Look now before they change it!
"Man Shot by Cheney to Make Statement"
Friday, February 17, 2006
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Burn My Siddur Award
The past week has seen many interesting questions relating to restricting expression (one's own and others').
This post isn't about censorship or freedom of speech. Censorship is generally done by a government or other de jure authority. In the United States, freedom of speech is guaranteed by the First Amendment (subject to certain limitations). However, "it's a free country" isn't the end of the story. Just because I have the right to say something doesn't necessarily mean that I should say it, and also doesn't mean that you have an obligation to publish it, or to listen. Therefore, there are questions that go beyond legal issues and public policy issues.
For example, one angle of the Danish cartoon controversy has focused on whether newspapers elsewhere in the world should reprint the cartoons. There is no question that, in the United States and many other countries, newspapers have the right to do so. But that's only the beginning of the conversation, not the end of it. But that's all I'm going to say about it for now.
Spinning the globe from Denmark, we arrive in China, and the google.cn controversy. Everyone (in the First World) agrees that the Chinese government's censorship of the Internet is a bad thing. The question is how Google should respond, given that the Chinese government is unlikely to change its mind soon. Should Google voluntarily comply with the Chinese censorship? Or should Google pull out of China entirely? Again, not an easy question.
Two things have come to light today that provide new perspectives on some of these questions.
One.
Kos brings us this message from a former eCampaign Director for the GOP:
I acknowledge that a blog belongs to a blogger. No one is inherently entitled to comment on another blog. But I exercise no substantive editorial restraint on the comments at Mah Rabu. The only comments I delete are obvious errors (e.g. someone accidentally posts the same comment twice) and spam. I am called "profoundly hypocritical", I leave the comment there, even if I choose not to dignify it with a response. Of course I can see changing this policy if I get overwhelmed with hostile comments to the point where they drown out everything else, because if you want a forum for your views, you can get your own blog. I'm nowhere near that threshold now, so all is well. But some bloggers set their threshold much lower, to the point where any fact that might encourage readers to look outside their bubble is unwelcome.
And thus we come to the first Burn My Siddur Award. The name is a reference to Steve Silver's periodic Burn Your Siddur Award (particularly because Kol Zimrah is so far the only recipient of the Don't Burn Your Siddur Award), but this new award is given for keeping alive the spirit of those who burned Mordecai Kaplan's siddur in 1945.
As far as I know, no one ever burned the Union Prayer Book. As far as the Union of Orthodox Rabbis was concerned, the Classical Reformers were just a bunch of far-out hippies with their organ music and their bare heads and their "Grant us peace, thy most precious gift". Groovy, man. But nothing that posed a serious threat to Orthodoxy, because its superficial elements were so different from Orthodoxy that they literally weren't speaking the same language. Now Kaplan, on the other hand. His proto-Reconstructionist siddur looked like an Orthodox siddur, and you had to actually read it to find the sedition. (This superficial similarity led to the historical accident by which the historic synagogue of Curacao affiliated with the Reconstructionist movement.) Thus Kaplan's siddur was perceived as much more dangerous, and had to be burned.
Today I read a post on Drew's blog where he responded to a post on Beyond Teshuva and expressed agreement, saying that he was also looking for a service that combined the full Shabbat liturgy with spirited music from NFTY and elsewhere. I posted a comment saying that Kol Zimrah was exactly what he was looking for, and you can read the rest.
I then went to the original post on Beyond Teshuva and submitted a similar comment, but without any of the politics in my comment to Drew. It said basically "Kol Zimrah was founded by NFTY alumni who wanted to pray the full kabbalat shabbat liturgy with ruach-filled music from NFTY and elsewhere. If you're ever in NYC, you're invited to join us!".
Then I got this email from the moderators:
Ok, let's analyze this. I won't contest the halachic issue -- I accept that, in the way that the folks at Beyond Teshuva understand halacha, playing (and probably listening to) musical instruments on Shabbat violates that understanding of halacha. But apparently it is also a violation of halacha to read about the existence of Jews playing musical instruments on Shabbat. I mean, I didn't go visit them on Shabbat and start playing musical instruments; all I did was link to a website about Shabbat services with musical instruments.
Does Beyond Teshuva really have a policy that no one can write about actions that violate halacha (according to the moderators)? Of course not -- here's a post that longingly discusses cheeseburgers and ham sandwiches. So what's the difference between cheeseburgers and Kol Zimrah?
Cheeseburgers are what these self-described "BTs" made a conscious choice to leave behind. Kol Zimrah, on the other hand, is something that addresses a spiritual need that they admit to having. Thus, Kol Zimrah, like Kaplan's siddur, poses a greater threat to this blog's paradigm of "growing" toward Orthodoxy.
Beyond Teshuva even has posts about Reform services with musical instruments. Is this description of a High Holiday service with a violin solo more halachic than KZ? No, and that's precisely the point. Discussing lame frontal Reform services is ok in opposition to warm and participatory Orthodox services, because it supports the frame that if you grow up Reform and you're interested in a more engaging Jewish experience, then it's time for you to "graduate" to Orthodoxy. (Indeed, many Reform congregations do such a good job confirming this frame that one wonders whether they're receiving commissions from Orthodox kiruv organizations or whether they're just doing it pro bono.) Kol Zimrah provides a different paradigm, because it proves that it is possible for educated liberal Jews to have an engaging, deeply personal, and deeply communal Jewish experience while maintaining all of their progressive Jewish values. And for this, it must be burned.
Of course, I have no right to have these opinions published on anyone else's blog; if I want a forum for my views, I can get my own blog. So I did.
This post isn't about censorship or freedom of speech. Censorship is generally done by a government or other de jure authority. In the United States, freedom of speech is guaranteed by the First Amendment (subject to certain limitations). However, "it's a free country" isn't the end of the story. Just because I have the right to say something doesn't necessarily mean that I should say it, and also doesn't mean that you have an obligation to publish it, or to listen. Therefore, there are questions that go beyond legal issues and public policy issues.
For example, one angle of the Danish cartoon controversy has focused on whether newspapers elsewhere in the world should reprint the cartoons. There is no question that, in the United States and many other countries, newspapers have the right to do so. But that's only the beginning of the conversation, not the end of it. But that's all I'm going to say about it for now.
Spinning the globe from Denmark, we arrive in China, and the google.cn controversy. Everyone (in the First World) agrees that the Chinese government's censorship of the Internet is a bad thing. The question is how Google should respond, given that the Chinese government is unlikely to change its mind soon. Should Google voluntarily comply with the Chinese censorship? Or should Google pull out of China entirely? Again, not an easy question.
Two things have come to light today that provide new perspectives on some of these questions.
One.
Kos brings us this message from a former eCampaign Director for the GOP:
The plans for the launch of GOP.com last spring included two things that have never made it to the light of day - a viral fundraising component, and a "MyGOP" functionality that would have let activists build a MySpace-like site on GOP.com. Practical reality set in, however, and killed both. The trouble with the MyGOP concept was the conflict it created with incredibly tight internal controls on message.
When we were forced to pull a Social Security Testimonials tool off the site because someone dared to use the word "private" instead of the more acceptable "personal" accounts, it became apparent that our internal tolerance for self-expression would not allow that sort of openness. Arguments that restrictions of that nature are ridiculous and hamper our ability to be effective online were met with stony silence. In the end, MyGOP went nowhere.
Why is the Republican Party so obsessed with maintaining a completely consistent message, to the point of stamping out individual voices? Because, as Glenn Greenwald points out (in a post that has circumnavigated the blogosphere many times in the last 2 days), "conservatism" has come to mean absolute loyalty to George Bush, rather than any political ideology, and "liberalism" (in the eyes of Bush supporters) means any deviation from that absolute loyalty.
Thus, just as Bush himself lives in a hermetically sealed bubble, having all his news filtered through his handlers, and speaking only to audiences who have signed loyalty oaths, the entire GOP machine is going to every length to create its own reality and avoid contact with any dissenting opinions or even inconvenient facts.
This is different from google.cn in its extent and authority (since no one is preventing me from writing this post, or you from reading it), but identical in its intent.
I acknowledge that a blog belongs to a blogger. No one is inherently entitled to comment on another blog. But I exercise no substantive editorial restraint on the comments at Mah Rabu. The only comments I delete are obvious errors (e.g. someone accidentally posts the same comment twice) and spam. I am called "profoundly hypocritical", I leave the comment there, even if I choose not to dignify it with a response. Of course I can see changing this policy if I get overwhelmed with hostile comments to the point where they drown out everything else, because if you want a forum for your views, you can get your own blog. I'm nowhere near that threshold now, so all is well. But some bloggers set their threshold much lower, to the point where any fact that might encourage readers to look outside their bubble is unwelcome.
And thus we come to the first Burn My Siddur Award. The name is a reference to Steve Silver's periodic Burn Your Siddur Award (particularly because Kol Zimrah is so far the only recipient of the Don't Burn Your Siddur Award), but this new award is given for keeping alive the spirit of those who burned Mordecai Kaplan's siddur in 1945.
As far as I know, no one ever burned the Union Prayer Book. As far as the Union of Orthodox Rabbis was concerned, the Classical Reformers were just a bunch of far-out hippies with their organ music and their bare heads and their "Grant us peace, thy most precious gift". Groovy, man. But nothing that posed a serious threat to Orthodoxy, because its superficial elements were so different from Orthodoxy that they literally weren't speaking the same language. Now Kaplan, on the other hand. His proto-Reconstructionist siddur looked like an Orthodox siddur, and you had to actually read it to find the sedition. (This superficial similarity led to the historical accident by which the historic synagogue of Curacao affiliated with the Reconstructionist movement.) Thus Kaplan's siddur was perceived as much more dangerous, and had to be burned.
Today I read a post on Drew's blog where he responded to a post on Beyond Teshuva and expressed agreement, saying that he was also looking for a service that combined the full Shabbat liturgy with spirited music from NFTY and elsewhere. I posted a comment saying that Kol Zimrah was exactly what he was looking for, and you can read the rest.
I then went to the original post on Beyond Teshuva and submitted a similar comment, but without any of the politics in my comment to Drew. It said basically "Kol Zimrah was founded by NFTY alumni who wanted to pray the full kabbalat shabbat liturgy with ruach-filled music from NFTY and elsewhere. If you're ever in NYC, you're invited to join us!".
Then I got this email from the moderators:
BZIt was with pain and hesitation that we deleted your link to yourFriday night services. The fact that you came over to our site, areinto Jewish music and Friday night services and want to share it withothers, shows that we have much in common.We set up this blog with Rabbinic guidelines, and one of them was towork within the framework of Halacha and musical instruments onShabbat aren't within that framework. We hope you understand andaren't hurt or offended. We certainly didn't mean to do that if wedid.Be WellMark
Ok, let's analyze this. I won't contest the halachic issue -- I accept that, in the way that the folks at Beyond Teshuva understand halacha, playing (and probably listening to) musical instruments on Shabbat violates that understanding of halacha. But apparently it is also a violation of halacha to read about the existence of Jews playing musical instruments on Shabbat. I mean, I didn't go visit them on Shabbat and start playing musical instruments; all I did was link to a website about Shabbat services with musical instruments.
Does Beyond Teshuva really have a policy that no one can write about actions that violate halacha (according to the moderators)? Of course not -- here's a post that longingly discusses cheeseburgers and ham sandwiches. So what's the difference between cheeseburgers and Kol Zimrah?
Cheeseburgers are what these self-described "BTs" made a conscious choice to leave behind. Kol Zimrah, on the other hand, is something that addresses a spiritual need that they admit to having. Thus, Kol Zimrah, like Kaplan's siddur, poses a greater threat to this blog's paradigm of "growing" toward Orthodoxy.
Beyond Teshuva even has posts about Reform services with musical instruments. Is this description of a High Holiday service with a violin solo more halachic than KZ? No, and that's precisely the point. Discussing lame frontal Reform services is ok in opposition to warm and participatory Orthodox services, because it supports the frame that if you grow up Reform and you're interested in a more engaging Jewish experience, then it's time for you to "graduate" to Orthodoxy. (Indeed, many Reform congregations do such a good job confirming this frame that one wonders whether they're receiving commissions from Orthodox kiruv organizations or whether they're just doing it pro bono.) Kol Zimrah provides a different paradigm, because it proves that it is possible for educated liberal Jews to have an engaging, deeply personal, and deeply communal Jewish experience while maintaining all of their progressive Jewish values. And for this, it must be burned.
Of course, I have no right to have these opinions published on anyone else's blog; if I want a forum for my views, I can get my own blog. So I did.
Monday, February 13, 2006
To the victor go the spoilers
What adolescent trauma has made Professor Snape so bitter at the world, and particularly at Harry Potter? The answer to this and many other questions can be found in Joel Henry Hollander's Harry Potter and the Ultimate Spoiler. No, Hollander (the father of an old friend of mine) does not have any inside information from J.K. Rowling about the content of the 7th and last Harry Potter book; he has produced this 91-page document through an incredibly close reading of the six books. It will shock and amaze you.
