We can all "kvell" over this stellar review of Cantor George Mordecai's concert this week in Florida. it is taken from the South Florida Classical Review:
Seraphic Fire transcends the centuries with music of the Jewish Diaspora
By Lawrence Budmen
The music of the Jewish Diaspora of ancient Iraq propelled Seraphic Fire’s presentation, titled “Out of Babylon” Wednesday night at St. Christopher’s by-the-Sea in Key Biscayne.
Cantor George Mordecai was once again a remarkable featured soloist and two dynamic musicians played indigenous ethnic instruments in a fascinating evening of Middle Eastern music that transcended its historical roots.
After the forced emigration of the Diaspora to ancient Babylon, a fusion of Judaic and Arabic musical traditions mirrored social and business relationships. Rather than more familiar Western modes, this music was based on the Eastern scale. Marked by octave leaps and quarter tones, these works were passed down through an aural tradition rather than published scores. Austere and otherworldly, these pieces fashion a unique sound world that is consistently compelling.
It was wonderful to see artistic director Patrick Dupre Quigley, who missed the group’s recent Midwestern tour due to illness, back in command. For this program, Quigley led a choir of eight male voices and played the Indian harmonium, an instrument with a small keyboard capable of unobtrusive quasi-percussive sound effects. Daphna Mor contributed instrumental support on six varieties of the ney—an Arabic flute—as well as the more traditional recorder. Rajesh Bhandari provided a one-man rhythm section with a brilliant display of Indian tabla drumming and the occasional cymbal.
At the center of this fusion of musicology and formidable contemporary performing forces stood the Australian-born Mordecai, former cantor at Miami Beach’s Temple Emanu-El. Whether spinning haunting incantation, displaying vocal acrobatics that prefigured Baroque roulades or delivering clipped, rhythmic anthems, Mordecai offered a stunning exhibition of indigenous vocal traditions. His vibratoless vocalism and natural delivery are much closer to folk singing than the modern classically oriented tenorial cantor tradition. Singing with vibrancy and soulful immediacy, Mordecai’s sterling musicianship and absorption in every bar were a model that many artists could well emulate.
Rather than attempting some variant of period performance, Mordecai and Quigley presented a thoroughly contemporary vision of an ancient culture, both reverent and creative. The male choir sang vigorously in an unforced, populist manner that was light years removed from their pristine, finely polished Baroque offerings.
Mor’s opening flute solo resounded softly with almost New Age modernity but soon morphed into swirling Middle Eastern rhythmic patterns. At times her duos with Bhandari’s throbbing tabla swayed to variations of a cool jazz beat but she excelled in spinning phrases of quiet stasis, evoking a land and sound far away and entrancingly exotic.
In the exciting El Nora, Quigley grafted a choral motet against Mordecai’s vigorous declamation – a truly modern reinvention of a rich tradition. In one of three songs of forgiveness, the male choir added to the percussive underpinning by breathing in rhythm. Other highlights included a rousing Purim anthem, the hypnotic Eastern melodic colors of Yum ha shebath and the invigorating, hand-clapping finale of El Eliyahu. With uniquely gifted guest artists, Seraphic Fire produced a deeply moving evening of music from another world that spoke in an original, remarkably contemporary voice.
Seraphic Fire repeats Out of Babylon 7:30 p.m. Thursday at Temple Judea in Coral Gables, 8 p.m. Saturday at Temple Emanu-El in Miami Beach and 4 p.m. Sunday at All Saints Episcopal Church in Ft. Lauderdale. 305-285-9060; SeraphicFire.org.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
World Wide Wrap 2011 Photos
Last Sunday was our annual World Wide Wrap program, where kids and adults learn about the mitzvot of tallit and tefillin. Here are photos of our 7th graders trying 'em on. Thanks to Jill Knopoff and Jill Teich for taking them. Click to enlarge.
Gazan Youth Are Taking Their Cues from Cairo - on Facebook
Gazans on Facebook: "We're Sick of Bearded Guys with Guns Abusing Their Power" - Jon Donnison
As Egypt's unrest continues, in neighboring Gaza an online manifesto for change has struck a chord with the young population. Posted online in December, the Gaza Youth Manifesto for Change now has over 19,000 followers on the group's Facebook page under the name Gaza Youth Breaks Out. The manifesto's opening salvo is a series of expletives directed at Hamas, Israel, Fatah, the UN, and the U.S. "Young people here are ready to explode. They go to college, they graduate with no opportunity of any job at the end, except working for Hamas," says Mukhaimer Abu Sada, professor of political science at al-Azhar University in Gaza. The manifesto is also extremely critical of Hamas: "We're sick of bearded guys walking ar ound with their guns abusing their power, beating up or incarcerating young people demonstrating for what they believe in." In the past two weeks, there have been calls issued on Facebook sites for pro-democracy demonstrations in Gaza against Hamas. But so far any protests have been very small and quickly broken up by Hamas police. (BBC News)
As Egypt's unrest continues, in neighboring Gaza an online manifesto for change has struck a chord with the young population. Posted online in December, the Gaza Youth Manifesto for Change now has over 19,000 followers on the group's Facebook page under the name Gaza Youth Breaks Out. The manifesto's opening salvo is a series of expletives directed at Hamas, Israel, Fatah, the UN, and the U.S. "Young people here are ready to explode. They go to college, they graduate with no opportunity of any job at the end, except working for Hamas," says Mukhaimer Abu Sada, professor of political science at al-Azhar University in Gaza. The manifesto is also extremely critical of Hamas: "We're sick of bearded guys walking ar ound with their guns abusing their power, beating up or incarcerating young people demonstrating for what they believe in." In the past two weeks, there have been calls issued on Facebook sites for pro-democracy demonstrations in Gaza against Hamas. But so far any protests have been very small and quickly broken up by Hamas police. (BBC News)
Temple Rock Photos
TBE's Temple Rock Cafe last week was a huge success in all respects. I've uploaded hundreds of photos (courtesy of Aviva Maller), and they can be found here. Thanks to our hard working committee for a fantastic evening!
Symbols of Coexistence
EXODUS 28:2
וְעָשִׂיתָ בִגְדֵי-קֹדֶשׁ, לְאַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ, לְכָבוֹד, וּלְתִפְאָרֶת
וְעָשִׂיתָ בִגְדֵי-קֹדֶשׁ, לְאַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ, לְכָבוֹד, וּלְתִפְאָרֶת
And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, for splendour and for beauty.
The breastplate described in this week's portion was worn by the Cohen as a symbol of the unity of the twelve tribes. Each tribe was represented by a precious stone affixed to the plate. Read more about it here.
A major theme of this weekend is coexistence and unity. I've discussed elsewhere that this is Avi Schaefer Shabbat, marking the first yahrzeit of a college student who did more to promote coexistence among Jews and others in his short life, especially in regards to Israel, than many do in a lifetime.
This week also saw the passing of philanthropist Alan Slifka, who established the Slifka Program on Intercommunal Coexistence at Brandeis, the Slifka Center for Jewish Life at Yale and the Abraham Fund Initiatives, bridging the gaps between Israeli Jews and Arabs. In memory of both Avi Schaefer and Alan Slifka, this is a good week for us to figure out how to place all the jewels of the priestly "hoshen" into neat rows, side by side, so that they all might glow independently even as they grow together, each with its own radiant color.
