Heavy antique furniture. Picture of Zarathustra on one wall, picture of the queen (Victoria) on the other wall. Scotch whisky. Impeccable English...
Sometimes antiquated slang, from the nineteen thirties. A general lamentation that today's Parsi boys are not up to the manly standards of the past, plus an immense pride in the cricket-greats of the last century. A casual, affectionate aquaintance with European capitols.
If they're from Gujerat, a weird affection for Undhio. If not, they hate the stuff.
Monday, June 19, 2006
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
LIME PICKLE
Dear reader, you may have noticed that I haven't posted much in the last week and a half -- I'm afraid I was somewhat preoccupied, and not really in the mood for posting. I'm sorry.
Still not quite in the mood, hence the somewhat oddish subjects of not only this post, but the two posts immediately preceding. Think of them as lazy lagniappes.
NIMBU ACHAR
The standard recipe for lime or lemon pickles starts off with three TBS salt and three TBS cayenne for either two large lemons or six, seven limes.
[The proportions are the same for a green mango pickle, using two very green mangoes.]
The lime or lemon is cut into quarters or eighths, salted, and put in a clean wide container to dry out for a day or two or three - in direct sunlight if possible. It is wise to cover it with cheesecloth to keep out shrotzim during this time.
And from there on it varies. The chunks of lime or lemon have by now reduced somewhat in size and exuded some liquid - all is scraped into a clean jar, and the cayenne is mixed in. One or two Tsp toasted brown mustard seeds are usually added, along with some fenugreek for flavour and a saucy mouth-feel, plus turmeric (teaspoonful) and asafoetida (generous pinch) for preservative qualities.
For the next week or so the pickle jar is put in the warm sun for a few hours and shaken once or twice per day to redistribute the juices and spices. Once it has reached the right stage of pickledness some heated mustard oil is poured over - enough to cover each piece of citrus with a thin film.
Hyderabadi lime pickle tones down the chili content, but adds garlic (which mellows with age) and accents the garlic with anise-type flavours (usually fennel seed).
Kalonji (wild black onion seed) is almost always added to muslim pickles (such as Hyderabadi lime pickle) - it is a taste preference that came with the Muslims from Afghanistan when they established their last empire in India (the Mughal empire).
Commercial pickles often use far too much oil. The oil functions as a sealant to the pickle, preventing exposure of surfaces to air. But the salt and acid (the juice of the limes or lemons) are what preserves this type of pickle - oil is far less necessary than with other pickles like cauliflower pickle (Poolgobi ka achar) or green mango pickle (Amb ka achar).
A well made lemon or lime pickle keeps nearly forever (because of the acid and salt), as also do other Indian pickles where the primary ingredient has been partially dried and heavily salted.
Final note: Kagzi nimboo makes excellent pickle.
Still not quite in the mood, hence the somewhat oddish subjects of not only this post, but the two posts immediately preceding. Think of them as lazy lagniappes.
--------- --------- ---------
NIMBU ACHAR
The standard recipe for lime or lemon pickles starts off with three TBS salt and three TBS cayenne for either two large lemons or six, seven limes.
[The proportions are the same for a green mango pickle, using two very green mangoes.]
The lime or lemon is cut into quarters or eighths, salted, and put in a clean wide container to dry out for a day or two or three - in direct sunlight if possible. It is wise to cover it with cheesecloth to keep out shrotzim during this time.
And from there on it varies. The chunks of lime or lemon have by now reduced somewhat in size and exuded some liquid - all is scraped into a clean jar, and the cayenne is mixed in. One or two Tsp toasted brown mustard seeds are usually added, along with some fenugreek for flavour and a saucy mouth-feel, plus turmeric (teaspoonful) and asafoetida (generous pinch) for preservative qualities.
For the next week or so the pickle jar is put in the warm sun for a few hours and shaken once or twice per day to redistribute the juices and spices. Once it has reached the right stage of pickledness some heated mustard oil is poured over - enough to cover each piece of citrus with a thin film.
Hyderabadi lime pickle tones down the chili content, but adds garlic (which mellows with age) and accents the garlic with anise-type flavours (usually fennel seed).
Kalonji (wild black onion seed) is almost always added to muslim pickles (such as Hyderabadi lime pickle) - it is a taste preference that came with the Muslims from Afghanistan when they established their last empire in India (the Mughal empire).
Commercial pickles often use far too much oil. The oil functions as a sealant to the pickle, preventing exposure of surfaces to air. But the salt and acid (the juice of the limes or lemons) are what preserves this type of pickle - oil is far less necessary than with other pickles like cauliflower pickle (Poolgobi ka achar) or green mango pickle (Amb ka achar).
A well made lemon or lime pickle keeps nearly forever (because of the acid and salt), as also do other Indian pickles where the primary ingredient has been partially dried and heavily salted.
Final note: Kagzi nimboo makes excellent pickle.
THE MODERN BUSINESS PLAN
-------------------------
The Modern Business Plan:
ASSETS
Grow like topsy, over-extend yourself, acquire everybody else in your field, and make sure to have plenty of non-core assets that can be unloaded at bargain-basement prices without actually damaging core infrastructure.
LIABILITIES
Be sure to plan your bankruptcy well in advance; have a strategy for maxing out on debt and forcing pennies on the dollar settlements for the majority, while renegotiating with key suppliers. Sequester capital and ownership in spin-offs, preferably independent entities with ownership offshore.
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Remunerate top executives beyond all rational levels before bankruptcy, compensate them generously from reorg funds during bankruptcy, and cut them in for a share of the leaner, meaner, company after bankruptcy. This way they will be obedient, and can also be future capital reserves.
RECORDS
Map out the logistics of shredding and deniability in advance; compromise regulators, and anybody else who might take your chamor to court.
Obfuscate - "Your honour, I dinna rightly remember" (the Scotch accent might buy you time).
Document storage should be farmed out to several layers of out-of-state shell-corporations.
A weak firewall is an advantage; Mr. Virus is your friend.
So is Mr. Lighter Fluid.
COMPETITION
Undercut anybody who might benefit from your weakness, then buy them into the thundering freight-train with worthless stock; especially in those spin-offs that will be gutted or cannibalized during your bankruptcy. There is no reason they should profit, or have any advantages at all while the market readjusts. Your debts should bankrupt your competitors' suppliers - and also their clients, if at all possible.
PUBLIC RELATIONS
Strategically place yourself for a government bailout. This way the public has an investment in glossing over events. It helps if one other company is the villain, and several other companies are the victims.
-------------------------
Please note: The text above was written during a fit of cynicism right after WorldCom Inc.'s chief executive said that the company hoped to emerge from court protection within a year with a shrunken debt load and fewer peripheral assets. Which was hours after filing the largest bankruptcy in history.
Which was four years ago.
I'm over my cynicism.
Honestly I am.
The Modern Business Plan:
ASSETS
Grow like topsy, over-extend yourself, acquire everybody else in your field, and make sure to have plenty of non-core assets that can be unloaded at bargain-basement prices without actually damaging core infrastructure.
LIABILITIES
Be sure to plan your bankruptcy well in advance; have a strategy for maxing out on debt and forcing pennies on the dollar settlements for the majority, while renegotiating with key suppliers. Sequester capital and ownership in spin-offs, preferably independent entities with ownership offshore.
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Remunerate top executives beyond all rational levels before bankruptcy, compensate them generously from reorg funds during bankruptcy, and cut them in for a share of the leaner, meaner, company after bankruptcy. This way they will be obedient, and can also be future capital reserves.
RECORDS
Map out the logistics of shredding and deniability in advance; compromise regulators, and anybody else who might take your chamor to court.
Obfuscate - "Your honour, I dinna rightly remember" (the Scotch accent might buy you time).
Document storage should be farmed out to several layers of out-of-state shell-corporations.
A weak firewall is an advantage; Mr. Virus is your friend.
So is Mr. Lighter Fluid.
COMPETITION
Undercut anybody who might benefit from your weakness, then buy them into the thundering freight-train with worthless stock; especially in those spin-offs that will be gutted or cannibalized during your bankruptcy. There is no reason they should profit, or have any advantages at all while the market readjusts. Your debts should bankrupt your competitors' suppliers - and also their clients, if at all possible.
PUBLIC RELATIONS
Strategically place yourself for a government bailout. This way the public has an investment in glossing over events. It helps if one other company is the villain, and several other companies are the victims.
-------------------------
Please note: The text above was written during a fit of cynicism right after WorldCom Inc.'s chief executive said that the company hoped to emerge from court protection within a year with a shrunken debt load and fewer peripheral assets. Which was hours after filing the largest bankruptcy in history.
Which was four years ago.
I'm over my cynicism.
Honestly I am.
LES BAGLEUX D'INDOCHINE
Shalom Shan,
In reference to that mishegoss with the missing bagels:
Visualize Keebler Elf Road kill, on the great Saigon to Hanoi highway (Route One) built by the French. Nha Trang is north of Saigon, before you get to Hue. Hot, sticky. And there, just south of the city, is the smear on the pavement.
The dead Keebler is slimy and turning greener than he already was, flies are nesting in the putrefying flesh. Buzz buzz buzz. The air is so thick, so moist, you can't breathe it, you swallow it. Like walking through hot Jell-O. And even disregarding the Keebler corpse self-alchemizing on the hot tarmac a few feet away, there is an unmistakable fecundity to the tropical reek.
Keeblers should never use camouflage grease on their faces or head into the bush; the tribals in the hills will kill them and take their heads for charms. Consecrated when the rice-wine has been made after the harvest, bubbles the size of missing bagels on the cream-cheese white surface of the fermenting brew. You can smell it a mile away.
Enjoy your lunch.
In reference to that mishegoss with the missing bagels:
Visualize Keebler Elf Road kill, on the great Saigon to Hanoi highway (Route One) built by the French. Nha Trang is north of Saigon, before you get to Hue. Hot, sticky. And there, just south of the city, is the smear on the pavement.
The dead Keebler is slimy and turning greener than he already was, flies are nesting in the putrefying flesh. Buzz buzz buzz. The air is so thick, so moist, you can't breathe it, you swallow it. Like walking through hot Jell-O. And even disregarding the Keebler corpse self-alchemizing on the hot tarmac a few feet away, there is an unmistakable fecundity to the tropical reek.
Keeblers should never use camouflage grease on their faces or head into the bush; the tribals in the hills will kill them and take their heads for charms. Consecrated when the rice-wine has been made after the harvest, bubbles the size of missing bagels on the cream-cheese white surface of the fermenting brew. You can smell it a mile away.
Enjoy your lunch.
Monday, June 05, 2006
HEXAKOSIOIHEXEKONTAHEXAPHOBIA
A BBC article about Dutchmen minus minds:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5049516.stm
Goofballs. Totally.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5049516.stm
Goofballs. Totally.
NARISHKEIT, SHTARK UND GAZUNT!
Dovbear (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!), quoting Pinchus Giller (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!) : "Most of the phenomena to which DB (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!) has objected seem far from the spirit of the Zohar & classical Kabbalah but are practices reduced to gratification of desires, a very modern, Western thing, right down to the slogan "Moshiach Now."
[Dovbear's zach:http://dovbear.blogspot.com/
Dovbear's post davke referenced above:http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/06/comment-of-day_05.html
And here's Pinchus Giller's comment mamesh:http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dovbear/114939077698646618/#298337 ]
That phrase 'Moshiach Now!' is VERY interesting..... Where have I heard that before?
...erm (davka?).
...uhhh (mamesh...).
...mmmh? (zach!).
Oooooh, yes! I davka remember, mamesh! It was a response hollered in a shtarke Litvish accent from the back of the Beis medrish during a recent riezige shiur by the Rabam (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!)!
[And in mittn drinnen, one more outburst in the Beis Medrish like that, Yankie (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!), and you will lose your health-club privileges and zach! We are running a proper yeshiva here, mamesh, davka not some goofball 'mookata' for the Edomites (solln bleybn shtill, und nicht azoy oysbunterish, tattenyu!!!!!!) !]
Davka for your gratification, I post the lecture by the Rabam (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!) below, prefaced mamesh by an intro by Rabbi Pinky Schmeckelstein (soll seyn davka shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!!). Kindly note that Rabbi Pinky Schmeckelstein (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!!!) is the Rosh-yeshiva of Yeshiva Chipas Emess (World-wide zach located in NY, soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!!!!), whereas the Rabam (soll seyn shtark und gazunt mamesh!!!!!!!!!!!) is mamesh the rosh-yeshiva of the San Francisco campus (noch alts sehr gazunt und zach, a dank!!!!!!!!!!!!), davka mameshedikke zachn.
Can you, dear reader (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), spot exactly when the phrase was hollered?
--- --- --- --- ---
Rabboisai,
I am very pleased to share with you a Toirah bonus, so you can begin to prepare yourself for Zman Matan Toirasainu. The following drasha was written by my esteemed colleague (and poker buddy... err... chavrusa) the RABAM. As I am sure you are all aware, the RABAM is the Rosheshiva of the San Francisco branch of our fine Toirah movement.
