Film on The New Yorker writer’s coverage of the Eichmann trial lacks some passion.
New theater troupe, a division of the Folksbiene, mounts second production digging into Russians’ complex background.
Learn the "Top 18" Kosher white, red and Israeli Wines, Read about the American kosher wine scene, Israeli wines and much more
Tourism booming in the Negev, that first teen roots journey, driving in Israel (really!), and more.
How do you know that the JCC has listened to their people? You also assume that synagogues aren't having 'learner's programs' like the JCC; perhaps they are?
Remember, this service is not free and let's face it, ultimately, the JCC wants them to pay them membership. So what is the difference between the JCC and the synagogues? They both want more members!
They shouldn't be in competition with each other, they should be working together. You may look at this as great, but these programs have the potential to tear communities apart.
As we reach Rosh Hashanah, I hope that we realize that our people must work together for a brighter Jewish future rather than work against each other.
Rabbi Weiss was quoted as saying:
“They have hired an outside rabbi, they’re saying the Kol Nidre prayer and they’re having a kiddush — they’re running a service and in so doing they have violated longstanding agreements in this community about our separate roles and missions,” Rabbi Weiss said.
The separate roles and missions of the JCC and synagogues are not clear cut. Initially the JCC was the Jewish agency that provided a Jewish preschool environment. Since the synagogues have stepped into that area, the roles and missions of the JCC and the synagogues have begun to overlap more, and the synagogues don't have the right to criticize the programs offered by the JCC. In addition, in a town where 2/3 of the Jews are unaffiliated, why shouldn't the JCC attempt to create an environment where those Jews can become more Jewishly engaged? After all, this is NOT a formal prayer service, it is a program where Jews can learn about the holidays and connect Jewishly, particularly those Jews who would not be attending formal synagogue services anyway.
Voted for Obama, never voted Republican in my life and am against the Mosque. J. Haber is 100% wrong. Most of my Jewish Dem friends are also against Mosque - 71% of Americans against Mosque and that includes many Liberal including Liberal Jews. that's a fact - obviously an uncomfortable one for the far Left.
Being against Mosque has nothing to do with our strong belief in freedom of religion and speech. This is a red herring brought in by Mosque-supporters to muddy up the conversation.
Thanks Daniel Gordis and thanks Jonathan Mark - keep on writing on this and other topics.
@Gravitas
All I ever need to know about Pamela Geller is based on her faith, ideas, and convictions,
and what a stupid blog, this Clownwatch or another " Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" website means for you ?
I don't know you, but I can easily guess what kind of esterhazy you are.
G-od create the world with the Truth, liers and haters will be prosecuted by Him.
G-od bless Pamela !
Congratulations on taking the leap - hope the commitment works out this time and your "curse" is just an illusion!
-Stacy
Pamela Gellar is a true leader not some multi millionaire worth 100 million or more who rotates around different Jewish organizations year to year.She's not some Let wing Jew who is thrilled like a puppy dog when some Muslim pats them on the head and says Israel can exist but without Jerusalem and with a partial right of return.As far as the Huffington Post i have seen as many Anti Jewish comments on that site as any White Nationalist site. Many complaints have been lodged to them and they said they would pre screen for Anti Jewish comments lol the comments have increased.Many Jews are getting feed up with left wing Jewish establshment and the fanatic Anti Israel Jews.Pamela is the wave of the future.
What an irresponsibly misleading headline! Anyone who has actually read Daniel Gordis' article (or at least read it carefully) knows that he did not come out against the mosque at all. In fact (and even one of the quotes in Jonathan Marks' article confirms this), he said that this was not about the mosque, but about the larger issue of combatting extremist, jihadist versions of Islam. I have come to rely on the Jewish Week as one of the more reasonable voices in the Jewish media. Unfortunately, it now appears that even the Jewish Week is not above sacrificing the integrity of someone's words about a very sensitive issue when an inflammatory headline might better attract attention.
Actually, the only Jews opposing the Muslim Center are rightwing, Likudnik Zionists, orthodox Jewish bigots, and aging Islamaphobes like Marty Peretz.