There is much work to do. The Abraham Fund has done much in Israel to combat ethnic segregation. Rabbi Naftali Rothenberg, an Orthodox authority in Israel, writing about the recent attempts in Israel to keep Arabs from buying in Jewish neighborhoods, said:
The State of Israel, which was established to repair historical injustice toward the Jewish people, which had first been expelled from its own land, and later found itself persecuted and without rights in the Diaspora, must in its relations with minority groups honor the claim that justifies its existence. This means fully protecting minorities' rights and integrating minority citizens fully into the state framework. Instead of complaining about extremist inciters of various shades and making absurd demands of our Arab citizens, the Jewish majority has a responsibility to allow the latter to act on the basis of rights derived from their citizenship.
Coexistence is on our minds these days, inspired by the "Three Faiths" exhibition at the New York Public Library and those ubiquitous "Coexist" bumper stickers.
Next Wednesday evening at the Avon Theater in Stamford, a film about Jewish - Arab coexistence will be shown, called Budrus, and there will be a post-film Q&A with producer Nadav Greenberg. I've not seen the film, which deals with issues surrounding protests over Israel's security fence. No doubt I'll disagree with many aspects of it, but the existence of any Palestinian protest movement based on the principles of non-violence has got to be good news for those supporters of Israel who also seek non violent resolution to the conflicts that have harmed too many for too long. The film has won many awards - see its website here.
I for one am very glad that the Palestinians have opted for the path of non-violence. Some may call this propaganda or even delegitimization. As dangerous as that may be, it pales in comparison to the dangers of violence and terror. Israel simply has to be prepared to make its case to the world, in the face of this sophisticated and compelling narrative. And in the new Middle East that is now being forged, an Israeli society based on principles of democracy, equality and human rights will truly become the model for its suddenly attentive neighbors, themselves eager to live in freedom and dignity.
Israel can, at last, become a light unto its neighbors!
Avi Schaefer Shabbat
One year ago, Avi Schafer was killed tragically in an auto accident near the campus of Brown University, where he was a freshman. This extraordinary young man's first yahrzeit will be recalled this weekend across the country at synagogues, Hillels and havurot, in what is being called "Avi Schaefer Shabbat." We'll be among those synagogues who will recall Avi during services and in particular, by reading this introduction to the mourner's kaddish written in his memory.
Read Avi's full bio here. Avi started college late because he served in the IDF for three years. He came back from the Israeli military to a very different kind of war, and immediately Avi became engaged in the battle for peace on a major college campus. He was not a "my-country-right-or-wrong" defender of Israel. Instead, he reached out to the other side. His outreach was not always reciprocated, however. Read this column he wrote in the Brown Daily Herald.
He said: "Let’s figure out how we can work together to do something productive to honor your name and find our common ground. I am here, ready and anxiously waiting for you to work with me, not against me. Do not give me another reason to lose hope, because my patience is sadly running out.”
Avi already had begun discussion with a Brown professor to create a course that would allow real dialogue to take place. Meanwhile, his final project for the Israel committee was a major fundraiser, not for Israel, but for Haiti, which raised $4,000 on campus. He quickly had become a leader of Hillel's Israel committee, even as a freshman. Everyone looked up to him. Here's Avi's final blog post, describing that Haiti event.
He was loved by students, professors and many in the Providence community, touching more lives than one would think possible in so brief a time. He was advising the Providence police SWAT team, sharing the lifesaving skills he had learned in Israel.
The Avi Schaefer Fund released a statement in anticipation of Avi Schaefer Shabbat. Here is an excerpt:
We can all use some of Avi's spirit with us now, as we face the realities of our complex world. The peace process, so full of promise and hope a few short months ago, seems hopelessly stalled as settlement construction and leaked diplomatic cables threaten the fragile stability of the region. On our campuses in America, the issue of peace in the middle east remains divisive and polarizing. But hope still remains, in the memory of Avi and his contribution to the cause of peace in this world. His words, excerpted from an op ed he wrote in the Brown Daily Herald, resonate heartbreakingly in his absence:
I am here, ready and anxiously waiting for you to work with me, not against me. Do not give me another reason to lose hope, because my patience is sadly running out. I wait for the day that the words of the Prophet Isaiah will ring true: “Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.”
Avi's legacy is one of activism, love, peace, and hope. Let us honor his memory by striving to bring his spirit into our discussions of complex, divisive issues in our community. Let us follow his example of compassionate activism and pursue peace and justice with the same fervor that he showed in his brief, shining moment on this earth. Let us hold a place in our hearts for him this February, and work towards realizing his vision of peace in our world.
I am here, ready and anxiously waiting for you to work with me, not against me. Do not give me another reason to lose hope, because my patience is sadly running out. I wait for the day that the words of the Prophet Isaiah will ring true: “Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.”
Avi's legacy is one of activism, love, peace, and hope. Let us honor his memory by striving to bring his spirit into our discussions of complex, divisive issues in our community. Let us follow his example of compassionate activism and pursue peace and justice with the same fervor that he showed in his brief, shining moment on this earth. Let us hold a place in our hearts for him this February, and work towards realizing his vision of peace in our world.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
United Synagogue Turns Inward
The USCJ's new strategic vision was just unveiled in draft form. Our board heard about it last night directly from a USCJ rep. See United Synagogue Turns Inward from the Jewish Week for more details and see the plan itself at http://www.uscj.org/index1.html. One feature of the new plan is to replace the word "congregation" with the Hebrew "Kehilla" - "Community." As I mentioned to or board last night, there are lots of things we can do to strengthen Conservative Judaism. But what will help most is what we can do best - be a role model of transformation, a magnet of energy and sanctity for all to see.
Egypt, Israel and a Strategic Reconsideration
Egypt, Israel and a Strategic Reconsideration is republished with permission of STRATFOR. A rabbinic colleague recommended it and it is an interesting analysis. STRATFOR’s global team of intelligence professionals provides an audience of decision-makers and sophisticated news consumers in the U.S. and around the world with insights into current political, economic, and military developments. The company uses human intelligence and other sources combined with powerful analysis based on geopolitics to produce penetrating explanations of world events. This independent, non-ideological content enables users better to understand international events.
Egypt, Israel and a Strategic Reconsideration
Created Feb 8 2011
By George Friedman
The events in Egypt have sent shock waves through Israel. The 1978 Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel have been the bedrock of Israeli national security. In three of the four wars Israel fought before the accords, a catastrophic outcome for Israel was conceivable. In 1948, 1967 and 1973, credible scenarios existed in which the Israelis were defeated and the state of Israel ceased to exist. In 1973, it appeared for several days that one of those scenarios was unfolding.
The survival of Israel was no longer at stake after 1978. In the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, the various Palestinian intifadas and the wars with Hezbollah in 2006 and Hamas in Gaza in 2008, Israeli interests were involved, but not survival. There is a huge difference between the two. Israel had achieved a geopolitical ideal after 1978 in which it had divided and effectively made peace with two of the four Arab states that bordered it, and neutralized one of those states. The treaty with Egypt removed the threat to the Negev and the southern coastal approaches to Tel Aviv.