I expect that you will treat him with the same degree of respect as you would treat me. That means: no talking during the drasha, no eating of traif gummy bears, and no throwing of spitballs at that hot new single woman on the other side of the mechitza.
Pinky
-------------
Shiur of the RABAM on Masechess Pesachim
"Tayere yingeln, we give a slight bow on being introduced to someone, because touching hands is sharing germs.
Or palm sweat - as it says in Vayikra 22:6 "nefesh asher tiga bo vetame'ah (a soul which touches it shall become defiled). And it is rude to immediately sterilize one's hand afterwards. Though the verse cited above goes on to say "...velo yochal min ha kodashim ki im rachatz besaro ba yamim" (...and shall not eat of koidesh things until he has washed his flesh in water). So neither should you eat after meeting strangers.
This is greater derech eretz than that of Mordechai, who refused to bow, wherefore Homon torched his embassy, as it says in Megillas Esther. Though Ben Bag Bag says it was because he doodled. Drew a cartoon of Ahura Mazda. And a camel. And there are several obscene jokes about camels.
Why is this not mentioned in the Megilla?
-- Because the version used by the P source was replaced, bitch.
-- Because the E source proved a point that the redactor also wanted to make.
-- Because the J source says "you are special, we are special, and forget about that other bunch".
-- Whereas the redactor says "we're ok, but that bunch there are truly nasty".
Say not 'we pissed off the Persians. We pissed off the Syro-grecians, we pissed off the Romans'..... But say rather 'the Persians were pissed at us, the Syro-grecians were pissed at us, and the Romans, having no imagination and being Amalek besides.... were also pissed at us.'
Reish Lakish asks: "Or rather, 'we pissed on the Persians. we pissed on the Syro-grecians, did we not also piss on the Romans?"
And Rabban Gamliel says that 'pissed' is a metaphor for engaging in the cloth trade.... because it is used as a fixative for dyes. Such as techeiles and argamom.
Whereas Elazar ben Hurkanos brings up the plural, to show that right and wrong are never singular. And are as opposite as red and blue.
Or as Rashi shatnez and Rabbeinu Tam shatnez (though some Chassidim wear both, to be hiddur mitzvah).
Why was this said?
-- So that you may remember the commandment.
-- So that you not invite Persians to parties where alcohol is served.
-- So that you write an eighteen page letter refuting the cartoons (and note: eighteen is the gematria of life - you shall write it that you may live).
But Abaye says 'so that you not draw cartoons for the newspapers of the nations, lest they hate us for it'.
Rashi explains newspaper as indicating that the text was edited. For there is no newspaper that is not edited. And there is no place that does not have a newspaper.
Shmuel says "Start reading the paper with mention of political disturbances in the land of Egypt (Dvarim 6:20) and move from the repressiveness of contemporary Middle-Eastern societies to political liberation.
Rav said: Start with Terach, Abraham's father and the state of golus to which we had descended. "Once upon a time our fathers lived among idolators who worshipped heathen gods. Now Hashem has brought us to vote for UTJ and Shas".
And know from this that even though we're really hosed, we are still better than the Arabs, because we have a free press and they don't (and following this is when it is customary to recite the blessing 'shlosha neenerim').
The Kitzer Shulchan Aruch explains that you should open the newspaper to the editorial page first. Then read the letters to the editor, starting at the top left hand corner of the page and proceding, with kavanah, all the way through to the last letter in the bottom right hand corner (if you are interrupted, start again at the top).
Finish that page by reading the cartoon. Then close the paper (along the crease), and compose an angry letter to the editor, so that it may remind you of tefillah.
But know that Lubavitch hold that there has been no editor since the Rebbe's petirah.
Satmar calls the entire question a depraved goyishe plot - there should be NO newspaper until the redeemer comes - and then we will ALL have newspapers.
Neturei Karta hold that it is best to read an Arab paper until the ketz. Ad mosai? Ad ki yavo....
Harav Kreiswirth (z.tz.l.), before he died, was meikel, but paskened that frumme yidden avoid the Nieuw Israelitisch Weekblad - at least until the techiyas hameisim.
Belz avers that like the students of Rabbi Ben Bag Bag, you should 'turn it over, again and again, for everything you want to know is found within it'.
Why does one read a paper?
Shimon HaTzaddik said: "The world rests on three things: on the sports scores, on the real-estate page, and on the want-ads".
Akiviya Ben Mehalalel said: "consider these three things and you will not fall into the clutches of sin. Know from whom you buy the paper, know to whom you will give the paper after you have clipped the coupons, and know where the coupons are redeemable."
Rabban Gamaliel said that whoever has not read these three things (the Washington Post, the Racing Times, and Playboy Magazine) has not fulfilled his obligation to disdain the goyishe world, lament losses at the track, and drool over unattainable hot shiksas. For in this you will know that you are truly in golus.
Regarding illustrated men's magazines, the Rambam says that one should not even look at the clothing of woman.
Why was this said?
Clothing reminds us (of the fig-leaves with which Adam and Chava clothed themselves), as is written in Bamidbar 15:39 "ve haya lachem le tsitsit u reitem oto u zechartem".
From this, know that it is a mitzvah and a blessing to look at pictures in Playboy magazine, because it recalls to us the Garden of Eden and man's primal purity.
And you should discuss this with your neighbor, on the road and in the home, whether standing or resting...until you are physically uncomfortable, and trembling (in awe). As it says "With all your heart, and all your means".
And now antshuldiks, I am stepping temporarily away from the shtender...
To buy a newspaper...., yes, that's it, a newspaper.
Grisn, und zolst hobn a gitn shabbes
http://www.geocities.com/npoj8/index.html
=====RABAM
Rosheshiva
Yeshiva Chipas Emmess -- San Francisco Campus
Mamesh.
[Dovbear's zach:http://dovbear.blogspot.com/
Dovbear's post davke referenced above:http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/06/comment-of-day_05.html
And here's Pinchus Giller's comment mamesh:http://www.haloscan.com/comments/dovbear/114939077698646618/#298337 ]
That phrase 'Moshiach Now!' is VERY interesting..... Where have I heard that before?
...erm (davka?).
...uhhh (mamesh...).
...mmmh? (zach!).
Oooooh, yes! I davka remember, mamesh! It was a response hollered in a shtarke Litvish accent from the back of the Beis medrish during a recent riezige shiur by the Rabam (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!)!
[And in mittn drinnen, one more outburst in the Beis Medrish like that, Yankie (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!), and you will lose your health-club privileges and zach! We are running a proper yeshiva here, mamesh, davka not some goofball 'mookata' for the Edomites (solln bleybn shtill, und nicht azoy oysbunterish, tattenyu!!!!!!) !]
Davka for your gratification, I post the lecture by the Rabam (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!) below, prefaced mamesh by an intro by Rabbi Pinky Schmeckelstein (soll seyn davka shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!!). Kindly note that Rabbi Pinky Schmeckelstein (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!!!) is the Rosh-yeshiva of Yeshiva Chipas Emess (World-wide zach located in NY, soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!!!!), whereas the Rabam (soll seyn shtark und gazunt mamesh!!!!!!!!!!!) is mamesh the rosh-yeshiva of the San Francisco campus (noch alts sehr gazunt und zach, a dank!!!!!!!!!!!!), davka mameshedikke zachn.
Can you, dear reader (soll seyn shtark und gazunt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), spot exactly when the phrase was hollered?
--- --- --- --- ---
Rabboisai,
I am very pleased to share with you a Toirah bonus, so you can begin to prepare yourself for Zman Matan Toirasainu. The following drasha was written by my esteemed colleague (and poker buddy... err... chavrusa) the RABAM. As I am sure you are all aware, the RABAM is the Rosheshiva of the San Francisco branch of our fine Toirah movement.
I expect that you will treat him with the same degree of respect as you would treat me. That means: no talking during the drasha, no eating of traif gummy bears, and no throwing of spitballs at that hot new single woman on the other side of the mechitza.
Pinky
-------------
Shiur of the RABAM on Masechess Pesachim
"Tayere yingeln, we give a slight bow on being introduced to someone, because touching hands is sharing germs.
Or palm sweat - as it says in Vayikra 22:6 "nefesh asher tiga bo vetame'ah (a soul which touches it shall become defiled). And it is rude to immediately sterilize one's hand afterwards. Though the verse cited above goes on to say "...velo yochal min ha kodashim ki im rachatz besaro ba yamim" (...and shall not eat of koidesh things until he has washed his flesh in water). So neither should you eat after meeting strangers.
This is greater derech eretz than that of Mordechai, who refused to bow, wherefore Homon torched his embassy, as it says in Megillas Esther. Though Ben Bag Bag says it was because he doodled. Drew a cartoon of Ahura Mazda. And a camel. And there are several obscene jokes about camels.
Why is this not mentioned in the Megilla?
-- Because the version used by the P source was replaced, bitch.
-- Because the E source proved a point that the redactor also wanted to make.
-- Because the J source says "you are special, we are special, and forget about that other bunch".
-- Whereas the redactor says "we're ok, but that bunch there are truly nasty".
Say not 'we pissed off the Persians. We pissed off the Syro-grecians, we pissed off the Romans'..... But say rather 'the Persians were pissed at us, the Syro-grecians were pissed at us, and the Romans, having no imagination and being Amalek besides.... were also pissed at us.'
Reish Lakish asks: "Or rather, 'we pissed on the Persians. we pissed on the Syro-grecians, did we not also piss on the Romans?"
And Rabban Gamliel says that 'pissed' is a metaphor for engaging in the cloth trade.... because it is used as a fixative for dyes. Such as techeiles and argamom.
Whereas Elazar ben Hurkanos brings up the plural, to show that right and wrong are never singular. And are as opposite as red and blue.
Or as Rashi shatnez and Rabbeinu Tam shatnez (though some Chassidim wear both, to be hiddur mitzvah).
Why was this said?
-- So that you may remember the commandment.
-- So that you not invite Persians to parties where alcohol is served.
-- So that you write an eighteen page letter refuting the cartoons (and note: eighteen is the gematria of life - you shall write it that you may live).
But Abaye says 'so that you not draw cartoons for the newspapers of the nations, lest they hate us for it'.
Rashi explains newspaper as indicating that the text was edited. For there is no newspaper that is not edited. And there is no place that does not have a newspaper.
Shmuel says "Start reading the paper with mention of political disturbances in the land of Egypt (Dvarim 6:20) and move from the repressiveness of contemporary Middle-Eastern societies to political liberation.
Rav said: Start with Terach, Abraham's father and the state of golus to which we had descended. "Once upon a time our fathers lived among idolators who worshipped heathen gods. Now Hashem has brought us to vote for UTJ and Shas".
And know from this that even though we're really hosed, we are still better than the Arabs, because we have a free press and they don't (and following this is when it is customary to recite the blessing 'shlosha neenerim').
The Kitzer Shulchan Aruch explains that you should open the newspaper to the editorial page first. Then read the letters to the editor, starting at the top left hand corner of the page and proceding, with kavanah, all the way through to the last letter in the bottom right hand corner (if you are interrupted, start again at the top).
Finish that page by reading the cartoon. Then close the paper (along the crease), and compose an angry letter to the editor, so that it may remind you of tefillah.
But know that Lubavitch hold that there has been no editor since the Rebbe's petirah.
Satmar calls the entire question a depraved goyishe plot - there should be NO newspaper until the redeemer comes - and then we will ALL have newspapers.
Neturei Karta hold that it is best to read an Arab paper until the ketz. Ad mosai? Ad ki yavo....
Harav Kreiswirth (z.tz.l.), before he died, was meikel, but paskened that frumme yidden avoid the Nieuw Israelitisch Weekblad - at least until the techiyas hameisim.
Belz avers that like the students of Rabbi Ben Bag Bag, you should 'turn it over, again and again, for everything you want to know is found within it'.
Why does one read a paper?
Shimon HaTzaddik said: "The world rests on three things: on the sports scores, on the real-estate page, and on the want-ads".
Akiviya Ben Mehalalel said: "consider these three things and you will not fall into the clutches of sin. Know from whom you buy the paper, know to whom you will give the paper after you have clipped the coupons, and know where the coupons are redeemable."
Rabban Gamaliel said that whoever has not read these three things (the Washington Post, the Racing Times, and Playboy Magazine) has not fulfilled his obligation to disdain the goyishe world, lament losses at the track, and drool over unattainable hot shiksas. For in this you will know that you are truly in golus.
Regarding illustrated men's magazines, the Rambam says that one should not even look at the clothing of woman.
Why was this said?
Clothing reminds us (of the fig-leaves with which Adam and Chava clothed themselves), as is written in Bamidbar 15:39 "ve haya lachem le tsitsit u reitem oto u zechartem".
From this, know that it is a mitzvah and a blessing to look at pictures in Playboy magazine, because it recalls to us the Garden of Eden and man's primal purity.
