Opuscula Will PLO/PFLP Decision Kill Area “A”?

ABU MAZEN, the alleged “leader” of the PLO/PFLP¹ in Oslo’s “Area A,” is promising to end all cooperation with Israeli security forces.

The problem is, even armed with U.S.-provided weapons, the PLO/PFLP cannot — or will not — prevent terrorists from entering Israel.

The bottom line is that Israel will be forced — by “Palestinians” — to take over and the Muslims will lose yet another piece of land.

 

Map by unnamed person claiming to be an American journalist living in Ramallah (https://tinyurl.com/ybzusjh5)

 

Israel has a right to live in peace and security, and it that means taking over Area A, as it took over all of Jerusalem and much of Judea and Samaria (Areas B and C).

Like Joe Biden; Abu Mazen is tripping over his tongue to the detriment of his constituents.

Area A, shown on the map, above, is ungovernable.

You cannot go from Jenin to Ramallah or Ramallah to Hebron in one contiguous area.

Had the PLO/PFLP come to a peace agreement with Israel before Oslo, the “Palestinians” could have had a real state.

Had the PLO/PFLP even considered President Trump’s grand plan, “Palestinians” could have had a real state — even linked to Gaza (which may be one reason Abu Mazen refused to even consider the plan).

Had the PLO/PFLP come to a peace agreement with Israel, residents of yet another Muslim state could have had better education, better medical care, better jobs (working in Israel or for Israeli firms setting up in the new state), improved incomes, less mothers crying for their dead children (on both sides).

It might not have been a Canada-U.S. relationship (even that one started off with some difficulties) but perhaps more of a Mexico-U.S. relationship.

Israel’s peace deal with Egypt is holding. It’s agreement with Jordan is, admittedly, shaky, mostly because Jordan’s king is threatened by the Palestinians in his kingdom, the “real” Palestine.

As time goes on, the PLO/PFLP is losing support from established Muslim states, in large part due to the non-elected government in Ramallah. (The Europeans still find ways to put Euros into the pockets of Abu Mazen and his cronies and to fund the PLO/PFLP’s “slay-for-pay” coffers.)

Abu Mazen, for his own part, needs Israeli security to alert him to approaching Hamas killers who want his head.

Given that Gaza would be part of Trump’s “Palestinian” state might be why Abu Mazen is so steadfastly against the plan to the point of not even looking at it.

None of the “Palestinian” despots in Ramallah or in Gaza have made any progress toward peace with Israel. Hamas, more than the PLO/PFLP, frequently announces that it’s sole goal it to destroy Israel.

 

Israel without Jews

Yet, in reality, if all the Jews who came after 1900, and their descendants, were to leave Israel, the end result would be lack of medical care for the Muslims, lack of education for the Muslims, lack of science and agricultural advances ... in other words, the land would return to its status when Samuel Clemens (right) toured it in 1867. Then Clemens (Mark Twain) wrote: Throughout Innocents Abroad², Twain explicitly states that the area was desolate and devoid of inhabitants. His group entered Palestine from the north, passing through such sites as the Sea of Galilee, the Banias, Nazareth, Jenin and Nablus.

Riding on horseback through the Jezreel Valley, Twain observed, “There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent – not for 30 miles in either direction. There are two or three small clusters of Bedouin tents, but not a single permanent habitation. One may ride 10 miles, hereabouts, and not see 10 human beings.”

Six hundred years before Twain’s visit, Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, known as Nachmanides (1194-1270), commenting on a verse in Leviticus that describes the curses that will befall the land of Israel, wrote that the devastation “constitutes a good tiding, proclaiming that during all our exiles, our land will not accept our enemies... Since the time that we left it, [the land] has not accepted any nation or people, and they all try to settle it... This is a great proof and assurance to us.”

The 13th-century scholar wrote that Israel will remain desolate until the Jewish People assume control. But when the people of Israel finally return to the land of Israel.

While the Muslims came to Israel and drove out some Jews, the only thing they managed to accomplish was to build on top of Judaism’s most holy site (for their third level holy site — they turn their posteriors to their precious mosque when they recite their prayers; some honor.

Did they bring agriculture to Israel? No.

Did they build colleges in Israel? No.

Did they build cities, great or small, in Israel? No.

In order for a land to be a people’s land, the people have to develop it.

The Muslims did nothing.

To be fair, what Jews remained in Israel mostly were beggars depending on handouts from Europe, Asia, and the Americas. But they DID have cities and they DID have education of a sort, and they DID have a court system.

 

Eyes that cannot see

Abu Mazen, et al, have eyes that cannot see that a lasting peace with Israel back in 1948 would be what today’s PLO/PFLP call “Palestine” would have been much larger and uncontested.

