DOVBEAR

Shocking: Newt lied when he reprimanded that hapless moderator

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:58:00 +0000

What follows was taken from Slate and written by Josh Voorhees

This story is false. Every personal friend I had in that period says the story was false. We offered several of them to ABC to prove it was false. They weren’t interested because they would like to attack any Republican. They’re attacking the governor, they’re attacking me, I’m sure they’ll get around to Sen. Santorum, and Congressman Paul. I am tired of the elite media protecting Barack Obama by attacking Republicans."

That was Newt Gingrich's memorable response last week to moderator John King after he opened the CNN debate with a question about Gingrich's ex-wife's claims that the GOP hopeful sought an open marriage. The rant was a crowd pleaser and not only allowed Gingrich to shake off the rather explosive allegations, but even to gain a little more of the all-important political momentum.

There's only one problem: Gingrich's camp now admits that the candidate was less than truthful during the debate -- and in a follow-up interview with CNN -- about who, exactly, he offered to ABC to refute the story. CNN reports that after "persistent" questions on the topic, Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond now says that the only people the campaign offered to ABC were the former House speaker's two daughters, Jackie Cushman and Kathy Gingrich Lubbers, who regularly appear on the campaign trail and who wrote a letter to ABC News defending their father that was widely circulated in the media.

That admission backs up ABC's on-the-record denial of Gingrich's original claim, something that Gingrich deemed "just plain baloney" on Tuesday. "If they're saying that, then they're not being honest," Gingrich said then. "We had several people prepared to be very clear and very aggressive in their dispute about that, and (ABC News) wasn't interested."

So there you have it. The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple put it best: "What CNN pried out of Gingrich &Co. was something akin to a correction. And like most corrections, it hits the public realm with a much smaller splash than the original erroneous accusation."

Search for more information about Josh Verhees at 4torah.com

The super-star of sanctimony

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:27:00 +0000

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The super-star of sanctimony is his excellence Newt Gingrich, as Jon Stewart aptly points out. (picks up at around 3.00)

Curious: Is there anyone in the real, non-South Carolina world who thinks this guy is to be taken seriously?

Search for more information about Newt at 4torah.com
Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog
Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

No one could move during darkness?

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:19:00 +0000

We famously interpret the plague of darkness as something that prevented the Egyptians from moving. "During the last three days, one who sat could not stand up, one who stood could not sit down, and one who was lying down could not rise upright."(Exodus Raba 14:3) and " It was the most complete, the most comprehensive literal suffering. It meant each man being held, chained and fasting, to the spot in which he happened to be." (Samson Raphael Hirsch)

My hunch is that this all based on a misunderstanding.

A purpose of the plagues as per God's own words was to embarrass the Egyptian deities, and to demonstrate that God is the true god.

Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments: (Exodus 6:6)
And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch forth mine hand upon Egypt (Exodus 7:5)
For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD.(Exodus 12:12)

I propose (actually, I think I saw it in Sarna's Exploring Exodus: The Origins of Biblical Israel) that darkness was an "attack" on the sun god

Sun worship was exceptionally prevalent in ancient Egyptian religion. The earliest deities associated with the sun are all goddesses: Wadjet, Sekhmet, Hathor, Nut, Bast,Bat, and Menhit. First Hathor, and then Isis, give birth to and nurse Horus and Ra. Hathor the horned-cow is one of the 12 daughters of Ra, gifted with joy and is a wet-nurse to Horus.The Sun's movement across the sky represents a struggle between the Pharaoh's soul and an avatar of Osiris. Ra travels across the sky in his solar-boat; at dawn he drives away the demon Apep of darkness. The "solarisation" of several local gods (Hnum-Re, Min-Re, Amon-Re) reaches its peak in the period of the fifth dynasty. (Wikipedia)

A millennium or more later, Jewish readers had no idea such a sun god existed. To them, the plauge of darkness seemed weird and especially unremarkable as the penultimate punishment. They asked, "What was so terrible about darkness? In what sense is that a plague?"

So, they read the psukim closely to find an answer.... "Can't move" was one solution. But it seems to have been based on a lack or information.

Search for more information about midrashic reality at 4torah.com

Demolishing Dumb Arguments: Bray's Appeal to Authority

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:38:00 +0000

I don't mean to pick on Bray, but his post yesterday does provide us with the opportunity to say a few things about logical reasoning.

He wrote:

...the fact that the [Hasidic] movement captured the hearts and minds of such intellectual and spiritual giants as the Alteh Rebbe, the Hafloah, the Kotzker, the Rim, the Divrei Chaim, the Sfas Emes, the Bnei Yissoskhor, the Lubliner Kohen, the Khelkas Yoav, the Kozhiklover, Rav Meir Shapiro and Rav Menachem Ziemba to name but a few, belies the conventional wisdom that Besh"tian Khasidus was a grass roots movement meant to serve the unlettered and unwashed masses.

The errors here are multiple. First, it's an appeal to authority. We're asked to accept that Hasidut is valid because the "hearts and minds" of various " intellectual and spiritual giants" were captured by it. Using Bray's logic you can also argue for the validity of Christianity on the basis of Newton, Amselem, Abelard, Thomas Aquinas, and the other intellectual giants who embraced it.