And you should discuss this with your neighbor, on the road and in the home, whether standing or resting...until you are physically uncomfortable, and trembling (in awe). As it says "With all your heart, and all your means".
And now antshuldiks, I am stepping temporarily away from the shtender...
To buy a newspaper...., yes, that's it, a newspaper.
Grisn, und zolst hobn a gitn shabbes
http://www.geocities.com/npoj8/index.html
=====RABAM
Rosheshiva
Yeshiva Chipas Emmess -- San Francisco Campus
Mamesh.
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
ODD AND ETHNIC - DUTCH REFORMED
What do you call one Dutchman? -- A believer.
What do you call two Dutchmen? -- A church.
What do you call three Dutchmen? -- A schism.
The Godol Hador (http://godolhador.blogspot.com/) writes: "There are about 20 ‘major’ world religions currently extant, which are subdivided into a total of 270 large religious groups, and many smaller ones too. 34,000 separate Christian groups alone have been identified in the world. Also, if you include all the different religious traditions that ever were, you get about 12,000 faiths. "
[See remainder of his post here: http://godolhador.blogspot.com/ ]
Well, the Godol Hador and his readers have already mentioned Mormonism in many details (including special Mormon undergarments, for illustration of which a zesty picture was provided), but one religion they have not mentioned is Dutch Reformed Christianity. Perhaps because it is goofy.
[Lest you jump all over me for dissin' someone else's belief system, I make haste to mention that unlike you, I am entitled to diss all over Dutch Reformed. From the sixth generation after the black death through the thirteenth generation, ancestors of mine have been Dutch Reformed - seven generations of pissy Protestants, of which five were in the new world. That's on my father's side. On my mother's side it's severe Scots-Irish Presbyterians mixed with even more Dutch Reformed. Even though the last three generations on either side have not been pissy Protestants (being instead rather sceptical of and casual about religion), I've got Dutch Reformed coming out the ears. In part this is also because I lived in the Netherlands (for sixteen years, from my second to my eighteenth year), which, of course, is more or less the great elephant burial ground of Dutch Reformed. So, I'll diss Dutch Reformed all I darn well want.]
I shall not delve into the arcane mysteries of Dutch Reformed belief, primarily because you, the reader, do not really need to know these things.
If you are Jewish, it would be too much information about something you normally think of as avodah zara.
If you are Dutch Reformed yourself, you are probably already twisted as all git-out.
And if you are something else, you would not understand anyway because it is more intense and complicated than anything in your own simple-minded denomination.
I shall instead somewhat superficially describe the chain of events whereby the one became the many, and the many ended up picking fights with each other.
The whole ghastly mess starts with the Frenchman Jean Cauvin (John Calvin, 1509 - 1564), a theology and law student at Paris, whose strident call for reforms in the Church resulted in him fleeing for his life in 1533, eventually ending up in Geneva in 1536. His thought was influenced by much of the theological ferment then current in Europe, including Lutheranism and Anabaptism.
There are also indications that much of his thought was influenced by headaches, gout, indigestion, kidney stones, and rheumatism, and many other aches and pains. This is significant - Calvinism is rigid and unyielding, and very tolerant of pain.
Two of the basic themes that he developed further were Biblical authority (as opposed to Church authority) in matters of the faith, and predestinationism (which more or less means that if you ain't one of the select, it doesn't really matter what you do in your life, you're hosed anyway).
He was a voluminous writer, publishing several volumes of commentary on both the Tanach and the Christian Subsequentia (N.T.).
[Lest you ask, I must add that his Bible commentaries are not comparable to Rashi, Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, Sforno, et al - don't ask.]
Two major ethno-denominational groupings eventually formed that were based on Calvin's thought: Scotch Presbyterianism, and Dutch Reform.
[And both of those ethno-denominational identitities come with "baggage" and "issues". Hmmph.]
At the same time as Calvin was stirring up a mess in the Alps, Netherlandish cities and nobles were getting steamed over Philip the Spaniard's attempts to unify the Netherlands into one coherent legal and administrative system.
The Netherlands which Philip had inherited were a loosely unified mess of conflicting law codes and civic privileges, sporadically called to order by a grand meeting of the States General in Brussels. While all territories were represented in the States General, not all played along with its decisions, and even fewer had any intention of doing so in any consistent manner. Other than in name, their unity lay in resisting Philip and disagreeing with each other.
The Dutch have always been a quarrelsome bunch of stubborn pissants. Which, at that time, was also evident in the various re-interpretations of Christianity gaining currency in the Netherlands - yet another situation that contributed to Philip's ire.
The situation exploded in 1567 when Philip sent the Duke of Alva (may his name be erased!) into the Netherlands to eradicate dissent and destroy heresy. In 1568 Alva had two of the grande seigneurs of the Netherlands, (counts Egmont and Hoorne), executed in the Grande Place in Brussels. Their crime was not disloyalty or treason, but that they had been too permissive of Protestantism, even though they themselves had remained Catholic.
The executions may have been pointless. But they did serve as tinder.
For the next four years, Alva savagely suppressed all dissent, political and religious, throughout the Netherlands, painting a swath of blood and murder across all the provinces. The tide turned in 1572 when the Sea Beggars captured Briel in 1572, gaining a foothold along the coast. Within the next few years the rebellion gained strength and territory, eventually unifying all of the northern provinces. Protestants, who faced certain death in the south, fled north in large numbers, and contributed their skills and their lives to the cause of the rebel republic .
[Among the refugees from the Spanish terror were two ancestors of mine, Willem van Deursen (b. 1542) and his son Peter Jansen van Deursen (b. 1575), who left Brabant and ended up in the city of Haarlem, where in 1607 Abraham Pietersen van Deursen was born (1607 - 1678?), who would subsequently emigrate to New Amsterdam.]
The war between Spain and the Dutch lasted until 1648, by which time Protestantism, in it's rather severe Calvinist form, had become entrenched in the north. Thenceforth Dutch quarrelsomeness would have the perfect medium in which to manifest itself - religion. Not until twentieth century politics would another so perfect vehicle for petty dispute and despicion come along (and how the Dutch enthusiastically jumped on that bandwagon is another story).
Among the first actions that the Calvinists theocrats took was the banning of Catholicism in Protestant cities. Thereafter they started fighting among themselves.
Not only in the Netherlands.
The first Dutch Reformed church in the new world was established in New Amsterdam in 1628 (about six years before my first American-born ancestor, Isaac Abrahamsen van Deursen (b. 1635) saw the light), and the first church was built in 1633 on what is now Pearl Street in Manhattan. The Brits eventually seized the property for military purposes, and a new church was built in 1693 on Exchange Place. By the end of the century Dutch Reformed congregations had arisen all over New York and New Jersey, including areas which are now Hareidi strongholds such as Brooklyn, Flatbush, Hempstead, Monsey, Paramus, etcetera.
By 1792 the Dutch American churches split off from the Dutch churches, at which time they already consisted of various splinter groups on both sides of the Atlantic.
In 1816 Dutch government meddling created even more splinter groups, all disunited in opposition to the official approved Dutch Reformed denomination. In 1822 more seceders split off from the Reformed Church in America to form the True Dutch Reformed Church, while in 1834 dissidents left the Reformed Church in the Netherlands to form two new denominations, the Christelijk Afgescheiden Kerk (Christian Separatist Church - CAK) and the Gereformeerde Kerk onder het kruis (Reformed Church under the cross, aka the Cross Churches).
That's not the end of it. Did I mention that the Dutch are a stubborn bunch of quarrelsome pissants? I really should have.
In 1841 pastor Ledeboer and his group in the Netherlands bailed out and set up shop separately, along with others (forming the Ledeboerian faction). A number of these people headed for the U.S. in 1846 under the leadership of Pastor Albert Van Raalte, becoming the second group of people to immigrate to North America to get away from religious freedom (the Puritans having been the first). They established the settlement of Holland, Michigan (gosh what an imaginative name for a settlement of Dutchmen!). By 1850 they had more or less united with the Reformed Church in America.
Shortly thereafter, a group of dissenters split off from the Second Reformed Church (in Grand Rapids) and the Fourth Reformed Church (in Pella) to form the Christian Reformed Church. The True Dutch Reformed Church joined with the Christian Reformed Church in 1890, forming their own classis within the movement - classis Hackensack. In 1908 most of classis Hackensack withdrew from the Christian Reformed Church in a dispute over the faithful joining civic lodges or fraternal organizations.
Please note that 'Second Christian Reformed' is USUALLY a term for split-offs from the Fourth Christian Reformed church (Pella), which itself is a split-off variant of Dutch Reformed.
Second Christian Reformed should not be confused with Third Christian Reformed or First Christian Reformed, even though most Christian Reformed Churches adhere to the same source documents: The Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the Canons of Dort.
Many Christian Reformed Churches, when they still worshipped in Dutch (in some places up until the nineteen-seventies or eighties!) still held to the Psalter of Petrus Datheen (1531 - 1588) (though note that some "Reformed" Churches held instead to the Psalter of Marnix Van St. Aldegonde (Philip van Marnix, lord of St. Aldegonde, 1538 - 1598), and a few deviants had long since switched to either the first or second Statenberijming, which dates from governmental meddling in church affairs starting in 1816 under William I).
Meanwhile, back in the swamp..., errm, I mean the Netherlands, several of the congregations of the Christelijk Afgescheiden Kerk and the Cross Churches combined to form another denomination - the Christelijk Gereformeerde Kerk (Christian Reformed Church, but not the same as the Christian Reformed Church in the American Midwest. In 1886 Doctor Abraham Kuyper and his followers split off from the official Dutch Reformed Church to unite with Christelijk Gereformeerde Kerk.
The Ledeboerian churches in the Netherlands joined with the remaining Cross Churches in 1907, forming a denomination which called itself the Gereformeerde Gemeenten (Reformed Congregations).
The remaining Ledeboerians in America had meanwhile formed the Netherlands Reformed Church in Michigan (in 1877), but, inevitably, there were more schisms to come.
In 1924, Reverend Herman Hoeksema of the Eastern Avenue Christian Reformed Church in Grand Rapids refused to agree to the teaching of the doctrines of common grace and presumptive regeneration, and left the church with most of his own congregation, plus a congregation in Kalamazoo, and other dissidents. In 1926 they organized the Protestant Reformed Churches. Their unity lasted for less than thirty years, nearly half of the members splitting off in 1954 to form the Orthodox Protestant Reformed Churches - which came in out of the cold in 1961, when they joined up with the Christian Reformed Church in 1961.
During WWII the Dutch showed that unity in hard times is hard - and a new denomination resulted: Gereformeerde Kerk Nederland - Vrijgemaakt (Reformed Church Netherlands - disassociated). By the nineteen fifties, this new denomination was also present in the U.S. and Canada.
Meanwhile, back in the swamp.....
A group seceded from the Gereformeerde Gemeenten (Reformed Congregations) over a doctrinal point that is totally incomprehensible, and became the Gereformeerde Gemeenten in Nederland (Reformed Congregations in the Netherlands). Their American branch is called the Reformed Congregations in North America.
Things have not been static since the nineteen sixties. In fact, far from it - since then the following dissenting North American denominations have been formed: Alliance of Reformed Churches, Christian Presbyterian, Orthodox Christian Reformed, United Reformed. And there are others.
The recent mega-merger in the Netherlands of the Nederlandsch Hervormde Kerk, the Gereformeerde Kerk Nederland, and the Dutch Lutheran Church has of course resulted in even more break-aways.
Well, you know what they say - you can't split rotten wood.
Addendum: In some ways, the events described above explain my own spiritual journey. Clearly an inherited propensity toward dissidence has found its end expression in a wholesale rejection of everything connected to the Christian Subsequentia (otherwise known, for some inexplicable reason, as 'New Testament'). But, having in a sustained fit of scepticism chucked out two thousand years of Roman cultic belief, I do not find myself with any greater conviction jumping into another religious derech. Instead I prefer to somewhat cynically, somewhat critically, explore a branch of monotheism that in its origins is close to what my grandparents knew (and paid scant attention to).
One could ask why I don't explore Buddhism or Islam (or other cults).
In what way do either of these speak to the pissant Dutchman within?
Both are foreign, both reject fundaments that are part of the subconscious western intellectual inheritance, fundaments which resonate with truth. Neither expresses the weltanschaung that we cannot know for certain, and may never know for certain. And neither have the same understanding of mercy and personal growth that is part of the tradition of both Rabbinic Judaism and it's crazy cousin Christianity.
Neither Islam nor Buddhism present a road through the same appealing scenery - only in their Hieronymus Boschian vistas do they even look familiar.
I cannot under any circumstances imagine myself EVER reciting the Muslim credo.
The magic syllable 'um', the mantra of which that is a part ("um money podmey um"), and my own lovely navel, will never be the triple nexus of my faith.
But 'Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai echad' has a ring to it.
What do you call two Dutchmen? -- A church.
What do you call three Dutchmen? -- A schism.