Of course Abu Mazen’s “Palestine” would be ruled from Amman, not from Ramallah, but that apparently was NOT a problem until Israel defeated five invading Muslim armies (Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and) Syria). Many “Palestinians” left what was the fledgling state of Israel so the “glorious invading Muslim armies could drive the Jews into the Sea.” Their descendants are living in UN “refugee” camps to this day.

More land was lost for the PLO/PFLP in 1967 when Israel was attacked by Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, and still more land during the “Yom Kippor” war of 1973 led by Egypt and Jordan.

Israel returned the Sinai to Egypt (but Egypt refused to accept Gaza) in exchange for a peace agreement. Jordan was allowed to maintain control of the mosque in return for a peace agreement with Israel. Due to Syria’s continuing belligerency, Israel remains in control of the Golan.

 

An aside: Yassir Arafat was born and raised an Egyptian. He co-founded Fatah in 1959 and joined the PLO in 1967.³

 

 

Sources

1. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) is an organization founded in 1964 with the purpose of the "liberation of Palestine" through armed struggle, with much of its violence aimed at Israeli civilians (https://tinyurl.com/dy2r89u)
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) is a secular Palestinian Marxist–Leninist and revolutionary socialist organization founded in 1967 by George Habash. It has consistently been the second-largest of the groups forming the Palestine Liberation Organization (the PLO, founded in 1964), the largest being Fatah (founded in 1959). As of 2015 the PFLP boycotts participation in the PLO Executive Committee and the Palestinian National Council. (https://tinyurl.com/q5229j3)

2. Samuel Clemens: https://tinyurl.com/y9wqqaur

3. Arafat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasser_Arafat

 

עינים להם ולא יראו * אזנים להם ולא יאזנו

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.

 

comment on End of Area “A”

Opuscula Did FDR’s death Mean life for Israel?

IF FDR HAD LIVED longer, would modern Israel have been “born?”

 

 

I AM READING A BOOK titled The Jews Should Keep Quiet¹ with the sub-title Franklin D. Roosevelt, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, and the Holocaust (right).

I will admit I have a strong bias against Roosevelt for what he did to Jews in Europe and Africa to avoid displeasing his nazi friends.

Were it not for Japan’s attack on 7 December 1941 — an attack Roosevelt allegedly knew was on the way — the U.S. likely would not have entered the war even as late as it did.

Medoff carefully documents his accusations with more than 55 (!) pages of citations and 12 index pages.

Based solely on Roosevelt’s inaction toward the fates of the Jews — again, in Europe and in Africa — it almost is a given that he would have instructed — or gone along with — the U.S. State Department to vote against statehood or Israel. Fortunately, he died on April 12, 1945, allowing the man who never was supposed to be president, Harry S Truman, to force a Yes vote for Israel a little more than two years later, when, on 29 November, 1947, the UN General Assembly voted on Resolution 181, adopting a plan to partition the British Mandate into two states, one Jewish, one Arab.² Israel declared statehood on May 14 1948, on the day in which the British Mandate over Palestine expired, the Jewish People's Council gathered at the Tel Aviv Museum, and declared the establishment of the State of Israel. The new state was recognized that night by the United States and three days later by the USSR.³

R. Wise was, in all respects, Roosevelt’s sycophant who used Roosevelt and much as Roosevelt used him.

Wise considered himself the leader of the Jews, if not in all the diaspora, then at least in the U.S., and for some time, he managed to parlay the relationship he thought he had with Roosevelt into a position of power. Meanwhile, Roosevelt was treating Wise as the “court Jew.”

Medoff documents how Roosevelt ignored the plight of Jews, even after the Vichy French (nazis and nazi sympathizers) were “officially” deposed by the Americans in North Africa — the Americans installed Vichy’s governor as their man in North Africa and, with Roosevelt’s understanding, allowed the Vichy discrimination laws to continue.

Roosevelt’s answer to any Jews who dared suggest he do something to aid the refugees in Europe — all refugees, but most were Jewish … — was that the “best way was to win the war.”

What was his excuse before December 7, 1941?

He feared his popularity would fall. As one wag suggested, Churchill’s sign was two fingers raised in a “V” for victory, while Roosevelt’s was a finger in the air testing which way the political wind was blowing.

To her credit, Eleanor Roosevelt showed more compassion for her fellow humans than her husband.

For his part, Wise, always Roosevelt’s toady and always trying to be The Leader of the Jews, used his power to insist Jews

  *  not to make waves

  *  not to seek support from non-Jews

  *  not to seek support from Republicans

even when he had substantial evidence of the nazi’s atrocities.