Tree tree tree, tree tree tree
I was listening to NPR during the eight crazy nights, and they interviewed a rabbi about all the different ways to spell Chanukah / Hanukkah / Hannuka / etc. He had his own preferred spelling (chet nun vav kaf hey), and his congregation had set an official one so that they could be consistent (Chanukkah), but when you get down to it, all the spellings are valid and it's just a question of personal preference.
The same is not true for the New Year of the Trees, which was observed last night and today. "Tu Bishvat" is correct (even though it's only #4 on Google), and the more popular "Tu B'Shevat" and "Tu B'Shvat" are WRONG WRONG WRONG.
Here's how it works:
The name of the 11th month is Sh'vat or Shevat. There is a sheva under the first letter, and it's a sheva na (vocal sheva) because a sheva under the first letter is always na (if SHF reads this, she may disagree about shtayim, but that's just an exception that probes the rule). The name of the month is prefixed with the preposition b' or be -- that's the letter bet with another sheva. Hence, many think that the result is "B'Shevat" or some such. BUT there is a rule that a word may not begin with two shevas. Thus the preposition becomes bi -- the sheva is lengthened to a chirik (that's the vowel that's just one dot under the letter). The sheva under the shin becomes nach (quiescent), since it's no longer at the beginning of a word; now it's just at the end of a closed syllable (bish).
Let's stop this phonological scourge by boycotting all "Tu B'Shevat" seders! Think globally, act locally!
For those who are interested, here are the Google rankings. Note that Google treats apostrophes, spaces, and hyphens as identical. These rankings are incomplete; feel free to contribute more possible spellings. All searches below are in quotes.
The same is not true for the New Year of the Trees, which was observed last night and today. "Tu Bishvat" is correct (even though it's only #4 on Google), and the more popular "Tu B'Shevat" and "Tu B'Shvat" are WRONG WRONG WRONG.
Here's how it works:
The name of the 11th month is Sh'vat or Shevat. There is a sheva under the first letter, and it's a sheva na (vocal sheva) because a sheva under the first letter is always na (if SHF reads this, she may disagree about shtayim, but that's just an exception that probes the rule). The name of the month is prefixed with the preposition b' or be -- that's the letter bet with another sheva. Hence, many think that the result is "B'Shevat" or some such. BUT there is a rule that a word may not begin with two shevas. Thus the preposition becomes bi -- the sheva is lengthened to a chirik (that's the vowel that's just one dot under the letter). The sheva under the shin becomes nach (quiescent), since it's no longer at the beginning of a word; now it's just at the end of a closed syllable (bish).
Let's stop this phonological scourge by boycotting all "Tu B'Shevat" seders! Think globally, act locally!
For those who are interested, here are the Google rankings. Note that Google treats apostrophes, spaces, and hyphens as identical. These rankings are incomplete; feel free to contribute more possible spellings. All searches below are in quotes.
- tu b'shevat 318,000
- tu b'shvat 196,000
- tu beshvat 87,000
- tu bishvat 83,300
- tubshvat 54,100 [this one, and #8, showed up mostly in URLs]
- tu bisvat 21,100
- tou bichvat 18,600
- tubishvat 11,500
- tu bish'vat 2500
- tu bshvat 1110
- tu bishevat 792
- tu bi'shevat 786
- jewish arbor day 784
- tu bischwat 663
- tubeshvat 604
- tu bshevat 588
- tu bi'shvat 503
- tu beshevat 478
- tu be'shvat 382
- tu b'sh'vat 332
- tu be'shevat 175
- tu bishbat 174
- tu b'shebat 44
- tubeshevat 41
- tu beshbat 28
- tube'shvat 28
- tubi'shvat 22
- tubi'shevat 19
- too bishvat 7
- tou b'chvat 7
- too beshvat 5
- too bshvat 4
- tu besh'vat 4
- too b'shvat 1 [Googlewhack!]
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Total Eclipse of the Tetragrammaton
The Automatic for the People kabbalat shabbat is serious, not just wacky contrafactum. But, as Kohelet said, there is a time for serious and a time for wacky contrafactum. And the latter time is coming up soon! Sort of. I mean, it's almost Tu Bishvat, which means it will be only a month until Purim, and some of us are planning well ahead.
This will be my sixth straight year leading Purim maariv, and my fourth straight year leading it in the same place. Since many of the same people are in the same church basement year after year, I need new material each time to keep it fresh. I see maariv as the opening act for the megillah reading, which is (at its best) a work of comedic theater. So maariv should get the crowd fired up and in a wacky mood, ready for some comic inversion. This is accomplished mainly through two types of musical devices (neither of which I can claim any credit for):
1) Dissonant nusach. For example, I often use the High Holiday maariv tune for Barechu, the High Holiday Torah service for the first line of Shema, yom tov maariv for the last line of Shema, High Holiday musaf for the first four words of Chatzi kaddish (before segueing into an unrelated song, see below), and a kaddish shaleim that combines Shabbat mincha, Shabbat musaf, yom tov musaf, High Holiday shacharit, and Debbie Friedman's Oseh Shalom.
2) Setting prayers to secular melodies. Yes, I often set prayers to secular melodies when it isn't Purim, and the two endeavors should in no way be confused. To avoid this confusion, I will not use any secular melody on Purim that I would use for serious davening during the rest of the year, lest people think that the use of these melodies during the year is nothing more than Purim silliness. Thus, all of Automatic for the People is off limits (I've set it to kabbalat shabbat), as are "Redemption Song" (Mi Chamocha), "Scarborough Fair" (havdalah), "Down in the River to Pray" (Psalm 136 or chatzi kaddish), and Leonard Cohen's "Halleluyah" (Psalm 146). [I don't take credit for all of those!] (Then there are the lesser-known melodies that I've used in non-Purim davening not because I thought anyone would recognize them, but just because they're good tunes: we used Phish's "Dirt" for I think Hashkiveinu at Kol Zimrah, and R.E.M.'s "Swan Swan H" as a wordless niggun. I've also used Bela Fleck and the Flecktones' "True North" at the end of pesukei d'zimrah on Shabbat, but it fits so seamlessly with the nusach that I'm not sure anyone noticed that it was anything other than embellishment of the nusach.)
So the melodies used on Purim have to be of a completely different sort. Past selections have included "Basket Case", "Blame Canada", "Blowing in the Wind", "Circle of Life" (from The Lion King), "Friend of the Devil", "Hey Jude", "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For", "Lean on Me", "Like a Prayer", the Looney Tunes theme, "Rubber Duckie", "Smells Like Teen Spirit", "Stand" (R.E.M.), The Brady Brunch theme, "The Sound of Silence", "Total Eclipse of the Heart", "Uf Gozal", "What a Wonderful World", and "Yellow Submarine".
What are the selection criteria? The song should be well-known to an American Jewish crowd mainly born between 1970 and 1984, and should be easily recognizable from the melody alone without instrumental accompaniment, and should ideally be either dissonant with prayer or somehow ridiculous or over-the-top or all of the above. Bonus points if I get to impersonate Louis Armstrong or Madonna or Bob Dylan or equivalent. In other words, all the criteria that make a good karaoke song.
And yes, secular Israeli songs are filed under secular (with "Yellow Submarine"), not sacred (with Automatic for the People). The fact that the original lyrics were in Hebrew does not change how goofy the song is. And please keep "Erev Shel Shoshanim" out of the kedushah. Thanks much.
So the reason I'm posting all of this now, over a month before Purim, is because I'm starting to work on this year's madness, and I thought the blogosphere would have some good suggestions for new songs to use. I have a few new ones lined up already (and no, I'm not telling! Wait until Purim to find out), and a small number of crowd favorites will return, but otherwise the floor is open. The selection criteria have been spelled out; now get to it! Thanks in advance!
This will be my sixth straight year leading Purim maariv, and my fourth straight year leading it in the same place. Since many of the same people are in the same church basement year after year, I need new material each time to keep it fresh. I see maariv as the opening act for the megillah reading, which is (at its best) a work of comedic theater. So maariv should get the crowd fired up and in a wacky mood, ready for some comic inversion. This is accomplished mainly through two types of musical devices (neither of which I can claim any credit for):
1) Dissonant nusach. For example, I often use the High Holiday maariv tune for Barechu, the High Holiday Torah service for the first line of Shema, yom tov maariv for the last line of Shema, High Holiday musaf for the first four words of Chatzi kaddish (before segueing into an unrelated song, see below), and a kaddish shaleim that combines Shabbat mincha, Shabbat musaf, yom tov musaf, High Holiday shacharit, and Debbie Friedman's Oseh Shalom.
2) Setting prayers to secular melodies. Yes, I often set prayers to secular melodies when it isn't Purim, and the two endeavors should in no way be confused. To avoid this confusion, I will not use any secular melody on Purim that I would use for serious davening during the rest of the year, lest people think that the use of these melodies during the year is nothing more than Purim silliness. Thus, all of Automatic for the People is off limits (I've set it to kabbalat shabbat), as are "Redemption Song" (Mi Chamocha), "Scarborough Fair" (havdalah), "Down in the River to Pray" (Psalm 136 or chatzi kaddish), and Leonard Cohen's "Halleluyah" (Psalm 146). [I don't take credit for all of those!] (Then there are the lesser-known melodies that I've used in non-Purim davening not because I thought anyone would recognize them, but just because they're good tunes: we used Phish's "Dirt" for I think Hashkiveinu at Kol Zimrah, and R.E.M.'s "Swan Swan H" as a wordless niggun. I've also used Bela Fleck and the Flecktones' "True North" at the end of pesukei d'zimrah on Shabbat, but it fits so seamlessly with the nusach that I'm not sure anyone noticed that it was anything other than embellishment of the nusach.)
So the melodies used on Purim have to be of a completely different sort. Past selections have included "Basket Case", "Blame Canada", "Blowing in the Wind", "Circle of Life" (from The Lion King), "Friend of the Devil", "Hey Jude", "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For", "Lean on Me", "Like a Prayer", the Looney Tunes theme, "Rubber Duckie", "Smells Like Teen Spirit", "Stand" (R.E.M.), The Brady Brunch theme, "The Sound of Silence", "Total Eclipse of the Heart", "Uf Gozal", "What a Wonderful World", and "Yellow Submarine".
What are the selection criteria? The song should be well-known to an American Jewish crowd mainly born between 1970 and 1984, and should be easily recognizable from the melody alone without instrumental accompaniment, and should ideally be either dissonant with prayer or somehow ridiculous or over-the-top or all of the above. Bonus points if I get to impersonate Louis Armstrong or Madonna or Bob Dylan or equivalent. In other words, all the criteria that make a good karaoke song.
And yes, secular Israeli songs are filed under secular (with "Yellow Submarine"), not sacred (with Automatic for the People). The fact that the original lyrics were in Hebrew does not change how goofy the song is. And please keep "Erev Shel Shoshanim" out of the kedushah. Thanks much.
So the reason I'm posting all of this now, over a month before Purim, is because I'm starting to work on this year's madness, and I thought the blogosphere would have some good suggestions for new songs to use. I have a few new ones lined up already (and no, I'm not telling! Wait until Purim to find out), and a small number of crowd favorites will return, but otherwise the floor is open. The selection criteria have been spelled out; now get to it! Thanks in advance!
Thursday, February 02, 2006
Voting: not just for Canadians
Thanks to everyone who voted in the first round of the Jewish & Israeli Blog Awards! With your support, Mah Rabu has advanced to the finals in all three categories for which it was nominated: Best Jewish Religion Blog, Best Post, and Best New Blog 2005. You can vote once every three days, from now until February 2. For those of you just joining us, here are some Mah Rabu highlights from 2005.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Regime change begins at home
The highlight of Bush's Speech from the Throne was when he outlined the Democratic domestic agenda for 2006:
That and the human-animal hybrids.
Ultimately, the only way to defeat the [...] is to defeat their dark vision of hatred and fear by offering the hopeful alternative of political freedom and peaceful change. So the United States of America supports democratic reform [...].
Elections are vital, but they are only the beginning. Raising up a democracy requires the rule of law, protection of minorities and strong, accountable institutions that last longer than a single vote.
That and the human-animal hybrids.
The right wing tips its hand
Priceless quote from the Associated Press:
''They are treating people here like Arabs,'' said legislator Arieh Eldad in a telephone interview from the scene with Israel Radio.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Mah Rabu goes international!
We've been picked up by Blind Janitor, a music website in Hebrew. Scroll down to #45 (under 2006-01-27). For those who can't read the Hebrew: (my translation; please correct it if it's wrong)
[Thanks to Sagol 59], who writes: The excellent Jewish blog Mah Rabu has found the ultimate soundtrack to listen to on Friday, just before the beginning of Shabbat. We're talking about none other than the 1992 album considered by many to be R.E.M.'s best. But that's not all: The blog has found a parallel between the contents of Automatic for the People and the contents of kabbalat Shabbat itself, including the psalms and prayers said in it according to tradition. What comes out is the most gripping and surprising article you'll read this Shabbat. [English]
Monday, January 30, 2006
Trees are blowing in the wind, they're blowing
All you environmentalists, kabbalists, and Zionists might think that the new year for trees is next fortnight, but followers of Beit Shammai know that it's RIGHT NOW! Happy new year!