The Godol Hador (http://godolhador.blogspot.com/) writes: "There are about 20 ‘major’ world religions currently extant, which are subdivided into a total of 270 large religious groups, and many smaller ones too. 34,000 separate Christian groups alone have been identified in the world. Also, if you include all the different religious traditions that ever were, you get about 12,000 faiths. "
[See remainder of his post here: http://godolhador.blogspot.com/ ]
Well, the Godol Hador and his readers have already mentioned Mormonism in many details (including special Mormon undergarments, for illustration of which a zesty picture was provided), but one religion they have not mentioned is Dutch Reformed Christianity. Perhaps because it is goofy.
[Lest you jump all over me for dissin' someone else's belief system, I make haste to mention that unlike you, I am entitled to diss all over Dutch Reformed. From the sixth generation after the black death through the thirteenth generation, ancestors of mine have been Dutch Reformed - seven generations of pissy Protestants, of which five were in the new world. That's on my father's side. On my mother's side it's severe Scots-Irish Presbyterians mixed with even more Dutch Reformed. Even though the last three generations on either side have not been pissy Protestants (being instead rather sceptical of and casual about religion), I've got Dutch Reformed coming out the ears. In part this is also because I lived in the Netherlands (for sixteen years, from my second to my eighteenth year), which, of course, is more or less the great elephant burial ground of Dutch Reformed. So, I'll diss Dutch Reformed all I darn well want.]
I shall not delve into the arcane mysteries of Dutch Reformed belief, primarily because you, the reader, do not really need to know these things.
If you are Jewish, it would be too much information about something you normally think of as avodah zara.
If you are Dutch Reformed yourself, you are probably already twisted as all git-out.
And if you are something else, you would not understand anyway because it is more intense and complicated than anything in your own simple-minded denomination.
I shall instead somewhat superficially describe the chain of events whereby the one became the many, and the many ended up picking fights with each other.
The whole ghastly mess starts with the Frenchman Jean Cauvin (John Calvin, 1509 - 1564), a theology and law student at Paris, whose strident call for reforms in the Church resulted in him fleeing for his life in 1533, eventually ending up in Geneva in 1536. His thought was influenced by much of the theological ferment then current in Europe, including Lutheranism and Anabaptism.
There are also indications that much of his thought was influenced by headaches, gout, indigestion, kidney stones, and rheumatism, and many other aches and pains. This is significant - Calvinism is rigid and unyielding, and very tolerant of pain.
Two of the basic themes that he developed further were Biblical authority (as opposed to Church authority) in matters of the faith, and predestinationism (which more or less means that if you ain't one of the select, it doesn't really matter what you do in your life, you're hosed anyway).
He was a voluminous writer, publishing several volumes of commentary on both the Tanach and the Christian Subsequentia (N.T.).
[Lest you ask, I must add that his Bible commentaries are not comparable to Rashi, Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, Sforno, et al - don't ask.]
Two major ethno-denominational groupings eventually formed that were based on Calvin's thought: Scotch Presbyterianism, and Dutch Reform.
[And both of those ethno-denominational identitities come with "baggage" and "issues". Hmmph.]
At the same time as Calvin was stirring up a mess in the Alps, Netherlandish cities and nobles were getting steamed over Philip the Spaniard's attempts to unify the Netherlands into one coherent legal and administrative system.
The Netherlands which Philip had inherited were a loosely unified mess of conflicting law codes and civic privileges, sporadically called to order by a grand meeting of the States General in Brussels. While all territories were represented in the States General, not all played along with its decisions, and even fewer had any intention of doing so in any consistent manner. Other than in name, their unity lay in resisting Philip and disagreeing with each other.
The Dutch have always been a quarrelsome bunch of stubborn pissants. Which, at that time, was also evident in the various re-interpretations of Christianity gaining currency in the Netherlands - yet another situation that contributed to Philip's ire.
The situation exploded in 1567 when Philip sent the Duke of Alva (may his name be erased!) into the Netherlands to eradicate dissent and destroy heresy. In 1568 Alva had two of the grande seigneurs of the Netherlands, (counts Egmont and Hoorne), executed in the Grande Place in Brussels. Their crime was not disloyalty or treason, but that they had been too permissive of Protestantism, even though they themselves had remained Catholic.
The executions may have been pointless. But they did serve as tinder.
For the next four years, Alva savagely suppressed all dissent, political and religious, throughout the Netherlands, painting a swath of blood and murder across all the provinces. The tide turned in 1572 when the Sea Beggars captured Briel in 1572, gaining a foothold along the coast. Within the next few years the rebellion gained strength and territory, eventually unifying all of the northern provinces. Protestants, who faced certain death in the south, fled north in large numbers, and contributed their skills and their lives to the cause of the rebel republic .
[Among the refugees from the Spanish terror were two ancestors of mine, Willem van Deursen (b. 1542) and his son Peter Jansen van Deursen (b. 1575), who left Brabant and ended up in the city of Haarlem, where in 1607 Abraham Pietersen van Deursen was born (1607 - 1678?), who would subsequently emigrate to New Amsterdam.]
The war between Spain and the Dutch lasted until 1648, by which time Protestantism, in it's rather severe Calvinist form, had become entrenched in the north. Thenceforth Dutch quarrelsomeness would have the perfect medium in which to manifest itself - religion. Not until twentieth century politics would another so perfect vehicle for petty dispute and despicion come along (and how the Dutch enthusiastically jumped on that bandwagon is another story).
Among the first actions that the Calvinists theocrats took was the banning of Catholicism in Protestant cities. Thereafter they started fighting among themselves.
Not only in the Netherlands.
The first Dutch Reformed church in the new world was established in New Amsterdam in 1628 (about six years before my first American-born ancestor, Isaac Abrahamsen van Deursen (b. 1635) saw the light), and the first church was built in 1633 on what is now Pearl Street in Manhattan. The Brits eventually seized the property for military purposes, and a new church was built in 1693 on Exchange Place. By the end of the century Dutch Reformed congregations had arisen all over New York and New Jersey, including areas which are now Hareidi strongholds such as Brooklyn, Flatbush, Hempstead, Monsey, Paramus, etcetera.
By 1792 the Dutch American churches split off from the Dutch churches, at which time they already consisted of various splinter groups on both sides of the Atlantic.
In 1816 Dutch government meddling created even more splinter groups, all disunited in opposition to the official approved Dutch Reformed denomination. In 1822 more seceders split off from the Reformed Church in America to form the True Dutch Reformed Church, while in 1834 dissidents left the Reformed Church in the Netherlands to form two new denominations, the Christelijk Afgescheiden Kerk (Christian Separatist Church - CAK) and the Gereformeerde Kerk onder het kruis (Reformed Church under the cross, aka the Cross Churches).
That's not the end of it. Did I mention that the Dutch are a stubborn bunch of quarrelsome pissants? I really should have.
In 1841 pastor Ledeboer and his group in the Netherlands bailed out and set up shop separately, along with others (forming the Ledeboerian faction). A number of these people headed for the U.S. in 1846 under the leadership of Pastor Albert Van Raalte, becoming the second group of people to immigrate to North America to get away from religious freedom (the Puritans having been the first). They established the settlement of Holland, Michigan (gosh what an imaginative name for a settlement of Dutchmen!). By 1850 they had more or less united with the Reformed Church in America.
Shortly thereafter, a group of dissenters split off from the Second Reformed Church (in Grand Rapids) and the Fourth Reformed Church (in Pella) to form the Christian Reformed Church. The True Dutch Reformed Church joined with the Christian Reformed Church in 1890, forming their own classis within the movement - classis Hackensack. In 1908 most of classis Hackensack withdrew from the Christian Reformed Church in a dispute over the faithful joining civic lodges or fraternal organizations.
Please note that 'Second Christian Reformed' is USUALLY a term for split-offs from the Fourth Christian Reformed church (Pella), which itself is a split-off variant of Dutch Reformed.
Second Christian Reformed should not be confused with Third Christian Reformed or First Christian Reformed, even though most Christian Reformed Churches adhere to the same source documents: The Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the Canons of Dort.
Many Christian Reformed Churches, when they still worshipped in Dutch (in some places up until the nineteen-seventies or eighties!) still held to the Psalter of Petrus Datheen (1531 - 1588) (though note that some "Reformed" Churches held instead to the Psalter of Marnix Van St. Aldegonde (Philip van Marnix, lord of St. Aldegonde, 1538 - 1598), and a few deviants had long since switched to either the first or second Statenberijming, which dates from governmental meddling in church affairs starting in 1816 under William I).
Meanwhile, back in the swamp..., errm, I mean the Netherlands, several of the congregations of the Christelijk Afgescheiden Kerk and the Cross Churches combined to form another denomination - the Christelijk Gereformeerde Kerk (Christian Reformed Church, but not the same as the Christian Reformed Church in the American Midwest. In 1886 Doctor Abraham Kuyper and his followers split off from the official Dutch Reformed Church to unite with Christelijk Gereformeerde Kerk.
The Ledeboerian churches in the Netherlands joined with the remaining Cross Churches in 1907, forming a denomination which called itself the Gereformeerde Gemeenten (Reformed Congregations).
The remaining Ledeboerians in America had meanwhile formed the Netherlands Reformed Church in Michigan (in 1877), but, inevitably, there were more schisms to come.
In 1924, Reverend Herman Hoeksema of the Eastern Avenue Christian Reformed Church in Grand Rapids refused to agree to the teaching of the doctrines of common grace and presumptive regeneration, and left the church with most of his own congregation, plus a congregation in Kalamazoo, and other dissidents. In 1926 they organized the Protestant Reformed Churches. Their unity lasted for less than thirty years, nearly half of the members splitting off in 1954 to form the Orthodox Protestant Reformed Churches - which came in out of the cold in 1961, when they joined up with the Christian Reformed Church in 1961.
During WWII the Dutch showed that unity in hard times is hard - and a new denomination resulted: Gereformeerde Kerk Nederland - Vrijgemaakt (Reformed Church Netherlands - disassociated). By the nineteen fifties, this new denomination was also present in the U.S. and Canada.
Meanwhile, back in the swamp.....
A group seceded from the Gereformeerde Gemeenten (Reformed Congregations) over a doctrinal point that is totally incomprehensible, and became the Gereformeerde Gemeenten in Nederland (Reformed Congregations in the Netherlands). Their American branch is called the Reformed Congregations in North America.
Things have not been static since the nineteen sixties. In fact, far from it - since then the following dissenting North American denominations have been formed: Alliance of Reformed Churches, Christian Presbyterian, Orthodox Christian Reformed, United Reformed. And there are others.
The recent mega-merger in the Netherlands of the Nederlandsch Hervormde Kerk, the Gereformeerde Kerk Nederland, and the Dutch Lutheran Church has of course resulted in even more break-aways.
Well, you know what they say - you can't split rotten wood.
--- - --- - --- - --- - -
Addendum: In some ways, the events described above explain my own spiritual journey. Clearly an inherited propensity toward dissidence has found its end expression in a wholesale rejection of everything connected to the Christian Subsequentia (otherwise known, for some inexplicable reason, as 'New Testament'). But, having in a sustained fit of scepticism chucked out two thousand years of Roman cultic belief, I do not find myself with any greater conviction jumping into another religious derech. Instead I prefer to somewhat cynically, somewhat critically, explore a branch of monotheism that in its origins is close to what my grandparents knew (and paid scant attention to).
One could ask why I don't explore Buddhism or Islam (or other cults).
In what way do either of these speak to the pissant Dutchman within?
Both are foreign, both reject fundaments that are part of the subconscious western intellectual inheritance, fundaments which resonate with truth. Neither expresses the weltanschaung that we cannot know for certain, and may never know for certain. And neither have the same understanding of mercy and personal growth that is part of the tradition of both Rabbinic Judaism and it's crazy cousin Christianity.
Neither Islam nor Buddhism present a road through the same appealing scenery - only in their Hieronymus Boschian vistas do they even look familiar.
I cannot under any circumstances imagine myself EVER reciting the Muslim credo.
The magic syllable 'um', the mantra of which that is a part ("um money podmey um"), and my own lovely navel, will never be the triple nexus of my faith.
But 'Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai echad' has a ring to it.
THE ENTIRE SHEITEL GESTALT
Please note: Someone mentioned sheitels, and of course I remembered the commentary from Yeshiva Chipas Emess about sheitlach, which was pursuant something Rav Pinky said last year in a drasha.
For your reference, here it is again.
The best are made with real human hair (low to medium four figures), inferior ones with heavens knows what (as cheap as a few hundred). No matter the expense, the effect is twixt old-country dowdy and New Jersey gangster wife stylish!
There has recently been a groise machloikes over sheitels made with hair from India.
The problem was that the hair (either all, or three symbolic tufts) was shorn from Hindu women at religious ceremonies - don’t ask, I haven’t a clue, I’m a rabbi tatenyu, not a pandit! But it had to do with purification for idolatrous rituals, and temple profits from the sale of the hair, and thus shmecked of avoidah zara (strange service, hence idolatry). It is issur to partake of, share in, or in fact have anything to do with idolatry. Especially monetarily!