Second, the passage suggests that the Alteh Rebbe, et al, were all fully grown adults, living solid anti-Hasidic lives, when in an instant they were "captured" by the Baal Shem Tov and his irrefutable arguments. However, not one of the people on Bray's list ever met the Baal Shem Tov, and one, the Hafloah, was in no sense a Chasid.

Several of the listed Rabbis were born long after the founder of Hasidut died, and long after his movement had transitioned, as all movements do, into something else entirely. Rabbi Yehudah Aryeh Leib Alter (the Sfas Emes), Rabbi Yoav Yehoshua Weingarten, (the Chelkas Yoav), Rav Meir Shapiro, and Rav Menchamem Ziemba were active in the 20th century. Like their predecessors Rav Zvi Elimelech Spira (The Bnai Yissacher) and Rav Chaim Halberstam (the Divrei Chaim), they were born to Hasidic parents in a Hasidic universe. In no sense can any of these men be described as being "captured" by the Baal Shem Tov, or his teachings. In fact, with the exception of the Alter Rebbe, and the possible exception of the Kotzker and Lubliner Kohen, who were born Misnagdim in a time and place where a new form of Hasidut was ascending, not one of the people on his list can properly be considered converts to the Baal Shem Tov's movement.

Though Bray might believe (as he wrote) "If they were as smart as you they would have walked away." such a statement reveals two fundamental misunderstandings (1) You generally DONT walk away from things you're born into (See Newton, Abelard, and other geniuses who didn't "walk away" from Christianity) --moreover, in that time and place, such rebellions were exceedingly rare; and (2) by the time almost all the Rabbis on Bray's list emerged, Hasidut had transitioned into something unlike the Baal Shem Tov's original movement.

Adds "S"

The Kotzker was a chossid of R. Bunim of Pshishcha who is otherwise known for intellectualizing Chassidus. R. Tzadok was a talmid of another talmid of R. Bunim. R. Menachem Ziemba, etc. was a Gur chossid, and Gur also came to the world through R. Bunim.
So . . . these are not examples which prove that at the beginning Chassidus was not a mass movement for Jewish peasants who loved their schnapps. Maybe you can prove it, but not from the intellectual revolution which occurred 75 years after the Baal Shem died.

Search for more information about the origins of Hasidut at 4torah.com
Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog
Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Rise of the Mega-Yeshivos-

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:55:00 +0000

By the BRAY of FUNDIE

I have never been really comfortable with the academic historical narrative about the origins of the Khasidic movement. Received wisdom always talks about the voids being addressed by the movement. The Rabbis grew remote and out-of-touch from the people. Common folk felt disenfranchised and hopeless etc. etc. Yet the fact that the movement captured the hearts and minds of such intellectual and spiritual giants as the Alteh Rebbe, the Hafloah, the Kotzker, the Rim, the Divrei Chaim, the Sfas Emes, the Bnei Yissoskhor, the Lubliner Kohen, the Khelkas Yoav, the Kozhiklover, Rav Meir Shapiro and Rav Menachem Ziemba to name but a few, belies the conventional wisdom that Besh"tian Khasidus was a grass roots movement meant to serve the unlettered and unwashed masses.

Nevertheless Khasidus did, in fact, address the spiritual needs and helped actualize the spiritual potential, or at least the religious yearnings, of masses of adherents and it continues to do so. Yeshivas traditionally gained cache and traction by virtue of the quality of the lamdonim who were their alumni. Few Yeshivaleit today know if Slabodka Mir and Telshe on the eve of World War II had 200, 400 or 4000 students. Nor can they say with any accuracy exactly how many branches comprised the Novardhoker Yeshiva Network. The reason? No one really cares, the number of students enrolled is beside the point of these legendary Yeshivos historical significance. OTOH Khasidus, at least over the last century, gained historical significance mostly by dint of large numbers. With a few notable exceptions the Khasidic groups who were major players over that time were the ones that boasted thousands of Khasidim. Satmar, Lubavitch, Ger, Belz, Vishnitz all have thousands of adherents, many Moisdos and concomitant political clout and influence.

By definition elitist institutions raise the requirement bar for membership in good standing higher than mass movements do. The skill-set mix needed to have "made-it" in historical Slabodka, Mir, Brisk, Chachmei Lublin or even the Lakewood of RAK included exemplary critical and abstract thinking, diligence (hasmoda), attention to detail, attention/concentration surplus disorder, creativity and, very often, asceticism, a high pain threshold and the ability to endure poverty and privation stoically . To lead such institutions required all of the above plus a mind of genius, great administrative and rhetorical talents, pedagogical virtuosity and , quite often, the kind of "publish-or-perish" pressures one associates with secular academia (though in the case of Brisk it was more like "perish-and-then-publish").