Sunday, January 29, 2006
From time to time
Exodus 13:10 says that Pesach shall be observed "mi-yamim yamimah", literally "from days to days". But this has been understood to mean "from year to year", and thus we have Pesach once a year.
The early interpreters of the U.S. Constitution must have been familiar with rabbinic exegesis. Article II says that the President "shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." The text specifies nothing about the frequency of this presidential requirement, nor have there (to my knowledge) been any legislation or Supreme Court decisions refining this clause. However, the Constitution shebe-'al peh has always understood the State of the Union address (whether in person or in writing) to be an annual obligation, interpreting "from time to time" to mean "from year to year". This is halachah le-Moshe mi-Sinai.
King George's sixth (and antepenultimate!) State of the Union Address will be this Tuesday night. Before it starts, be sure to take the State of the Union Predictions Quiz, and prognosticate everything from the color of his tie to the presence of purple fingers. During the address, play the State of the Union Drinking Game! I'll be playing a non-alcoholic version and getting trashed on Leo's. All are invited over here.
The early interpreters of the U.S. Constitution must have been familiar with rabbinic exegesis. Article II says that the President "shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." The text specifies nothing about the frequency of this presidential requirement, nor have there (to my knowledge) been any legislation or Supreme Court decisions refining this clause. However, the Constitution shebe-'al peh has always understood the State of the Union address (whether in person or in writing) to be an annual obligation, interpreting "from time to time" to mean "from year to year". This is halachah le-Moshe mi-Sinai.
King George's sixth (and antepenultimate!) State of the Union Address will be this Tuesday night. Before it starts, be sure to take the State of the Union Predictions Quiz, and prognosticate everything from the color of his tie to the presence of purple fingers. During the address, play the State of the Union Drinking Game! I'll be playing a non-alcoholic version and getting trashed on Leo's. All are invited over here.
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Throw the bums out
The results are worrisome. Both Hamas and the Conservative Party of Canada have achieved upset electoral victories this week. But what does it mean? Have Canadians abandoned their progressive traditions? Are the Palestinian voters set on prolonging the conflict? More likely, in both cases, the electorate has had enough of a party that it perceives to be corrupt and ineffectual, and wants an alternative, regardless of ideology.
This trend bodes well for the US congressional elections in November. If it keeps up, the Democrats will garner the support not only of the 50%+ of Americans who agree with the Democratic platform, but even of conservatives who are fed up with Republican corruption and incompetence and are ready for a change.
This trend bodes well for the US congressional elections in November. If it keeps up, the Democrats will garner the support not only of the 50%+ of Americans who agree with the Democratic platform, but even of conservatives who are fed up with Republican corruption and incompetence and are ready for a change.
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
I can always sleep standing up
Catching up on the Limmud NY blogging, which is far from liveblogging at this point:
The Automatic for the People kabbalat shabbat made its New York State debut at Limmud NY, after a number of appearances in New England. It wasn't actually one of the kabbalat shabbat options; it was just a session on Friday afternoon. It happened to be scheduled at the same time as (and next door to) the panel on "Is Hip Enough?", so I suggested that this session constituted one answer to that question, but I wasn't sure whether it was yes or no. (Probably no, since R.E.M. hasn't been hip for about 20 years.)
The AFTP kabbalat shabbat is exactly what it sounds like: we sang all the words of kabbalat shabbat set to all the music of R.E.M.'s Automatic for the People. But before that, we discussed how this came about, and why Automatic for the People and kabbalat shabbat actually fit together; this wasn't simply a Purim-style contrafactum.
The story begins in the 16th century. The mystics of Tzfat would go out into the fields and greet Shabbat with the song Lecha Dodi, around which the whole kabbalat shabbat (welcoming Shabbat) service developed. Six psalms were added before it (Psalms 95-99 and 29), corresponding to the six days of creation, and sharing the common theme of God as sovereign over all creation. Two psalms were added after it (Psalms 92-93), corresponding to Shabbat itself; Psalm 92 is titled "Mizmor shir le-yom ha-shabbat" going all the way back.
Fast forward to 1992. The Georgia-based band R.E.M. released its ninth (and often considered best) album, Automatic for the People. (In response to the questions that came up, no, the members of R.E.M. aren't Jewish, and yes, I consider it Jewish music.) AFTP had a different tone from all previous and subsequent R.E.M. albums, trading the usual rock sounds for a string ensemble. Rather than being just a great collection of songs, AFTP is a coherent work from beginning to end: most of the songs are in the same key (D), and the album is a journey from the arpeggiated D minor chord that begins "Drive" to the arpeggiated D major chord that ends "Find the River".
Fast forward about four more years, when I had started to get into R.E.M. I was between high school and college, and driving about 40 minutes each way to work, just enough time to listen to about one CD per drive. I listened to a lot of music that year. One Friday afternoon I popped in Automatic for the People for the drive home, providing excellent driving music from "Maybe I ride and maybe you walk" to "The photograph on the dashboard" to "Leave the road". But it wasn't just driving music. I realized that the journey of AFTP was the transition from the work week into Shabbat, from the agitation of "Drive" to the serenity of "Find the River". It became my minhag to listen to Automatic for the People on the way home every Friday.
Fast forward to spring 1999. If AFTP is the consummate pre-Shabbat music, why not combine it with the words of kabbalat Shabbat? I figured there were 10 things in kabbalat shabbat (Lecha Dodi with 6 psalms before and 2 psalms after, and I also included Yedid Nefesh at the beginning as is done in some communities) and 12 tracks on the album, so I took out "New Orleans Instrumental No. 1" (because even though it's a great song (which i've once heard described as two robots playing ping-pong) and has an important role on the album as a breather after "Everybody Hurts", it's an instrumental (as the title would suggest) and there's no way to fit words to it) and "Star Me Kitten" (because it sucks), and set those 10 elements of kabbalat shabbat, in order, to the remaining 10 songs on AFTP. I didn't include Ana Be-choach, and it's fortuitously in exactly the right place for "Star Me Kitten", so if you disagree with my (and like everyone's) assessment of the song, feel free to experiment. Don't blame me if Nechuniah ben Hakanah jumps out of his grave.
So we did a few Automatic for the People kabbalat shabbat events at Hillel, and I plastered the campus with posters containing lines from the album: "Listen here, my sister and my brother", "Now it's time to sing along", "Nonsense isn't new to me", "TV tells a million lies", etc. We did it before Shabbat, so that anyone could attend regardless of their stance about musical instruments, and so that it wouldn't compete with the regular minyanim. The participants in attendance had never before prayed in the same room. I learned an important lesson about Jewish pluralism: the way to get people to sit down together meaningfully is to do something entirely outside the box.
As we did this more and more, I started to notice more correspondences between AFTP and kabbalat shabbat beyond the overall trend from agitation to serenity. The words and themes of individual psalms fit with the words and music of their corresponding song.
I'm not claiming that R.E.M. had this sequence of psalms in mind when they wrote Automatic for the People, and I'm certainly not claiming that the psalmist foretold the works of R.E.M. But I'm asserting my postmodern right to not care. I'm an agnostic about whether the Dark Side of the Rainbow had an intelligent designer, but that doesn't change my appreciation of it one way or the other.
So here goes:
Drive / Yedid Nefesh: Yedid Nefesh was written in the 16th century by Eliezer Azikri, as a love poem to God: just as acrostic love poems spell out the name of the addressee, the first letter of each verse of Yedid Nefesh spells out the name of God. It begins, as does "Drive", with simmering tension and desire. Yarutz avdach kemo ayal - your servant runs like a ram. "Maybe I ride, maybe you walk." Nafshi cholat ahavatach - my soul is sick with your love. "Maybe you're crazy in the head." And then, in the third stanza, the song EXPLODES! ANA EILI, MACHMAD LIBI, CHUSHAH NA, VE-AL TIT'ALAM! The gas leak of the work week is set on fire, the gas is consumed, and we're ready for... Shabbat!
Try Not to Breathe / Psalm 95: Directly from D minor into D major ("happier" by western convention). We've had our first catharsis and expressed our as-yet unrequited desire, and now we go into Lechu neranenah lAdonai - let's go sing to God!
A theme in this psalm, particularly in the last few verses, is memory. We recount the past, including the bad parts, so that we're ready to move beyond it. "I want you to remember." "I have seen things that you will never see."
The Sidewinder Sleeps Tonite / Psalm 96: Unrequited desires, check. Painful memories, check. Now that we've gotten both of those out of the way, we're ready for unfettered joy! Shiru lAdonai kol ha-aretz! Sing to God, the whole world!!! I don't claim to know what the lyrics of this song are about ("a candy bar, a falling star, or a reading from Dr. Seuss"), but I know that it's the most exuberant song on the album, and that Psalm 96 is the most exuberant prayer in many Carlebach-influenced kabbalat shabbat services (and that's no accident, looking at the words).
Everybody Hurts / Psalm 97: This song paradoxically provides a message of hope by universalizing despair. "When you feel like you're alone ... everybody hurts". This meaning can be read back into the words of the psalm (even if that wasn't the original plain sense). Anan va-'arefel sevivav - Cloud and mist surround [God]. Yes, this was originally about mystery and majesty. But in contemporary American culture, clouds are a symbol of gloom and confusion. Even God is surrounded by clouds -- it doesn't get more universal than that! And yet! Eish lefanav teilech, fire goes before God. Hei'iru verakav teiveil, God's lightning lights up the world. Even when surrounded by these clouds, there is light. Ve-ra'u chol ha-'amim kevodo - all the nations see this. Everyone experiences this. And the triumphant conclusion: or zarua' la-tzadik. Light is sown for the righteous. Everyone experiences these clouds, and yet has the opportunity to have the darkness lit up.
Sweetness Follows / Psalm 98: Both Psalm 98 and Sweetness Follows encapsulate the central themes of kabbalat shabbat. "It's these little things, they can pull you under / Live your life filled with joy and wonder"-- or the second time through -- "Live your life filled with joy and thunder / Yeah, yeah we were altogether lost in our own little lives." Joy and thunder are the two central themes. During the week, we are "lost in our own little lives", but Shabbat is an escape from "these little things", as we instead focus on joy and thunder, recognizing the big picture.
Shiru lAdonai shir chadash ki nifla'ot 'asah - there's the thunder.
Zameru lAdonai be-chinor - and there's the joy.
Lifnei Adonai ki va lishpot ha-aretz - and we're back to the thunder.
Monty Got a Raw Deal / Psalm 99: Fear and trembling! Revelation! Bow down! The music shifts back into minor here (both on AFTP, and in some versions of nusach!) in recognition of these solemn themes. Perhaps this song has subtly influenced Kol Zimrah's frequent use of this Yah Ribon tune for Psalm 99.
Ignoreland / Psalm 29: Stand up! Building to the climax! The last day of creation before Shabbat, the last non-mellow song on AFTP, all of creation must recognize its creator! Kol Adonai chotzeiv lahavot eish! I feel better having screamed, don't you?
Man on the Moon / Lecha Dodi: The climax. The focal point of kabbalat shabbat, one of the most well-known songs on the album. Written as an elegy for Andy Kaufman which spawned a biopic of the same name, and that's not so relevant to Lecha Dodi. But it is relevant that the song has a bittersweet tone, recognizing the happy within the sad and vice versa. Rav lach shevet be-'eimek ha-bacha, too long have you dwelled in the valley of tears. And it's just a fun way to sing Lecha Dodi.
Nightswimming / Psalm 92: Mizmor shir le-yom ha-shabbat, a song for the Shabbat day. But what does that even mean? The content has nothing directly pertaining to Shabbat. Why is this, of all psalms, the "psalm for Shabbat"? The rabbis had an answer in Mishnah Tamid: they interpreted the title of this psalm (in a phrase popularized in birkat hamazon) as Mizmor shir le-'atid lavo, le-yom she-kulo shabbat u-mnuchah le-chayei ha-'olamim. A song for the future, for a day that is entirely Shabbat and rest, unto eternal life. Thus, this psalm can be understood as talking about an ideal time in the future, when God really really is in fact sovereign over everything (v'atah marom le-'olam Adonai), and when the righteous really flourish like palm trees (tzadik ka-tamar yifrach) and all the evildoers are scattered. Like the shadows in Plato's cave, Shabbat serves as a reflection of that ideal time in the future. Though we're not in that time yet, we can experience a taste of it through Shabbat.
"Nightswimming" is about exactly the same thing, except the ideal time it talks about is in the past, not the future. "The photograph on the dashboard taken years ago... / Every streetlight reveals a picture in reverse." "The photograph reflects, every streetlight a reminder." We're not experiencing that ideal time, or even an image of that time, but just a reflection of an image of that time. "It's not like years ago." We're very much not in that ideal time now. "These things they go away, replaced by every day." Here we return to the same theme as in "Sweetness Follows" ("It's these little things, they can pull you under..."). Because these things go away, it is ever more important to embrace Shabbat, which represents the ideals to which we strive, whether we project those ideals into the past or into the future.
