtiness, or complete lack thereof, no one mistakes him for a warm and fuzzy kind of guy. Aaron, however, is. The Sifra (Shemini 1) even claims that Aaron never said to a person, “You have sinned”
.
One of the other effects that our sages noted from salt is that it shrinks that which it is placed upon. Aaron merited an eternal covenant because through that which he suffered, he was able to shrink himself, and through by doing so, he brought huge numbers of people to God and away from sin. Despite Rabbi Ismar Schorsch’s recent excoriation of touchy-feeliness, it seems that the tradition itself recognizes that there is a way in which eternity is often better promoted through human relationships than through other means.

In a certain sense, the covenant itself is a reflection on the family to whom it is given. If the way that the House of Levi relates to the world is through kindness, which made them so loved that “thousands in Israel were called by the name Aaron,” (Avot d’rabbi natan 12:3), then who could better stand a covenant which in giving up any inheritance of land, requires that family to rely on the gifts of others for their livelihood? What other family could be charged with bearing the sins of the entire people Israel – who better than the family which through their gentleness, drew people to Torah.

While Korach is a symbol of everything that can go wrong in how one approaches service to God and one’s people, Moshe turns out also not to be the model for us. Moshe, no mater how you slice him, is different than the rest of us. In theory, sure, anyone could aspire to being a Moshe, but in reality, the one who is really successful in bringing people together are not the prophets who speak face to face with God, but those who speak face to face with us. That is, the salt of the earth.

Crossposted to RadicalTorah

Shavuot

1st Torah:
In the talmud in Pesachim (68b) the rabbis engage in an argument about what the obligations are or various holidays. It comes down to two basic commandments is one obligated to sepnd the entire day instudy of holy texts? Or is one obligated to eat and drink and be festive? After quoting some sources and arguiing amongst themselves about Pesach and Succot, they turn their attention to Shavuot:Rabbi Eliezer says: All agree that in the case Shavuot (which they refer to as Atzeret) we are rquired to celebate festively as well as study - one may not fulfil their obligation only through study.. The talmud continues, "What is the reason?" It is the day on which Torah was given.

This does not strike me as a particularly complete answer. The chatam sofer offers some explanation: claiming that the obligation of festive celebration stems from the universal nature of Matan Torah. God did not give the Torah only to the scholars; it is bequeathed toall of the Jewish people alike. All segments of the population, therefore, must rejoice on this festival. However, if you are a regular Joe or Jane, if you don't read Hebrew - yet- or have someone with whom you can study and really begin to understand the tradition that you are a part of, how can you still be a part of the Jewish people? How can you fulfill your obligation to God and Torah? God does not ever demand the impossible of us: God sometimes asks what is difficult, but always we have a way to fullfil it. So the Torah instructs us not only is study mandatory, but physical celebration as well: spend timewith your family, eat and drink, don't spend money, refrain from the stresses of the world. Eating and drinking provides a means by which everyone can truly rejoice.
The Chatam Sofer reminds us that everyone is a part of the people and each of us is beloved by God. The Torah portion that we read today reminds us "You have seen…that I bore you on eagles wings (Ex.19:4). As we prepared to stand before Sinai, God told us that if we obey God faithfully and kep God's covenenat, we shall be God's segulah mikol ha'amim - a treasure out of all the people. It is worth noting that the wording of the Torah stresses that we aren't treasured by God for no reason, but because we are willing to do those difficult tasks that we are called to. The verse continues: Since all the earth is Mine. All people are God's people, but we have a special role - we have the Torah, and to do what the next verse requires - to be a kingdom of preists and a holy nation- means that we have to be willing to do more.
You may be thinking, well, hwat's the big eal about eating and drinking on Shavuot? What's so chosen about that? Anyone can do that.
This is true. Anyone could do that - but of all the people in Washington DC (let's say) how many are actually doing it. Even of all the Jews in this city, who has set aside time to honor the idea that Torah matters, that God has a plan for us, an that holiness and blessing make a difference in our lives?
Very near the end of what we read today, God says, "In every place where I cause my name to be remembered, I will come to you and bless you."
And truly, what is Torah and the gift of Torah, if not a moment where we make every place where we are a place in which God makes God's name remembered - for a person who receives the Torah, takes Torah with her everywhere she goes, and so everywhere she goes is blessed.