In contradistinction to this membership in good standing in the diverse khasidic movements required a whole different skill set and, arguably, one that is easier, less demanding and more commonly found among great numbers of people. These include self-abnegation to the Leader, an obscurantist sensibility, a suspension of disbelief in the miraculous and in the Masters capacity to work same, a tendency towards group-think, the wearing of a uniform, a willingness to travel and spend quality time away from wife and family and a religious sensibility predicated more on heart than on head. To lead such tribes was very often, nothing more than an accident of birth. Preferably, in order to maintain or build up the following, Khasidic leadership required a great and empathic heart, a passionate approach to the staples of daily Jewish life like davening, Shabbos and Yom Tov, formulating a cause or a leitmotif that proffered the khasidim a distinct sense of identity (some might call this the narcissism of small differences) and a sharp piqkhus . Even this last quality is intellectual without being academic. Most would associate piqkhus more with street smarts than with book smarts.

Today there exist two Mega-Yeshivas. Mir in Jerusalem boasts an enrollment of 6000+ while BMG in Lakewood, New Jersey may be up over 7000. The rise of these gigantic Yeshivas and the concomitant marginalization of almost all other Yeshivas for talmidim who are 23+ represents a sea change in the very institution and , in a way far more telling than uniform l'vush, their Chasidification.

Historically Torah Observant Jews in eastern Europe managed to lead lives of observance and commitment with a mere Kheder schooling. An amkha yid might not have been capable of self-study of Gemara but was a member of Khevra Mishnayos, Shas or Ein Yaakov. Kashrus and other basic halakhos were absorbed through observing parental and communal behaviors. The great Yeshivos Gedolos were reserved for a tiny intellectual elite. Jews receiving the equivalent of an eighth grade education and/or, in the case of the women, no formal schooling at all managed to stay ehrlich and live halakhically until the day they died.

But all this began changing in the inter-war period of revolutionary and nationalistic ferment and was accelerated by the War and the post-war American melting pot and the Israeli gallop towards Westernization. Now, without the inoculation against the winds of change provided by in-depth Torah study for many years ones Jewish identity and fealty to Halakha becomes suspect. And so Yeshivas adapted and evolved/devolved to the point that they have become open-admission and long term institutions.

But converting from elitist academies to mass cities of refuge against the rising tide of heresy and materialism comes at a price. Academic standards fall. Fidelity to a particular ideology replaced intellectual acuity as the currency of admission and acceptance. A student body too unwieldy to manage as individuals must be integrated through the glue of group-think. Those who think alike begin to dress alike and books of peoples inner-lives are judged by their covers. Self-delusions of scholarly grandeur persist only so long and values other than great academic achievement in determining ones self-worth begin to creep in.

I have long held these beliefs to be fairly self-evident but I was particularly struck by the encomiums I heard about the late great Mirrer Rosh HaYeshiva Rav Noson Tzvi Finkel OBM at his shloshim. His love and support for each and every student were praised. Speakers were in awe of his self-sacrifice in particularly on behalf of the spiritual growth of others. He was lauded as a great fund-raiser and institution builder. He was extolled as one who did, and in the afterlife would continue, storming the gates of heaven to advocate on behalf of his students and on behalf of all Jews. Anecdotes of scrupulous observance without compromise in the face of great pain and extraordinary challenges were heard.

I closed my eyes for a moment and wondered; "Are these hespedim for the Mirrer Rosh HaYeshiva... or for Reb Shloimeleh, the Bobover Rebbe ZYA???" Almost every praise about RNTF that I heard were those one normally associates with a Khasidic Master rather than with a Lithaninan Rosh HaYeshiva. Conspicuously absent were any mentions of Geonus, Iluyis, profundity, bekius, power of Horoah, originality in approach or novelty in khidushim. How incredibly different these hespedim were from those of the prior Mirrer Roshei Yeshiva Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz OBM and Rav Nokhum Trackaier OBM a generation earlier or even from those of Rav Berel Shvartzman OBM, who headed up a mid-size, decidedly non mega-Yeshiva a mere week before.

As gauged by that which is deemed praiseworthy an entire cultures value system had changed in my lifetime. ( See Rabenu Yonah where he explains Mishlei 27:21). IMO the mega-Yeshiva is the Coup de Grâce of Chasidification of the rest of us. All the other external trappings of the Chasidification are merely external symptoms of this inner shift in core values.

Search for more information about BRAY OF FUNDIE at 4torah.com
Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog
Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

The amazing chiasmus at the beginning of parsha Va'aira

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:36:00 +0000

"The manifestation of aesthetic phenomena in Scripture cannot be brushed aside as an unnecessary luxury. The aesthetic exposure is broad and extensive, involving vast swaths of narratives and poetry. God used a complex of aesthetic patterns as He revealed Himself in Scripture." -- Jo Ann Davidson, Toward a Theology of Beauty: A Biblical Perspective

As Nehama Leibowitzand others have pointed out, the opening speech in parshas Va'aira take the form of a chiasmus. "In rhetoric, chiasmus (from the Greek: χιάζω, chiázō, "to shape like the letter Χ") is the figure of speech in which two or more clauses are related to each other through a reversal of structures in order to make a larger point; that is, the clauses display inverted parallelism."(Wikipedia)

In a typical chiasmus, the first and last thought are parallel, as are the second and second to last thought, and so on. Here's the example from Va'aira, with each clause lettered to illustrate the parallels:

And G-d said to Moses:

I am the Lord.
[A] I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as the Lord Almighty, but by my name G-d I was not known to them.
[B] I also established my covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, where they lived as aliens.
[C] Moreover, I have heard the groaning of the Israelites, whom the Egyptians are enslaving, and have remembered my covenant. Therefore say to the Israelites,
I am the Lord
[C1]and I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. I will free you from being slaves to them, and will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgments. I will take you as my own people, and I will be your G-d. Then you will know that I am the Lord your G-d who brought you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians.
[B1]And I will bring you to the land I swore with uplifted hands to give
[A1] to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. I will give it to you as a possession.
I am the Lord.