When others tried to rally Jews specifically and Americans in general, Wise worked hard to prevent any attacks on “his friend.” Besides, like Roosevelt before Pearl Harbor, Wise didn’t want to offend the nazis, then among America’s trading partners.

Likewise, Wise led U.S. Jews in opposition of European Jews finding refuge in the U.S. (Alaska was suggested, but Wise determined that was “too cold” for the Jews of Poland and northern Europe. The U.S. Virgin Islands also were suggested, but they were “too hot” and besides, a nazi spy might be in their midst and try to enter the continental U.S.; on that both Roosevelt and Wise agreed.)

Although a self-proclaimed Zionist, and although he did encourage the English to allow fuller immigration to Israel — then called Palestine — he never was forceful because the man whose respect he most wanted (Roosevelt) would not pressure the English.

 

For their part, the English were concerned that the Muslims would revolt and riot.

They did that anyway.

 

Haj Amin el Husseini and Hitler

 

Moreover, the English were too blind, or stupid, to realize that the Muslim’s religious and political leader, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el Husseini, worked for Hitler and the nazis and encouraged Muslims to fight the Allies and to kill infidels at every opportunity.⁴

 

Meanwhile, the Jews of the Yishuv (then Mandatory Palestine) were lining up to help the allies.⁵ The Jews had helped the English during “The Great war” with Vladimir Jabotinsky’s Jewish Legion (1915-1918). ⁶

Jabotinsky was one of the people high on Wise’s “hate list.” Although a self-proclaimed Zionist, his brand of Zionism was hardly the same as Jabotinsky’s.

Roosevelt wanted the Jews to be quiet, and he had Wise in his pocket to help assure that, even when Wise knew what was happening in Europe.

 

An aside on President Truman.

Truman did what he thought best for America.

  *  He ordered the bombing of the Japanese industrial cities of Nagasaki⁷ and Hiroshima.⁸

  *  He fired a general who forgot who was Commander in Chief.⁹

  *  Unlike presidents that came after him, Truman took responsibility for his actions and made the phrase “The buck stops here” famous.

 

 

Bottom Line: Any Jew who still thinks Roosevelt was a friend to Jews should read this book. Roosevelt was a friend only to himself.

Likewise, if anyone thinks that Stephen Wise was a great leader and concerned first and foremost with the Jewish people, this book will quickly disabuse the reader of that notion.

From this scrivener’s perspective, the book reinforces previously held opinions of Roosevelt and left me wondering how a Jew of Wise’s stature could be so accommodating to a man (Roosevelt) who Wise knew cared not fig for the Jews of Europe and North Africa.

Had Roosevelt lived, his representatives to the UN surely would have cast a NO vote on partition and the then-USSR likely would have voted likewise.

 

Honesty in blogging: I have two passports: one U.S. and one Israel.

 

 

Sources

1. The Jews Should Keep Quiet, Rafael Medoff, JPS, ISBN 978-0-8276-1470-30

2. UN Resolution 181: https://tinyurl.com/yd7hk6lc

3. Israel independence declared: https://tinyurl.com/yytaxq7g

4. Hitler & Grand Mufti: https://tinyurl.com/y57wmrcw

5. Jewish Brigade: https://tinyurl.com/j45egzp

6. Zion Mule Corps: https://tinyurl.com/ycvrf4dqhttps://tinyurl.com/ycvrf4dq

7. Nagasaki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagasaki

8. Hiroshima: https://tinyurl.com/y69upyjv

9. MacArthur sacked: https://tinyurl.com/ycaajr3z

עינים להם ולא יראו * אזנים להם ולא יאזנו

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.

 

Comment: Roosevelt & Israel

Opuscula Extremely unique And other misuse Of the language

Rabbi Marc Angel (right) of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals recently blogged about superlatives, e.g., “strict,” “strictly” or “strictest.”

He also peripherally touched on “levels” of kashrut.

What he chose not to mention — perhaps deliberately and wisely — is the difference between Ashkenazi kashrut and Sefardi kashrut, a/k/a Bet Yosef or Halak, both for products and food preparation.

The rabbi also ignored the word “unique.”

Unlike “kosher” which may be modified with a superlative, e.g., “glatt” or “strictly,” unique is one of only a handful of words that stand alone: something either is, or it is not, unique.

 

Sampling of kosher labels from https://tinyurl.com/yd7o9hk6

 

The following is from R. Marc Angel’s blog (https://tinyurl.com/ybdhty2n).

The rabbi’s writings are, in my opinion, most important, very special, extremely brilliant — and on and on as will become clear as his words, below, are read.

 

Some words get overused, misused and abused. The words become degraded so that they no longer can be taken at face value.

The word “kosher” is an example of a word that has become compromised.