Haftarah:
I have to admit, that Ezekiel is one of my favorite books - it' s full of incredibly bizarre details and reads like a hallucination.How many of us when we envision angels think of fat little pig-babies in renaissance paintings? Well, let Yechezkel set you straight. No pig-babies here: these angels have four faces and four wings per face and one straight leg - no knees; their faces are like a lion, an ox, a human, and an eagle. Or take the ofanim, which also seem to be a sort of angel: they look like a wheel within a wheel, they have four sides and they don't turn, but just travel toward the direction of one of their -er- faces. Their backs are full of eyes.
With details like this, it's hard to even envision what this all must look like. And perhaps that's the point. Fat litle cherubs are a lot easier to picture - and much easier to dumb down. The recent trend of talking to angels that took over not long ago seems to me to be partially because angels as presented in Christian popular culture aren't majestic or hard to understand - they're sweet, they're like humans, thy're even -shudder- cuddly. But Ezekiel's angels are not. They're at best difficult to understand, and even harder to picture. How can a wheel within a wheel have a back full of eyes? That's not cuddly. It's not something you feel you can talk to. It's not particularly comprehensible for humans.
Perhaps that's why the rabbis chose this as the haftarah for the first day of shavuot. When we receive Torah, it's full of mystery and confusion. It's not cuddly. The people stood back from the mountain and struggled with synesthesia - they saw sounds, and they were afraid of what was happening.
Torah is the posession of Israel, but it is not a tame book, a collection of human platitudes and fun ideas for civil society. It is the wisdom not of humans, but of God,and we find it difficult to reconcile ourselves to obeying anything that we can't understand - but of course, when we do understand, or think we do, that becomes our excuse for ignoring, also. Once something is put into its little box of "explicable," then we are free to ignore it and chase after our comfortable lives.
So on Shavuot, when we stand before God and receive the Torah, we do want to remember that we are the possessors of Torah, that it is made for us and not for angels, and that it is so written that we will understand and do. But at the same time, it is also a work of God: God beyond vision, beyond human senses, beyond comprehension. God is not a human being, not a body, not a thing that we can say, oh God is just like us, defined and full of moods and well, you just have to know how to talk to Him.
And yet, we still have to have a way to enter into relationship with God, to love God and to understand what it might mean for God to love us.
Perhaps that's why the haftarah ends with a verse from two chapters later. Instead of trying to explain what Ezekiel sees, it says instead Then a ruach -spirit or wind- lifted me and I heard behind me kol ra'ash Gadol - a great noisy voice or sound, saying "Blessed be the glory of God in Its place."
Rather than trying to rely on our primary sense - vision, a sense which in reality is not so completely reliable, but a sense which our brains use as a filtering tool to try to make sense of a lot of different kinds of stimuli - instead of vision, our verse closes the haftarah with a sound, a voice. Of course, this reminds us also of when Elijah encounters God, and standing in front of the cave in which he had hidden from the troops of the queen, God sends reassurance to Elijah of God's power and presence: a great wind which tore up mountains and smashed rocks, and God was not in the wind, and then there was an earthquake, and God was not in the earthquke, and after the earthquake was a fire, and God was not in the fire, but after the fire came a kol d'mamah dakah - usually translated "a still small voice," but d'mamah which can mean "still," can also mean "silent:" a voice of thin silence.
Yet another paradox, of sound, and yet somehow, unlike the vision of Ezekiel, which floods us with an incomprehensible rush of images, Elijah's vision somehow speaks to us: a place of calm after a terrifying violence. And both Ezekiel and Elijah are pieces of the experience of encountering God. Today we stand before God to receive the greatest gift ever given to humans: the Torah. And the Torah is not a human document, but one of overwhelming power. Both Ezekiel and Elijah describe the confusion and un-humanness of an encounter with God - just as Israel at Sinai, they describe a confusion of the senses, something so beyond human that our bodies cannot really grasp what's going on - and so we experience it as terror or hallucination. But. Yet.
The wind lifted me, and I heard behind me a kol ra'ash gadol. An overwhelming sound. Close your eyes and don't try to look. Just take a moment and try not to be limited to the experience of your vision. Imagine the terror and awe of actually encountering God. Perhaps this is the real reason that we are commanded on Shavuot to eat and drink and celebrate as humans. In the moment of encountering God, truly reaching out to God in intimacy, there must be terror and awe. How could there not? And so, we are commanded to also remember our human-ness. Torah is awesome, but it is also meant for us. Every year, we return again to the moment at Sinai where we encountered God directly, and could not stand it. We fled and begged Moses to stand between us. Every year, though, we return to try again, to stand at Sinai and try to understand the incomprehensible, to open ourselves to something we know is beyond us, so that we can carry God's message into the world. How heroic is that?
As a nation we choose not to make God into a copy of ourselves, but try to meet God where God is, even knowing that the potential for our own destruction lies in the overwhelming otherness of God. No wonder God loves us. Even in human relationships it is incredibly difficult to be with another human and to understand them as they are, rather than as we wish them to be. And yet year after year, we return to Sinai, and try to become the one who is not only Beloved, but lover.