In Covenant Conversation: The Book of RedemptionChief Rabbi Sacks fleshes out the parallels as follows:

A and A1 are about the Avot
B and B1 are about the land
C and C1 are about slavery

A-C are in the past tense and speak of Israel as them
A1-C1 are in the future tense and speak of Israel as you.

A-C are exactly fifty words in the original Hebrew.
A1-C1 are also fifty words.

Search for more information about Chiasmus at 4torah.com
Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog
Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

And they say bloggers are mean? (Williamsburg tries to ban Ami)

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:54:00 +0000

Thanks to our crack Williamsburg correspondent for providing this nasty bit of business he found in Dvar Yom Be'yomo a daily paper of classified ads distributed in Williamsburg shuls and groceries. Its basically an old-style blog. Apparently, Dvar Yom Be'yomo supports the goons of Bet Shemesh and wishes to punish the Ami magazine for disagreeing.

Translation provided by the correspondent:

Residents of Williamsburg brothers in opinion:

Being that recently some began to sell in our town the "Ami" magazine which spreads rotten views (hashkafot) of Haskalah and Zionism, and particularly, recently they went a step forward to defame the erlikhe (pious) Jews in Israel who endure bitter persecution and arrests from the Zionists hitters and police, and instead of writing about the inhuman persecution of religion in our Holy Land they chose to legitimize all the cruelty by over blowing alleged "extreme acts" committed by the oppressed ehrlikhe (-pious) Jews - which only came as a result of a long chain of persecuting religion - as if these acts are retroactively the cause of the vast hate of religion by the Zionists,

In the same time that outspoken Zionist leaders and parties are written up there with the nicest colors as if they, with extremism have no connection...

People (Rabosai)! We can't remain quiet when this hazardous magazine is playing with the blood of ehrlikhe (pious) Jews who fight the fight of God in Israel. Demand from your grocer to take out this magazine and make it clear to him that you wouldn't want to buy in a store that is hurting you feelings and helps defame your ehrlikhe (pious) hashkafot (views) with loathly incitement.

Such magazines were never sold among us and we're asking not to break the boundaries that our forefathers erected.

Remember! "A costumer has the strongest power!"

Here is the place to thank the over 20 groceries! Taking into account their costumers feelings they don't take in anymore this magazine/pashkevill in their stores!

Search for more information about XXX at 4torah.com
Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog
Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

I'm proud of Republican voters

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:43:00 +0000

Have to say, I was pretty sure you GOP voters were going to embrace Rick Perry. He seemed to have what all the qualities the Rush Limbaugh-influenced electorate value most:

A presidential demeanor
A firm contempt for science
Raw, unreflective Christian values
A gift for making dumb remarks
An inability to hold his own with smart people
A habit of saying pointless, yet powerful-sounding things about our relationship with Israel

Like Bush, who also personified those qualities, Perry was "the sort of guy you'd like to have a beer with". I'm glad Right Wing voters finally seem to realize there is more to leadership.

Search for more information about Perry's demise at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

So check this out

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:36:00 +0000

A new, great way, to consume DovBear

Search for more information about XXX at 4torah.com
Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog
Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Olemainu Again

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:57:00 +0000

Here's another delightful polemic courtesy of the children's magazine Olemainu, and OTML where it was posted in 2008

Search for more information about kid magazines at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Foment or ferment?

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 13:49:00 +0000

Yesterday, I was accused by commenters of using the wrong word in a post title.

Richie
The word is "foment", not ferment:
fo·ment/ˈfōment/
Verb:
Instigate or stir up (an undesirable or violent sentiment or course of action): "they accused him of fomenting political unrest".

MDJ
You mean "foments" not "ferments"

BSD
For the love of Mike, please change the title.

Sorry, children, but my usage was perfectly correct. See more after the jump

Daily Writing Tips

Is “foment” the same as “ferment”?

People stirring up discord are often described as “fomenting trouble”. If you search for the phrase on the Internet you’ll find, for instance, Indian agents fomenting trouble in Canada and the Russian Kremlin fomenting trouble in Belarus, to pick just two recent examples.

But quite often, the phrase used in this situation is “fermenting” rather than “fomenting” trouble. This is a less common phrase, but there are still plenty of instances to be found, all over the world, of people fermenting trouble.

Are both phrases correct or do people write “ferment” when they should say “foment”?

The Oxford dictionary’s definition of foment as a transitive verb is :

instigate or stir up (an undesirable or violent sentiment or course of action)

as in for example :

they accused him of fomenting political unrest

The word derives from the Latin word fomentum, meaning a poultice or a lotion. Originally, to foment was to bathe a part of the body with a warm or a medicated lotion.