Why is hair from India used in wigs?
The two main sources of hair used in wigs and hairpieces are Europe and India. The desirability of Indian temple-cut hair lay in the length, strength, and alignment.
Hair that is aligned (that has all its cuticles pointing in the same direction – called Remy hair) can be used for high quality wigs that have a natural look, whereas hair that is not aligned will need to be chemically stripped of the cuticle layer to keep it becoming tangled.
Note: to dye hair, it has to be stripped and bleached; this is never done to Remy hair.
Keeping hair aligned is done by tying it with ribbons prior to cutting; this was in fact customary at the temple. The hair was then sold, and the money benefited the idol served at that temple.
Aligned hair is more expensive than stripped hair, and is used for better wigs, whereas stripped hair is often also chemically bleached, dyed, and conditioned.
So the problem is this: if your sheitel is glossy, black and expensive, it probably is made of Indian Remy hair. If it is any other colour but did not cost an arm and a leg, it nevertheless also may be made of Indian hair.
Is all hair from India suspect?
Only ten percent (more or less) of the hair purchased from India comes from the temple in question (Tirumala). Because a much larger percentage of Remy hair from India is temple hair, it might be argued that a wig made from dyed hair (remember, Remy hair is not dyed) should contain far less temple hair. But there is no way of telling – a sheitel of dyed hair could be all temple hair, because not all temple hair is Remy.
In the same way that one can not assume that a piece of meat is kosher without evidence (presumption based on place purchased, trust in the merchant having full knowledge of the derivation, and verifiability based on trusted agents who oversee and examine), one can not blithely assume that because the sheitel is not Remy it is safe.
What about European hair?
Hinduism is not prevalent in Europe, and there are no religious practices in Europe in which a woman cuts off long hair. So, based on currently known data, European Remy hair should be considered Halachically acceptable.
Several ravs have spouted psak and teshuve ad nauseum, most either coming out against Indian hair wigs except under certain circumstances (psak l’issur), or stating l’heter that they were acceptable unless it was definitely known that the hair was tainted by A.Z., or in fact outright takruves (offerings) to the getchkeh (idol).
Some went on for several pages, quoted multiple authorities most marvelously, without actually saying anything. And a few proved nothing more than that an obsession with hair is not unusual among poskim, so if you have a fetish, you’re in good company!
Rav X in Antwerp, in his considered opinion of the issue, may have said something to the effect that ‘de milde toepassing van de wet verdient de voorkeur’ (the mild application of the law deserves precedence), but he said it in over twenty pages of densely written Ivrit – this he expects women to read?
This he expects ME to read????
Shroyb es oyf Fleymish oder mameloshn, zeyt azoy git! And be brief; I still have to read next week’s parsha!
That a lenient ruling should be made is in keeping with the decision made by rebbeyim over fifteen years ago (AND thirty years ago) when this issue came up before. But it may be that, at that time, the poskim were not fully aware of the details of the issue, hence their being matir.
In mittn drinnen, most gedolei ha poskim (greats among the orthodox halachic decisors) have aza yechechishe yad that whatever they write cannot be deciphered – there ARE typewriters for Hebrew, frevinseyks, or hire a safir!
There are some very fine sheitlach made from Chinese hair (which is as strong as Indian hair, but has a softer look), but if you must have a head of Chinese hair, best keep the Chinese person attached. Believe me, you won’t regret it. I haven’t.
On the other hand, hair from a harlot, or from a murderess shorn at her imprisonment, would also be perfectly acceptable - as long as she was not intimately involved in idolatry.
Taking care of your sheitel is crucial. Many women use a sheitel liner in between their head and the actual wig, which keeps it cleaner and prevents their own hair from intruding on the elegant, sexy lines of the sheitel. Synthetic hair is easier to clean, but bear in mind that synthetic wigs end up looking ratty and eccentric within a year, whereas a good real hair wig maintains its looks a bit longer.
If you wish to wash your wig yourself, instead of taking it to your local sheitel macher, do so every five or six weeks. It is best to place the thing securely on a Styrofoam head (use pins), wet it with warm water, lather with shampoo, and rinse gently. Conditioner can be applied, but apply AWAY from the root. Rinse after a minute or so. It can be air-dried, but in moist environments it is advisable to speed up the process with a blow dryer on low heat – also good for styling.
Why a wig in the first place?
Rabbinic law states that married women should cover their hair before all save their husbands, for reasons of modesty.
In the eighteenth century, when ultra-orthodoxim first started wearing sheitlach, the deceptively real appearance of certain wigs was manifestly not a problem; wigs were observedly unnatural, and no immodesty could be imputed.
Many orthodox rebbeyim at that time opined that covering one’s hair was more effectively done l’halocho with a sheitel than with a tiechel (headkerchief) or hat, as the sheitel can cover all of the hair, while also being convenient for wearing indoors.
Since then wiggery has become a firm custom, which many do not have the confidence to discard, and yet do not think deeply about. And there are those who, b’hiddur mitzvah, also wear a kerchief or a hat, in addition to their perruque.
Yet a good wig can mislead other women (who cannot see that it is fake, and may therefore assume that if a woman who is known to be respectable and frum is showing hair, it is acceptable to do so), and may in fact be as immodest in its effects as flaunting a luxurious head of hair for men to see, to smell, nay even to brush their faces against on the bus, inhaling deeply of its delicate aroma of perfumed shampoo.
Finally, if showing hair is tantamount to immodesty, I have to wonder whether it is not best for men to expose their big (!) bushy (!) beards (!) only to their wives, and only in the home.
For your reference, here it is again.
--- --- ---
The best are made with real human hair (low to medium four figures), inferior ones with heavens knows what (as cheap as a few hundred). No matter the expense, the effect is twixt old-country dowdy and New Jersey gangster wife stylish!
There has recently been a groise machloikes over sheitels made with hair from India.
The problem was that the hair (either all, or three symbolic tufts) was shorn from Hindu women at religious ceremonies - don’t ask, I haven’t a clue, I’m a rabbi tatenyu, not a pandit! But it had to do with purification for idolatrous rituals, and temple profits from the sale of the hair, and thus shmecked of avoidah zara (strange service, hence idolatry). It is issur to partake of, share in, or in fact have anything to do with idolatry. Especially monetarily!
Why is hair from India used in wigs?
The two main sources of hair used in wigs and hairpieces are Europe and India. The desirability of Indian temple-cut hair lay in the length, strength, and alignment.
Hair that is aligned (that has all its cuticles pointing in the same direction – called Remy hair) can be used for high quality wigs that have a natural look, whereas hair that is not aligned will need to be chemically stripped of the cuticle layer to keep it becoming tangled.
Note: to dye hair, it has to be stripped and bleached; this is never done to Remy hair.
Keeping hair aligned is done by tying it with ribbons prior to cutting; this was in fact customary at the temple. The hair was then sold, and the money benefited the idol served at that temple.
Aligned hair is more expensive than stripped hair, and is used for better wigs, whereas stripped hair is often also chemically bleached, dyed, and conditioned.
So the problem is this: if your sheitel is glossy, black and expensive, it probably is made of Indian Remy hair. If it is any other colour but did not cost an arm and a leg, it nevertheless also may be made of Indian hair.
Is all hair from India suspect?
Only ten percent (more or less) of the hair purchased from India comes from the temple in question (Tirumala). Because a much larger percentage of Remy hair from India is temple hair, it might be argued that a wig made from dyed hair (remember, Remy hair is not dyed) should contain far less temple hair. But there is no way of telling – a sheitel of dyed hair could be all temple hair, because not all temple hair is Remy.
In the same way that one can not assume that a piece of meat is kosher without evidence (presumption based on place purchased, trust in the merchant having full knowledge of the derivation, and verifiability based on trusted agents who oversee and examine), one can not blithely assume that because the sheitel is not Remy it is safe.
What about European hair?
Hinduism is not prevalent in Europe, and there are no religious practices in Europe in which a woman cuts off long hair. So, based on currently known data, European Remy hair should be considered Halachically acceptable.
Several ravs have spouted psak and teshuve ad nauseum, most either coming out against Indian hair wigs except under certain circumstances (psak l’issur), or stating l’heter that they were acceptable unless it was definitely known that the hair was tainted by A.Z., or in fact outright takruves (offerings) to the getchkeh (idol).
Some went on for several pages, quoted multiple authorities most marvelously, without actually saying anything. And a few proved nothing more than that an obsession with hair is not unusual among poskim, so if you have a fetish, you’re in good company!
Rav X in Antwerp, in his considered opinion of the issue, may have said something to the effect that ‘de milde toepassing van de wet verdient de voorkeur’ (the mild application of the law deserves precedence), but he said it in over twenty pages of densely written Ivrit – this he expects women to read?
This he expects ME to read????
Shroyb es oyf Fleymish oder mameloshn, zeyt azoy git! And be brief; I still have to read next week’s parsha!
That a lenient ruling should be made is in keeping with the decision made by rebbeyim over fifteen years ago (AND thirty years ago) when this issue came up before. But it may be that, at that time, the poskim were not fully aware of the details of the issue, hence their being matir.
In mittn drinnen, most gedolei ha poskim (greats among the orthodox halachic decisors) have aza yechechishe yad that whatever they write cannot be deciphered – there ARE typewriters for Hebrew, frevinseyks, or hire a safir!
There are some very fine sheitlach made from Chinese hair (which is as strong as Indian hair, but has a softer look), but if you must have a head of Chinese hair, best keep the Chinese person attached. Believe me, you won’t regret it. I haven’t.
On the other hand, hair from a harlot, or from a murderess shorn at her imprisonment, would also be perfectly acceptable - as long as she was not intimately involved in idolatry.
Taking care of your sheitel is crucial. Many women use a sheitel liner in between their head and the actual wig, which keeps it cleaner and prevents their own hair from intruding on the elegant, sexy lines of the sheitel. Synthetic hair is easier to clean, but bear in mind that synthetic wigs end up looking ratty and eccentric within a year, whereas a good real hair wig maintains its looks a bit longer.
If you wish to wash your wig yourself, instead of taking it to your local sheitel macher, do so every five or six weeks. It is best to place the thing securely on a Styrofoam head (use pins), wet it with warm water, lather with shampoo, and rinse gently. Conditioner can be applied, but apply AWAY from the root. Rinse after a minute or so. It can be air-dried, but in moist environments it is advisable to speed up the process with a blow dryer on low heat – also good for styling.
Why a wig in the first place?
Rabbinic law states that married women should cover their hair before all save their husbands, for reasons of modesty.
In the eighteenth century, when ultra-orthodoxim first started wearing sheitlach, the deceptively real appearance of certain wigs was manifestly not a problem; wigs were observedly unnatural, and no immodesty could be imputed.
Many orthodox rebbeyim at that time opined that covering one’s hair was more effectively done l’halocho with a sheitel than with a tiechel (headkerchief) or hat, as the sheitel can cover all of the hair, while also being convenient for wearing indoors.
Since then wiggery has become a firm custom, which many do not have the confidence to discard, and yet do not think deeply about. And there are those who, b’hiddur mitzvah, also wear a kerchief or a hat, in addition to their perruque.
Yet a good wig can mislead other women (who cannot see that it is fake, and may therefore assume that if a woman who is known to be respectable and frum is showing hair, it is acceptable to do so), and may in fact be as immodest in its effects as flaunting a luxurious head of hair for men to see, to smell, nay even to brush their faces against on the bus, inhaling deeply of its delicate aroma of perfumed shampoo.
Finally, if showing hair is tantamount to immodesty, I have to wonder whether it is not best for men to expose their big (!) bushy (!) beards (!) only to their wives, and only in the home.
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
BRITISH ACADEMIC BOYCOTT
An English academic union, the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE) voted yesterday to encourage it's members to boycott Israeli academic professionals and institutions of higher learning unless they "disassociate themselves" from Israel’s "apartheid policy" in Judea and Samaria.
Condemnation has been swift. But perhaps there is less here than meets the eye.
Consider, for a moment, what this vote really means.
Does it mean institutions are committed to boycotting Israeli academic professionals and institutions?
No.
Does it mean that academics in fields in which Israeli academic professionals and institutions contribute will be required to boycott?
No.
Does it mean that worthwhile papers by Israeli academic professionals and institutions will not be published?
No.
I think we can assume that in fields which are already dominated by anti-Semites there will be little change.
In fields to which Israeli academic professionals and institutions contribute significantly, there will also be little change.
British institutions are not bound by this vote, nor will they gladly disregard worthwhile material. Unlike unions, universities are committed to academic freedom.
And in any case, by June 1st the matter will be moot.
[Because the union in question is amalgamating with another union, and the resolution becomes merely advisory at that point.]
There were two resolutions which were voted on by NATFHE:
The first called upon the NATFHE membership to 'aid, protect and support PA institutions and universities, and to continue to maintain ties with the PA'. It also called the cordon sanitaire against the terrorist group Hamas "scandalous".