Jewish Dr. Seuss Fans

Not really seasonal, but I have a two year old, so someday he'll probably run into this classic tale of one poor young child struggling with dealing with the wide, non-kosher world, the rejection of treif and how that child is cajoled, nay, browbeaten, into violating our obligation to follow God's plan. Here is a far, far happier ending from the internet, one which allows the child to remain faithful to God and God's people, and yet to be open to the world of interesting new foods - at least those which are kosher!
(postscript - if anyone knows the original author so I can post b'shem omro, that would be great. Thanks)


Will you never see?They are not KOSHER, So let me be!
I will not eat green eggs and ham.
I will not eat them, Sam-I-am.

But I'll eat green eggs with a biscuit.
Or I will try them with some brisket.
I'll eat green eggs in a box.
If you serve them with some lox.

And those green eggs are worth a try
Scrambled up in matzoh brie!
And on a boat upon the river,
I'll eat green eggs with chopped liver!

So if you're a Jewish Dr. Seuss fan,
But troubled by green eggs and ham,
Let your friends in on the scoop:
Green eggs taste best with chicken soup.

Day WIthout an Immigrant

Today is May 1st. Today the stores are empty, restaurants are closed, and much work is going undone, because today immigrants stand up to say, "we make this country happen."
Today I remind all of us who are Jewish, that today, we are immigrants too - and alwaטs have been. Don't forget your brothers and sisters. Remember that you too were strangers in a strange land, which took us in, and fed us and made us fabulously secure. Did we not just read: Let those who are hungry come and eat. Let those who are in need come and celebrate the Passover. This year we are slaves, next year we will be free..."

הוי כל צמא לכו למים ואשר אין לו כסף לכו שברו ואכלו

ישעיה נה :א

must watch you-tube

OK, not as funny as the Chinese boys, but a very interesting Israeli ad for... chocolate snacki of some sort. not the sort of thing I recommend eating, but definitely an ad worth watching.

Boingboing (one of my favorite sites!) paired it with this genderbending campari ad
A very interesting justaposition.