But then again, you probably find Muslim Center supporter Leon Wieseltier to be a "leftist extremist." He'll get a kick out of that when I see him at shul.
As the Rambam says, the sick taste the bitter as sweet and the sweet as bitter.
For Wieseltier's excellent article in full, see
http://basmanroselaw.blogspot.com/2010/09/best-piece-ever-on-mosque-contretemps.html
Hmmm...I've only ever tried to post here twice...and both got blocked. Not worth visiting if you can't join in discussion.
This is a fine article. As Leon Wieseltier has just pointed out in the New Republic, every religion has messages of war and peace, love and hate.
Judaism has more than its share of anti-gentile messages and bigotry -- goyyim are not human (Zohar); they have no human soul (Tanya); the filth of Eve's sexual sin with the serpent was not washed off of them. Jesus and Muhammed have been vilified; the virgin Mary was a whore; the list goes on and on, and it is possible to cherry pick these passages, as anti-Semites have done for centuries, or it is possible to censor them, as Jews and non-Jews have done. It is also possible to explain them away, as Jewish apologists have done.
If you are a traditional Jew, as I am, you know that you cannot understand a religion until you live it and study it for years. And yet I see Jews in America, who would never pick up a humash without reading commentaries, profess to be experts on Islam after they read a few websites.
There are close to 1.4 billion Muslims in the world. If there are 10,000 jihadi terrorists in the world (there are not), that would be -- what -- a hundredth of one percent of Muslims? Like any religion or ideology, Islam has its negative side, and fundamentalist Islam is something that has to be studied and understood. Within Islam's canonical texts you can find the same love and hate that you can find within all of the Western religious texts. Muhammed had a much more ambivalent relationship with Jews then the Jews had with Amalek, though both groups were perceived as enemies at certain times.
Islamophobic Jews have to stop acting like Jewish Henry Fords and start meeting real Muslims. And New York is a great place to do that.
Jewish groups would be supporting if not openly pushing for school propaganda that talked about american indians or blacks, the problems they face and the white western man being responsible. The shoe is on the other foot a little bit with the palestinians now becoming a trendy leftist pet cause. I laugh in your face. What goes around comes around. Enjoy the demonization that my people have had to endure for decades now, thanks in no small part to to the efforts of so many members of your tribe.
It will not be long before the native peoples of Sweden, Denmark, Germany and France will be chased through the streets of their own cities, running for their lives as a reward for their misplaced charity and tolerance. To some degree, this is already happening.
Matt, that is beautiful. The perfect illustration of what we, members of the LDS faith, have as our intent when performing ordinances by proxy for the dead. We are not out to convert the dead, but to just make every blessing, in our understanding, available to those who have passed on if they choose to accept them.
I'm a little disappointed that this concept has been so hard for everyone to grasp. Everything we do, we do out of love.
If one doesn't believe our church is the true church of Christ on this earth, then why be threatened by our practices?
I am in admiration of the compromise given and the efforts put forth to encourage further cooperation of faiths. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I will exercise faith in our leadership and support it. Heavenly Father knows what is going on here and has a plan with all of this. Perhaps right now our camaraderie with our Jewish brothers and sisters needs to take precedence over the work for their dead. I'm sure Heavenly Father is keeping them close with assurances that there will be a time in the future when their work will go forth once more.
Amen to that.
Looks as if Dr. Norman Finkelstein was right after all.
I had the same desire to find out what was going on after 9/11 but came to a very different conclusion than Ms. Geller. It only took a little bit of scratching the surface to see that the official narrative of Israel/Jews as entirely the "white hats" and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims as the "black hats" was horribly one-sided.
I am an atheist and reject everyone's mythology. And while fundamentalists and fanatics are certainly more troublesome than your ordinary practitioners, our pluralist values are worth defending as it protects our rights individually. If we go even crazier then we have already, then the terrorists have won.