The agreement with Jordan in 1994, which formalized a long-standing relationship, secured the longest and most vulnerable border along the Jordan River. The situation in Lebanon was such that whatever threat emerged from there was limited. Only Syria remained hostile but, by itself, it could not threaten Israel. Damascus was far more focused on Lebanon anyway. As for the Palestinians, they posed a problem for Israel, but without the foreign military forces along the frontiers, the Palestinians could trouble but not destroy Israel. Israel’s existence was not at stake, nor was it an issue for 33 years.
The Historic Egyptian Threat to Israel
The center of gravity of Israel’s strategic challenge was always Egypt. The largest Arab country, with about 80 million people, Egypt could field the most substantial army. More to the point, Egypt could absorb casualties at a far higher rate than Israel. The danger that the Egyptian army posed was that it could close with the Israelis and engage in extended, high-intensity combat that would break the back of Israel Defense Forces by imposing a rate of attrition that Israel could not sustain. If Israel were to be simultaneously engaged with Syria, dividing its forces and its logistical capabilities, it could run out of troops long before Egypt, even if Egypt were absorbing far more casualties.
The solution for the Israelis was to initiate combat at a time and place of their own choosing, preferably with surprise, as they did in 1956 and 1967. Failing that, as they did in 1973, the Israelis would be forced into a holding action they could not sustain and forced onto an offensive in which the risks of failure — and the possibility — would be substantial.
It was to the great benefit of Israel that Egyptian forces were generally poorly commanded and trained and that Egyptian war-fighting doctrine, derived from Britain and the Soviet Union, was not suited to the battle problem Israel posed. In 1967, Israel won its most complete victory over Egypt, as well as Jordan and Syria. It appeared to the Israelis that the Arabs in general and Egyptians in particular were culturally incapable of mastering modern warfare.
Thus it was an extraordinary shock when, just six years after their 1967 defeat, the Egyptians mounted a two-army assault across the Suez, coordinated with a simultaneous Syrian attack on the Golan Heights. Even more stunning than the assault was the operational security the Egyptians maintained and the degree of surprise they achieved. One of Israel’s fundamental assumptions was that Israeli intelligence would provide ample warning of an attack. And one of the fundamental assumptions of Israeli intelligence was that Egypt could not mount an attack while Israel maintained air superiority. Both assumptions were wrong. But the most important error was the assumption that Egypt could not, by itself, coordinate a massive and complex military operation. In the end, the Israelis defeated the Egyptians, but at the cost of the confidence they achieved in 1967 and a recognition that comfortable assumptions were impermissible in warfare in general and regarding Egypt in particular.
The Egyptians had also learned lessons. The most important was that the existence of the state of Israel did not represent a challenge to Egypt’s national interest. Israel existed across a fairly wide and inhospitable buffer zone — the Sinai Peninsula. The logistical problems involved in deploying a massive force to the east had resulted in three major defeats, while the single partial victory took place on much shorter lines of supply. Holding or taking the Sinai was difficult and possible only with a massive infusion of weapons and supplies from the outside, from the Soviet Union. This meant that Egypt was a hostage to Soviet interests. Egypt had a greater interest in breaking its dependency on the Soviets than in defeating Israel. It could do the former more readily than the latter.
The Egyptian recognition that its interests in Israel were minimal and the Israeli recognition that eliminating the potential threat from Egypt guaranteed its national security have been the foundation of the regional balance since 1978. All other considerations — Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas and the rest — were trivial in comparison. Geography — the Sinai — made this strategic distancing possible. So did American aid to Egypt. The substitution of American weapons for Soviet ones in the years after the treaty achieved two things. First, they ended Egypt’s dependency on the Soviets. Second, they further guaranteed Israel’s security by creating an Egyptian army dependent on a steady flow of spare parts and contractors from the United States. Cut the flow and the Egyptian army would be crippled.
The governments of Anwar Sadat and then Hosni Mubarak were content with this arrangement. The generation that came to power with Gamal Nasser had fought four wars with Israel and had little stomach for any more. They had proved themselves in October 1973 on the Suez and had no appetite to fight again or to send their sons to war. It is not that they created an oasis of prosperity in Egypt. But they no longer had to go to war every few years, and they were able, as military officers, to live good lives. What is now regarded as corruption was then regarded as just rewards for bleeding in four wars against the Israelis.
Mubarak and the Military
The solution for the Israelis was to initiate combat at a time and place of their own choosing, preferably with surprise, as they did in 1956 and 1967. Failing that, as they did in 1973, the Israelis would be forced into a holding action they could not sustain and forced onto an offensive in which the risks of failure — and the possibility — would be substantial.
It was to the great benefit of Israel that Egyptian forces were generally poorly commanded and trained and that Egyptian war-fighting doctrine, derived from Britain and the Soviet Union, was not suited to the battle problem Israel posed. In 1967, Israel won its most complete victory over Egypt, as well as Jordan and Syria. It appeared to the Israelis that the Arabs in general and Egyptians in particular were culturally incapable of mastering modern warfare.
Thus it was an extraordinary shock when, just six years after their 1967 defeat, the Egyptians mounted a two-army assault across the Suez, coordinated with a simultaneous Syrian attack on the Golan Heights. Even more stunning than the assault was the operational security the Egyptians maintained and the degree of surprise they achieved. One of Israel’s fundamental assumptions was that Israeli intelligence would provide ample warning of an attack. And one of the fundamental assumptions of Israeli intelligence was that Egypt could not mount an attack while Israel maintained air superiority. Both assumptions were wrong. But the most important error was the assumption that Egypt could not, by itself, coordinate a massive and complex military operation. In the end, the Israelis defeated the Egyptians, but at the cost of the confidence they achieved in 1967 and a recognition that comfortable assumptions were impermissible in warfare in general and regarding Egypt in particular.
The Egyptians had also learned lessons. The most important was that the existence of the state of Israel did not represent a challenge to Egypt’s national interest. Israel existed across a fairly wide and inhospitable buffer zone — the Sinai Peninsula. The logistical problems involved in deploying a massive force to the east had resulted in three major defeats, while the single partial victory took place on much shorter lines of supply. Holding or taking the Sinai was difficult and possible only with a massive infusion of weapons and supplies from the outside, from the Soviet Union. This meant that Egypt was a hostage to Soviet interests. Egypt had a greater interest in breaking its dependency on the Soviets than in defeating Israel. It could do the former more readily than the latter.
The Egyptian recognition that its interests in Israel were minimal and the Israeli recognition that eliminating the potential threat from Egypt guaranteed its national security have been the foundation of the regional balance since 1978. All other considerations — Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas and the rest — were trivial in comparison. Geography — the Sinai — made this strategic distancing possible. So did American aid to Egypt. The substitution of American weapons for Soviet ones in the years after the treaty achieved two things. First, they ended Egypt’s dependency on the Soviets. Second, they further guaranteed Israel’s security by creating an Egyptian army dependent on a steady flow of spare parts and contractors from the United States. Cut the flow and the Egyptian army would be crippled.
The governments of Anwar Sadat and then Hosni Mubarak were content with this arrangement. The generation that came to power with Gamal Nasser had fought four wars with Israel and had little stomach for any more. They had proved themselves in October 1973 on the Suez and had no appetite to fight again or to send their sons to war. It is not that they created an oasis of prosperity in Egypt. But they no longer had to go to war every few years, and they were able, as military officers, to live good lives. What is now regarded as corruption was then regarded as just rewards for bleeding in four wars against the Israelis.