The packaging on kosher foods reflects the problem. The word “kosher,” by itself, seems no longer to indicate that a product is actually kosher. Much packaging states that the product is under “strict rabbinic supervision,” or that it is “strictly kosher;” apparently, without the words “strict” or “strictly” we couldn’t trust its kashrut. Some packaging now states that the product is under the “strictest rabbinic supervision,” implying that just being “strict” or “strictly kosher” isn’t kosher enough. Only “strictest” should be trusted.

To complicate matters, we often find products that are under multiple rabbinic supervisions…as many as four or five different hashgahot per item. Does having multiple hashgahot make the product more kosher? Are those items with only one or even two hashgahot not kosher enough?

The word “kosher” has been degraded; many people apparently don’t trust the word unless it is accompanied by “strict,” “strictly” or “strictest;” or unless it is authenticated by multiple hashgahot. This may be the fault of manufacturers, or of kashrut agencies, or of consumers…but the result is to downgrade the word “kosher” and to confuse the public.

The word “major” is another example of a compromised word.

We receive notices from various congregations and organizations announcing lectures, shiurim, and a variety of programs. Apparently, it is felt that just announcing the topic is inadequate to gain people’s attention. So we are told that the upcoming lecture/shiur/program is “important.” But since everything seems to be “important” these days, the announcements inform us that the upcoming event is “special.” Recently, I’ve begun receiving notices for upcoming lectures/shiurim that are “major.” But if these lectures/shiurim are “major,” does that imply that they are more significant than if they were just “special” or “important?” And does that imply that all “non-major” lectures, shiurim/programs are “minor?”  When hyping events as “major,” the result is to downgrade all other “non-major” events…and ultimately to downgrade “major” itself.

Another phrase that has been popping up is “extremely brilliant.” It seems that just being smart, intelligent or even brilliant is no longer enough; one needs to be “extremely brilliant.” Yet, if so many people are upgraded to being “extremely brilliant,” then the phrase loses its significance. If you really want to stand out, you’ll need to find a phrase that goes higher than “extremely brilliant.” But then, many others will adopt that new phrase too, in a never-ending effort to outdo others. The more hyperbole we use, the less the words really mean.

Wouldn’t it be nice if people used words carefully, without need for hyperbole? It would be a very strictly, major, and extremely brilliant thing to do!

 

R. Angle didn’t mention it — perhaps for “shalom biet” amongst us — but we tend to apply superlative labels — and sometimes derogatory labels — to other Jews who are “not like us.” Hebrew’s חילוני and חרדי are relatively harmless words, as are orthodox, conservative, reform, etc., with initial capitals or not. But add “extreme” to any of those categories, or “Super Jew” to refer to the religiously orthodox residents of Bnai Brak or Mea Sherim and suddenly the words may take on pejorative meaning. “Black Hat” is, by itself, simply descriptive.

 

Kosher supervision = Big Business

As R. Angel noted, there are food products with multiple hecksures – kosher certification symbols. The image above is just a sampling!

The plethora of companies offering to certify something — food, appliances, utensils, clothing (שעטנז) and who knows what else — each competing with the others for the same currency. (Israel now has competition for the chief rabbinate that had, until recently, a strangle hold on on kashrut supervision in Israel. That did not prevent others acceptable-to-the-chief rabbis from setting up their own labels, usually bdatz. )

In the end, it comes down to who do you — or your father or mother or rabbi — trust?

Glatt, smatt — as long as it’s Bet Yosef.

 

 

עינים להם ולא יראו * אזנים להם ולא יאזנו

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.

 

Comment on Extremely unique

insert r. marc angle.jpg
Rabbi Marc Angel (right) of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals recently blogged about superlatives, e.g., “strict,” “strictly” or “strictest.”

He also peripherally touched on “levels” of kashrut.

What he chose not to mention — perhaps deliberately and wisely — is the difference between Ashkenazi kashrut and Sefardi kashrut, a/k/a Bet Yosef or Halak, both for products and food preparation.

The rabbi also ignored the word “unique.”

Unlike “kosher” which may be modified with a superlative, e.g., “glatt” or “strictly,” unique is one of only a handful of words that stand alone: something either is, or it is not, unique.

 

insert kosher labels.jpg

Sampling of kosher labels from https://tinyurl.com/yd7o9hk6

 

The following is from R. Marc Angel’s blog (https://tinyurl.com/ybdhty2n).

The rabbi’s writings are, in my opinion, most important, very special, extremely brilliant — and on and on as will become clear as his words, below, are read.

 

Some words get overused, misused and abused. The words become degraded so that they no longer can be taken at face value.

The word “kosher” is an example of a word that has become compromised.