Ferment as a transitive verb, meanwhile, means :

incite or stir up (trouble or disorder)

as in for example :

the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos

This word derives from the Latin word fermentum meaning yeast.

As you can see, both foment and ferment have ended up meaning more or less the same thing in this context, despite their different derivations. Perhaps this is because they sound so similar or it might be because they share that sense of heat. Fomentum itself derived from the Latin verb fovere to heat, whilefermentum derived from fervere, to boil.

So, while it is more common to “foment” trouble, it is also perfectly acceptable to “ferment” it.

And from

Fowler's Modern English Usage

2. As verbs, ferment and foment are often confused because they are pronounced approximately the same way and their uses overlap in their figurative meanings. To ferment means literally 'to effervesce or cause to effervesce' (from Latin fervēre meaning 'to boil') and figuratively 'to excite or become excited'; and so it can be transitive (with an object) or intransitive: you can ferment trouble or trouble can ferment. Foment means literally 'to bathe with warm or medicated liquid' (from Latin fomentum meaning 'poultice') and figuratively 'to instigate or stir up' (especially trouble). Foment is only transitive: you can foment trouble but trouble cannot foment. Examples:

Gladstone's complaint in 1874 that the opposition fomented by the Daily News had been 'one main cause' of the weakness of his late government was, of course, a simplism—Times Literary Supplement, 1977

He hosted the meetings where the rebellion was fomented which ousted Mrs Thatcher from power—Today, 1992

What are the TUC on about? Why are they fermenting trouble at this of all moments?—People, 2002

They funded courses in car mechanics and carpentry as a chance to own a business for unemployed young men whose frustration was fermenting dangerously—Sunday Times, 2007

Good Word Guide

Search for more information about XXX at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Olamainu ferments sinas chinam

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:08:00 +0000

OTML posted this first, thought we received it at the same time from the same person. Ah, well. Snooze you lose.

An editorial cartoon, apparently designed to create sinas chinam, appeared this month in the children's magazine Olameinu.

For those unfamiliar with the yeshivish dialect I supply the following translation:

Boy: That's a very nice collage of Gedolim [=great Rabbis] you made!

Girl: Thank you. But it won't hang straight. It keeps tilting to the right!

Boy: Well of course. The right-wing Gedolim are bigger [=smarter and more important.]

Search for more information about insiduos cartoons at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Frum women in the pool

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:15:00 +0000

We tell ourselves non-Jews hold us in high regard when we act oddly in public in the name of our religion... eh... not so much, as this vid reveals.

Search for more information about tznius at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

We are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:10:00 +0000

Why Martin Matters: As a member of a minority yourself, I would not safe and secure living in a country with laws that demonstrated utter contempt for another minority. MLK helped to change that, and through his efforts and the efforts of people like him, the US began to live up to its own ideals of justice, making this country a better, safer place for everyone, Jews included.

Martin Luther King, Jr: Selected Readings

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together. --Martin Luther King, Jr., Address at the Freedom March on Washington D.C, 28 August 1963

For nonviolence not only calls upon its adherents to avoid external physical violence, but it calls upon them to avoid internal violence of spirit. It calls on them to engage in that something called love. And I know it is difficult sometimes. When I say love at this point, I'm not talking about an affectionate emotion. It's nonsense to urge people, oppressed people, to love their oppressors in an affectionate sense. I'm talking about something much deeper. I'm talking about a sort of understanding, creative, redemptive goodwill for all men. --Martin Luther King, Jr., Address at the Freedom Rally in Cobo Hall, 23 June 1963

"...when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five-year-old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross-county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes "nigger," your middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "John," and your wife and mother are never given the respected title "Mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, livingconstantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you no forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness" then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience. --Martin Luther King, Jr., Letter from Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963

Selected Speeches and Essays:
'I've Been to the Mountaintop'
'I Have a Dream'
Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech
Letter from Birmingham Jail

Search for more information about MLK at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Tropper Makes a Cameo in Sotah

noreply@blogger.com (EFink) — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:47:00 +0000

A Guest Post by E. Fink

Remember Tropper? The rabbi who was trading conversions for "that which shall not be named"? In what might be the most ironic thing ever, he also wrote a book on the Laws of Yichud. Haha. Chortle. Chortle. We laughed about this way back when...

Anyway, I was reading Naomi Ragen's book, Sotah and I chanced upon this gem. A charedi man is attempting to seduce a charedi woman. They are both from Meah Shearim. He is "helping her" with the books in her mother's wool store. She is suspicious and mindful of the yichud issue so she asks him if they should leave the door open. He replies with some fancy pants piskei halacha that hold merely leaving the door unlocked in sufficient. The last source he quotes is Tropper.

Needless to say, things escalate and eventually more than the laws of yichud are violated

I actually laughed out loud when I read that. Sotah was written 18 years prior to Tropper's scandal. How appropriate was it for Mrs. Ragen to use his book as a fake "heter" for a charedi man to seduce a charedi woman?! Uncanny!

In another era, we would have called Mrs. Ragen a prophetess. Or maybe she just has ruach hakodesh...