Find the River / Psalm 93: Not only do AFTP and kabbalat shabbat end the same way, they even use the exact same metaphor: the river. The river represents eternity, as it did for Kohelet. As we enter Shabbat, we enter eternity. Eternity utters a day. "Pick up here and chase the ride / The river empties to the tide / All of this is coming your way." Adonai le-orech yamim.
The Automatic for the People kabbalat shabbat made its New York State debut at Limmud NY, after a number of appearances in New England. It wasn't actually one of the kabbalat shabbat options; it was just a session on Friday afternoon. It happened to be scheduled at the same time as (and next door to) the panel on "Is Hip Enough?", so I suggested that this session constituted one answer to that question, but I wasn't sure whether it was yes or no. (Probably no, since R.E.M. hasn't been hip for about 20 years.)
The AFTP kabbalat shabbat is exactly what it sounds like: we sang all the words of kabbalat shabbat set to all the music of R.E.M.'s Automatic for the People. But before that, we discussed how this came about, and why Automatic for the People and kabbalat shabbat actually fit together; this wasn't simply a Purim-style contrafactum.
The story begins in the 16th century. The mystics of Tzfat would go out into the fields and greet Shabbat with the song Lecha Dodi, around which the whole kabbalat shabbat (welcoming Shabbat) service developed. Six psalms were added before it (Psalms 95-99 and 29), corresponding to the six days of creation, and sharing the common theme of God as sovereign over all creation. Two psalms were added after it (Psalms 92-93), corresponding to Shabbat itself; Psalm 92 is titled "Mizmor shir le-yom ha-shabbat" going all the way back.
Fast forward to 1992. The Georgia-based band R.E.M. released its ninth (and often considered best) album, Automatic for the People. (In response to the questions that came up, no, the members of R.E.M. aren't Jewish, and yes, I consider it Jewish music.) AFTP had a different tone from all previous and subsequent R.E.M. albums, trading the usual rock sounds for a string ensemble. Rather than being just a great collection of songs, AFTP is a coherent work from beginning to end: most of the songs are in the same key (D), and the album is a journey from the arpeggiated D minor chord that begins "Drive" to the arpeggiated D major chord that ends "Find the River".
Fast forward about four more years, when I had started to get into R.E.M. I was between high school and college, and driving about 40 minutes each way to work, just enough time to listen to about one CD per drive. I listened to a lot of music that year. One Friday afternoon I popped in Automatic for the People for the drive home, providing excellent driving music from "Maybe I ride and maybe you walk" to "The photograph on the dashboard" to "Leave the road". But it wasn't just driving music. I realized that the journey of AFTP was the transition from the work week into Shabbat, from the agitation of "Drive" to the serenity of "Find the River". It became my minhag to listen to Automatic for the People on the way home every Friday.
Fast forward to spring 1999. If AFTP is the consummate pre-Shabbat music, why not combine it with the words of kabbalat Shabbat? I figured there were 10 things in kabbalat shabbat (Lecha Dodi with 6 psalms before and 2 psalms after, and I also included Yedid Nefesh at the beginning as is done in some communities) and 12 tracks on the album, so I took out "New Orleans Instrumental No. 1" (because even though it's a great song (which i've once heard described as two robots playing ping-pong) and has an important role on the album as a breather after "Everybody Hurts", it's an instrumental (as the title would suggest) and there's no way to fit words to it) and "Star Me Kitten" (because it sucks), and set those 10 elements of kabbalat shabbat, in order, to the remaining 10 songs on AFTP. I didn't include Ana Be-choach, and it's fortuitously in exactly the right place for "Star Me Kitten", so if you disagree with my (and like everyone's) assessment of the song, feel free to experiment. Don't blame me if Nechuniah ben Hakanah jumps out of his grave.
So we did a few Automatic for the People kabbalat shabbat events at Hillel, and I plastered the campus with posters containing lines from the album: "Listen here, my sister and my brother", "Now it's time to sing along", "Nonsense isn't new to me", "TV tells a million lies", etc. We did it before Shabbat, so that anyone could attend regardless of their stance about musical instruments, and so that it wouldn't compete with the regular minyanim. The participants in attendance had never before prayed in the same room. I learned an important lesson about Jewish pluralism: the way to get people to sit down together meaningfully is to do something entirely outside the box.
As we did this more and more, I started to notice more correspondences between AFTP and kabbalat shabbat beyond the overall trend from agitation to serenity. The words and themes of individual psalms fit with the words and music of their corresponding song.
I'm not claiming that R.E.M. had this sequence of psalms in mind when they wrote Automatic for the People, and I'm certainly not claiming that the psalmist foretold the works of R.E.M. But I'm asserting my postmodern right to not care. I'm an agnostic about whether the Dark Side of the Rainbow had an intelligent designer, but that doesn't change my appreciation of it one way or the other.
So here goes:
Drive / Yedid Nefesh: Yedid Nefesh was written in the 16th century by Eliezer Azikri, as a love poem to God: just as acrostic love poems spell out the name of the addressee, the first letter of each verse of Yedid Nefesh spells out the name of God. It begins, as does "Drive", with simmering tension and desire. Yarutz avdach kemo ayal - your servant runs like a ram. "Maybe I ride, maybe you walk." Nafshi cholat ahavatach - my soul is sick with your love. "Maybe you're crazy in the head." And then, in the third stanza, the song EXPLODES! ANA EILI, MACHMAD LIBI, CHUSHAH NA, VE-AL TIT'ALAM! The gas leak of the work week is set on fire, the gas is consumed, and we're ready for... Shabbat!
Try Not to Breathe / Psalm 95: Directly from D minor into D major ("happier" by western convention). We've had our first catharsis and expressed our as-yet unrequited desire, and now we go into Lechu neranenah lAdonai - let's go sing to God!
A theme in this psalm, particularly in the last few verses, is memory. We recount the past, including the bad parts, so that we're ready to move beyond it. "I want you to remember." "I have seen things that you will never see."
The Sidewinder Sleeps Tonite / Psalm 96: Unrequited desires, check. Painful memories, check. Now that we've gotten both of those out of the way, we're ready for unfettered joy! Shiru lAdonai kol ha-aretz! Sing to God, the whole world!!! I don't claim to know what the lyrics of this song are about ("a candy bar, a falling star, or a reading from Dr. Seuss"), but I know that it's the most exuberant song on the album, and that Psalm 96 is the most exuberant prayer in many Carlebach-influenced kabbalat shabbat services (and that's no accident, looking at the words).
Everybody Hurts / Psalm 97: This song paradoxically provides a message of hope by universalizing despair. "When you feel like you're alone ... everybody hurts". This meaning can be read back into the words of the psalm (even if that wasn't the original plain sense). Anan va-'arefel sevivav - Cloud and mist surround [God]. Yes, this was originally about mystery and majesty. But in contemporary American culture, clouds are a symbol of gloom and confusion. Even God is surrounded by clouds -- it doesn't get more universal than that! And yet! Eish lefanav teilech, fire goes before God. Hei'iru verakav teiveil, God's lightning lights up the world. Even when surrounded by these clouds, there is light. Ve-ra'u chol ha-'amim kevodo - all the nations see this. Everyone experiences this. And the triumphant conclusion: or zarua' la-tzadik. Light is sown for the righteous. Everyone experiences these clouds, and yet has the opportunity to have the darkness lit up.
Sweetness Follows / Psalm 98: Both Psalm 98 and Sweetness Follows encapsulate the central themes of kabbalat shabbat. "It's these little things, they can pull you under / Live your life filled with joy and wonder"-- or the second time through -- "Live your life filled with joy and thunder / Yeah, yeah we were altogether lost in our own little lives." Joy and thunder are the two central themes. During the week, we are "lost in our own little lives", but Shabbat is an escape from "these little things", as we instead focus on joy and thunder, recognizing the big picture.
Shiru lAdonai shir chadash ki nifla'ot 'asah - there's the thunder.
Zameru lAdonai be-chinor - and there's the joy.
Lifnei Adonai ki va lishpot ha-aretz - and we're back to the thunder.
Monty Got a Raw Deal / Psalm 99: Fear and trembling! Revelation! Bow down! The music shifts back into minor here (both on AFTP, and in some versions of nusach!) in recognition of these solemn themes. Perhaps this song has subtly influenced Kol Zimrah's frequent use of this Yah Ribon tune for Psalm 99.
Ignoreland / Psalm 29: Stand up! Building to the climax! The last day of creation before Shabbat, the last non-mellow song on AFTP, all of creation must recognize its creator! Kol Adonai chotzeiv lahavot eish! I feel better having screamed, don't you?
Man on the Moon / Lecha Dodi: The climax. The focal point of kabbalat shabbat, one of the most well-known songs on the album. Written as an elegy for Andy Kaufman which spawned a biopic of the same name, and that's not so relevant to Lecha Dodi. But it is relevant that the song has a bittersweet tone, recognizing the happy within the sad and vice versa. Rav lach shevet be-'eimek ha-bacha, too long have you dwelled in the valley of tears. And it's just a fun way to sing Lecha Dodi.
Nightswimming / Psalm 92: Mizmor shir le-yom ha-shabbat, a song for the Shabbat day. But what does that even mean? The content has nothing directly pertaining to Shabbat. Why is this, of all psalms, the "psalm for Shabbat"? The rabbis had an answer in Mishnah Tamid: they interpreted the title of this psalm (in a phrase popularized in birkat hamazon) as Mizmor shir le-'atid lavo, le-yom she-kulo shabbat u-mnuchah le-chayei ha-'olamim. A song for the future, for a day that is entirely Shabbat and rest, unto eternal life. Thus, this psalm can be understood as talking about an ideal time in the future, when God really really is in fact sovereign over everything (v'atah marom le-'olam Adonai), and when the righteous really flourish like palm trees (tzadik ka-tamar yifrach) and all the evildoers are scattered. Like the shadows in Plato's cave, Shabbat serves as a reflection of that ideal time in the future. Though we're not in that time yet, we can experience a taste of it through Shabbat.
"Nightswimming" is about exactly the same thing, except the ideal time it talks about is in the past, not the future. "The photograph on the dashboard taken years ago... / Every streetlight reveals a picture in reverse." "The photograph reflects, every streetlight a reminder." We're not experiencing that ideal time, or even an image of that time, but just a reflection of an image of that time. "It's not like years ago." We're very much not in that ideal time now. "These things they go away, replaced by every day." Here we return to the same theme as in "Sweetness Follows" ("It's these little things, they can pull you under..."). Because these things go away, it is ever more important to embrace Shabbat, which represents the ideals to which we strive, whether we project those ideals into the past or into the future.
Find the River / Psalm 93: Not only do AFTP and kabbalat shabbat end the same way, they even use the exact same metaphor: the river. The river represents eternity, as it did for Kohelet. As we enter Shabbat, we enter eternity. Eternity utters a day. "Pick up here and chase the ride / The river empties to the tide / All of this is coming your way." Adonai le-orech yamim.
Friday, January 20, 2006
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Welcome, JIB Award voters!
[This post will remain at the top until JIB voting is over. Scroll down for new posts.]
Mah Rabu has been nominated for the Jerusalem Post's 2005 Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards in three categories: Best Jewish Religion Blog, Best New Blog 2005, and Best Post (for "Taxonomy of Jewish pluralism").
Voting is in progress!!! Vote early and often -- you're allowed to vote once every three days! Voting continues through January 19.
For those who are here for the first time, I haven't had time to post a lot recently, but here is a selection of relevant posts from this year, arranged by topic.
Contemporary American Judaism:
Jewish holidays:
Talmud:
Judaism and physics:
Israel:
Mah Rabu has been nominated for the Jerusalem Post's 2005 Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards in three categories: Best Jewish Religion Blog, Best New Blog 2005, and Best Post (for "Taxonomy of Jewish pluralism").
Voting is in progress!!! Vote early and often -- you're allowed to vote once every three days! Voting continues through January 19.
For those who are here for the first time, I haven't had time to post a lot recently, but here is a selection of relevant posts from this year, arranged by topic.
Contemporary American Judaism:
- Profile of an "Unaffiliated" Jew
- Taxonomy of Jewish pluralism
- Just talkin' 'bout my generation
- The wealth of nations
- Just crying out that he was framed / Count the frames / Count the frames: the answers!
- Move along, nothing to see here
- Guns, germs, and steel-string guitars
- Repairing Friday night
- Why don't we get together and call ourselves an Institute?