Mubarak and the Military
But now is 33 years later, and the world has changed. The generation that fought is very old. Today’s Egyptian military trains with the Americans, and its officers pass through the American command and staff and war colleges. This generation has close ties to the United States, but not nearly as close ties to the British-trained generation that fought the Israelis or to Egypt’s former patrons, the Russians. Mubarak has locked the younger generation, in their fifties and sixties, out of senior command positions and away from the wealth his generation has accumulated. They want him out.
For this younger generation, the idea of Gamal Mubarak being allowed to take over the presidency was the last straw. They wanted the elder Mubarak to leave not only because he had ambitions for his son but also because he didn’t want to leave after more than a quarter century of pressure. Mubarak wanted guarantees that, if he left, his possessions, in addition to his honor, would remain intact. If Gamal could not be president, then no one’s promise had value. So Mubarak locked himself into position.
The cameras love demonstrations, but they are frequently not the real story. The demonstrators who wanted democracy are a real faction, but they don’t speak for the shopkeepers and peasants more interested in prosperity than wealth. Since Egypt is a Muslim country, the West freezes when anything happens, dreading the hand of Osama bin Laden. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood was once a powerful force, and it might become one again someday, but right now it is a shadow of its former self. What is going on now is a struggle within the military, between generations, for the future of the Egyptian military and therefore the heart of the Egyptian regime. Mubarak will leave, the younger officers will emerge, the constitution will make some changes and life will continue.
The Israelis will return to their complacency. They should not. The usual first warning of a heart attack is death. Among the fortunate, it is a mild coronary followed by a dramatic change of life style. The events in Egypt should be taken as a mild coronary and treated with great relief by Israel that it wasn’t worse.
Reconsidering the Israeli Position
I have laid out the reasons why the 1978 treaty is in Egypt’s national interest. I have left out two pieces. The first is ideology. The ideological tenor of the Middle East prior to 1978 was secular and socialist. Today it is increasingly Islamist. Egypt is not immune to this trend, even if the Muslim Brotherhood should not be seen as the embodiment of that threat. Second, military technology, skills and terrain have made Egypt a defensive power for the past 33 years. But military technology and skills can change, on both sides. Egyptian defensiveness is built on assumptions of Israeli military capability and interest. As Israeli ideology becomes more militant and as its capabilities grow, Egypt may be forced to reconsider its strategic posture. As new generations of officers arise, who have heard of war only from their grandfathers, the fear of war declines and the desire for glory grows. Combine that with ideology in Egypt and Israel and things change. They won’t change quickly — a generation of military transformation will be needed once regimes have changed and the decisions to prepare for war have been made — but they can change.
Two things from this should strike the Israelis. The first is how badly they need peace with Egypt. It is easy to forget what things were like 40 years back, but it is important to remember that the prosperity of Israel today depends in part on the treaty with Egypt. Iran is a distant abstraction, with a notional bomb whose completion date keeps moving. Israel can fight many wars with Egypt and win. It need lose only one. The second lesson is that Israel should do everything possible to make certain that the transfer of power in Egypt is from Mubarak to the next generation of military officers and that these officers maintain their credibility in Egypt. Whether Israel likes it or not, there is an Islamist movement in Egypt. Whether the new generation controls that movement as the previous one did or whether they succumb to it is the existential question for Israel. If the treaty with Egypt is the foundation of Israel’s national security, it is logical that the Israelis should do everything possible to preserve it.
This was not the fatal heart attack. It might not even have been more than indigestion. But recent events in Egypt point to a long-term problem with Israeli strategy. Given the strategic and ideological crosscurrents in Egypt, it is in Israel’s national interest to minimize the intensity of the ideological and make certain that Israel is not perceived as a threat. In Gaza, for example, Israel and Egypt may have shared a common interest in containing Hamas, and the next generation of Egyptian officers may share it as well. But what didn’t materialize in the streets this time could in the future: an Islamist rising. In that case, the Egyptian military might find it in its interest to preserve its power by accommodating the Islamists. At this point, Egypt becomes the problem and not part of the solution.
Keeping Egypt from coming to this is the imperative of military dispassion. If the long-term center of gravity of Israel’s national security is at least the neutrality of Egypt, then doing everything to maintain that is a military requirement. That military requirement must be carried out by political means. That requires the recognition of priorities. The future of Gaza or the precise borders of a Palestinian state are trivial compared to preserving the treaty with Egypt. If it is found that a particular political strategy undermines the strategic requirement, then that political strategy must be sacrificed.
In other words, the worst-case scenario for Israel would be a return to the pre-1978 relationship with Egypt without a settlement with the Palestinians. That would open the door for a potential two-front war with an intifada in the middle. To avoid that, the ideological pressure on Egypt must be eased, and that means a settlement with the Palestinians on less-than-optimal terms. The alternative is to stay the current course and let Israel take its chances. The question is where the greater safety lies. Israel has assumed that it lies with confrontation with the Palestinians. That’s true only if Egypt stays neutral. If the pressure on the Palestinians destabilizes Egypt, it is not the most prudent course.
There are those in Israel who would argue that any release in pressure on the Palestinians will be met with rejection. If that is true, then, in my view, that is catastrophic news for Israel. In due course, ideological shifts and recalculations of Israeli intentions will cause a change in Egyptian policy. This will take several decades to turn into effective military force, and the first conflicts may well end in Israeli victory. But, as I have said before, it must always be remembered that no matter how many times Israel wins, it need only lose once to be annihilated.
To some it means that Israel should remain as strong as possible. To me it means that Israel should avoid rolling the dice too often, regardless of how strong it thinks it is. The Mubarak affair might open a strategic reconsideration of the Israeli position.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source URL: http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110207-egypt-israel-and-strategic-reconsideration
Links:
[4] http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20081229_israel_palestinian_territories_hamas_and_israeli_offensive
Friday, February 4, 2011
Egypt - the Birthplace of Freedom
The situation in Egypt has become so tenuous and complicated that it is hard to distinguish the forest for the trees, especially regarding the impact on Israel. I've asked some people-in-the-know for some good resources for intelligent and informed analysis, and in particular a sense of the Egyptian mindset. The suggestions are at the bottom, but first my own less-then expert take:
I saw a cute joke yesterday, a statement from Israelis that the rioters should be careful not to damage the pyramids, since our original craftsmanship did not come with a lifetime warranty. When you get beyond the humor, though, there is some truth. The Jewish people were born of a dramatic liberation that took place in the very same place where people are dying right now for the right to self determination.
So I trend toward accepting the Passover narrative for what's going on, rather than the Purim narrative, where the Muslim Brotherhood are Haman, manipulating events and standing in the wings, plotting to annihilate the Jews.
Here are some of the most recent articles expressing Israel's justifiable angst.
On Israel and Egypt
Why Israel fears a free Egypt (Washington Post)
Betting on Egypt democracy is Israel's only choice (Ha'aretz)
Why Israel Hates the Egyptian Uprising - Slate Magazine
Editor's Notes: The reversal of a generation's momentum - Jerusalem Post
Unrest in Egypt could lead to Israel's worst nightmare JTA
and I especially liked this NYTimes Conversation Conversation between David Brooks and Gail Collins
It is dangerous to look for analogies in recent as well as ancient history. In many ways this feels like Berlin in 1989, in other ways like Iran in '79, but neither situation takes into account the massive globalization that has taken place and in particular the impact of technology. Egyptians might be struggling for food and dignity, but they all seem to have cell phones. The Muslim Brotherhood remains virulently anti Israel and anti-Semitic, but by all accounts they are far from a majority and are not steering events right now. The peace treaty, cold as it has been, has held since 1979, but it is universally held that peace treaties between real democracies are much more stable than those with dictators.