I have more concern about the lies US citizens are being told regarding 9/11 then I do over a "beheading threat" based on the rise of Islam (Americans love beer, bacon, and dogs too much). And I have a hypothetical for Pam -- if it was established that Israel played a part in the 9/11 attacks, would she be for the prohibition of synagogues near Ground Zero?
Our "War on Terror" has made us no safer, and exposed our own moral bankruptcy.
After 9/11 we were outraged by the killing of thousands of innocent people over a political beef; so we responded by killing thousands and thousands of innocent people over a political beef.
First, contrary to the previous writer's assertion, Rabbi Broyde's essay is clearly an attempt to explain what Rabbi Broyde considers to be the normative Jewish position. True, Rabbi Broyde's essay may reflect his individual understanding of that "normative" approach, but there is no question that the position that Rabbi Broyde assumes that Rabbi Broyde is defending the "normative" Jewish approach and that Rabbi Weiss's position goes against that approach.
Second, Mr. Gross was not attacking Rabbi Broyde for disputing Rabbi Weiss, as the previous writer implies. On the contrary, Mr. Gross was engaging Rabbi Broyde in a substantive discussion of the issue. Surely a writer who argues that Rabbi Broyde "should be thanked" for his "attempt to...engage in rational ...discussion," should be thankful to Mr. Gross for doing the same. Unless, of course, the writer only supports substantive articulation of positions the writer agrees with.
The writer's last paragraph is not only condescending but suggests that the writer may not have actually read Mr. Gross's entire article (though the writer clearly reached paragraph 1, where Mr. Gross describes Rabbi Broyde's aforementioned "normative" assumption). After all, Mr. Gross directly addresses the writer's concern by speaking of the communal considerations that may have motivated Rabbi Weiss's decision. Indeed, Mr. Gross criticizes Rabbi Broyde for not addressing such communal considerations and engaging in the type of weighing that the writer describes. A writer who (rightly) argues for such a rational and careful approach, would be well-served to actually read the pieces he or she criticizes.
As usual, R. Broyde’s presentation of the halachic history and material is elegant, comprehensive, and lucid. Probably, few lay readers are qualified to argue with the analysis. On the other hand, I think that he has the sociology backwards and ignores community developments over the past 60-70 years.
During much of that time, our community has encouraged and promoted the intensive study by women of traditional Talmudic text. Our institutions have not confined women to Chumash, Tanach, or parshanut, or restricted them to mimeographed extracts from Talmudic and its sources. We have come far beyond the initial limited scope of the authorization for establishment of Beis Yaakov schools at the turn of the last century, incorporating women’s advanced Torah study as a lechatchila. Given that encouragement, isn’t it natural to expect some impulse or desire for liturgical expression of religious identification from these same women who are now educated at an increasingly high level?
Instead, viewed from the perspective of many decades, mainstream halacha has adopted a consistently negative position on such liturgical efforts. Women’s Megillah readings have strong rabbinic backings, but our rabbis dismiss them as “not communally accepted! ”Women’s tefila groups are rejected as “not expressions of true religious piety” because they forgo tefilla betsibur –but there is little attempt to encourage women to join tefilla betsibur at kabbalat Shabbat or Shabbat Mincha. Women presidents who may have responsibility for ongoing maintenance of minyanim, but it is the Rambam and not lenient authorities who is quoted to forbid it. Women’s leadership of Kabbalat Shabbat is “technically all right, but not appropriate!”
No limmud zechus is necessary for one or more of the suggested forms of participation when it is really allowed. We need only recognize the implications of increased Torah learning by women. Where social norms and practices of significant segments of the community begin to ignore official psak, we run the risk that the posek and the rabbi will eventually be ignored in more areas by broad swathes of the community.
Larry
GDG - It is not clear to me what you are faulting. The fact that Ramah graduates feel compelled to continue their Jewish practice, and find haven in an Orthodox shul, indicates to me that they must have had Jewish experiences at Ramah far richer than simply singing "Zoom Gali Gali." While I too am disheartened that some Jewish people lack strong Jewish identities (whether as a result of their own choices or the lack of support by Jewish professionals/communties), I don't think that the Ramah Camps should take any of the blame. If anything, the Ramah camps have produced generations of committed Jews, wholesome people, and active members of whatever communities they choose to participate in.