- Dar es Salaam
- The New Jew
- 770
- Da'as torah
Jewish holidays:
- Why I don't observe Yom Hashoah
- In life there are no second chances (Pesach Sheni)
- Why I don't observe Lag Ba'omer
- Rosh Chodesh Sivan
- Yom Meyuchas
- Why I don't observe the 2nd day of Shavuot
- Tisha B'Av
- Think fast! (Tzom Gedaliah)
- Idle thoughts on Yom Kippur
- Why I don't observe the 2nd day of Sukkot
- Why I don't observe Hoshanah Rabbah
- Eight days a week (Shemini Atzeret)
- Why I don't observe Simchat Torah
Talmud:
- On Bull____ (Rosh Hashanah 26a-b)
- Jubilee throng (Rosh Hashanah 26b-27a)
- No more, no less (Rosh Hashanah 27b-29a)
- We will return to you, the court saw it! (Rosh Hashanah 29a-30a)
- Roll over, Beethoven (Rosh Hashanah 30a-31b)
- Okay, starting with hamelech (Rosh Hashanah 31b-32b)
- Welcome to our Sho-ar (Rosh Hashanah 32b-33b)
- Hadran alach! (Rosh Hashanah 33b-end)
- Amen amen amen selah va'ed! (siyyum on Rosh Hashanah)
- Oh, the Ram Parts! Why a Ram's Horn?
- The whole megillah (Megillah 2a)
- You are likely to be eaten by a grue (Megillah 2b-3a)
- Tournament of champions (Megillah 3a-3b)
- Be my Yoko Ono (Megillah 3b-4a)
- Bowling alone (Megillah 4a-5a)
- Son pied sent il beau (Megillah 5a-6a)
- Chickenhawk feedlot (Megillah 6a-7a)
- Dry wit (Megillah 7a-b)
- Nothing in between (Megillah 7b-8b)
- Baby, you got the tzara'at (Megillah 8b-9b)
- Play it, Leo!!! (Megillah 9b-10b)
- When Esther first saw the Armenian man (Megillah 10b-11a)
- Walking and chewing gum (Makkot 2a-b)
- Wanna know what I'm buying, Ringo? (Makkot 2b-3a)
- Great expectations (Makkot 3a)
Judaism and physics:
Israel:
- Israel at 57: the geeky side
- Israel at 57: the political side
- Israel at 57: the religious side
- Israel at 57: the personal side
- Israel at 57: the culinary side
- Israel at 57: the political side vs the religious side
- Tomorrow I am a man? [Yom Yerushalayim]
- Shed a tear for Greenwich [disengagement]
- I will tell you how our people were once joyous [disengagement]
Monday, January 16, 2006
Welcome, Limmudnyks!
I just got back from Limmud NY, one of the few real-life examples of Stage 3 pluralism. We've been blogging about it over at Jewschool, where it has its very own category.
If you also just got back from the Catskills and arrived at this blog via the link in the back of the Limmud NY program book, then it's likely that you're looking for one of the following:
Other questions?
If you also just got back from the Catskills and arrived at this blog via the link in the back of the Limmud NY program book, then it's likely that you're looking for one of the following:
- Kol Zimrah has monthly services in the style of Friday night's musical service, and the next one is this coming Friday night, January 20! All are invited.
- Kol Zimrah's MP3 collection contains various tunes for kabbalat shabbat.
- Hadar's CD, Pri Eitz Hadar, contains tunes particularly for Shabbat morning and high holidays.
- There will be much much more soon! I can't say anything more now, but it will be so worth the wait!
- You can order your very own Friday night purple siddur, seen at the musical service and the learners' service.
- The yellow siddur (not seen at Limmud NY) is a similar format for Shabbat morning.
- The new Reform siddur (seen at the Saturday morning musical service) is coming out in the next few months, and you can pre-order a copy.
- No, there's no book (that I know of) about quantum mechanics, Talmud, and indeterminacy; it's still Oral Torah.
- I'm co-chairing the NHC Summer Institute (August 7-13), which is similar to Limmud, but a week long and with better weather and a more relaxed pace. Registration will open soon!
Other questions?
Friday, January 13, 2006
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Monday, January 09, 2006
10 Tevet
Tomorrow is the fast of 10 Tevet, when Nebuchadnezzar's armies laid siege to Jerusalem. Today we are besieged in our own homes, wherever we are.
In September I posted:
In September I posted:
As a followup to a previous post about fasts, I'm now declaring by fiat that (for American Jews) Tzom Gedaliah is dedicated to the rest of the world (outside the US and Israel), 10 Tevet to the US, 17 Tammuz to Israel, and 9 Av as the uber-fast that encompasses all of them.Therefore, on this fast day, we mourn everything that is happening here at home, and seek to repent. Think of the 50 million Americans without health care, the 37 million living in poverty, the Gulf Coast residents who are still displaced from their homes four months after Katrina, and the society that allows this to happen.
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Faster than a speeding bullet
I'm a few chapters into The Physics of Superheroes by James Kakalios. Go read it. It's good for the non-physicist who wants to learn some physics while exploring superpowers, the physicist who enjoys wacky back-of-the envelope calculations, and the physics teacher who wants ideas for exciting examples to use in class. After a historical introduction to comic books and superheroes, the chapters are arranged like a physics textbook, with sections for mechanics, thermodynamics, electricity & magnetism, and "modern physics", with the relevant superheroes introduced at each point.
Kakalios begins with an astute observation about physics education:
So true. The irrelevant details in the example problems make such a difference for student engagement. So instead of the standard weight on a pulley, when I'm teaching I'll often change it to a monkey on a pulley; it doesn't cost any extra. Lots of imaginary monkeys get harmed, but the students pay more attention, so it's all worth it. Some textbooks understand this and others don't. The Halliday/Resnick/Walker book that we use for AP Physics C is much better in this regard than the Walker book (not the same Walker) that for some reason we use for Regents physics. Where Walker has a box sliding down an incline, Halliday/Resnick/Walker has a box of cheese, because why the hell not? One memorable problem in H/R/W involves a box of dirty money and a box of laundered money. Walker tries to be hip by asking questions about movies... and the movies are The Rocketeer and Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, both of which came out the year my freshmen were born! I saw them in the theater when I was in junior high, but I'm not taking the class. And it's not like those were left in from some hoary previous edition; these movie-based questions are new to the 2003 edition. Now you see what I have to deal with every day.
Meanwhile, I am convinced that the Regents physics exam is a conspiracy to get students not to be interested in physics. A student wants to measure the speed of a 2.0-kilogram object, blah blah blah. Could the questions be any duller? So when I put together the January final, I based most of the questions on old Regents questions, but changed the student to Batman and changed the moving object to the Batmobile or a mutant frog or whatever. The "ph" in physics stands for phun!
Back to Kakalios and superheroes. I don't know much about comic books, except what I know from The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay and Megillat Esther and the odd Batman or Spider-Man movie here and there. So I've learned lots of comic book history so far, e.g. the original Superman couldn't fly! And the differences between the Golden Age (1940s) and Silver Age (late '50s and '60s); the latter had much more science, thanks to the Sputnik effect and fighting against the idea that comics are a corrupting influence on the youth. As for the physics, I already know all the basic physics discussed (as one would certainly hope from someone who does this for a living), but it was inspiring to see the back-of-the-envelope calculation for the acceleration due to gravity on the planet Krypton, and the density thereof. I hope this book is successful in bringing physics principles to a general audience. I feel it apologizes too much for using math, playing into the popular conception that math is scary and that it is socially acceptable to be innumerate. (If you have TimesSelect, see Kristof's column from December 6, 2005: "In the U.S. and most of the Western world, it's considered barbaric in educated circles to be unfamiliar with Plato or Monet or Dickens, but quite natural to be oblivious of quarks and chi-squares. A century ago, Einstein published his first paper on relativity -- making 1905 as important a milestone for world history as 1066 or 1789 -- but relativity has yet to filter into the consciousness of otherwise educated people.") But it goes on and uses the math anyway, so maybe a few apologies here and there are what it takes.
Now is the time on Sprockets when we nitpick. That's right, I don't only nitpick pop-physics books by rabbis; pop-physics books by physicists should be held to an even higher standard.
First of all, it's confusing the way he switches back and forth between different units -- between the miles and pounds that the lay American audience is more familiar with, and the SI units that make it easier to do the physics calculations. And then there's "the density of neutron star material is one hundred thousand billion grams per cubic centimeter", apparently because people are afraid of scientific notation, but I find it much simpler than "hundred thousand billion". But that's just a question of taste.
More objectively, the explanation of Newton's Third Law made me sad. As far as I can tell, it was eventually used correctly to explain how (Golden Age, pre-flying) Superman jumps. But before that, we have:
No no no no no!!!!! Yes, it's true that the wall exerts a force on you, preventing you from crashing through the wall. But this has nothing to do with Newton's Third Law. The "action" and "reaction" forces never cancel each other out, because they're acting on different objects. A exerts a force on B, and B exerts an equal and opposite force on A. When you draw a free-body diagram for an object, you only consider the forces acting on that object. The sum of the forces acting on an object equals the mass of that object times the acceleration of that object. (Yes, if you're considering all the forces acting on a system of objects, then the action and reaction forces cancel each other out, from which we can derive conservation of momentum for a closed isolated system. But that tells you nothing about whether any individual object in the system is in equilibrium.) I've started to explicitly teach "Newton's Zeroth Law", to help avert this misconception. The wall does exert a normal force on you... well, forget the wall for now, let's keep it simple and make it the floor. The floor exerts an upward normal force on you, and this cancels out the downward force that the earth's gravity exerts on you, so you're in equilibrium. These two forces are equal and opposite, but they are not a Third-Law action-reaction pair, because they're acting on the same object (you). [The two relevant Third-Law pairs here are: 1) the floor pushes you up, and you push the floor down; 2) the Earth pulls you down, and you pull the Earth up.] If anything, this is an example of Newton's First Law: the sum of the forces on an object is zero iff the object is not accelerating.
But anyway, I look forward to reading the rest of the book! For great justice!
Kakalios begins with an astute observation about physics education:
The real world is a complicated place. In order to provide illustrations in a physics lesson that emphasize only a single concept, such as Newton's Second Law of Motion or the principle of Conservation of Energy, over the decades physics teachers have developed an arsenal of overly stylized scenarios involving projectile motion, weights on pulleys, or oscillating masses on springs. These situations seem so artificial that students inevitably lament, "When am I ever going to use this stuff in my real life?"
One trick I've hit upon in teaching physics involves using examples culled from superhero comic books that correctly illustrate various applications of physics principles. Interestingly enough, whenever I cite examples from superhero comic books in a lecture, my students never wonder when they will use this information in "real life." Apparently they all have plans, post-graduation, that involve Spandex and protecting the City from all threats.
So true. The irrelevant details in the example problems make such a difference for student engagement. So instead of the standard weight on a pulley, when I'm teaching I'll often change it to a monkey on a pulley; it doesn't cost any extra. Lots of imaginary monkeys get harmed, but the students pay more attention, so it's all worth it. Some textbooks understand this and others don't. The Halliday/Resnick/Walker book that we use for AP Physics C is much better in this regard than the Walker book (not the same Walker) that for some reason we use for Regents physics. Where Walker has a box sliding down an incline, Halliday/Resnick/Walker has a box of cheese, because why the hell not? One memorable problem in H/R/W involves a box of dirty money and a box of laundered money. Walker tries to be hip by asking questions about movies... and the movies are The Rocketeer and Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, both of which came out the year my freshmen were born! I saw them in the theater when I was in junior high, but I'm not taking the class. And it's not like those were left in from some hoary previous edition; these movie-based questions are new to the 2003 edition. Now you see what I have to deal with every day.
Meanwhile, I am convinced that the Regents physics exam is a conspiracy to get students not to be interested in physics. A student wants to measure the speed of a 2.0-kilogram object, blah blah blah. Could the questions be any duller? So when I put together the January final, I based most of the questions on old Regents questions, but changed the student to Batman and changed the moving object to the Batmobile or a mutant frog or whatever. The "ph" in physics stands for phun!
Back to Kakalios and superheroes. I don't know much about comic books, except what I know from The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay and Megillat Esther and the odd Batman or Spider-Man movie here and there. So I've learned lots of comic book history so far, e.g. the original Superman couldn't fly! And the differences between the Golden Age (1940s) and Silver Age (late '50s and '60s); the latter had much more science, thanks to the Sputnik effect and fighting against the idea that comics are a corrupting influence on the youth. As for the physics, I already know all the basic physics discussed (as one would certainly hope from someone who does this for a living), but it was inspiring to see the back-of-the-envelope calculation for the acceleration due to gravity on the planet Krypton, and the density thereof. I hope this book is successful in bringing physics principles to a general audience. I feel it apologizes too much for using math, playing into the popular conception that math is scary and that it is socially acceptable to be innumerate. (If you have TimesSelect, see Kristof's column from December 6, 2005: "In the U.S. and most of the Western world, it's considered barbaric in educated circles to be unfamiliar with Plato or Monet or Dickens, but quite natural to be oblivious of quarks and chi-squares. A century ago, Einstein published his first paper on relativity -- making 1905 as important a milestone for world history as 1066 or 1789 -- but relativity has yet to filter into the consciousness of otherwise educated people.") But it goes on and uses the math anyway, so maybe a few apologies here and there are what it takes.