The week before I was about to spend my rabbinical school year in Israel in 1981, Anwar Sadat was assassinated. Here was the man who single handedly forged peace with Israel, and this was a time, only two years later, when not only was the ink on that treaty barely dry, but the emotional scars of the 1973 war were still fresh on both sides. If ever there was a time to panic about a transition, that was it. Who knew what would happen?
Mubarak is no Sadat, and he could have gone either way. The promise of American dollars and regional stability lured him toward the West. This current Facebook/Twitter-stoked revolution was not born in Mecca or Medina, but in Mark Zuckerberg's dorm room at Harvard. The arc of history may be taking some unusual detours, but the trends of the past decade, including the crushed revolt in Iran and gradual liberalization in China, point toward the Egyptian adventure leading, lurching, toward a positive outcome.
I am by nature an optimist - sometimes painfully so. I also agree with those that a mad rush to elections would be a mistake, as we saw in the West Bank and Gaza. But democratic institutions can be nurtured and proceed with due speed, and negotiations can as well. Israel needs to be in constant conversation with all elements of the Egyptian body politic, in particular the business sector. And negotiations with the Palestinians need to continue too.
We talk of wanting to be on the right side of history. Democratic governments need first and foremost to feed their people in order to stay in power. Trying to distract them by creating scapegoats does much less good, whether they be the press, the Americans, the Israelis or others.
The "Arab Street" is fast turning into the "Arab Electorate," and the flag burning is being replaced by a the vigorous exchange of ideas by an empowered electorate. It won't happen over night. But once it does, Israel will potentially be more secure than ever. It's neighbors will be speaking the same language - the language of representative, responsible government.
That's the side of history I would want to be on, were I Bibi Netanyahu. The people of Israel gained its freedom on the banks of the Nile. It's so fitting that its neighbors might now do the same.
Online resources:
The International Crisis Group (ICG) - This resource will be most helpful over the coming weeks as the situation begins to clarify. Always a reliable contribution to further analysis of the dynamics of politics and conflict; at this point their positions on Egypt are short, but this is a good site to monitor.
Human Rights Watch - good accounts of the abuses with perhaps a more comprehensive and deeper presentation than that of Amnesty International’s reports;
UNDP (UN Development Programme) Arab States - publishes the annual Human Development Reports specifically about the countries of the Arab (and the better-known annual global HDRs).
Peace and Collaborative Development Network - http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/, article at bottom of page by Firouzeh Afsharnia, “From Tunis to Egypt and Iran: Democracy in Subtitles”;
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace – http://www.carnegieendowment.org/, a publication, “US Aid to Egypt: The Current Situation and Future Prospects”, June 2009.
Books:
1. The Jacoubian Building by Alaa al Aswany, a journalist and writer in the Thoreauian spirit who makes a living as a dentist.
In addition to providing valuable commentary about Egyptian life, human behaviour in an authoritarian environment, this book also offers important insights into the social cleavage (and of course economic) between the rural and the urban - which one could posit - serves as one of the many causes of resentment, frustration, and humiliation manifested in the interactions between these two social strata (as demonstrated perhaps with the manipulative use of whip and machete-wielding horse and camel-riders).
2. The Geopolitics of Emotion: How Cultures of Fear, Humiliation, and Hope are Reshaping the World by Dominique Moisi, the French journalist, analyst who helped to found the French Institute of International Affairs.
While at times superficial and questionable in terms of ‘voice’, Dominique’s book is nevertheless an important contribution to understanding motivations (beyond the realpolitik) of societies, nation-states, et al.
3. Reset: Iran, Turkey and America’s Future by Stephen Kinzer, author of the excellent book, All the Shah’s Men.
While not Egypt-specific, the book is certainly very relevant to understanding the dynamics concerning two other societies ‘in transition’ and their similarities and differences with Egypt.
4. Islamic Liberation Theology by Hamid Dabashi, a Columbia University professor of Iranian studies and comparative literature, writes a thought-provoking alternative treatise to Huntington’s so-called clash of civilisations with detail and fresh paradigms about Islam, the West, ideology, and more.
5. The Last Pharaoh by Aladdin Elaasar, Egyptian-born/raised lecturer and author/journalist, lives in US.
Elaasar’s work is a trenchant, multi-disciplinary presentation of Egypt’s history and present state that holds no punches.
I saw a cute joke yesterday, a statement from Israelis that the rioters should be careful not to damage the pyramids, since our original craftsmanship did not come with a lifetime warranty. When you get beyond the humor, though, there is some truth. The Jewish people were born of a dramatic liberation that took place in the very same place where people are dying right now for the right to self determination.
So I trend toward accepting the Passover narrative for what's going on, rather than the Purim narrative, where the Muslim Brotherhood are Haman, manipulating events and standing in the wings, plotting to annihilate the Jews.
Here are some of the most recent articles expressing Israel's justifiable angst.
On Israel and Egypt
Why Israel fears a free Egypt (Washington Post)
Betting on Egypt democracy is Israel's only choice (Ha'aretz)
Why Israel Hates the Egyptian Uprising - Slate Magazine
Editor's Notes: The reversal of a generation's momentum - Jerusalem Post
Unrest in Egypt could lead to Israel's worst nightmare JTA
and I especially liked this NYTimes Conversation Conversation between David Brooks and Gail Collins
It is dangerous to look for analogies in recent as well as ancient history. In many ways this feels like Berlin in 1989, in other ways like Iran in '79, but neither situation takes into account the massive globalization that has taken place and in particular the impact of technology. Egyptians might be struggling for food and dignity, but they all seem to have cell phones. The Muslim Brotherhood remains virulently anti Israel and anti-Semitic, but by all accounts they are far from a majority and are not steering events right now. The peace treaty, cold as it has been, has held since 1979, but it is universally held that peace treaties between real democracies are much more stable than those with dictators.
The week before I was about to spend my rabbinical school year in Israel in 1981, Anwar Sadat was assassinated. Here was the man who single handedly forged peace with Israel, and this was a time, only two years later, when not only was the ink on that treaty barely dry, but the emotional scars of the 1973 war were still fresh on both sides. If ever there was a time to panic about a transition, that was it. Who knew what would happen?
Mubarak is no Sadat, and he could have gone either way. The promise of American dollars and regional stability lured him toward the West. This current Facebook/Twitter-stoked revolution was not born in Mecca or Medina, but in Mark Zuckerberg's dorm room at Harvard. The arc of history may be taking some unusual detours, but the trends of the past decade, including the crushed revolt in Iran and gradual liberalization in China, point toward the Egyptian adventure leading, lurching, toward a positive outcome.
I am by nature an optimist - sometimes painfully so. I also agree with those that a mad rush to elections would be a mistake, as we saw in the West Bank and Gaza. But democratic institutions can be nurtured and proceed with due speed, and negotiations can as well. Israel needs to be in constant conversation with all elements of the Egyptian body politic, in particular the business sector. And negotiations with the Palestinians need to continue too.