The packaging on kosher foods reflects the problem. The word “kosher,” by itself, seems no longer to indicate that a product is actually kosher. Much packaging states that the product is under “strict rabbinic supervision,” or that it is “strictly kosher;” apparently, without the words “strict” or “strictly” we couldn’t trust its kashrut. Some packaging now states that the product is under the “strictest rabbinic supervision,” implying that just being “strict” or “strictly kosher” isn’t kosher enough. Only “strictest” should be trusted.

To complicate matters, we often find products that are under multiple rabbinic supervisions…as many as four or five different hashgahot per item. Does having multiple hashgahot make the product more kosher? Are those items with only one or even two hashgahot not kosher enough?

The word “kosher” has been degraded; many people apparently don’t trust the word unless it is accompanied by “strict,” “strictly” or “strictest;” or unless it is authenticated by multiple hashgahot. This may be the fault of manufacturers, or of kashrut agencies, or of consumers…but the result is to downgrade the word “kosher” and to confuse the public.

The word “major” is another example of a compromised word.

We receive notices from various congregations and organizations announcing lectures, shiurim, and a variety of programs. Apparently, it is felt that just announcing the topic is inadequate to gain people’s attention. So we are told that the upcoming lecture/shiur/program is “important.” But since everything seems to be “important” these days, the announcements inform us that the upcoming event is “special.” Recently, I’ve begun receiving notices for upcoming lectures/shiurim that are “major.” But if these lectures/shiurim are “major,” does that imply that they are more significant than if they were just “special” or “important?” And does that imply that all “non-major” lectures, shiurim/programs are “minor?”  When hyping events as “major,” the result is to downgrade all other “non-major” events…and ultimately to downgrade “major” itself.

Another phrase that has been popping up is “extremely brilliant.” It seems that just being smart, intelligent or even brilliant is no longer enough; one needs to be “extremely brilliant.” Yet, if so many people are upgraded to being “extremely brilliant,” then the phrase loses its significance. If you really want to stand out, you’ll need to find a phrase that goes higher than “extremely brilliant.” But then, many others will adopt that new phrase too, in a never-ending effort to outdo others. The more hyperbole we use, the less the words really mean.

Wouldn’t it be nice if people used words carefully, without need for hyperbole? It would be a very strictly, major, and extremely brilliant thing to do!

 

R. Angle didn’t mention it — perhaps for “shalom biet” amongst us — but we tend to apply superlative labels — and sometimes derogatory labels — to other Jews who are “not like us.” Hebrew’s חילוני and חרדי are relatively harmless words, as are orthodox, conservative, reform, etc., with initial capitals or not. But add “extreme” to any of those categories, or “Super Jew” to refer to the religiously orthodox residents of Bnai Brak or Mea Sherim and suddenly the words may take on pejorative meaning. “Black Hat” is, by itself, simply descriptive.

 

Kosher supervision = Big Business

As R. Angel noted, there are food products with multiple hecksures – kosher certification symbols. The image above is just a sampling!

The plethora of companies offering to certify something — food, appliances, utensils, clothing (שעטנז) and who knows what else — each competing with the others for the same currency. (Israel now has competition for the chief rabbinate that had, until recently, a strangle hold on on kashrut supervision in Israel. That did not prevent others acceptable-to-the-chief rabbis from setting up their own labels, usually bdatz.

In the end, it comes down to who do you — or your father or mother or rabbi — trust?

Glatt, smatt — as long as it’s Bet Yosef.

 

 

עינים להם ולא יראו * אזנים להם ולא יאזנו

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.

 

Comment on Extremely unique

Opuscula Rabbis vs. Torah

THE OTHER DAY, AS I WAS considering the differences in traditions among observant Jews it struck me that some mitzvoth have been canceled by some rabbis.

I will be one of the first to admit that without rabbinical rulings in the talmuds — things such as the prosbul¹ for commercial loans — life would be difficult indeed.

 

 

HOWEVER, I think “the rabbis” have gone to far in countermanding the Torah.

Herewith the usual caveat: I am not a rabbi and I don’t play one on tv.

 

Cohanic blessing (ברכת הכהנים)

Every sedur in my house, even before the midnight prayers (תיקון חצות) and as part of the opening morning prayers (ברכת השחר) tells the cohanim (Numbers Parashat Naso, Chap. 6, Ver. 22 - 27 (במדבר נשא ו’ כ”ב – כ”ז) that HaShem told Moses to Speak to the Aaron and his sons: You will bless the children of Israel; you will say to them: The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you. The Lord lift up his countenance on you and give you peace. So shall they put my name upon the children of Israel.