Now is the time on Sprockets when we nitpick. That's right, I don't only nitpick pop-physics books by rabbis; pop-physics books by physicists should be held to an even higher standard.
First of all, it's confusing the way he switches back and forth between different units -- between the miles and pounds that the lay American audience is more familiar with, and the SI units that make it easier to do the physics calculations. And then there's "the density of neutron star material is one hundred thousand billion grams per cubic centimeter", apparently because people are afraid of scientific notation, but I find it much simpler than "hundred thousand billion". But that's just a question of taste.
More objectively, the explanation of Newton's Third Law made me sad. As far as I can tell, it was eventually used correctly to explain how (Golden Age, pre-flying) Superman jumps. But before that, we have:
You can only support yourself by leaning on the wall if the wall resists you -- that is, pushes back with an equal and opposite force. If the force were not exactly equal and in the opposite direction, then there would be a net nonzero force, which would lead to an acceleration and you crashing into the wall.
No no no no no!!!!! Yes, it's true that the wall exerts a force on you, preventing you from crashing through the wall. But this has nothing to do with Newton's Third Law. The "action" and "reaction" forces never cancel each other out, because they're acting on different objects. A exerts a force on B, and B exerts an equal and opposite force on A. When you draw a free-body diagram for an object, you only consider the forces acting on that object. The sum of the forces acting on an object equals the mass of that object times the acceleration of that object. (Yes, if you're considering all the forces acting on a system of objects, then the action and reaction forces cancel each other out, from which we can derive conservation of momentum for a closed isolated system. But that tells you nothing about whether any individual object in the system is in equilibrium.) I've started to explicitly teach "Newton's Zeroth Law", to help avert this misconception. The wall does exert a normal force on you... well, forget the wall for now, let's keep it simple and make it the floor. The floor exerts an upward normal force on you, and this cancels out the downward force that the earth's gravity exerts on you, so you're in equilibrium. These two forces are equal and opposite, but they are not a Third-Law action-reaction pair, because they're acting on the same object (you). [The two relevant Third-Law pairs here are: 1) the floor pushes you up, and you push the floor down; 2) the Earth pulls you down, and you pull the Earth up.] If anything, this is an example of Newton's First Law: the sum of the forces on an object is zero iff the object is not accelerating.
But anyway, I look forward to reading the rest of the book! For great justice!
Sunday, January 01, 2006
And never brought to mind
I received an invitation for a New Year's Eve gathering (which I couldn't attend, since I was in the enfranchised United States) that said:
So yeah, what is with the idea that we have to be watching the Times Square revelers in order to fulfill our obligation of ringing in the new year? It seems even more ridiculous now that I live in New York, and Times Square is no longer a shrine that I see on TV once a year, but an ordinary (albeit flashy) place that I traverse (underground) twice a day.
So I think there is a cultic ritual going on. Just as the High Priest performed the service of Yom Kippur in order to atone for the sins of all Israel (watching in the courtyard and falling on their faces), so too do the New Year's Eve broadcasts serve a similar vicarious function in America. The High Priest was separated seven days before Yom Kippur, and stayed up all night, in order to ensure that he would be ritually pure for the sacred avodah. Likewise, the TV anchors hand the mike to breathless tourists who are so excited that they've been standing there since 10 AM. When the time ball falls, the High Priest dons his own clothes and throws a feast, wishing everyone an acrostically happy new year.
This will be a gathering at which our own unselfconscious enjoyment of the impending New Year will play a central role. (If your own enjoyment of the impending New Year requires extended observation of others engaged in ostentatious enjoyment of the impending New Year, you may want to attend a different gathering at an apartment with a TV.)
So yeah, what is with the idea that we have to be watching the Times Square revelers in order to fulfill our obligation of ringing in the new year? It seems even more ridiculous now that I live in New York, and Times Square is no longer a shrine that I see on TV once a year, but an ordinary (albeit flashy) place that I traverse (underground) twice a day.
So I think there is a cultic ritual going on. Just as the High Priest performed the service of Yom Kippur in order to atone for the sins of all Israel (watching in the courtyard and falling on their faces), so too do the New Year's Eve broadcasts serve a similar vicarious function in America. The High Priest was separated seven days before Yom Kippur, and stayed up all night, in order to ensure that he would be ritually pure for the sacred avodah. Likewise, the TV anchors hand the mike to breathless tourists who are so excited that they've been standing there since 10 AM. When the time ball falls, the High Priest dons his own clothes and throws a feast, wishing everyone an acrostically happy new year.
Hark!
Two Chanukahs ago, someone posted this to an email list that I'm on.
I responded:
You might remember me complaining in previous years about the translation of "mi y'malel g'vurot yisra'el, otan mi yimneh" (which I'd translate loosely as, who can recall the might/heroics of Israel, who can number/count them?) unfortunately as (yes, you all know it) "who can retell the things that befell us, who can count them?" Yes, so it rhymes. But it also totally puts us in a victim role, and is a really awful translation as far as I can tell.
I responded:
This is interesting; i hadn't thought about this before.
The lyrics of Mi Y'maleil are controversial, with or without translation. The words and music were written by secular Zionists in the 20th century (does anyone know more details?). The first line is based on Psalm 106:2 ("Mi y'maleil g'vurot **ADONAI**, yashmia kol t'hilato?" = "Who can recall the heroics of **GOD**, and declare all of God's praise?", a line that we may know from the extra verse sometimes added to Shir Hama'alot in the birkat hamazon). But they change it to "Mi y'maleil g'vurot **YISRAEL**", a one-word emendation that shifts the agency from divine to human.
This seems to be exactly the reverse of the rabbinic transformation of Chanukah. The original story (in the books of Maccabees) was about a military victory, and the Hasmonean dynasty seizing power. The rabbis didn't like this one bit, so Chanukah is almost absent in the Mishnah, and when it shows up in the Gemara, the military story is replaced with the familiar Sunday-school story about the oil lasting 8 days. This shabbat, we'll read the haftarah with the line "Not by might and not by power, but by my spirit", which seems to be the essence of the rabbinic Chanukah. ("she'asah nisim la'avoteinu" -- God did miracles for our ancestors, not our ancestors for themselves. Similarly, the rabbis turned Exodus, the tragic drama of Moses's life, into the haggadah, where Moses is barely mentioned.)
In contrast, the modern Israeli spin on Chanukah brings back the might and power. These "g'vurot" (heroic deeds) are now attributed to Israel, not God. "Makabi moshia' ufodeh" - "Maccabee saves and frees", using words traditionally associated only with God, not humans (the Nishmat prayer says "umibal'adecha EIN LANU melech go'el umoshia', podeh etc." - "aside from you WE HAVE NO ruler who redeems, saves, frees, etc.")
Are the newer words empowering? Do they make us subjects of history rather than mere objects? Do we gain more responsibility for our actions? Do we gain hope in times when God's face is hidden? ("Emancipate yourself from mental slavery / None but ourselves can free our minds." --Bob Marley)
Or do we come to worship might and power? Are we making the error of saying "My own power and the might of my own hand have won this for me"(Deut 8:17)? Are we actually abdicating moral responsibility, selectively seeing history as "g'vurot Yisrael" when we're happy with the outcome and just "things that befell us" when we're not? Do we lose our humility?
It's a tough call.
Light one candle
An interesting "kosher pig"-style halachic question:
On the Friday night during Chanukah, the Chanukah candles are traditionally lit before the Shabbat candles. This is because once the Shabbat candles are lit, it is Shabbat, so lighting fire is forbidden.
However, I recently spoke with a minyan that started their Friday night services well after sundown, and had an optional candle lighting right before services for those who wanted to take part. This is certainly widespread. So the question is, in what order should Shabbat and Chanukah candles be lit if they are lit after sundown?
One who is lighting candles after sundown is implicitly holding that lighting fire on Shabbat is permitted. Therefore, it seems to me that the reasoning above does not apply, and the principle of "tadir ve-she-eino tadir, tadir kodeim" should predominate. This principle states that a more common action should precede a less common action. (This is why shacharit precedes musaf, and why (according to Beit Hillel, whom we follow) borei peri hagafen precedes mekadeish ha-shabbat in the kiddush.) Therefore, since Shabbat is more common than Chanukah, it seems to me that in this circumstance, Shabbat candles should be lit first.
UPDATE: I received the following response from a correspondent who wishes to remain anonymous. Which approach is correct? You decide.
On the Friday night during Chanukah, the Chanukah candles are traditionally lit before the Shabbat candles. This is because once the Shabbat candles are lit, it is Shabbat, so lighting fire is forbidden.
However, I recently spoke with a minyan that started their Friday night services well after sundown, and had an optional candle lighting right before services for those who wanted to take part. This is certainly widespread. So the question is, in what order should Shabbat and Chanukah candles be lit if they are lit after sundown?
One who is lighting candles after sundown is implicitly holding that lighting fire on Shabbat is permitted. Therefore, it seems to me that the reasoning above does not apply, and the principle of "tadir ve-she-eino tadir, tadir kodeim" should predominate. This principle states that a more common action should precede a less common action. (This is why shacharit precedes musaf, and why (according to Beit Hillel, whom we follow) borei peri hagafen precedes mekadeish ha-shabbat in the kiddush.) Therefore, since Shabbat is more common than Chanukah, it seems to me that in this circumstance, Shabbat candles should be lit first.
UPDATE: I received the following response from a correspondent who wishes to remain anonymous. Which approach is correct? You decide.
Just read your posting about Hanukkah/Shabbat candles - apparently I'm not up-to-date enough to actually comment on the blog itself, but here's my take: you're wrong in saying that people who light after sunset are implicitly holding that kindling fire on Shabbat is permitted. In fact, I would be very surprised to hear anyone who does light at such a minyan say that. I bet instead they would simply say that they light candles for Shabbat and Hanukkah, and hence light them before services - in other words, they're not Shabbat-observant. I think it's nice to try to judge them in the most favorable light possible - which I think you're doing in trying to force their actions into a halachic framework - but in doing so I don't think you're fairly representing them.
On a more practical note, I would suggest two things, from a halachic point of view, since there is really no way in halachah to support lighting fire on Shabbat:
1) It would be better to light using electric candles, since there is ample halachic support for the notion that using electricity is permitted on Shabbat, even if observant communities do not actually do so. It would be best to use battery-powered lights, so that the "fuel" is limited just as it is with regular candles.
2) You should still light Hanukkah candles before Shabbat candles, for a few reasons - first, "lo plug." Just because in this case you are lighting after sunset should not cause you to think that in general you should light Hanukkah candles after Shabbat candles; second, "lo titgodedu": it is better to light candles the same way Jews around the world are. We have our many and varied differences, but is it necessary for this to be one too? I think not.
Friday, December 30, 2005
The philanthropist wears no clothes
Great post on Jewschool responding to the Jewish Week's article on "hipster Judaism". And it includes shouts-out to Kol Zimrah and the rest of the independent minyan scene.
Thursday, December 29, 2005
Hiatus? I hardly know us!
I've been away from blogging for a while. Between teaching, KZ, NHC, Limmud NY, a visit to the old country, learning Talmud on the proverbial bus, a transit strike, and fighting the war on Christmas, there just hasn't been time. But I'll be back to it soon. I don't know if I'll ever catch up on blogging the Talmud. Summary: Many dapim later, Masechet Megillah is still engaged in midrash on Esther, though we're almost done with the first perek. Masechet Makkot has produced lots of plots for tannaitic murder mysteries, and we're also almost done with the first perek.
Upcoming posts:
Upcoming posts:
- Chanukah: divine agency vs. human agency
- New Year's Eve: performative ritual
- fawning book review of Al Franken's The Truth (with Jokes)
- nitpicky review of the first few chapters of The Physics of Superheroes
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Big bang nucleosynthesis
The long-awaited "big bang" (or as William Safire said, "the hamapatz hagadol"; I'd expect that from the hoi polloi, but not from Safire!) has arrived. Shimon Peres has left the Labor Party and put his support behind Sharon's Kadima party.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The New York Times reports that the Republicans are running as fast as they can from ex-Rep. Randy Cunningham. It seems that in this era of Republican lawlessness, they're even violating the Eleventh Commandment!
Just to review for those playing along at home, the six prominent Republicans who have been indicted or pleaded guilty so far (and that doesn't include the no-name DeLay associates and such) have been caught in no fewer than five separate investigations, in four different jurisdictions:
Just to review for those playing along at home, the six prominent Republicans who have been indicted or pleaded guilty so far (and that doesn't include the no-name DeLay associates and such) have been caught in no fewer than five separate investigations, in four different jurisdictions:
- Rep. Tom DeLay: indicted for money laundering and conspiracy to violate election law, state court in Texas
- Jack Abramoff: indicted for fraud in the SunCruz Casino case, federal court in Florida
- I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby: indicted for obstruction of justice, perjury, and false statements in the Plame affair, federal court in DC
- David Safavian and Michael Scanlon: indicted for false statements and obstruction; pleaded guilty to conspiracy to bribe [respectively], in the Abramoff-Reed Indian Gambling Scandal, federal court in DC
- Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham: pleaded guilty to tax evasion and conspiracy, federal court in California
We must move forward, not backward, upward, not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom
Does Ariel Sharon's new Kadima party take its name from this line from the original version of David Broza's optimistic song "Yihyeh Tov"?