Search for more information about Tropper's Book on Yichud at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Truthiness at the Times

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 21:11:00 +0000

Shark-jumping moment over at the paper of record:

I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about.

That's the Times public editor wondering aloud in his weekly column if maybe the reporters who work for his paper should determine the truth or falsehood of a statement before printing it.

The subject came up after readers complained that the Times was blindly printing lies told by Republican candidates and flacks without pointing out that the quoted statements were, in fact, false.

This is a complaint Jews have been making for years, and its a problem on the oped page as well, where guest columnists often seem free to make any crazy assertion they like with no push-back from the editors.

The problem is this: Journalists, for the most part, believe they are supposed to be objective and report what's happened without commenting on it. If Mitt Romney, for example, announces that aliens have arrived from Mars, most reporters think their obligation is to report what Romney said, without offering an opinion on the candidate's sanity. Some other public figure is expected to counter the lie, at which point the journalist will report on that, as well, leaving it to the readers to determine who is right and who is wrong.

Or that's the theory anyway.

It fails for two reasons.

(1) People have their own biases. When you see someone in handcuffs you presume he's committed a crime, and when you see something printed in the New York Times you imagine its true. We're simply not trained, as newspaper readers, to second-guess examples of recorded speech that professional editors have elected to publish. We presume the editor checked to see if the statement was true. It never occurs to us, that maybe the statement is false, and the paper merely wants us to know that these words were said by this person, irrespective of their validity.

(2) Objectivity is a chimera. No human can achieve it. Even the best intentioned reporter is going to slant one way or the other. And, let's face it, most reporters aren't well-intentioned. I prefer to get my information from someone like Jon Stewart or Sean Hannity, who wear their bias as badges of honor, than from a reporter aspiring to objectivity. The reporter is going to fail, leaving us to wonder where he got it wrong. With guys like Hannity and Stewart we know going in which way the scale is tipped.

Search for more information about newspaper objectivity at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Chivalry is dead

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 19:31:00 +0000

When Women Can't Even Say Thank You
Stifling Modesty Code Prevents Everyday Acts of Civility
by William Kolbrenner in the Jewish Daily Forward

Not long ago, on my way down three flights of stairs from the improvised nursery school where I used to take my youngest son every morning, I saw a woman struggling with several shopping bags filled with groceries. I asked her if she needed help, and when she nodded — though somewhat reluctantly — I carried the bags back up the three flights to her apartment. I tell this story not because I am vying for my neighborhood ‘Tzadik of the Month’ award, but because as I was going back down the steps the second time, I realized that something was missing: She did not say thank you.

I am sure this woman, whom I had never met and only rarely see, has excellent manners. But she refrained from acknowledging the small favor I did for her — nothing so little as to raise her eyes to mine — because in the ultra-Orthodox neighborhood in Jerusalem where I live, men do not talk to women, and women certainly not to men, not even to say thank you. It is because, as seminary girls will tell you (they hear it all day as a mantra), “It is not tznius!” meaning that this behavior is considered immodest.

Amid the polemical rhetoric that has taken over what has now become a full-fledged culture war about gender discrimination on Israel’s public buses, there is another, quieter story. To be sure, the attack on Tanya Rosenblit for not ceding her place on a gender-separated bus is appalling, and the general encroachment of religious values into the public sphere is an alarming development, but beyond the proclamations, the more everyday story — an equally disturbing one — has not been fully told.
That story includes that of the woman on the stairwell. She was certainly grateful. But since she is so concerned about the public perception that both men and women may have of her, she acts in a manner that she knows — she must — to be wrong. Better to be perceived to be impolite than immodest. A few grateful words, even the wrong gesture, might be negatively construed by someone watching, betraying the fear that someone must be watching, and all the time.

Common sense civility in the public sphere has yielded to the establishing and policing of boundaries. My 16-year-old daughter, naturally modest — not just tznius in the sociological sense — told me that when a man got on a local Jerusalem bus, finding her and a friend sitting in the men’s section (the very language sounds like it belongs in the private sphere of a synagogue and not on a public bus), he pointed at them. He clicked his tongue a few times, then, with a waive of his hand, signaled them to the back of the bus.

The Shulchan Aruch, the Code of Jewish Law, affirms, “All of our women are important,” including, without doubt, my 16-year-old and her friend, yet that was certainly not reflected in the peremptory and entitled arrogance she met on the bus. True, some complain these days that the old language of chivalry objectifies women; but that chivalrous behavior is to be preferred to the dismissive treatment of women as objects who should move at the behest and slightest gesture — even approach — of a man. Without even taking into account the extreme behavior of harassment, assaults and public sphere violence, this is the other question that comes to mind: What happened to the respect for women for which Jewish men have been known for centuries?

But the answer is simple: Chivalry is dead in some parts of the Jewish world.

Walking in the neighborhood where I live, I used to, in my ignorance, greet on the street women whom I know. After all, I thought to myself, I am friends with their husbands, have watched their children grow up with mine and have sat in their homes for Sabbath afternoon meals. But most of the women — I have learned over the years, to modify my behavior — will not return my greeting. At first I wondered if there was something wrong with me. I still talk to my 16-year-old daughter’s friends. They look at me sometimes with surprise, or perhaps amusement. “He’s an American,” they probably say to one another. “He does not understand.” And the truth is, I do not understand. I am waiting to see at what age they will also stop talking to me.