I fail to read where HaShem says that the cohanim should only bless the congregation on certain holy days or if they felt like it. (The image at the right by Leonard Cohen and appears in his work The Flame)

But some rabbis have declared that this mitzvah — commandment — is omitted during normal weekdays and Shabatot.

Sefardi cohanim bless the people every day and twice on Shabat and haggim (when there is musaf, the “extra” service).

Not so Ashkenazim.

On what grounds?

Well, we don’t know who really IS a cohen. OK, so why allow these suspect cohanim to bless the people at all. Are they, like Kosher for Passover, only “kosher” cohanim on certain days?

Single cohanim are prohibited from blessing the congregation in some traditions. Why? Well, the rabbis insist, an unmarried man cannot be happy and a cohen must be happy when he blesses the congregation.

There ARE some Torah limits that preclude a cohen from blessing the people. From the Torah, if the cohen has a “mum,” a physical defect that would distract the congregation from the blessing’s words or if the cohen married a divorced woman. An inebriated cohen is forbidden from blessing the people.

There are a number of other situations when a cohen either is prohibited from blessing the people or is excused.² If a cohen doesn’t want to bless the people, for whatever reason, he is expected to step outside until the willing cohanim have returned to their places.

Some congregations allow, and others prohibit, pre-bar mitzvah boys to perform the rite, others allow it if the child goes up with his father.

Where to stand, where to look

According to most authorities, only people standing in front of the cohanim are included in the blessing.

Many Sefardi cohanim partially turn to the left and to the right during the blessing, to expand the number or people receiving the blessing. I have not seen Ashkenazi cohanim do this, but then I don’t belong to an Ashkenazi minyan.

Many people have the custom of covering their head and eyes during the cohen’s blessing; others look down. This is to preclude looking at the cohanim. Some people mistakenly turn their backs to the cohanim; this is disrespectful both to the cohenim and the sefri Torah in the ark before which the cohanim stand, and it is questionable if these people are included in the blessing.

There is a custom that father’s cover their sons (and very young daughters, too,) heads with the father’s large tallit during the blessing.(Right) I have done this for my two sons and my son-in-law. (Since the boys now are much taller than their father, they have to bend over a little — else I would have to stand on a chair.) There also is room for my grandsons when we are together.

 

Tefillin (תפילין)

We read it everyday.

In fact, we read it several times a day.

(במדבר ו, 8-9) וקשרתם לאת על-ידך והיו לטטפת בין עיניך

You shall bind them as a sign upon hand, and they shall be a reminder between your eyes. (Deuteronomy, Parashat V’Ethchanan, Chap. 6, Ver. 8-9)

That does not seem like multiple choice.

The rabbis decided that Shabatot are sufficiently happy that these signs are redundant; unnecessary.

Ditto the first and last days of haggim (שלוש רגלים).

Sefardi hakhamim decided that the intermediate days of a festival are as happy as the first and last days. After all, it is eat, sleep, pray, repeat. Given that, unlike the Ashkenazim, Sefardim go about sans the sign on the hand and reminders between the eyes.

A Sefardi in an Ashkenazi congregation may be asked to either put on tefillin or go pray elsewhere. (I have never seen an Ashkenazi wearing tefillin on hol ha’moed asked to leave the room where Sefardim are “davening.”)

The general rule is, “when in Rome…” — if you are in a Sefardi congregation, behave like a Sefardi; in an Ashkenazi “shul,” act like an Ashkenazi.

There is an on-going debate: May a Sefardi use Ashkenazi tefillin?

There are those who say NO.

There are those who say in a pinch, yes.

Not having an Ashkenazi tradition, I don’t know how the majority of Ashkenazi rabbis rule.

The problem is the amount of space, or lack of same, between two paragraphs of the Shema in the tefillin.

Is either the Sefardi or Ashkenazi way to wrap tefillin correct? In a word: Yes.

Different traditions wrap tefillin differently.

As Tevye from Fiddler on the Roof would bellow: TRADITION!

An aside. When do Moroccan women put on tefillin? On a Monday or Thursday prior to a boy’s first Shabat aliyah it is the custom that the women in his life — mother, sisters, aunts — each make one “turn” of the hand tefillin strap as the boy is about to enter the minyan area. The question was not “When do Moroccan women wear tefillin,” but when do they put on tefillin.³

 

Parting thought

What brought about the destruction of the Second Temple?

What allegedly caused the plague that killed 24,000 (!) of R. Akiva ben Yosef's students?

Unjustified hatred and speaking ill of others.

In Avot (Chap. 2, Ver. 13 – 14) we learn what R. Akiva considered what is good and what is evil. Consider the words of R. Elazar that R. Akiva found satisfactory.