I hope so!
V'az hu amar "Kadima, rak teitz'u meihashetachim"
I hope so!
Monday, November 28, 2005
Friday, November 25, 2005
When Esther first saw the Armenian man
Now that I'm in the old country with fewer distractions (except turkey), there's time to blog the Talmud.
Megillah 10b-11a:
Where we last left off, the Gemara on this perek had called it a day on commenting (in the broader sense) on the Mishnah, and had begun an extended midrashic work on Megillat Esther. We're still in the introduction.
Rabbi Levi has yet another received tradition from our ancestors: the ark that contained the tablets took up no space. Just do the math: the inner sanctum was twenty cubits in each dimension, and each cherub took up ten cubits, leaving zero cubits left over. Thus the ark only stood because a miracle suspended geometry (just like how there was room for everyone to prostrate themselves even though they were standing shoulder to shoulder). Far be it from me to second-guess a received tradition, but why do we assume that the ark and the cherubim were collinear? Why wouldn't they be arranged like this picture or this one or any other graphic representation of the ark?
The next step, before we dive into the text of Esther itself, is a series of petichtas to introduce the book. This is a homiletical form (seen in places like Vayikra Rabbah and Pesikta d'Rav Kahana) that ends with the target verse (often from the Torah), and begins with a verse from far away in Tanakh (often an unrelated verse from Neviim or Ketuvim), and gets from B to A by a complex chain of associations. But in this case, all we see is the verse from elsewhere and maybe a line or two of explanation. Each rabbi has his own petichta for Esther, each with the goal of situating Esther conceptually within the rest of the biblical tradition. Each one has a different idea about the main take-home message of Esther.
1) R. Yonatan opens with Isaiah 14:22. For him, the beginning of Esther is the fulfillment of the prophecy against Babylonia. Achashverosh's empire of 127 states is already evidence that Babylonia is no longer the dominant power. Isaiah's prophecy says that God will cut off Babylon's sheim (this refers to writing: no Babylonian writings survive except through other nations. Can the historians here address the veracity of this claim?), she'ar (this refers to language: the Aramaic language is dead, except in that one village in Syria, and ironically, among the Jews), nin (this refers to the kingship), and neched (this refers to Vashti, who according to tradition was the granddaughter of Nebuchadnezzar). Thus, the removal of Vashti is, for R. Yonatan, the completion of Bavel's fall.
I should note here that I was a bit surprised here (and further on) to see Vashti portrayed as a villain. In all the communities I've run in, Vashti has always been seen as a sympathetic character and/or feminist heroine (who stood up to Achashverosh's drunken misogyny), and it didn't occur to me that the rabbis would have thought otherwise. We then made a list of other characters who seem ok from the plain sense of the text, but whom the rabbis turned into bad guys. This list included Eisav, Bil'am, and Ishmael.
2) Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani opens with Isaiah 55:13. As do we. Could he have known that one day, this would be read as the haftarah on the afternoon before Purim? The na'atzutz is replaced with berosh: Haman, who made himself an idol to bow down to (and na'atzutz is associated with idolatry), is replaced with Mordechai, who is rosh of all the spices ("[besamim rosh] mor deror" is translated into Aramaic as "marei dechai"). The sirpad is replaced with hadas: Vashti (granddaughter of the one who burned the roof of God's house - saraf refidat beit h') is replaced by Esther (Hadassah). The last clauses of the verse (about an eternal sign) refer to the reading of the megillah and the days of Purim.
3) R. Yehoshua ben Levi opens with the curses in Deuteronomy 28:63. So for him, Haman's attempted destruction of the Jews was a gleeful divine punishment for their sins.
But then we see an objection to the idea that God is happy about the downfall of the wicked. When Moab and Ammon get defeated, Israel exclaims "hodu ladonai ki le'olam chasdo". "Ki tov" is missing, because God isn't happy.
This is the source for the famous midrash that when the Israelites crossed the sea, the angels began singing, until God said "My creations are drowning, and you sing songs of praise?!". Thus, we spill out wine from our cups for the Ten Plagues, and we abridge hallel during Pesach. Even the people we don't like are God's creations.
Rabbi Elazar resolves the contradiction: God itself doesn't rejoice, but makes others rejoice (yasis is in the causative). Whether or not this is the ideal response, it is certainly empirically true that humans rejoice at their enemies' downfall.
4) Rabbi Abba bar Kahana opens with Kohelet 2:26. Mordechai is the good guy, Haman is the bad guy, and Mordechai and Esther end up with Haman's stuff at the end. This is the cowboy reading of Esther: the good guys always win.
5) Rabbah bar Ofran opens with Jeremiah 49:38. Elam is Persia. Again, a prophecy about upheaval is fulfilled. The melech is Vashti (in a gender-bending role), and the sarim are Haman and his ten sons.
6) Rav Dimi bar Yitzchak opens with Ezra 9:9. Self-explanatory: God has "extended mercy to us in the sight of the kinds of Persia".
7) Rabbi Chanina bar Papa opens with Psalm 66:12. We went through fire (in the time of Nebuchadnezzar) and water (in the time of Pharaoh), but now it's all going to be ok.
8) Rabbi Yochanan opens with Psalm 98:3. Self-explanatory salvation.
9) Reish Lakish opens with Proverbs 28:15. The lion is Nebuchadnezzar. The bear is Achashverosh (since those Persians eat and drink like bears, get fat like bears, grow hair like bears, and are restless like bears - funny, I thought bears were known for sleeping). The wicked ruler is He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, and guess who the humble nation is.
10) Rabbi Elazar opens with Kohelet 10:18. Israel got lazy with the mitzvot, so (if such a thing were possible) God got weak, leaving Haman with free reign to attack Israel's compromised immune system.
11) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak opens with Psalm 124:1-2. God saved us when a plain old adam, not a king, rose against us. That's right, it was Haman!
12) Rava opens with Proverbs 29:2. Guess who the "righteous" and "wicked" are supposed to be. This verse encapsulates the plot of the megillah, but in reverse order, thanks to comic inversion.
13) Rav Matanah opens with Deuteronomy 4:7 - look how great we are!
14) Rav Ashi opens with Deuteronomy 4:34, and he gets the last word, so Purim is framed as a story of Pesach-like wonders and redemption.
In conclusion, Esther is a Rorschach test.
***
Exegesis begins.
VAYHI BIMEI ACHASHVEROSH!!! IT HAPPENED IN THE DAYS OF ACHASHVEROSH!
Vay vehi -- oy vey!
Rav sees the glass as half empty, while Shmuel sees it as half full. Yes, this is a story of exile and persecution, but even in the worst of times, God hasn't forgotten Israel. Even in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, there was Daniel and his buddies. In the time of the Greeks, there were Shimon haTzaddik and the Maccabees. In the time of Haman, there were Mordechai and Esther. In the time of the Persians (here the rabbis talk about their own time), there were the rabbis! And in the future, no nation will be able to rule over Israel.
Shabbat is about to arrive in Chicago, so I'll stop there for now.
Megillah 10b-11a:
Where we last left off, the Gemara on this perek had called it a day on commenting (in the broader sense) on the Mishnah, and had begun an extended midrashic work on Megillat Esther. We're still in the introduction.
Rabbi Levi has yet another received tradition from our ancestors: the ark that contained the tablets took up no space. Just do the math: the inner sanctum was twenty cubits in each dimension, and each cherub took up ten cubits, leaving zero cubits left over. Thus the ark only stood because a miracle suspended geometry (just like how there was room for everyone to prostrate themselves even though they were standing shoulder to shoulder). Far be it from me to second-guess a received tradition, but why do we assume that the ark and the cherubim were collinear? Why wouldn't they be arranged like this picture or this one or any other graphic representation of the ark?
The next step, before we dive into the text of Esther itself, is a series of petichtas to introduce the book. This is a homiletical form (seen in places like Vayikra Rabbah and Pesikta d'Rav Kahana) that ends with the target verse (often from the Torah), and begins with a verse from far away in Tanakh (often an unrelated verse from Neviim or Ketuvim), and gets from B to A by a complex chain of associations. But in this case, all we see is the verse from elsewhere and maybe a line or two of explanation. Each rabbi has his own petichta for Esther, each with the goal of situating Esther conceptually within the rest of the biblical tradition. Each one has a different idea about the main take-home message of Esther.
1) R. Yonatan opens with Isaiah 14:22. For him, the beginning of Esther is the fulfillment of the prophecy against Babylonia. Achashverosh's empire of 127 states is already evidence that Babylonia is no longer the dominant power. Isaiah's prophecy says that God will cut off Babylon's sheim (this refers to writing: no Babylonian writings survive except through other nations. Can the historians here address the veracity of this claim?), she'ar (this refers to language: the Aramaic language is dead, except in that one village in Syria, and ironically, among the Jews), nin (this refers to the kingship), and neched (this refers to Vashti, who according to tradition was the granddaughter of Nebuchadnezzar). Thus, the removal of Vashti is, for R. Yonatan, the completion of Bavel's fall.
I should note here that I was a bit surprised here (and further on) to see Vashti portrayed as a villain. In all the communities I've run in, Vashti has always been seen as a sympathetic character and/or feminist heroine (who stood up to Achashverosh's drunken misogyny), and it didn't occur to me that the rabbis would have thought otherwise. We then made a list of other characters who seem ok from the plain sense of the text, but whom the rabbis turned into bad guys. This list included Eisav, Bil'am, and Ishmael.
2) Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani opens with Isaiah 55:13. As do we. Could he have known that one day, this would be read as the haftarah on the afternoon before Purim? The na'atzutz is replaced with berosh: Haman, who made himself an idol to bow down to (and na'atzutz is associated with idolatry), is replaced with Mordechai, who is rosh of all the spices ("[besamim rosh] mor deror" is translated into Aramaic as "marei dechai"). The sirpad is replaced with hadas: Vashti (granddaughter of the one who burned the roof of God's house - saraf refidat beit h') is replaced by Esther (Hadassah). The last clauses of the verse (about an eternal sign) refer to the reading of the megillah and the days of Purim.
3) R. Yehoshua ben Levi opens with the curses in Deuteronomy 28:63. So for him, Haman's attempted destruction of the Jews was a gleeful divine punishment for their sins.
But then we see an objection to the idea that God is happy about the downfall of the wicked. When Moab and Ammon get defeated, Israel exclaims "hodu ladonai ki le'olam chasdo". "Ki tov" is missing, because God isn't happy.
This is the source for the famous midrash that when the Israelites crossed the sea, the angels began singing, until God said "My creations are drowning, and you sing songs of praise?!". Thus, we spill out wine from our cups for the Ten Plagues, and we abridge hallel during Pesach. Even the people we don't like are God's creations.
Rabbi Elazar resolves the contradiction: God itself doesn't rejoice, but makes others rejoice (yasis is in the causative). Whether or not this is the ideal response, it is certainly empirically true that humans rejoice at their enemies' downfall.
4) Rabbi Abba bar Kahana opens with Kohelet 2:26. Mordechai is the good guy, Haman is the bad guy, and Mordechai and Esther end up with Haman's stuff at the end. This is the cowboy reading of Esther: the good guys always win.
5) Rabbah bar Ofran opens with Jeremiah 49:38. Elam is Persia. Again, a prophecy about upheaval is fulfilled. The melech is Vashti (in a gender-bending role), and the sarim are Haman and his ten sons.
6) Rav Dimi bar Yitzchak opens with Ezra 9:9. Self-explanatory: God has "extended mercy to us in the sight of the kinds of Persia".
7) Rabbi Chanina bar Papa opens with Psalm 66:12. We went through fire (in the time of Nebuchadnezzar) and water (in the time of Pharaoh), but now it's all going to be ok.
8) Rabbi Yochanan opens with Psalm 98:3. Self-explanatory salvation.
9) Reish Lakish opens with Proverbs 28:15. The lion is Nebuchadnezzar. The bear is Achashverosh (since those Persians eat and drink like bears, get fat like bears, grow hair like bears, and are restless like bears - funny, I thought bears were known for sleeping). The wicked ruler is He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, and guess who the humble nation is.
10) Rabbi Elazar opens with Kohelet 10:18. Israel got lazy with the mitzvot, so (if such a thing were possible) God got weak, leaving Haman with free reign to attack Israel's compromised immune system.
11) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak opens with Psalm 124:1-2. God saved us when a plain old adam, not a king, rose against us. That's right, it was Haman!
12) Rava opens with Proverbs 29:2. Guess who the "righteous" and "wicked" are supposed to be. This verse encapsulates the plot of the megillah, but in reverse order, thanks to comic inversion.