The second motion demanded a boycott against "Israel’s persistent apartheid policy" - it is not clear exactly what was meant by this, as gibberant left-wing rhetoric standardly becomes unintelligible when grunted through foaming lips.
Both motions do not force a boycott of Israel, but are recommendations to the membership to consider taking action privately.
What would either of these motions mean in practise?
Well, imagine that an Israeli institution found a cure for a disease. If anyone where to take the "boycott" seriously, they would neither publish the research findings, nor permit their associates to use the research findings in any way. In actuality, only the Arabs are crazy enough to follow this course of action (or sane enough, as publishing Israeli research results might bring a firing squad or lynch mob into your future in large parts of the Islamic world).
As you can imagine, serious scholars will blithely ignore this call to boycott, and mediocrities will pay it lip-service until they need to plagiarize.
And please note that if they broke British laws while "supporting Palestinian Institutions", they would be in trouble no matter how enthusiastic the pc glee club was about their actions.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Related thereto, there has been an absolute barrage of hate e-mail to the address of union leadership. Hundreds of venomous, vituperative, and very badly written e-mails from American 'non-academics' (judging by spelling mistakes and trailer-park grammar) were received.
What exactly do the writers of such poison-pen screeds hope to achieve?
Other than creating the impression that they are idiots?
I can understand anger and fury. I can understand wanting to break something. But if you want to convince someone of the rightness of your position, jumping up and down screaming like a baboon is not an effective approach.
Trust me on this.
I base this statement on personal experience.
All it got me was a good spanking.
[I shall not publish the e-mail addresses of the leadership of the union, as I do not wish to encourage such misbehaviour. You will kindly note that my own e-mail address is nowhere to be seen on this blog either, as I have no need to get roped into private spitting matches - please use the comments field and entertain the other readers of this blog if you're that rabid. Thank you.]
If you really want to change minds, you will coherently and rationally argue your points, with grace and good cheer, on your blogs and in your articles. Those who are irrational will not change (and would not even if you did call them names), those who are wrong may change their minds (but will certainly not do so if you call them names).
There is indeed an air of anti-Semitism to this - it would be odd if there were not. But anti-Semitism is a normal and natural state for slope-brows. They also hate, despise, and condemn pretty much everybody else (including penguins, postage workers, and dachshunds).
The problem is not the anti-Semitism, it is the ignorance, and blinkered points of view, of fairly decent individuals, who are hampered by their cultural praeconceptions besides. Now that is something that you can work on.
Be patient, and maintain a positive attitude, as you will have to explain much.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
APPENDIX:
Below are two examples of the hate e-mail which I mentioned - please note that both are remarkably badly written (just over the border of illiteracy, in fact), and have no point other than relieving the unfortunate medical conditions of the authors. We wish them a full recovery. Do not read if you are easily offended.
From: Guy Yanai
Sent: 28 May 2006 04:54
To: Paul Mackney
Subject: JEW HATER!
its nice to hate jews and single them out for everything!!!
its called ANTISEMITISM you disgucting piece of shit!!!
you and your family should be ashamed of yourself!!
you should boycot yourself!
From: sultan
Sent: 29 May 2006 17:21
To: Paul Mackney
Subject: Examinations
Examine yourself You dirty little Jew Baiting cunt. You and your fellow filth will end up the way all black and red facists do as dust to be walked on.
PLEASE NOTE: Paul Mackney spoke against the resolutions. He was the recipient of these e-mails because he is an officer of the union, and thus in the line of public fire.
As a further note, it is interesting that we have had a debate about the official language of the United States recently. Judging by these and similar e-mails I have seen, it will indeed be nice when Americans learn English.
I can hardly wait.
Condemnation has been swift. But perhaps there is less here than meets the eye.
Consider, for a moment, what this vote really means.
Does it mean institutions are committed to boycotting Israeli academic professionals and institutions?
No.
Does it mean that academics in fields in which Israeli academic professionals and institutions contribute will be required to boycott?
No.
Does it mean that worthwhile papers by Israeli academic professionals and institutions will not be published?
No.
I think we can assume that in fields which are already dominated by anti-Semites there will be little change.
In fields to which Israeli academic professionals and institutions contribute significantly, there will also be little change.
British institutions are not bound by this vote, nor will they gladly disregard worthwhile material. Unlike unions, universities are committed to academic freedom.
And in any case, by June 1st the matter will be moot.
[Because the union in question is amalgamating with another union, and the resolution becomes merely advisory at that point.]
There were two resolutions which were voted on by NATFHE:
The first called upon the NATFHE membership to 'aid, protect and support PA institutions and universities, and to continue to maintain ties with the PA'. It also called the cordon sanitaire against the terrorist group Hamas "scandalous".
The second motion demanded a boycott against "Israel’s persistent apartheid policy" - it is not clear exactly what was meant by this, as gibberant left-wing rhetoric standardly becomes unintelligible when grunted through foaming lips.
Both motions do not force a boycott of Israel, but are recommendations to the membership to consider taking action privately.
What would either of these motions mean in practise?
Well, imagine that an Israeli institution found a cure for a disease. If anyone where to take the "boycott" seriously, they would neither publish the research findings, nor permit their associates to use the research findings in any way. In actuality, only the Arabs are crazy enough to follow this course of action (or sane enough, as publishing Israeli research results might bring a firing squad or lynch mob into your future in large parts of the Islamic world).
As you can imagine, serious scholars will blithely ignore this call to boycott, and mediocrities will pay it lip-service until they need to plagiarize.
And please note that if they broke British laws while "supporting Palestinian Institutions", they would be in trouble no matter how enthusiastic the pc glee club was about their actions.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Related thereto, there has been an absolute barrage of hate e-mail to the address of union leadership. Hundreds of venomous, vituperative, and very badly written e-mails from American 'non-academics' (judging by spelling mistakes and trailer-park grammar) were received.
What exactly do the writers of such poison-pen screeds hope to achieve?
Other than creating the impression that they are idiots?
I can understand anger and fury. I can understand wanting to break something. But if you want to convince someone of the rightness of your position, jumping up and down screaming like a baboon is not an effective approach.
Trust me on this.
I base this statement on personal experience.
All it got me was a good spanking.
[I shall not publish the e-mail addresses of the leadership of the union, as I do not wish to encourage such misbehaviour. You will kindly note that my own e-mail address is nowhere to be seen on this blog either, as I have no need to get roped into private spitting matches - please use the comments field and entertain the other readers of this blog if you're that rabid. Thank you.]
If you really want to change minds, you will coherently and rationally argue your points, with grace and good cheer, on your blogs and in your articles. Those who are irrational will not change (and would not even if you did call them names), those who are wrong may change their minds (but will certainly not do so if you call them names).
There is indeed an air of anti-Semitism to this - it would be odd if there were not. But anti-Semitism is a normal and natural state for slope-brows. They also hate, despise, and condemn pretty much everybody else (including penguins, postage workers, and dachshunds).
The problem is not the anti-Semitism, it is the ignorance, and blinkered points of view, of fairly decent individuals, who are hampered by their cultural praeconceptions besides. Now that is something that you can work on.
Be patient, and maintain a positive attitude, as you will have to explain much.
Calm down. And speak slowly.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
APPENDIX:
Below are two examples of the hate e-mail which I mentioned - please note that both are remarkably badly written (just over the border of illiteracy, in fact), and have no point other than relieving the unfortunate medical conditions of the authors. We wish them a full recovery. Do not read if you are easily offended.
From: Guy Yanai
Sent: 28 May 2006 04:54
To: Paul Mackney
Subject: JEW HATER!
its nice to hate jews and single them out for everything!!!
its called ANTISEMITISM you disgucting piece of shit!!!
you and your family should be ashamed of yourself!!
you should boycot yourself!
From: sultan
Sent: 29 May 2006 17:21
To: Paul Mackney
Subject: Examinations
Examine yourself You dirty little Jew Baiting cunt. You and your fellow filth will end up the way all black and red facists do as dust to be walked on.
PLEASE NOTE: Paul Mackney spoke against the resolutions. He was the recipient of these e-mails because he is an officer of the union, and thus in the line of public fire.
As a further note, it is interesting that we have had a debate about the official language of the United States recently. Judging by these and similar e-mails I have seen, it will indeed be nice when Americans learn English.
I can hardly wait.
Friday, May 26, 2006
JOKE
Two reptiles meet on a sidewalk in Manhattan, and recognizing each other as being in the same phylum, stop and talk.
Finally, one asks the other "what are you?"
To which the other replies "Well actually, I'm a dinosaur - what about you?"
The first one answers "I'm a dinosaur too."
"That's funny", says the other, "you don't look Antediluvian...."
Note: this joke was inspired by reading this posting: http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/05/casual-anti-semitism.html
Just remember, a mind is a terrible thing.
o - o - o - o - o - o - o
Finally, one asks the other "what are you?"
To which the other replies "Well actually, I'm a dinosaur - what about you?"
The first one answers "I'm a dinosaur too."
"That's funny", says the other, "you don't look Antediluvian...."
--- --- --- --- ---
Note: this joke was inspired by reading this posting: http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/05/casual-anti-semitism.html
Just remember, a mind is a terrible thing.
o - o - o - o - o - o - o
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
TALKING BIBLE DOLLS
Eric S. alerts me to a wonderful new product, for parents who are scared their little monsters will grow up to be heathens or intelligent.....
Talking Bible Dolls!
http://talkingbibledolls.com/
The manufacturers of Talking Bible Dolls™ believe this to be a great toy for any child.
They're twisted. Truly.
This is sick.
Click here if you want to hear the dolls:
http://talkingbibledolls.com/listen.htm
[I note that Talking Moses recites the ten commandments. Be prepared to explain to your little no-neck monster exactly what adultery and coveting your neighbor's wife or butler entail. And don't forget that part about coveting the beasts either.]
The dolls are supposed to be huggable and cuddly.
That's right, if your kid ain't crazy enough already with you as parent, they can curl up with Jezus, Moses, and Esther. Or all three together, talking gang-busters.
I am sure that they will comfort your little troll while she cries herself to sleep everynight. And put her in the right mood after she finishes screaming herself awake the next morning.
The outfit that manufactures these repellent voodoo dolls also is involved in the traditional missionary activity of white Anglo-Saxon Protestants - stuffing simplistic intellectual pablum into the craniums of folks whom they believe to be stupid, credulous, and desperately in need of salvation (that's right, third-worlders - 'cause ALL nice white people just know those poor ugly dark folks need a white person to tell 'em all about G-d, and save their poor underdeveloped little heathen souls!).
Quote: "Our dolls are programmed to bring messages of hope, love, joy, wisdom and knowledge from the bible. Donations are used to provide dolls to missionaries, churches and individuals who are spreading God’s word. "
I am tempted to buy a set, just so that I can replace the talking part with something that makes a rude sound.
Purely for reference purposes, I include the Aseret ha-dibrot below.
Sefer Shmos, Parshas Yitro;
Psook 20:01
Vayedaber Elohim et kol-hadevarim haele lemor:
And G-d spoke all these words, saying:
Psook 20:02
Anochi adonai eloheicha asher hotzeticha meeretz mitzrayim mibeit avadim:
I am the LORD your God, who brought y'all out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
Psook 20:03
lo-yihye lecha Elohim acherim al-panai.
Y'all shall have no other gods before Me.
Psook 20:04
Lo-taase lecha fesel ve chol-temuna asher bashamayim mimaal vaasher baaretz mitachat vaasher bamayim mitachat laaretz.
Y'all shall not make unto y'all a graven image, nor any manner of likeness, of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;
Psook 20:05
Lo-tishtachave lahem ve lo taavdem ki anochi adonai eloheicha el kana poked avon avot al-banim al-shileshim v'al-ribeim l'sonai;
Y'all shall not bow down unto them, nor serve them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me;
Psook 20:06
Ve ose chesed laalafim l'ohavai uleshomrei mitzvotai.
And showing mercy unto the thousandth generation of them that love Me and keep My commandments.
Psook 20:07
Lo tisa et-shem-adonai eloheicha lashav ki lo yenake adonai et asher-yisa et-shemo lashav.
Y'all shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that takes His name in vain.
Psook 20:08
Zachor et-yom hashabat l'kadsho.
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Psook 20:09
Sheshet yamim taavod ve asita kol-melachtecha:
Six days shal y'all labour, and do all your work;
Psook 20:10
Ve yom hashevii shabat la adonai eloheicha lo-taase chol-m'lacha ata uvincha uvitecha avd'cha vaamatcha uvehemtecha ve gercha asher bishareicha.
But the seventh day is a sabbath unto the LORD your God, in it y'all shall not do any manner of work, not you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your man-servant, nor your maid-servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger within your gates.
Psook 20:11
Ki sheshet-yamim asa adonai et-hashamayim ve et-haaretz et-hayam ve et-kol-asher-bam vayanach bayom hashevii al-ken berach adonai et-yom hashabat vayekadshehu.