 

Sources

1. Hillel the Elder in the 1st century BCE created the prosbul to permit private loans to persons in need without fear on the lender's part that the debt would be legally abrogated at the end of the sabbatical year. (https://www.britannica.com/topic/prosbul)

2. Prohibitions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priestly_Blessing

3. Women and tefillin: footnote 13 on Page 62 of סידור אבותנו ע"פ חכמי מורוקו

עינים להם ולא יראו * אזנים להם ולא יאזנו

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.

 

Comment on Rabbis vs. Torah

Opuscula היקר or Different strokes For different folks

IT IS AMAZING that after centuries of dispersion and diversion, that most of our practices are similar.

There are, however, a few differences that make life interesting.

The following considers only traditional Jewish practices. Contact a Conservative, Reform, or other religious leader to learn how it is done in their congregation — if it is done at all.

 

 

There are many books on the differences, and anyone picking up sedurim (prayer books) and machzorim (prayer books for the festivals) can compare them.

However, the best book I have found is by R. Israel Meir Lau. His book,
יהדות הלכה למעשה .

R. Lau discusses different traditions and never claims that one minhag is “kosher” and another is not “kosher.” R. Lau is highly respected in both Sefardi/Mizrachi and Ashkenazi communities for his wisdom and openness. The book is written in relatively easy Hebrew (that is, I can read and understand it, and Hebrew for me is a distant second to English).

The following is not concerned with either the order of prayers or piyutim that often are unique to a geographical area.

 

Going out and Coming in

Jewish fellow is considering a move into a retirement home.

He notices that there are no mezuzot (mezuzahs) on the doors.

He asks the sales person about the absence of mezuzot.

Sales person: You’ve heard about central tv antennas on the roof?

Jew: Yes, sure.

Sales person: We have a central mezzuzah.

 

While I have seen mezuzot on a slant in some Sefardi homes — and I have seen Sefardi homes with both slanted and vertical mezuzot; היקר שיש מזוזות the important thing is that there are mezuzot on the doors.

Originally mezuzot were mounted vertically, like a sans serif “I”. I am given to understand that R. Tam wanted to mount the mezuzot horizontally (–). In order to honor both R. Tam and his grandfather, Rashi, the people decided to affix the mezzuzah on a slant (\). Since both Rashi and R. Tam were Ashkenazi, Ashkenazi mezuzot generally are mounted on a slant.

Sefardim pretty much mount their mezuzot straight up and down.

To the best of my knowledge, the SIZE of the kosher klaf doesn’t matter, but it seems logical that the smaller the klaf, the more expensive since the sofer stam (writer of Sefer Torah, Tefillin, and Mezuzot) faces a greater challenge to write tiny, properly formed letters.

The mezzuzah case may be whatever suits your fancy, but outdoor cases should be made to keep out moisture. In some ancient instances, spaces were dug out of plaster, the klaf inserted and the plaster sealed with the klaf in place. The klaf is what’s important, not the “house” (בית) that holds it.

היקר that there are mezuzot at the doors.

What needs mezuzot and what dosen’t? Ask your rabbi.

 

Singles’ ID

Most Sefardim and Mizrachim males start wearing a large tallit (תלות גדול) at their bar mitzvah. Many Ashkenazi males have a tradition to only don a large tallit when called to the Torah.

Why? Ashkenazi tradition holds that a man cannot be happy, and worthy of being adorned with a tallit until he is married. Once wed, the Ashkenazi male wears his tallit at morning services. (Ashkenazim also wear a tallit when leading afternoon and evening services; Sefardim do not.)

A girl looking for a hatan (husband) only has to look at the men sans tallit gadol to know who is eligible. Pity the Sefardi miss — all the men from bar mitzvah age up are wearing a large tallit. How’s a poor girl to know? (Just ask; every mother knows which males are unattached.)

Among those who wear a tallit katan or “arba kanfot,” there are those who wear the tzit-tzit (strings) outside their trousers and those who tuck them in.

While there may be 50 ways to leave your lover¹, there probably are as many ways to put on a large tallit. A student of tallit wearers might be able to tell who is what by the way the tallit is put on, much as a student of the harideem can tell to what sect a man belongs by his head covering (or the way he wears his socks).

The one thing consistent is that the large tallit must be big enough to enwrap the person and to have two tzit-tzit in front and two in back; a “scarf” is too small to meet the enwrapping and front-and-back tzit-tzit requirements.

There are perhaps a half-dozen ways to tie the knots in the tzit-tzit. Two predominate. The primary ways to knot tzit-tzit are “kosher” if they are otherwise kosher tzit-tzit.

The most common knot-wrap combinations are 10-5 & 6-5 and 7-8-11-13.

 

Slapping leather

As with donning the tallit, there are many ways to put on tefillin.