13) Rav Matanah opens with Deuteronomy 4:7 - look how great we are!
14) Rav Ashi opens with Deuteronomy 4:34, and he gets the last word, so Purim is framed as a story of Pesach-like wonders and redemption.
In conclusion, Esther is a Rorschach test.
***
Exegesis begins.
VAYHI BIMEI ACHASHVEROSH!!! IT HAPPENED IN THE DAYS OF ACHASHVEROSH!
Vay vehi -- oy vey!
Rav sees the glass as half empty, while Shmuel sees it as half full. Yes, this is a story of exile and persecution, but even in the worst of times, God hasn't forgotten Israel. Even in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, there was Daniel and his buddies. In the time of the Greeks, there were Shimon haTzaddik and the Maccabees. In the time of Haman, there were Mordechai and Esther. In the time of the Persians (here the rabbis talk about their own time), there were the rabbis! And in the future, no nation will be able to rule over Israel.
Shabbat is about to arrive in Chicago, so I'll stop there for now.
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
To the book depository!
This is the speech that JFK would have given in Dallas on November 22, 1963.
Monday, November 21, 2005
The little bang
Sharon is leaving the Likud! And starting his own party called National Responsibility. But Shimon Peres is staying in Labor, and it's unclear whether anyone else will defect from Labor. Sharon has asked President Katsav to dissolve the Knesset and call for early elections, which must happen within 90 days.
The world says no to war
The Union of Reform Judaism biennial just ended in Houston. Velveteen Rabbi has blogged about it at great length.
The most important part of the week was that the URJ delegates overwhelmingly passed a resolution calling for an exit strategy from Iraq and a withdrawal of troops.
Full press release and full text of the resolution.
Kudos to the URJ. Finally, the organizations perceived as speaking for the Jewish community are breaking their silence on this disastrous war. It would have been even better if they had shown this kind of spine in early 2003, but hey, better late than never.
The delegates also voted to oppose the Alito nomination, support voting rights for the District of Columbia, and support the right of workers to organize and bargain collectively. Yasher koach.
The other highlight of the Biennial (for me, sitting over 1000 miles away) was that my aunt was an honored guest at Rabbi Eric Yoffie's "State of the Union" sermon, like the special guests who stand up during the president's State of the Union address (except Rosa Parks z"l, who "may get up or not as she chooses").
Yoffie said:
The sermon also included other great statements on behalf of the Religious Left. After praising the Jewish community's role in disaster relief following Hurricane Katrina, Yoffie says:
Also, his attack on the "Religious Right" has been lauded all over the liberal blogosphere:
In an otherwise excellent address, I found a few things perplexing. First of all, the Reform movement appears to be petitioning for a Reform rabbi to receive a state salary like her Orthodox counterparts. This position of antidisestablishmentarianism seems inconsistent with the movement's other positions. Particularly in light of Rabbi Yoffie's Katrina comments above, shouldn't they be seeking to dismantle the Israeli theocracy rather than broaden it? I understand that getting funding for a few Reform rabbis is a more attainable goal than removing funding from thousands of Orthodox rabbis. But it would be even easier (and wouldn't even require court intervention) to say "you can't fire me, I quit!" and spin the lack of government funding for the Reform movement by saying that the movement doesn't believe in taking government money. This allows the movement to declare victory and go home, and keep its hands clean from the corrupting influence of excessive entanglement.
Also, a major section of the sermon dealt with making synagogues into welcoming communities for everyone. Obviously this is a praiseworthy goal, and I agree with everything Yoffie said. The problem is what he didn't say. Yoffie mentioned specific constituencies to reach out to, such as single parents, or empty-nesters who leave their congregation after the kids move out. Apparently I don't exist. There was no mention anywhere in the address of the existence of Jews who are between high school age and becoming parents (even college students weren't mentioned, though most Hillel Reform minyanim are pathetic). They haven't listened to a thing I've said. And these unaffiliated Jews who are to be reached out to are presumed to be Jewishly uneducated. Is the Reform movement triaging us, because they simply see educated lay childless adults as a lost cause?
If the Reform movement is advocating for causes I believe in but doesn't want me as a part of it, I'll just have to accept that and continue to admire its advocacy from the outside. There's room for both of us.
The most important part of the week was that the URJ delegates overwhelmingly passed a resolution calling for an exit strategy from Iraq and a withdrawal of troops.
In addition to the development of an exit strategy, the resolution calls on the Bush administration to provide more transparency regarding all aspects of the war and calls for a bi-partisan, independent commission to determine the lessons learned from this war’s failures. It also condemns “in the strongest possible terms,” violations of the Geneva Conventions, including torture and abuse of prisoners and detainees in US custody, and condemns those who would use opposition to the war as a justification for anti-Israel efforts.
Full press release and full text of the resolution.
Kudos to the URJ. Finally, the organizations perceived as speaking for the Jewish community are breaking their silence on this disastrous war. It would have been even better if they had shown this kind of spine in early 2003, but hey, better late than never.
The delegates also voted to oppose the Alito nomination, support voting rights for the District of Columbia, and support the right of workers to organize and bargain collectively. Yasher koach.
The other highlight of the Biennial (for me, sitting over 1000 miles away) was that my aunt was an honored guest at Rabbi Eric Yoffie's "State of the Union" sermon, like the special guests who stand up during the president's State of the Union address (except Rosa Parks z"l, who "may get up or not as she chooses").
Yoffie said:
To begin with, we need to do far more for the non-Jewish spouses in our midst. We welcome all such spouses, of course, including those who do not identify as Jewish. But when a spouse involves herself in the activities of the synagogue; offers support to the Jewish involvements of husband or wife; attends Jewish worship; and, most important of all, commits to raising Jewish children, he or she is deserving not only of welcome but of our profound thanks.
These spouses are heroes—yes, heroes—of Jewish life. While maintaining some measure of attachment to their own traditions, and sometimes continuing to practice their religion, they take on responsibilities that, by any reasonable calculation, belong to the Jewish spouse. And very often they do all of this without recognition from either their Jewish family or their synagogue.
I would like you to meet one such hero. Helen _______ met Richard, her husband-to-be, on a blind date and later took an Introduction to Judaism class with him. Although she enjoyed the class and admired Judaism, she did not think that she could convert. But she and Richard agreed to raise their children as Jews and joined Temple Emanuel here in Houston. When her two boys started preschool, Helen felt embraced by the synagogue. Over time, much of the family’s holiday and Shabbat preparation fell to her, and she grew to enjoy it. She also became involved in the Parent-Teacher Organization of the religious school. When her husband fell ill with colon cancer in 2003, Judaism was a source of consolation and the temple offered support throughout. Following Richard’s death earlier this year, Helen and her sons—Daniel, 10, and Adam, 8—have remained immersed in religious school and temple life. I would like to ask Helen to stand.
Our obligation is to extend our appreciation with a full embrace to Helen and to others like her.
The sermon also included other great statements on behalf of the Religious Left. After praising the Jewish community's role in disaster relief following Hurricane Katrina, Yoffie says:
Contrast this to the government response at all levels. This is a story that has been told many times and that I need not repeat.
But it is important that we draw the proper conclusions.
Incredibly, federal officials are using this tragedy to promote so-called faith-based initiatives. The failures of government and the successes of religion are now seen as a reason why churches and synagogues should be state-funded to do what the government has been unable or unwilling to do.
But this is absurd for many reasons. First, we religious people do what we do because it is God’s work and it is right. People of faith do not need government handouts to do what God expects of us. The last thing we want is politicians dangling million-dollar grants in front of us with a promise of more if only we will support them. Some may think that religious leaders will somehow be immune to the corrupting influence of power and money, but believe me, we will not.
Second, religious programs can only supplement government programs; they can never replace them. The damage caused by Katrina and Rita was so devastating that years will pass before some areas return to a semblance of normality. In these situations, religious acts of charity, no matter how laudable, can never be enough.
What is required in these cases is a competent, well-financed, and well-prepared government response. So let’s be clear: The lesson of Katrina is that religious institutions play a big role in American life, but social service is the job of government and cannot be farmed out.
Also, his attack on the "Religious Right" has been lauded all over the liberal blogosphere:
We are particularly offended by the suggestion that the opposite of the Religious Right is the voice of atheism. We are appalled when “people of faith” is used in such a way that it excludes us, as well as most Jews, Catholics, and Muslims. What could be more bigoted than to claim that you have a monopoly on God and that anyone who disagrees with you is not a person of faith?
So we ask our neighbors on the Religious Right to take note: We are religious Jews, gathered in Houston to study, pray, and commit ourselves to God. And yes, we are generally liberal in our politics. But our liberalism flows directly from our religious commitments.
And we worry that you don’t understand what this means, or what it means for anyone to be a liberal religious believer.
What it means is this: that we bring a measure of humility to our religious belief. We study religious texts day and night, but we have no direct lines to heaven and we aren’t always sure that we know God’s will.
It means believing that religion involves concern for the poor and the needy, and giving a fair shake to all. When people talk about God and yet ignore justice, it just feels downright wrong to us. When they cloak themselves in religion and forget mercy, it strikes us as blasphemy.
It means that “family values” require providing health care to every child and that God cares about the 12 million children without health insurance.
It means valuing a child with diabetes over a frozen embryo in a fertility clinic, and seeing the teaching of science as a primary social good.
And it means reserving the right for each person to prayerfully make decisions for herself about when she dies.
It also means believing in legal protection for gay couples. We understand those who believe that the Bible opposes gay marriage, even though we read that text in a very different way. But we cannot understand why any two people who make a lifelong commitment to each other should be denied legal guarantees that protect them and their children and benefit the broader society. We cannot forget that when Hitler came to power in 1933, one of the first things that he did was ban gay organizations. And today, we cannot feel anything but rage when we hear about gay men and women, some on the front lines, being hounded out of our armed services. Yes, we can disagree about gay marriage. But there is no excuse for hateful rhetoric that fuels the hellfires of anti-gay bigotry.
In an otherwise excellent address, I found a few things perplexing. First of all, the Reform movement appears to be petitioning for a Reform rabbi to receive a state salary like her Orthodox counterparts. This position of antidisestablishmentarianism seems inconsistent with the movement's other positions. Particularly in light of Rabbi Yoffie's Katrina comments above, shouldn't they be seeking to dismantle the Israeli theocracy rather than broaden it? I understand that getting funding for a few Reform rabbis is a more attainable goal than removing funding from thousands of Orthodox rabbis. But it would be even easier (and wouldn't even require court intervention) to say "you can't fire me, I quit!" and spin the lack of government funding for the Reform movement by saying that the movement doesn't believe in taking government money. This allows the movement to declare victory and go home, and keep its hands clean from the corrupting influence of excessive entanglement.
Also, a major section of the sermon dealt with making synagogues into welcoming communities for everyone. Obviously this is a praiseworthy goal, and I agree with everything Yoffie said. The problem is what he didn't say. Yoffie mentioned specific constituencies to reach out to, such as single parents, or empty-nesters who leave their congregation after the kids move out. Apparently I don't exist. There was no mention anywhere in the address of the existence of Jews who are between high school age and becoming parents (even college students weren't mentioned, though most Hillel Reform minyanim are pathetic). They haven't listened to a thing I've said. And these unaffiliated Jews who are to be reached out to are presumed to be Jewishly uneducated. Is the Reform movement triaging us, because they simply see educated lay childless adults as a lost cause?
If the Reform movement is advocating for causes I believe in but doesn't want me as a part of it, I'll just have to accept that and continue to admire its advocacy from the outside. There's room for both of us.
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Dolph is Jewish!!!
Dolph, one of the bullies on The Simpsons, was outed tonight as going to Hebrew school!
So far the confirmed Jewish Simpsons characters include Krusty the Clown, his father Rabbi Hyman Krustofsky, Mr. Bergstrom, the Crazy Old Man, and Lisa's imaginary friend. Am I missing any?
Tonight's episode also revealed the Crazy Cat Lady's name to be Eleanor Abernathy. Between this new revelation and learning the Comic Book Guy's name (Jeff Albertson), is there any mystery left in the world?
So far the confirmed Jewish Simpsons characters include Krusty the Clown, his father Rabbi Hyman Krustofsky, Mr. Bergstrom, the Crazy Old Man, and Lisa's imaginary friend. Am I missing any?
Tonight's episode also revealed the Crazy Cat Lady's name to be Eleanor Abernathy. Between this new revelation and learning the Comic Book Guy's name (Jeff Albertson), is there any mystery left in the world?
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
It's gonna be cold, cold, cold, cold, cold
Tomorrow is projected to be the First Cold Day (FCD) of the year (or at least the first cold schoolday) in Manhattan. We're planning to bust open the giant can of hot chocolate in my office.
When Chekhov saw the long winter, he saw a winter bleak and dark and bereft of hope. Yet we know that winter is just another step in the cycle of life. But standing here among the people of Punxsutawney and basking in the warmth of their hearths and hearts, I couldn't imagine a better fate than a long and lustrous winter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)