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Psook 20:12
Kabed et-avicha ve et-imecha l'maan yaarichun yameicha al haadama asher-adonai eloheicha noten lach.
Honour your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the LORD your God has given you.
Psook 20:13
Lo tirtzach, lo tinaf, lo tignov. Lo-taane v'reacha ed shaker.
Y'all shall not murder; y'all shall not commit adultery; y'all shall not steal; y'all shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
Psook 20:14
Lo tachmod beit reecha, lo-tachmod eshet reecha ve avdo va amato ve shoro va chamoro ve chol asher l'reecha.
Y'all shall not covet your neighbour's house; y'all shall not covet your neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is your neighbour's.
As they say on tv, "these are professionals, don't try this at home".
Talking Bible Dolls!
http://talkingbibledolls.com/
The manufacturers of Talking Bible Dolls™ believe this to be a great toy for any child.
They're twisted. Truly.
This is sick.
Click here if you want to hear the dolls:
http://talkingbibledolls.com/listen.htm
[I note that Talking Moses recites the ten commandments. Be prepared to explain to your little no-neck monster exactly what adultery and coveting your neighbor's wife or butler entail. And don't forget that part about coveting the beasts either.]
The dolls are supposed to be huggable and cuddly.
That's right, if your kid ain't crazy enough already with you as parent, they can curl up with Jezus, Moses, and Esther. Or all three together, talking gang-busters.
I am sure that they will comfort your little troll while she cries herself to sleep everynight. And put her in the right mood after she finishes screaming herself awake the next morning.
The outfit that manufactures these repellent voodoo dolls also is involved in the traditional missionary activity of white Anglo-Saxon Protestants - stuffing simplistic intellectual pablum into the craniums of folks whom they believe to be stupid, credulous, and desperately in need of salvation (that's right, third-worlders - 'cause ALL nice white people just know those poor ugly dark folks need a white person to tell 'em all about G-d, and save their poor underdeveloped little heathen souls!).
Quote: "Our dolls are programmed to bring messages of hope, love, joy, wisdom and knowledge from the bible. Donations are used to provide dolls to missionaries, churches and individuals who are spreading God’s word. "
I am tempted to buy a set, just so that I can replace the talking part with something that makes a rude sound.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Purely for reference purposes, I include the Aseret ha-dibrot below.
Sefer Shmos, Parshas Yitro;
Psook 20:01
Vayedaber Elohim et kol-hadevarim haele lemor:
And G-d spoke all these words, saying:
Psook 20:02
Anochi adonai eloheicha asher hotzeticha meeretz mitzrayim mibeit avadim:
I am the LORD your God, who brought y'all out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
Psook 20:03
lo-yihye lecha Elohim acherim al-panai.
Y'all shall have no other gods before Me.
Psook 20:04
Lo-taase lecha fesel ve chol-temuna asher bashamayim mimaal vaasher baaretz mitachat vaasher bamayim mitachat laaretz.
Y'all shall not make unto y'all a graven image, nor any manner of likeness, of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;
Psook 20:05
Lo-tishtachave lahem ve lo taavdem ki anochi adonai eloheicha el kana poked avon avot al-banim al-shileshim v'al-ribeim l'sonai;
Y'all shall not bow down unto them, nor serve them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me;
Psook 20:06
Ve ose chesed laalafim l'ohavai uleshomrei mitzvotai.
And showing mercy unto the thousandth generation of them that love Me and keep My commandments.
Psook 20:07
Lo tisa et-shem-adonai eloheicha lashav ki lo yenake adonai et asher-yisa et-shemo lashav.
Y'all shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that takes His name in vain.
Psook 20:08
Zachor et-yom hashabat l'kadsho.
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Psook 20:09
Sheshet yamim taavod ve asita kol-melachtecha:
Six days shal y'all labour, and do all your work;
Psook 20:10
Ve yom hashevii shabat la adonai eloheicha lo-taase chol-m'lacha ata uvincha uvitecha avd'cha vaamatcha uvehemtecha ve gercha asher bishareicha.
But the seventh day is a sabbath unto the LORD your God, in it y'all shall not do any manner of work, not you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your man-servant, nor your maid-servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger within your gates.
Psook 20:11
Ki sheshet-yamim asa adonai et-hashamayim ve et-haaretz et-hayam ve et-kol-asher-bam vayanach bayom hashevii al-ken berach adonai et-yom hashabat vayekadshehu.
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Psook 20:12
Kabed et-avicha ve et-imecha l'maan yaarichun yameicha al haadama asher-adonai eloheicha noten lach.
Honour your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the LORD your God has given you.
Psook 20:13
Lo tirtzach, lo tinaf, lo tignov. Lo-taane v'reacha ed shaker.
Y'all shall not murder; y'all shall not commit adultery; y'all shall not steal; y'all shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
Psook 20:14
Lo tachmod beit reecha, lo-tachmod eshet reecha ve avdo va amato ve shoro va chamoro ve chol asher l'reecha.
Y'all shall not covet your neighbour's house; y'all shall not covet your neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is your neighbour's.
As they say on tv, "these are professionals, don't try this at home".
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
KONSTANTIJNTJE
A poem by Joost van den Vondel
[If you don't read seventeenth century Dutch, scroll down to the English commentary]
Kinderlijck - Konstantijntje, 't zaligh kijntje
Cherubijntje, van om hoogh
d'Ydelheden, hier beneden,
Uitlacht met een lodderoogh.
Moeder, zeit hy, waerom schreit ghy?
Waerom greit ghy op mijn lijck?
Boven leef ick, boven zweef ick,
Engheltje van 't hemelrijck:
En ick blinck' er, en ick drinck' er,
't Geen de schincker alles goets
Schenckt de zielen, die daer krielen,
Dertel van veel overvloets.
Leer dan reizen, met gepeizen,
Naer palaizen, uit het slick
Dezer werrelt, die zoo dwerrelt:
Eeuwigh gaet voor oogenblick.
Progression: the deceased infant questions his mother's obsession with his mortal remains, then seeks to comfort her with a descriptus of heaven, aburst with good stuffs, courtesy of the deity. A surfeit, a reminder of the transitoriness of the world of the living, and a statement about eternity.
Images: dead eyes, child's cadaver, wailing parent, greedy spirit, crawling souls, mud palaces.
All in all, grim little versiflage.
In Vondel's writing, the name Konstantijntje refers to his second son, named after Constantyn De Grote, about whom Vondel was for many years obsessed.
The child did not live long, and his death affected the poet so badly that he eventually destroyed the manuscript of his 'Constantinade', on which he had laboured for many years.
This particular poem is somewhat lugubrious; the voice is of the deceased infant speaking from heaven to his weeping mother. It is also precious, silly, and sacharine. One of Vondel's odder pieces.
Some of my grammar school teachers would have thought this poem absolutely delightful.
Not all teachers are good with children; some are a little off-concept.
Vondel is often held to be our greatest poet.
I prefer Brederode.
[If you don't read seventeenth century Dutch, scroll down to the English commentary]
Kinderlijck - Konstantijntje, 't zaligh kijntje
Cherubijntje, van om hoogh
d'Ydelheden, hier beneden,
Uitlacht met een lodderoogh.
Moeder, zeit hy, waerom schreit ghy?
Waerom greit ghy op mijn lijck?
Boven leef ick, boven zweef ick,
Engheltje van 't hemelrijck:
En ick blinck' er, en ick drinck' er,
't Geen de schincker alles goets
Schenckt de zielen, die daer krielen,
Dertel van veel overvloets.
Leer dan reizen, met gepeizen,
Naer palaizen, uit het slick
Dezer werrelt, die zoo dwerrelt:
Eeuwigh gaet voor oogenblick.
Progression: the deceased infant questions his mother's obsession with his mortal remains, then seeks to comfort her with a descriptus of heaven, aburst with good stuffs, courtesy of the deity. A surfeit, a reminder of the transitoriness of the world of the living, and a statement about eternity.
Images: dead eyes, child's cadaver, wailing parent, greedy spirit, crawling souls, mud palaces.
All in all, grim little versiflage.
In Vondel's writing, the name Konstantijntje refers to his second son, named after Constantyn De Grote, about whom Vondel was for many years obsessed.
The child did not live long, and his death affected the poet so badly that he eventually destroyed the manuscript of his 'Constantinade', on which he had laboured for many years.
This particular poem is somewhat lugubrious; the voice is of the deceased infant speaking from heaven to his weeping mother. It is also precious, silly, and sacharine. One of Vondel's odder pieces.
Some of my grammar school teachers would have thought this poem absolutely delightful.
Not all teachers are good with children; some are a little off-concept.
Vondel is often held to be our greatest poet.
I prefer Brederode.
Monday, May 22, 2006
CORPORAL PUNISHMENT
Now all repeat after me... makkos mardus!
"The teaching faculty that flogs one schoolboy in seven years is called "murderous." Master Elazar ben Azariah says that this extends to one good thrashing in seventy (!) years. Master Tarfon and Master Akiva say, "If we had been tenured, no one would ever have been caned, whether with birches or with rods." Master Simon ben Gamliel responds, "Such an attitude would increase misbehaviour in the lower forms." "
---Extract from the Mishna, Maseches Rugby.
"The teaching faculty that flogs one schoolboy in seven years is called "murderous." Master Elazar ben Azariah says that this extends to one good thrashing in seventy (!) years. Master Tarfon and Master Akiva say, "If we had been tenured, no one would ever have been caned, whether with birches or with rods." Master Simon ben Gamliel responds, "Such an attitude would increase misbehaviour in the lower forms." "
---Extract from the Mishna, Maseches Rugby.
Friday, May 19, 2006
RABBI ARYEH GINZBERG: CHILD MOLESTATION IS CHILUL SHEM SHOMAYIM
What follows is a clear and succinct letter from a Rabbi in Cedarhurst (5 towns shul & Jewish center) that addresses the problem / scandal / issue of child-molestation. This letter was sent in response to the recent brouhaha over Yehuda Kolko (accused of rape of students for a number of years) and Lipa Margulies (Kolko's boss, who is alleged to have covered for Kolko for as many years).
Note: I first saw this letter on Dovbear's site - here: http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/05/received-by-email.html
For anybody who wants to delve into the outrage over events that have recently come to light, that would be a good place to start.
Just bear in mind that if it weren't for outrage, many good people would not be noticed - it is only when they are justifiably infuriated that they become vocal. Necessarily, this is not always pretty. Neither is what spurred their anger.
The point of the letter is, quite simply, child-molestation is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE by any standards, nor is there any Halachic defense for not bringing this to the attention of the authorities immediately.
Follows the letter, with an explanatory preamble:
At the request of Rabbi Aryeh Ginzberg, we, the moderators of FTS/FTJC,have approved the distribution of the below letter (which is also attached in pdf format). Rabbi Ginzberg has informed us that he has been approached by numerous community members to clarify -- and issue a ruling on -- the matter addressed in the letter. Given the urgency of this message, and the unavailablity of other effective means in which to distribute this information on a Friday afternoon, we believe it is important to use this list to support the request of a community Rov.
Finally, we assure you that this was in fact authorized by Rabbi
Ginzberg and have met with him personally to confirm.
**************************************************************************
Dear Community Members
.
.
Over the last few days, a number of people have brought to my attention an article from a secular publication asserting that a world-renowned Rosh Hayeshiva issued a halachic ruling regarding child molestation. This alleged ruling – through this publication – has resulted in widespread Chilul Hashem and gross misrepresentation of clear and indisputable Halacha.
.
.
The purpose of this letter is not to address the context of the quote, the alleged ruling in question or the specifics of the primary accusations made in the article. This letter is about clarifying the position of halacha with regard to child abuse, to the extent that position has been clouded by these recent events. Moreover, this letter is about urgently disseminating essential halachic facts which -- hopefully -- will serve to mitigate the potential damage and destruction caused by this mischaracterization.
.
.
It is incumbent upon all Rabbonim worldwide to unite and unequivocally declare that Orthodox Judaism absolutely forbids child abuse of any kind – sexual and non-sexual. And, as with any other allegation of halachic wrongdoing, the appropriate testimony must be given, and the appropriate proceedings must be convened, in order to establish the truth of any accusations.
.
.
Allow me to be among the first to make this declaration, and I speak not only for myself but also for the Rosh Hayeshiva named in this publication, with whom I have consulted:
.
Sexually abusing a child in any form is a flagrant violation of our Torah. Halacha absolutely prohibits any and all such conduct. No "benchmark" exists to qualify a sexually motivated act as child molestation, and there are no "technical defenses" to justify child abuse. To be crystal clear: the touching of a child in a sexual manner is utterly forbidden by our Torah and by our mesorah.
.
.
It is my hope and prayer that this letter will serve to clarify any confusion about the Torah view on these very serious issues.Obviously, this is not a scholarly letter or article -- now is not the time for Talmudic sources, lengthy discussions or intellectual debates. It is simply the time to set the record straight – solely for the purpose of abruptly ending the Chilul Shaim Shomayim facilitated by the dissemination of the supposed Torah viewpoint reported in the article.