Ashkenazim generally wrap inward (clockwise) while Sefardim wrap outward (counter-clockwise).

Almost all hand tefillin will be wrapped someplace to form the letter shin (ש). For Ashkenazim, the shin usually is on the hand; for Sefaridim, usually on the bicep.

Everyone wraps seven complete turns. Usually there is a half turn above the elbow and a half turn at the wrist. These half-turns do not count as part of the seven.

Everyone I’ve seen makes three wraps around their middle finger, but there are variations on that, too.

May a Sefardi wear Ashkenazi tefillin and vice versa. Ask your rabbi. There IS a slight difference in the way the paragraphs are spaced on the klaf. (I am not a posek and I don’t play one on tv.) Beyond the spacing issue, to wear the other minhag’s tefillin means rearranging the strap on the hand tefillin. Just remember to put the strap (רצועה) back the way it was.

Sefaridim sit when putting on the hand tefillin and stand when putting on the head tefillin. Only one blessing is recited (for the hand) as long as there are no interruptions between the hand and head tefillin. Ashkenazim stand for both and recite separate blessings for both. The tefillin yad (hand) is wrapped bicep-to-the hand, the head tefillin is put on, and then the hand tefillin is completed with the wraps around the finger.

Taking off the tefillin is done in reverse to the way they were put on.

Many sedurim have “how to” pictures, but beware, the pictures are for the minhag of the sedur.

Sefardim leave their tefillin in the bag during festivals, including the intermediate days (hol ha’moed). Ashkenazim put on tefillin during hol ha’moed. In a congregation dominated by Ashkenazim, the Sefardim may be asked to find a new place to pray the morning prayers. (See “Basic Rule: When in Rome…” later in this effort.)

היקר that men don tefillin on weekdays.

 

Standing for the “18”

There are a few obvious differences between the ahmedah (עמידה) or “18” for Ashkenazim and for Sefardim/Mizrachim..

Ouch

Ashkenazim smack their chest when they say סלח לנו (forgive us). Sephardim do not.

Summer prayer and winter prayer

Sefardim have separate paragraphs for summer and for winter while Ashkenazim simply change a few words to go from tal (dew) in the summer to tal and matar (rain) for winter.

Cohanim

In Sefardi/Mizrachi congregations, cohanim bless the kahal (congregation) at every morning service since the Torah clearly states that the cohanim are “commanded to bless the people Israel in love”
וצונו לברך את עמו ישראל באהבה
On days when musaf is read, the cohanim in Sefardi congregations bless the people again.

Depending on which Ashkenazi tradition is followed, and where the person is making minyan, the cohanim may bless the congregation on festivals and/or during the 10 days.

In my mixed Sefardi/Mizrachi and Ashkenazi congregation, the cohanim are Ashkenazi, but they bless the congregation at every opportunity.

Basic rule: When in Rome . . . In other words, if an Ashkenazi is praying in a congregation where the majority are Sephardim/Mizrachim, the Ashkenazi should follow the majority’s minhag; and vice versa, of course.

There are debates in many congregations
  Should only married cohanim be allowed to bless the congregation?
  Should a pre-bar mitzvah boy be allowed to bless the congregation?

If a cohen cannot, or refuses, to bless the congregation, the cohen leaves the room until the blessing is completed.

Crossed legs

In some (read Moroccan) congregations if a person sits with crossed legs he may be asked to either (a) uncross his legs or (b) leave (willingly or under escort). This is an Arab thing; showing the sole of your shoe or foot is a huge insult among Arabs. ² If showing the sole of a shoe is an insult to a human judge (in Morocco); how much more of an insult to the Judge of Judges!

This may go beyond Morocco to all North African and, perhaps, Mizrachi congregations, too.

 

Shake, shake, shake your lulav

Ashkenazim generally stand in one spot and shake their lulav to the west (assuming they are facing east) over their shoulder.

Sefardim and Mizrachim on the other hand, turn to each direction, and always clockwise. Within the Sefardi community there are different traditions. The Moroccan tradition is

    South

    North

    East

    Up

    Down

    West

The important thing is to “bench Lulav,” as the Ashkenazim say.

In most Sefardi congregations, a person sans lulav and etrog still can join the hakafot (the walk around the reader’s stand where the sefri Torah are placed). More typically, one person loans his lulav and etrog to another — on the condition that it be returned — to the other person can make the walk with the symbols of the festival.

היקר that there are lulavs to wave and etrogim to hold.

 

 

Sources

1. 50 ways: https://tinyurl.com/yakcdfwq

2. Sole insult: https://tinyurl.com/yahfsjmh

עינים להם ולא יראו * אזנים להם ולא יאזנו

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.

 

Comment on Differences