We talk of wanting to be on the right side of history. Democratic governments need first and foremost to feed their people in order to stay in power. Trying to distract them by creating scapegoats does much less good, whether they be the press, the Americans, the Israelis or others.
The "Arab Street" is fast turning into the "Arab Electorate," and the flag burning is being replaced by a the vigorous exchange of ideas by an empowered electorate. It won't happen over night. But once it does, Israel will potentially be more secure than ever. It's neighbors will be speaking the same language - the language of representative, responsible government.
That's the side of history I would want to be on, were I Bibi Netanyahu. The people of Israel gained its freedom on the banks of the Nile. It's so fitting that its neighbors might now do the same.
Online resources:
The International Crisis Group (ICG) - This resource will be most helpful over the coming weeks as the situation begins to clarify. Always a reliable contribution to further analysis of the dynamics of politics and conflict; at this point their positions on Egypt are short, but this is a good site to monitor.
Human Rights Watch - good accounts of the abuses with perhaps a more comprehensive and deeper presentation than that of Amnesty International’s reports;
UNDP (UN Development Programme) Arab States - publishes the annual Human Development Reports specifically about the countries of the Arab (and the better-known annual global HDRs).
Peace and Collaborative Development Network - http://www.internationalpeaceandconflict.org/, article at bottom of page by Firouzeh Afsharnia, “From Tunis to Egypt and Iran: Democracy in Subtitles”;
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace – http://www.carnegieendowment.org/, a publication, “US Aid to Egypt: The Current Situation and Future Prospects”, June 2009.
Books:
1. The Jacoubian Building by Alaa al Aswany, a journalist and writer in the Thoreauian spirit who makes a living as a dentist.
In addition to providing valuable commentary about Egyptian life, human behaviour in an authoritarian environment, this book also offers important insights into the social cleavage (and of course economic) between the rural and the urban - which one could posit - serves as one of the many causes of resentment, frustration, and humiliation manifested in the interactions between these two social strata (as demonstrated perhaps with the manipulative use of whip and machete-wielding horse and camel-riders).
2. The Geopolitics of Emotion: How Cultures of Fear, Humiliation, and Hope are Reshaping the World by Dominique Moisi, the French journalist, analyst who helped to found the French Institute of International Affairs.
While at times superficial and questionable in terms of ‘voice’, Dominique’s book is nevertheless an important contribution to understanding motivations (beyond the realpolitik) of societies, nation-states, et al.
3. Reset: Iran, Turkey and America’s Future by Stephen Kinzer, author of the excellent book, All the Shah’s Men.
While not Egypt-specific, the book is certainly very relevant to understanding the dynamics concerning two other societies ‘in transition’ and their similarities and differences with Egypt.
4. Islamic Liberation Theology by Hamid Dabashi, a Columbia University professor of Iranian studies and comparative literature, writes a thought-provoking alternative treatise to Huntington’s so-called clash of civilisations with detail and fresh paradigms about Islam, the West, ideology, and more.
5. The Last Pharaoh by Aladdin Elaasar, Egyptian-born/raised lecturer and author/journalist, lives in US.
Elaasar’s work is a trenchant, multi-disciplinary presentation of Egypt’s history and present state that holds no punches.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Snow Days, Facebook and Cheating: Hammerman on Ethics
See my latest Hammerman on Ethics piece from the Jewish Week:
Q - I am a high school student. My math final was postponed because of a mid-day snow storm, but a friend of mine had taken the test earlier that day. That night while I was studying, I paused to take a peek at my Facebook news feed and saw that my friend had posted a page from the test. I didn't realize what it was at first so I looked at it. But when I realized what it was, I deleted it. I took the test the next day and did not say anything. I had studied hard and would have gotten those answers right anyway. Was I right to say nothing?
A - OK, let's set aside the question of right and wrong for a moment. Does your friend actually want to go to college? Does he want eventually to get a job? Does he realize how exposed he is right now? Assuming he sent the answers to all his Facebook friends, not just you, someone is bound to rat on him. And even if not, the evidence is out there in cyberspace, and that means it's there forever. Even if this teacher is clueless as to the ways of social networking, some other teacher or prospective employer or college admissions officer will find out about it.
What happened is similar to the recent cheating scandal at the University of Central Florida, where 600 business students were forced to retake an exam after the professor got wind that hundreds of them had gotten access to the answer key online. The professor's speech to the students has become a YouTube classic. The incident has sparked soul searching on that campus and well beyond, as people have speculated about a generational divide as to what constitutes cheating. It has simply become far too easy to cheat and few seem to care. But the technology that giveth also taketh away, and it is now much easier to detect cheating, which is what that UCF professor was able to do after a statistical analysis of the students' answers.
Click here for the rest of the answer.
Q - I am a high school student. My math final was postponed because of a mid-day snow storm, but a friend of mine had taken the test earlier that day. That night while I was studying, I paused to take a peek at my Facebook news feed and saw that my friend had posted a page from the test. I didn't realize what it was at first so I looked at it. But when I realized what it was, I deleted it. I took the test the next day and did not say anything. I had studied hard and would have gotten those answers right anyway. Was I right to say nothing?
A - OK, let's set aside the question of right and wrong for a moment. Does your friend actually want to go to college? Does he want eventually to get a job? Does he realize how exposed he is right now? Assuming he sent the answers to all his Facebook friends, not just you, someone is bound to rat on him. And even if not, the evidence is out there in cyberspace, and that means it's there forever. Even if this teacher is clueless as to the ways of social networking, some other teacher or prospective employer or college admissions officer will find out about it.
What happened is similar to the recent cheating scandal at the University of Central Florida, where 600 business students were forced to retake an exam after the professor got wind that hundreds of them had gotten access to the answer key online. The professor's speech to the students has become a YouTube classic. The incident has sparked soul searching on that campus and well beyond, as people have speculated about a generational divide as to what constitutes cheating. It has simply become far too easy to cheat and few seem to care. But the technology that giveth also taketh away, and it is now much easier to detect cheating, which is what that UCF professor was able to do after a statistical analysis of the students' answers.
Click here for the rest of the answer.
Annual Super Bowl Prediction: Packers vs. Steelers
It’s not easy for me to make a prediction after the Patriots' disappointing finish. But since I’ve almost always been right (my personal favorite being Pats-Rams in 2002), I must meet the challenge. So who will it be: Steelers or Packers?
Scanning for clues: How about the Ten Commandments? “Thou shalt not steel…” seems to be imploring me to lean Green Bay’s way. On the other hand, the final commandment tells us not to be green with envy.
There is to my knowledge no “packer” in the Bible, though Jews are perpetually packing their bags as they head off to one exile or another. But the word "green" appears dozens of times, at least 40 by my count, almost always in reference to growth in nature (along with the occasional mildew or sacrificial blemish). The Hebrew word "yarok" (the color green) also means vegetable, has connotations of paleness, and in verb form it means to expectorate. So one could call this a game between Pittsburgh and Spitsburgh. But it doesn't tell us who is going to win.
JEWISH LAST NAMES?