As Freud underlines, relationships between men and women are always fraught, but the ultra-Orthodox treatment of the public sphere renders every gesture potentially and dangerously sexual. A sign, for a recent example, went up in many neighborhoods, forbidding the purchase of expensive foreign-made baby carriages, deemed possibly too enticing for some men to resist, their intrigued gazes in the end resting on the woman pushing them along. In a paradoxical and surprising way, ultra-Orthodox Jews — who mostly dismiss Freud’s thought — are more Freudian than Freud himself. As a result of this hyper-consciousness, they create a repressive culture of silence.

I do not want my girls constantly policing themselves, nor do I want to be surrounded by men who, in autocratic and arbitrary fashion, justify their discriminatory attitudes. I do want women, including my four daughters, to participate in the public sphere — without fear.

Chivalry may be dead, but our women are important. I want to hear — and I don’t think I am the only one — what they have to say.

William Kolbrener, professor of English literature at Bar-Ilan University, is the author of, most recently,“Open Minded Torah, of Irony, Fundamentalism and Love” (Continuum, 2011).”

Search for more information about XXX at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Don't women have what to daven for?

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:22:00 +0000

Attended a bris last week. Rather then use his shul, the baal simcha rented a catering hall. We men prayed in the front of the room. A mechitzah was set up behind us, with the women and the breakfast tables behind it. By the time we reached shmoneh esray, at the end of services, I estimate at least 75 women were present.

If you've ever been to a bris in a catering hall, I'm sure you can guess what happened. During the silent recitation of the Amida the women chatted. Loudly. They were shusshed several times, to no avail.

Here are some of the thoughts that went through my head:

1) Don't women have what to daven for? Though I'm sure a few women were participating in the service, most were not. Why? You send your sons to yeshivot where they are taught that prayer is valuable. Don't you believe it? Or is there something unfeminine about praying during the week? (I'm not being factious here: I really do think some women feel its beneath their womanly dignity to pray in public during the week. Sort of like how some men won't wear pink or take out the trash)

2) Many of you are the sort of women who gather at each other's houses, with cake and fruit set our before you, to say tehillim. Has charedi Judaism decided that Psalm parties are appropriate for women but morning prayers are not?

3) Even if you're not interested in praying, don't you realize that the men are praying and that your chatter is creating a disturbance? (Basic bein adam l'chavero, no?)

4) And if you're too cool to pray, don't you believe in segulot? Well, davening with a minyan and answering amen and yehai shmai raba have for more than millennium been considered segulot of the first order. If you believe these things work, why don't you participate?

5) And even if you don't think prayer matters, and feel segulot are rubbish, and think its okj to disrtupt, don't you nashim tzidoknios reallize that your gabbiness during services is only confirming the male charedi in his notion that women, in the main, are flibbertigibbets? Show some self-respect charedi women. If you want your men to regard you as something other than lightweights, don't act like ill-mannered children. I guarantee you every second or third man in that room was thinking something along the lines of "Well, what do you expect from women. That's why God respects me more than He respects her."

Additionally:

Women are required by all authorities to say Shachris. I promise you every Rabbi in that room would have responded ferociously had a woman appeared with cleavage showing. In fact many of those present have signed on to the latest local campaign against a woman's right to choose her own clothing. Yet, there is no rabbinic campaign to encourage women to meet their minimum prayer obligations. Why not?

And finally, the sole coherent halachic argument against WPGs (Women Prayer Groups) goes like this: "Women are not obligated to pray with a minyan but if they are willing to put in the effort to do so but instead choose to pray without a minyan, they are essentially slapping the greater mitzvah in the face and saying "We don't want you." It is a quintessential [example of] ma'avirin al ha-mitzvos which is a non-halakhic (maybe even anti-halakhic) attitude." (Hirhurim, March 31, 2004)

Can't the same be said of women who arrive at a bris and ignore the minyan?

Search for more information about WPGs at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Wow Obama Sure Does Hate Jews

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:31:00 +0000

Why else would he keep naming them Chief of Staff?

For those not keeping track, Jack Lew is Obama's third chief, and the second Jew he has named to this job.

Search for more information about Jack Lew at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Great Moments in Pandering

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:50:00 +0000

I see MBD wants a few new Hasidic customers:

...true Chasidim don’t copy music and those who are not so Chasidic are the ones who are doing the copying. I have my finger on the pulse of American buyers. In the Chasidic areas, like Monsey, Monroe, Borough Park and Williamsburg, it is flying off the shelves. Apparently true Chasidim learn Shulchan Aruch and they don’t steal.”

Um,yeah, NTS.

Also, can someone please ask MBD about the orgin of his hit song Yidden?

PS: Are Breslav Chasidim "True Chasidim?" If so, they should give back their stolen anthem, shouldn't they?