Pesach, 7th day

שמות פרק טו פסוק כב-כז

ויסע משה את ישראל מים סוף ויצאו אל מדבר שור וילכו שלשת ימים במדבר ולא מצאו מים: ויבאו מרתה ולא יכלו לשתת מים ממרה כי מרים הם על כן קרא שמה מרה: וילנו העם על משה לאמר מה נשתה: ויצעק אל יי ויורהו יי עץ וישלך אל המים וימתקו המים שם שם לו חק ומשפט ושם נסהו:ויאמר אם שמוע תשמע לקול ידוד אלהיך והישר בעיניו תעשה והאזנת למצותיו ושמרת כל חקיו כל המחלה אשר מתי במצרים לא אשים עליך כי אני יי רפאך: ויבאו אילמה ושם שתים עשרה עינת מים ושבעים תמרים ויחנו שם על המים:

Moses caused Israel to journy from the Sea of Reeds and they went out to the wilderness of Shur; they went for a three-day period in the Wilderness, but they did not find water. They came to Marah, but they could not drink the waters of Marah because they were bitter; therefore they named it Marah. The people complained against Moses, saying, "What shall we drink?
He cried out to God, and God showed him a tree; he threw it into the water and the water became sweet. There He established for [the nation] a decree and an ordinance, and there He tested it. He said, "If you hearken diligently to the voice of Hashem your God, and do what is just in His eyes, give ear to His commandments and observe all His decrees, then any of the diseases that I placed upon Egypt, I will not bring upon you, for I am HaShem, your Healer."
They arrived at Elim, where there were twelve springs of water and seventy date palms; they encamped there by the water. (Ex. 15:22-27)

In the morning, one of the first blessings that we say during Bircot HaShachar is the blessing on studying Torah

ברכות התורה:
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יְיָ אֱלֹהֵֽינוּ מֶֽלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם, אֲשֶׁר קִדְשָֽׁנוּ בְּמִצְוֹתָיו, וְצִוָּֽנוּ לַעֲסוֹק בְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה:

וְהַעֲרֶב־נָא יְיָ אֱלֹהֵֽינוּ אֶת־דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָתֶךָ בְּפִֽינוּ, וּבְפִי עַמְּךָ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְנִהְיֶה אֲנַֽחְנוּ וְצֶאֱצָאֵֽינוּ, וְצֶאֱצָאֵי עַמְּךָ בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל, כֻּלָּֽנוּ יוֹדְעֵי שְׁמֶֽךָ, וְלוֹמְדֵי תוֹרָתֶֽךָ לִשְׁמָהּ: בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יְיָ, הַמְלַמֵּד תּוֹרָה לְעַמּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל:

בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יְיָ אֱלֹהֵֽינוּ מֶֽלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם, אֲשֶׁר בָּֽחַר בָּֽנוּ מִכָּל הָעַמִּים, וְנָֽתַן לָֽנוּ אֶת תּוֹרָתוֹ: בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יְיָ, נוֹתֵן הַתּוֹרָה:

After we praise God for commanding us to busy ourselves with words/matters of Torah, we continue in the middle paragraph, "Adonai, our God, may the words of Your Torah be sweet in our mouths... [ and in the mouth of your people, the house of Israel and let it be that we and our descendants and the descendants of Your people, the House of Israel, all of us will know Your name and study Your Torah for its own sake. Blessed are you God, the Teacher of Torah to His people Israel."]

In addition to reminding ourselves every morning that we should see the words of Torah as something that sweeten our lives, there is a Jewish tradition that when a child reaches the age of three, we begin their education by giving them a page of the Hebrew alphabet with a little honey on it, or cookies shaped like the aleph-bet, in order that they should associate learning Torah with sweetness.
But the Israelites in our Torah portion have not yet made this connection. The Israelites, as usual, are as full of complaints as a pumpkin has seeds. Immediately following the miracle of the sea splitting for them, just after they sing and dance on the shore, the first thing they do is start complaining .The Torah tells us,

ויבאו מרתה ולא יכלו לשתת מים ממרה כי מרים הם

They came to Marah but they could not drink the waters of Marah because marim hem. The words literally mean, "They were bitter" mayim, water, in Hebrew is plural. But the referent of marim hem is unclear, and so the midrash explains that it was "they," the people, not "they," the waters, which were bitter. Itturei Torah adds: "Bitterness was not the actual condition of the water; rather, the Israelites felt bitter and, therefore, whatever they tasted was bitter to them." It's worth noting that the Torah hints at this broadly,.