Of course, it is worth mentioning that there are many Jews with the last name Green, but far more with a name ending with "berg" (though admittedly, few ending with "burgh"). Point for Pittsburgh... except that both teams include gold as one of their colors, so the Goldberg connection can cut both ways. And when you throw in "Greenberg," we seem to leaning toward Packer colors on the Jewish spectrum. No "Blackbergs" that I know of, though I know at least two Jews with the last name "Black."
STEEL IN THE BIBLE
The modern Hebrew word for steel is “peled,” from the three letter root meaning “to consume in flames,” based on Nahum 2:3: “For the Lord restores the pride of Jacob... The shield of his mighty men is made red, the valiant men are in scarlet; the chariots are fire of steel in the day of his preparation, and the cypress spears are made to quiver.”
Steel, as we know it, didn’t exist in biblical times. Looking at the concordance, we find a connection to the Hebrew word for copper, nechoshet, a word familiar from the song “Jerusalem of Gold.” Think of that song… “Yerushalyim shel zahav (Gold), v’shel nechoshet v’shel ORE.” “Ore” means light, but the English transliteration of the word points to something else. To quote from the Wikipedia: Iron ore is the raw material used to make pig iron, which is one of the main raw materials to make steel.
Pig iron? Does this correspond to the football or to Steeler Hall of Fame linebacker Jack Ham?
But given the choice between that classic combo of ham and cheese, I prefer cheese. Cheese is more, well, KOSHER. A vote for the cheeseheads from Green Bay.
Except that the first mass produced items that received kosher supervision in America were, you guessed it, Heinz pickles and other products - and Heinz is of course not only from Pittsburgh, but they named the stadium after it - and their best receiver (different spelling), not to mention their KOSHER dills.
There is little kosher about the meat packed in Green Bay.
On the other hand, Wisconsin DOES have a village - and a bay - called Whitefish Bay. Sounds pretty kosher to me. And what's a bay but the first syllable of bagel?
In the Bible, the word for iron is typically barzel. The “Encyclopedia of Jewish Symbols” informs us that iron has long been seen as a powerful protector against demons. One explanation has it that the first plague on Egpyt, blood, impacted water in vessels of wood and vessels of stone, but not water found in vessels of iron. The four letters of that word also correspond to the first letters of the names of the Jacob’s four wives, Bilhah, Rachel, Zilpah and Leah. “Rock is hard,” says the Talmud (Bava Batra 10a), “but Iron cuts it.” So if we were playing “Rock, Paper , Scissors,” or if Green Bay was known for paper packers rather than meatpacking, no doubt the Steelers would win.
But while iron cuts rock, can it it cut through "Frozen Tundra?" My experience over the last few days tells me no. Nothin' cuts through this stuff. Certainly not my iron shovel.
OWNERSHIP
Let's look at Jewish ownership, something covered in Tablet magazine's Super Bowl preview. The Steelers have been owned by the Rooney family since so long ago that Terry Bradshaw even had hair. Even longer! Not that there's anything wrong with Irish Catholic owners, but the Packers are owned by the entire population of Green Bay, which includes at least a minyan of Jews. We know that because there is at least one synagogue, Cnesses Israel (Conservative, no less). I understand they wear cheeseheads as yarmulkes.
But the clincher is that this week's Torah portion - and next week's as well - focuses on the role and garb of the High Priest. His name? Aaron. yes, Aaron Rodgers, the Packer quarterback, is the main topic of this week's portion. As for the Steeler QB, his name, "Ben" is actually part of EVERY male's Hebrew name - because it means "son of," and we are all the son of someone. But Ben here is actually short for Benjamin, and we haven't read about him in the Torah for quite some time.
One of the priestly garments worn by Aaron was a breast plate consisting of a dozen precious stones. Notice which color is the top row:
Exod 28:15-29:
"You shall make the breastplate of judgment. Artistically woven according to the workmanship of the ephod you shall make it: of gold, blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and fine woven linen, you shall make it. It shall be doubled into a square: a span shall be its length, and a span shall be its width. And you shall put settings of stones in it, four rows of stones: The first row shall be a sardius, a topaz, and an emerald; this shall be the first row; the second row shall be a turquoise, a sapphire, and a diamond; the third row, a jacinth, an agate, and an amethyst; and the fourth row, a beryl, an onyx, and a jasper. They shall be set in gold settings. And the stones shall have the names of the sons of Israel, twelve according to their names, like the engravings of a signet, each one with its own name; they shall be according to the twelve tribes. You shall make chains for the breastplate at the end, like braided cords of pure gold."
Aaron will be wearing jewelry of green and gold. That's what the Torah says. Who am I to argue?
The Packers will win.
…of course it must be stated that in no way do I condone gambling and past performance should not be an indicator of future results…
Scanning for clues: How about the Ten Commandments? “Thou shalt not steel…” seems to be imploring me to lean Green Bay’s way. On the other hand, the final commandment tells us not to be green with envy.
There is to my knowledge no “packer” in the Bible, though Jews are perpetually packing their bags as they head off to one exile or another. But the word "green" appears dozens of times, at least 40 by my count, almost always in reference to growth in nature (along with the occasional mildew or sacrificial blemish). The Hebrew word "yarok" (the color green) also means vegetable, has connotations of paleness, and in verb form it means to expectorate. So one could call this a game between Pittsburgh and Spitsburgh. But it doesn't tell us who is going to win.
JEWISH LAST NAMES?
Of course, it is worth mentioning that there are many Jews with the last name Green, but far more with a name ending with "berg" (though admittedly, few ending with "burgh"). Point for Pittsburgh... except that both teams include gold as one of their colors, so the Goldberg connection can cut both ways. And when you throw in "Greenberg," we seem to leaning toward Packer colors on the Jewish spectrum. No "Blackbergs" that I know of, though I know at least two Jews with the last name "Black."
STEEL IN THE BIBLE
The modern Hebrew word for steel is “peled,” from the three letter root meaning “to consume in flames,” based on Nahum 2:3: “For the Lord restores the pride of Jacob... The shield of his mighty men is made red, the valiant men are in scarlet; the chariots are fire of steel in the day of his preparation, and the cypress spears are made to quiver.”
Steel, as we know it, didn’t exist in biblical times. Looking at the concordance, we find a connection to the Hebrew word for copper, nechoshet, a word familiar from the song “Jerusalem of Gold.” Think of that song… “Yerushalyim shel zahav (Gold), v’shel nechoshet v’shel ORE.” “Ore” means light, but the English transliteration of the word points to something else. To quote from the Wikipedia: Iron ore is the raw material used to make pig iron, which is one of the main raw materials to make steel.
Pig iron? Does this correspond to the football or to Steeler Hall of Fame linebacker Jack Ham?
But given the choice between that classic combo of ham and cheese, I prefer cheese. Cheese is more, well, KOSHER. A vote for the cheeseheads from Green Bay.
Except that the first mass produced items that received kosher supervision in America were, you guessed it, Heinz pickles and other products - and Heinz is of course not only from Pittsburgh, but they named the stadium after it - and their best receiver (different spelling), not to mention their KOSHER dills.
There is little kosher about the meat packed in Green Bay.
On the other hand, Wisconsin DOES have a village - and a bay - called Whitefish Bay. Sounds pretty kosher to me. And what's a bay but the first syllable of bagel?