Search for more information about MBD at 4torah.co

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

This is just wrong (Tebow Edition)

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:44:00 +0000

Courtesy of tebowing.com and Ksil Loyavin, the blog]s Chief Tebow Correspondent

Search for more information about TEBOWINGat 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

There are no coincidences!! (Tebow edition)

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:26:00 +0000

God's favorite quarterback, Tim Tebow, had a big day on Sunday throwing for 316 yards. This, of course, is a heavenly sign that must not be ignored as the yardage perfectly corresponds with John 3:16, the favorite bible verse of all sports nuts.

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

If you're still not convinced that God loves Tebow consider this, courtesy of Yahoo Sports, and Ksil lo Yavin, our Chief Tebow Correspondent:

- Tebow averaged 31.6 yards per pass.

- the final quarter-hour television rating for was 31.6

Zowee! What are the odds?!

In all seriousness, the hoopla surrounding Tim's stats is precisely why I object so strongly to the fraudulently pious claim that "There are no coincidences!!"

If you subscribe to this nonsense idea, what do you do about Tim Tebow? Modify the claim to "There are no coincidences!! (other than those coincidences which fail to support my previously held cherished beliefs)"? Embrace the New Testament?

Better to escape the trap entirely by joining me in the insistence that coincidences are just coincidences.

Search for more information about amazing coincidences! at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Why we think we were redeemed in the merit of keeping our names (maybe)

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:25:00 +0000

According to the Bible, the Israelites wre taken out of Egypt in fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham. According to the Prophets, the redemption came in the merit of blood, as Ezekiel writes: וָאֶעֱבֹ֤ר עָלַ֙יִךְ֙ וָֽאֶרְאֵ֔ךְ מִתְבֹּוסֶ֖סֶת בְּדָמָ֑יִךְ וָאֹ֤מַר לָךְ֙ בְּדָמַ֣יִךְ חֲיִ֔י וָאֹ֥מַר לָ֖ךְ בְּדָמַ֥יִךְ חֲיִֽי׃. Generally, the double mention of blood is understood as a reference to the two sacrifices performed by the Israelites on the eve of the Exodus, cicrcmcision and the Korben Pesach.

Thousands of years later, the authors of the Midrash attribute the redemption to a different set of merits, suggesting that God took us out of Egypt because we kept various signs of Jewish identity, including our names, our clothing and our language; also, according to other sources, it was because we remained sexually pure.

How do we explain this shift?

Because I am an irresponsible blogger, I'll speculate. I think the answer has to do with the era in which the midrash was written. This had to have been around the time of the Second Destruction. With the destruction having just occurred, or appearing imminent, Rabbis were rightly concerned about the survival of the Jewish people; also, they may have worried about a new Jewish sect, one that seemed to put an undo emphasis on blood sacrifice in general, and the Passover sacrifice in particular.

While Ezekiel seems to confirm the Christian claims by insisting that redemption is possible only through blood, the Rabbis of the Midrash tell us something new. Not blood, but behavior: Keep your names, and your clothing, and your language. Remain sexually pure and do not mix with the gentiles. This, not the blood of the sacrifice, is the secret of Jewish survival. Without a Temple, we Jews will yet endure --- but, only if you cling to the symbols of your identity.

And, they were proven correct

Search for more information about what midrashim really mean (maybe) at 4torah.com
Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog
Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

The rules of candy bag tossing

noreply@blogger.com (DovBear) — Sun, 08 Jan 2012 14:20:00 +0000

Traditionally, whose job was it to toss candy bags at grooms and bar mitzvah boys after the Aliya? In some places, this is exclusively women's work. Elsewhere, men do it, too.

In days of old, I know nuts, not candies, were thrown, but who threw them? Men, women or both?

Nowadays, the shteeble custom is for men to aggressively hurl hard candies, aiming for the head. Was the nut throwing custom like this, or was it a gentler affair?

And what about the singing? When I was young, no song accompanied the pelting. The bags rained down in silence, Now, there are at least two traditional tunes, and if no song is sung, you can expect the old men to hum.

When I was a kid, we used white bags for grooms, and brown bags for bar mitzvah boys. Now, you hardly ever see paper bags anymore. Instead, they are usually made from some kind of mesh or satin, and mothers who love their sons are careful to pack them with soft treats, only.

So far no official rules governing this tradition have been published, but how long can that last? I expect when a new code of Jewish law is written (and don't we get one every few generations?) a chapter on this practice, upgraded to ritual, will be included.

Search for more information about XXX at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think

Pritzus in Monsey

noreply@blogger.com (EFink) — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 16:41:00 +0000

A Guest Post By E. Fink

An intrepid reader sent in this horrible violation of tznius rules at Rockland Kosher in Monsey. This is the same place with a sign prohibiting anyone from shopping if they are not wearing socks.

It seems that either the censor forgot to cover this pornographic display of female anatomy or a lustful man was unable to control himself and ripped off the tznius coverup in testosterone fueled curiosity.

I hope this situation is corrected as soon as possible.

HT and Photo Credit: Motti Yaniv

Search for more information about Breaches of Tznius at 4torah.com

Support the pathetic annual telethon by making a donation toward the upkeep of this blog

Buy one of the books that changed the way I think