I read this article with great interest, and after thinking about it, there was one simple question that kept coming to mind, and that is, what's the big deal?
I firmly believe that ANYTHING that gets Jews more involved in Jewish life is a positive thing, regardless of the location, shul or JCC. It's as simple as that!
I have worked in Jewish educational and community organizations in several different cities for more than 15 years, and frankly, I found the attitudes of the Rabbis quoted in the article to be quite unprofessional and childish.
While I understand fully that all synagogues/Rabbis are trying to do the best that they can to reach out to the community, (many are quite good at it), and that many shuls are having difficult times economically, the attitude displayed here is one of the reasons that a growing number of Jews, particularly younger families and individuals, are not joining a synagogue. Instead of worrying about "numbers" and "usurping authority", they should be concentrating on trying a bit harder to listen to and connect with the type of Jews that are going to alternative types of services and programs.
I congratulate the JCC in Florida for stepping up and listening to them!
The "parallel" that is claimed here is superficial. The writer might as well say that an elephant and a can of soup are the same since neither one can ride a horse.
Even if certain Quran verses can be taken out of context it doesn’t mean that they all are, or that those who do this are doing so insidiously. The fact is that the holy book of Islam does contain a great many anti-Semitic verses, and merely saying that they are taken out of context doesn’t make it so.
In fact, the "context" of these verses is the life of Muhammad, who attacked peaceful Jewish communities, beheaded the men, raped the women and enslaved the children. His companions continued doing the same long after his death.
I agree with Victoria 100%. Bayoumi was actually my professor for a graduate course I took a few years back at Brooklyn College. He is a great guy and takes everyone's opinion into consideration. The nature of his work can be political, but Bayoumi's book is representing an uncommon view point that we do not see within the media much. Muslims, Arabs, South Asians and others who fall into similar categories have been for the most part dehumanized within the West after 9/11. He is simply enlightening us with the other side. But isn't that the nature of literature and books? They are suppposed to have a thesis, an argument and a focal point, even if we don't necessarily agree with it. Bayoumi has an opinion and he is relaying it to us. Although the book is a required read, it does not mean one is required to agree with the opinion relayed by the book. That's the whole point of literature classes though, is it not? To react and relay your own opinion to readings.
With that said, students at Brooklyn College will be receiving a different point of view, but this is in no way "indoctrination". In fact, I think very interesting arguments and papers will be written about the book by students. I wonder though, if Brooklyn College was assigning a book to freshmen by an author who is pro-Israeli, anti-Palestinian and anti-Muslim instead of Bayoumi's book, would the protestors make the same argument that it's "indoctrination" or be angry that the college assigned the work. Somehow I don't think so. So what's all the fuss about? Please be fair.
After reading this article...I can only say Wow! It's so filled with lies & half truths. I was at the community board meeting & nobody was shouted down. It is true that about 95% of the speakers were against the mega (in your face) mosque, from being built so close to ground zero. That was to be expected. Most New Yorkers have some semblance of respect & decency. It is not OK to draw a cartoon?, but building a shrine to the 911 murderers seems to be just fine to this writer. Anyone who has bothered to read what is written in the Koran, would know that it is a book full of hate for all non-believers. All the politically correct rhetoric can not change that fact. I applaud Pamela Geller for having the guts to speak the truth about Islam. All you liberal Jews would be the first ones to be beheaded, if the Islamists ever gained power in the US. Shame on You!
The history of the Jews, the return of Christ, and the global governance of the earth, can not be divorced from each other.
Follow me in Twitter@jerryopus as we explore this truth.
Mr Chandler, you are a disgrace to the Jewish community.
A bitchy article, no substance, just plain leftwing bitchy dhimmitude.
I won't ever visit this site again and all other ties ceased.
Absolutely disgraceful.