In the Bible, the word for iron is typically barzel. The “Encyclopedia of Jewish Symbols” informs us that iron has long been seen as a powerful protector against demons. One explanation has it that the first plague on Egpyt, blood, impacted water in vessels of wood and vessels of stone, but not water found in vessels of iron. The four letters of that word also correspond to the first letters of the names of the Jacob’s four wives, Bilhah, Rachel, Zilpah and Leah. “Rock is hard,” says the Talmud (Bava Batra 10a), “but Iron cuts it.” So if we were playing “Rock, Paper , Scissors,” or if Green Bay was known for paper packers rather than meatpacking, no doubt the Steelers would win.
But while iron cuts rock, can it it cut through "Frozen Tundra?" My experience over the last few days tells me no. Nothin' cuts through this stuff. Certainly not my iron shovel.
OWNERSHIP
Let's look at Jewish ownership, something covered in Tablet magazine's Super Bowl preview. The Steelers have been owned by the Rooney family since so long ago that Terry Bradshaw even had hair. Even longer! Not that there's anything wrong with Irish Catholic owners, but the Packers are owned by the entire population of Green Bay, which includes at least a minyan of Jews. We know that because there is at least one synagogue, Cnesses Israel (Conservative, no less). I understand they wear cheeseheads as yarmulkes.
But the clincher is that this week's Torah portion - and next week's as well - focuses on the role and garb of the High Priest. His name? Aaron. yes, Aaron Rodgers, the Packer quarterback, is the main topic of this week's portion. As for the Steeler QB, his name, "Ben" is actually part of EVERY male's Hebrew name - because it means "son of," and we are all the son of someone. But Ben here is actually short for Benjamin, and we haven't read about him in the Torah for quite some time.
One of the priestly garments worn by Aaron was a breast plate consisting of a dozen precious stones. Notice which color is the top row:
Exod 28:15-29:
"You shall make the breastplate of judgment. Artistically woven according to the workmanship of the ephod you shall make it: of gold, blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and fine woven linen, you shall make it. It shall be doubled into a square: a span shall be its length, and a span shall be its width. And you shall put settings of stones in it, four rows of stones: The first row shall be a sardius, a topaz, and an emerald; this shall be the first row; the second row shall be a turquoise, a sapphire, and a diamond; the third row, a jacinth, an agate, and an amethyst; and the fourth row, a beryl, an onyx, and a jasper. They shall be set in gold settings. And the stones shall have the names of the sons of Israel, twelve according to their names, like the engravings of a signet, each one with its own name; they shall be according to the twelve tribes. You shall make chains for the breastplate at the end, like braided cords of pure gold."
Aaron will be wearing jewelry of green and gold. That's what the Torah says. Who am I to argue?
The Packers will win.
…of course it must be stated that in no way do I condone gambling and past performance should not be an indicator of future results…
Letter from Netanya: Israel on Edge
Jan Gaines reports to us from her listening post in Netanya on the nervousness in Israel as Egypt stands on the brink. What does it mean for Israel? We'll discuss at services this Shabbat morning.
Dear Friends,
How astounding that between my last letter and today, the world has changed for the Middle East and especially for Israel.
While Israeli's generally are just staying quiet and watching, once you bring up the subject , the fear and worry are just beneath the surface. Since Israel will be the first country affected if the Moslem Brotherhood and other Islamists take over the country.
We are balanced on a tightrope, hoping not to fall off.
Israel seems to be the only country asking, even begging the U.S. not to push Mubarak out so fast. Whether Obama et al understand the ramifications of what it means if Mubarak falls immediately, I'm not sure.
From the beginning it was obvious that ElBaradei was in bed with the Moslem Brotherhood. In fact, I believe that his return just 2 weeks before all this happened, was not an accident. And given the solid organization of the Moslem Brotherhood, it is not far-fetched to see them filling the vacuum.
All I can tell you is to please watch the news, especially Fox- - Yes Fox is the one channel that gets it right. If any of you plan to travel here in the next 6 months, don't change your plans. Nothing is going to happen before the fall I think, since elections are scheduled for Sept. in Egypt.
Maybe it will all turn out OK, if the very popular and strong Army prevails instead of the Moslem Brotherhood and other Islamists. So let's pray for that.
Shabbat Shalom, Jan
Dear Friends,
How astounding that between my last letter and today, the world has changed for the Middle East and especially for Israel.
While Israeli's generally are just staying quiet and watching, once you bring up the subject , the fear and worry are just beneath the surface. Since Israel will be the first country affected if the Moslem Brotherhood and other Islamists take over the country.
We are balanced on a tightrope, hoping not to fall off.
Israel seems to be the only country asking, even begging the U.S. not to push Mubarak out so fast. Whether Obama et al understand the ramifications of what it means if Mubarak falls immediately, I'm not sure.
From the beginning it was obvious that ElBaradei was in bed with the Moslem Brotherhood. In fact, I believe that his return just 2 weeks before all this happened, was not an accident. And given the solid organization of the Moslem Brotherhood, it is not far-fetched to see them filling the vacuum.
All I can tell you is to please watch the news, especially Fox- - Yes Fox is the one channel that gets it right. If any of you plan to travel here in the next 6 months, don't change your plans. Nothing is going to happen before the fall I think, since elections are scheduled for Sept. in Egypt.
Maybe it will all turn out OK, if the very popular and strong Army prevails instead of the Moslem Brotherhood and other Islamists. So let's pray for that.
Shabbat Shalom, Jan
Black Jew Dialogues at NCC's New Hillel
Kudos to TBE's own Rachael Lederman for helping to open a new Hillel at Norwalk Community College. (See the Ledger's feature here). Hillel will hold its first event, a performance of “The Black Jew Dialogues” on Wednesday, Feb. 9, from 11:30 a.m – 12:50 p.m. in the NCC PepsiCo Theater. The play, which will be free and open to the community, uses comedy to explore race and cultural relations in America. It combines fast-paced sketches, improvisations and multi-media. The Black Jew Dialogues has been touring to universities, high schools, synagogues, and theatres throughout the US with great success.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Holy Spaces: The Tabernacle, the Temple and the Kotel
In this 2010 parsha packet I explore in great depth the concept of holy place, sacred space, as it applied in the Bible through the tabernacle and temple, and as it applies today in the Western Wall. I include ancient and contemporary reflections on what it means to have a sanctuary, and what it meant to the ancients, and how the earthy construct has a celestial blueprint.
More verses are used to describe the tabernacle than any other object in the Bible - fully half the book of Exodus is devoted to it. Why?
Finally, how has the Western Wall today become just the opposite of what its predecessors to be. Why is it now a place of disunity and discrimination? And is it really supposed to be a synagogue?
The Shechina has left the building.
More verses are used to describe the tabernacle than any other object in the Bible - fully half the book of Exodus is devoted to it. Why?
Finally, how has the Western Wall today become just the opposite of what its predecessors to be. Why is it now a place of disunity and discrimination? And is it really supposed to be a synagogue?
The Shechina has left the building.
Where Does God Live? Parsha Packet for Terumah
Click here for a parsha packet, "Where Does God Live?" Why would God insist on a physical sanctuary as a home, when God is in fact everywhere. See a survey of Jewish sources on the subject, including one (Sfat Emet) suggesting that God "lived" in the tabernacle because it was the location of such selfless generosity and unity among the Israelites.
God "lives" there but sanctity can be experienced everywhere.
God "lives" there but sanctity can be experienced everywhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)