In verse 22, it says וילכו שלשת ימים במדבר ולא מצאו מים they went three days in the wilderness and they did not find water, not that there was no water. Why didn't they find any water? Perhaps because they were unable to see, because of their state of mind. After all, in verse 27, just one verse past our portion, the Torah tells us that the arrived at a place where there were twelve springs of water, and seventy trees - quite a lush place!
So why were they unable to find water to drink until then? What changed for them?

The Torah tells us, [Moses] cried out to God, and God showed him a tree; he threw it into the water and the water became sweet. Nachmanides notes, "I have not found the expression of moreh [from the root of Torah and yoreh] except in the sense of instruction."
The midrash Tanchuma, says," See what is written there. It does not say VaYareihu (God showed him), but VaYoreihu -God taught him. Rabbi Shimon Ben Yohai said, "[God] taught him from the Torah, concerning that which it is written (Prov 3:18) 'It is a tree of life.' The Holy One taught [Moses] [the living tree of Torah]..." According to the midrash this is proven, because the next verse continues, There He established for [the nation] a decree and an ordinance, and there He tested it. In other words, the tree that Moses was shown was the Etz Chaim - the tree of life, Torah. God Taught Moses the Torah, and this made the waters sweet.

A number of commentators riff off this, that Torah can make our lives sweeter, or that if only we would commit ourselves to Torah study, we would be able to see that many of the things of life that seem bitter are actually sweet. But I take a different message from these words.

It wasn't just that God taught Moses some Torah and all of a sudden everyone was able to drink the water! In fact, what the Torah actually says was, [Moses] cried out to God, and God showed him a tree; he threw it into the water and the water became sweet.
So we see that God teaching Moses was not enough, in fact, Moses had to actually do something with his learning in order for change to happen. And what did he do? He threw the tree into the water. If that tree is Torah, then the water, which is bitter, stands for the bitter circumstances of peoples' lives. Water is something which can be both good and bad: think of the sea which we have just crossed through, for the Israelites, it was moments before a terror - the cliff up to which they were backed, with the Egyptians in pursuit. In a moment, it changed and became their salvation as God split the sea and they came through, with God closing the sea after them, to prevent the Egyptians from pursuing. Water is one of the basic needs of life, we cannot live without it, but in the desert where sometimes we find pools of water which are chemically undrinkable, people can be poisoned by it as well. It can be the rains which grow the crops, or the hurricanes which kill and disposses people of their homes, belongings, and in some cases their families, and even their political enfranchisement.
And so the water that Israel was immersed in at that time was bitter, it was undrinkable, they could not stand the circumstances of their own lives. And so God gave to Moses a tree, Torah. But Torah was not enough. Moses had to take that Torah and throw it into the water. He had to not just know the Torah, but do the Torah; to take the Torah he had learned and live it.
I know that many Jews feel that living out the words of commandment is a pain in the neck. How many Jews actually keep kosher, shabbat, holidays - just to start with? yet we are commanded to do these things as well as many others. The decrees and ordinances that God taught Moses at Marah though, are part of a holistic system that must be fully lived for the world to achieve justice.The Torah is a system of law which commands us to a network of obligations that makes us part of the force for change in the world.
The next verse tells us that God said, "If you hearken diligently to the voice of Hashem your God, and do what is just in His eyes, give ear to His commandments and observe all His decrees, ... I am HaShem, your Healer."
The verse that we are reading parallels the verses at the beginning of the book of Shemot, the beginning of the story of Pesach: Egypt embittered -y'mar'ru- the lives of the Israelites, and because of this, God heard their crying out and brought them out of slavery to serve, not a human tyrant, but the Creator of the universe. It's not easy to live Torah. To live Torah often means that we have to put ourselves aside to honor something that is bigger than us; Torah can be inconvenient. It can even feel - dare I say it?- bitter. But Torah is the lever to upend tyrrany; Torah is the tree that turns the bitter waters into sweet, but it means that we have work to do. Learning Torah is the beginning - the very beginning. To live Torah, we have to take the Torah and use it to make the bitter, sweet.
God is our healer, but not without us doing the work that we were given to do. The word Marah, also has echoes with in it of Moriah - another name for the mountain from which Torah was given to us. If we wish to make the bitter sweet, then it's not enough to think we already know what to do, we have to study Torah. But it's also not enough to study Torah without going out and doing. It's not enough to have Torah. We have plenty of examples of people who supposedly "have Torah" but then go out and do things which are a chillul hashem - an embarrassment to God's name. There are plenty of examples of people who supposedly have Torah, but believe - and act- as though learning words is enough. They are happy to spend their days in the beit midrash, the place of learning, simply examining the words written on the page. But Torah is not written on the page. In (Shmot 25:8) it says –

ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם

Let them make me a sanctuary and I will dwell among them.
The Lubavitcher rebbe says , one can read this verse as " and I will dwell inside them." – And how can God dwell inside us?
There is no sweetness unless Torah -that is, we ourselves- are immersed into the bitter, used to make lives better; we ourselves must be willing to bring Torah to the oppression that makes people cry out. Like God, when someone cries out under the weight of

וימררו את חייהם בעבדה קשה (שמות א:יד

"Their lives were made bitter with hard work," we too must be willing to hear. Unless we take our Torah into the Marah, there is no Moriah.There He established for [the nation] a decree and an ordinance, and there He tested it

We were given the Torah, and it is a test. We are tested with a world full of oppression. and we need not go very far to find it. If you yourself are bitter, become Torah: go out and fix the world and make it sweet. Thus the 12th Century sage, Rabbenu Ephraim said, "Any ill person who would drink from those sweetened waters would be healed. That is the reason why in the next verse the Torah says, “ .. .I am Hashem your Healer”. R’ Chaim David Azulai, known as the Chida, adds, that after “ .. .I am Hashem your Healer", comes the verse: “Then they came to Elim, and there were twelve springs of water. . .” . He maintains this is a proof for Rabbenu Ephraim's statement. On Passover, we are required to remember as if we ourselves came forth out of Egypt. if we took this seriously, how much more work might we be willing to commit ourselves to than we do now? Would be be working to make sure the African Americans of New Orleans had a say in the rebuilding of their city, instead of letting those who hope that they will be distributed around the country for other cities to "deal with" while the culture they built is mined for its tourist appeal? Would we be satisfied for people all over the city to go hungry as we ate our fabulous seder meals in comfort? Would we be shouting to make sure that immigrants to the US were treated with respect and given all the advantages that we ourselves had when our parents and grandparents came here, from the enforcement of labor laws, to the building of unions? Would we be content to live in a city where the middle class who supports the economy and fills the jobs of teacher, police, fire fighter must commute in from homes far away because they cannot afford to live here? What would we be doing, if we threw ourselves into the water? What water will you make sweet tomorrow, and the day after. And the day after that? If you can become Torah, you will come to a place of lushness where water springs up from the ground: the waters of Torah, sweet and life-giving, will come forth from the ground along with the seventy trees - the seventy nations of the world, which will become fruitful as the world is filled with Torah, and they themselves are fed by its sweetness, in turn becoming sweet, and building a future for all people. I am God, your healer. This is the final line of our portion today, and I bless us all that we can recognize the disease of the Egyptians - callousness, disregard, racism, xenophobia. Let it be that we will heed the Lord diligently doing what is upright in God's sight, keeping all God's laws, so that God will not bring upon us any of these diseases of the Egyptians; let it be that God is our healer, as we become Torah and ourselves sweeten the world.