.
.
Child abuse is forbidden. An issue this easy does not need further clarification. It is my sincere hope that, in consultation with other Rabbonim in our community, we can collectively and effectively formulate appropriate strategies to ensure that the issue of child abuse is dealt with appropriately, proactively and swiftly in our community and beyond.
.
.
Good Shabbos.
Rabbi Aryeh Ginzberg
.
========================
Note: I first saw this letter on Dovbear's site - here: http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/05/received-by-email.html
For anybody who wants to delve into the outrage over events that have recently come to light, that would be a good place to start.
Just bear in mind that if it weren't for outrage, many good people would not be noticed - it is only when they are justifiably infuriated that they become vocal. Necessarily, this is not always pretty. Neither is what spurred their anger.
The point of the letter is, quite simply, child-molestation is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE by any standards, nor is there any Halachic defense for not bringing this to the attention of the authorities immediately.
Follows the letter, with an explanatory preamble:
At the request of Rabbi Aryeh Ginzberg, we, the moderators of FTS/FTJC,have approved the distribution of the below letter (which is also attached in pdf format). Rabbi Ginzberg has informed us that he has been approached by numerous community members to clarify -- and issue a ruling on -- the matter addressed in the letter. Given the urgency of this message, and the unavailablity of other effective means in which to distribute this information on a Friday afternoon, we believe it is important to use this list to support the request of a community Rov.
Finally, we assure you that this was in fact authorized by Rabbi
Ginzberg and have met with him personally to confirm.
**************************************************************************
Dear Community Members
.
.
Over the last few days, a number of people have brought to my attention an article from a secular publication asserting that a world-renowned Rosh Hayeshiva issued a halachic ruling regarding child molestation. This alleged ruling – through this publication – has resulted in widespread Chilul Hashem and gross misrepresentation of clear and indisputable Halacha.
.
.
The purpose of this letter is not to address the context of the quote, the alleged ruling in question or the specifics of the primary accusations made in the article. This letter is about clarifying the position of halacha with regard to child abuse, to the extent that position has been clouded by these recent events. Moreover, this letter is about urgently disseminating essential halachic facts which -- hopefully -- will serve to mitigate the potential damage and destruction caused by this mischaracterization.
.
.
It is incumbent upon all Rabbonim worldwide to unite and unequivocally declare that Orthodox Judaism absolutely forbids child abuse of any kind – sexual and non-sexual. And, as with any other allegation of halachic wrongdoing, the appropriate testimony must be given, and the appropriate proceedings must be convened, in order to establish the truth of any accusations.
.
.
Allow me to be among the first to make this declaration, and I speak not only for myself but also for the Rosh Hayeshiva named in this publication, with whom I have consulted:
.
Sexually abusing a child in any form is a flagrant violation of our Torah. Halacha absolutely prohibits any and all such conduct. No "benchmark" exists to qualify a sexually motivated act as child molestation, and there are no "technical defenses" to justify child abuse. To be crystal clear: the touching of a child in a sexual manner is utterly forbidden by our Torah and by our mesorah.
.
.
It is my hope and prayer that this letter will serve to clarify any confusion about the Torah view on these very serious issues.Obviously, this is not a scholarly letter or article -- now is not the time for Talmudic sources, lengthy discussions or intellectual debates. It is simply the time to set the record straight – solely for the purpose of abruptly ending the Chilul Shaim Shomayim facilitated by the dissemination of the supposed Torah viewpoint reported in the article.
.
.
Child abuse is forbidden. An issue this easy does not need further clarification. It is my sincere hope that, in consultation with other Rabbonim in our community, we can collectively and effectively formulate appropriate strategies to ensure that the issue of child abuse is dealt with appropriately, proactively and swiftly in our community and beyond.
.
.
Good Shabbos.
Rabbi Aryeh Ginzberg
.
========================
Thursday, May 18, 2006
KOLKO & MARGULIES
One of the two best posts on the Kolko / Margulies issue that I've seen (the other being today's post by Jameel at the Muqata: http://muqata.blogspot.com/) is RenReb's angry rant (here: http://renegaderebbetzin.blogspot.com/2006/05/flames-pain-and-fury-read-at-your-own.html).
Renreb argues that reports of multiple occurrences over a great length of time do almost certainly mean that Yehuda Kolko is guilty. Indeed, a pattern so clear establishes that this is not mere lashon hara, but that something evil was going on, for a very long time.
By the same token, his boss Lipa Margulies is an enabler and an accessory.
But we cannot state that they are guilty until they have been tried - as Dayan Roy Bean would say, 'give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em'.
Perhaps a mere pro forma detail, but nevertheless a legal necessity.
Until then, Kolko and Margulies are legally innocent.
And frontier justice, for whatever reason, does not reflect well on the society which permits it.
[No matter how satisfying splintering two baseball bats over two heads might be. I could also suggest something with a broken broomstick, but I'm controlling myself, and keeping this blog clean.]
The other aspect is that a beis din which did not bring this to the attention of the authorities bears legal responsibility - whoever was part of that panel can and will be seen as aiding and abetting the rape of minors that happened since they were first made aware of the matter.
This will have an impact on them, this will have an even worse impact on the entire bassei din concept in America - it casts doubt on the permissibility of intra-mural dispute resolution in matters where crimes may have been committed. It demonstrates that bassei din may need civil regulation.
This is not an issue of a chillul Hashem - it is an issue of chillul Hashem squared.
There are just too many different horrors all on one page.
How could any of the people involved in not bringing this to the attention of authorities possibly consider themselves good Jews?
If there was any chance that this was going on (and as it turns out there was abundant chance for this to go on), how could they not see that doing nothing to stop it would reflect badly on them, their value system, their institutions, their community, their own legal standing, and their faith?
How could they not consider the immense damage to the boys entrusted to Kolko and Margulies? How could they disregard their own responsibility to their community, to the parents of these students, and to the boys themselves? Why would they even take the chance that their inaction would cause further suffering?
What the she'ol were they thinking?!?!
And these were not ignorant halfwits. There is no excuse.
Renreb argues that reports of multiple occurrences over a great length of time do almost certainly mean that Yehuda Kolko is guilty. Indeed, a pattern so clear establishes that this is not mere lashon hara, but that something evil was going on, for a very long time.
By the same token, his boss Lipa Margulies is an enabler and an accessory.
But we cannot state that they are guilty until they have been tried - as Dayan Roy Bean would say, 'give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em'.
Perhaps a mere pro forma detail, but nevertheless a legal necessity.
Until then, Kolko and Margulies are legally innocent.
And frontier justice, for whatever reason, does not reflect well on the society which permits it.
[No matter how satisfying splintering two baseball bats over two heads might be. I could also suggest something with a broken broomstick, but I'm controlling myself, and keeping this blog clean.]
The other aspect is that a beis din which did not bring this to the attention of the authorities bears legal responsibility - whoever was part of that panel can and will be seen as aiding and abetting the rape of minors that happened since they were first made aware of the matter.
This will have an impact on them, this will have an even worse impact on the entire bassei din concept in America - it casts doubt on the permissibility of intra-mural dispute resolution in matters where crimes may have been committed. It demonstrates that bassei din may need civil regulation.
This is not an issue of a chillul Hashem - it is an issue of chillul Hashem squared.
There are just too many different horrors all on one page.
How could any of the people involved in not bringing this to the attention of authorities possibly consider themselves good Jews?
If there was any chance that this was going on (and as it turns out there was abundant chance for this to go on), how could they not see that doing nothing to stop it would reflect badly on them, their value system, their institutions, their community, their own legal standing, and their faith?
How could they not consider the immense damage to the boys entrusted to Kolko and Margulies? How could they disregard their own responsibility to their community, to the parents of these students, and to the boys themselves? Why would they even take the chance that their inaction would cause further suffering?
What the she'ol were they thinking?!?!
And these were not ignorant halfwits. There is no excuse.
BAD IMMIGRANT! NO BISCUIT!
Regarding Ayaan Hirsi Ali, further articles are here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/18/world/europe/18dutch.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
[Muslim's Loss of Dutch Citizenship Stirs Storm ]
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2006-05-18T125718Z_01_L18284140_RTRUKOC_0_US-DUTCH-ASYLUM-USA.xml&archived=False
[Somali-born Dutch lawmaker welcome in US: Zoellick]
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-05-15T211830Z_01_L15526496_RTRUKOC_0_US-DUTCH-ASYLUM.xml&archived=False
[Dutch lawmaker in asylum row to move to US]
I have not written a posting to accompany them yet. But please read these articles, and comment.
The press is focussing too much on her being a Muslim, not nearly enough on her freedom of speech activism.
Nor is the press pointing out that the ruckus is both politically motivated (elections coming up), and a convenient way for the Liberal Party (VVD) to divest themselves of someone who is no longer useful and obedient - a nice quiet immigrant who will say yes sir, thank you sir, and then shut up and only speak when spoken to.
The Dutch do not like foreigners, and they do not like brown people who speak up.
Brown people who dutifully volunteer for broom duty will be tolerated.
Others will be smacked at the earliest opportunity.
Feisty foreigners, however, are usually despised by many. The Dutch, like the Americans, believe themselves to be blessed.
Plus the whole thing has a nasty undertone of currying favour with the Dutch Muslim community - 'see, we got rid of that woman who was pissin' y'all off, now vote for our party and stop complaining'.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/18/world/europe/18dutch.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
[Muslim's Loss of Dutch Citizenship Stirs Storm ]
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2006-05-18T125718Z_01_L18284140_RTRUKOC_0_US-DUTCH-ASYLUM-USA.xml&archived=False
[Somali-born Dutch lawmaker welcome in US: Zoellick]
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-05-15T211830Z_01_L15526496_RTRUKOC_0_US-DUTCH-ASYLUM.xml&archived=False
[Dutch lawmaker in asylum row to move to US]
I have not written a posting to accompany them yet. But please read these articles, and comment.
The press is focussing too much on her being a Muslim, not nearly enough on her freedom of speech activism.
Nor is the press pointing out that the ruckus is both politically motivated (elections coming up), and a convenient way for the Liberal Party (VVD) to divest themselves of someone who is no longer useful and obedient - a nice quiet immigrant who will say yes sir, thank you sir, and then shut up and only speak when spoken to.
The Dutch do not like foreigners, and they do not like brown people who speak up.
Brown people who dutifully volunteer for broom duty will be tolerated.
Others will be smacked at the earliest opportunity.
Feisty foreigners, however, are usually despised by many. The Dutch, like the Americans, believe themselves to be blessed.
Plus the whole thing has a nasty undertone of currying favour with the Dutch Muslim community - 'see, we got rid of that woman who was pissin' y'all off, now vote for our party and stop complaining'.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
AYAAN HIRSI ALI - (AYAAN HIRSI MAGAN) AYAAN HIRSI ALI - (AYAAN HIRSI MAGAN) AYAAN HIRSI ALI - (AYAAN HIRSI MAGAN)
Dear fellow bloggers,
Please devote a post on your blogs to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the dutch former parlementarian who was deprived of Dutch citizenship today.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the well-known feminist, free-speech defender, and opponent of religous extremism.
Please devote a post on your blogs to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the dutch former parlementarian who was deprived of Dutch citizenship today.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the well-known feminist, free-speech defender, and opponent of religous extremism.
Up-to date biographic material here:
[Note: the author of this entry is clearly a Dutch speaker - the English betrays some minor stumbles.]
BBC article (Dutch MP to quit amid asylum row) here:
BBC article (Dutch MP to quit amid asylum row) here:
PS: Note that the name Ayaan Hirsi Ali is apparently not entirely correct - it should probably have been Ayaan Hirsi Magan.
RANCID DUTCH POLITICS
There are times when the Dutch rise to greatness.
Understandably, I take great pride in partially belonging to the tribe at those times.
There are many more times when I am embarrassed as all git out to be associated with that bunch of narrow-minded cheese-whacking pustules, and would rather not even be on the same planet as them. Well, half of them.
Such as when Dutch politicians prove, once again, that they are cretins.
They do this often enough that it's a permanent sore, but what those blinkered bastards did recently takes the cake.
They have demanded that Ayaan Hirsi Ali turn in her Dutch passport. Apparently errors regarding name and birthdate on forms are mortal sins in the Netherlands
[These are the same people who consistently mis-spelled MY name when I lived there? The same bunch of muddle-headed twats who DID NOT EVEN WRITE MY NAME CORRECTLY ON MY DIPLOMAS!!!???!]
To refresh your memory, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the Dutch mp who has been receiving death threats from both the right wing and the left wing, as well as the hard-core Islamist camp and the neo-Nazis. A courageous woman. A woman worth emulating. A far better Dutchwoman than Rita Verdonk will ever be. A credit to her party. Who by their recent actions have proven themselves unworthy entirely of such credit. The skunks do not deserve her.
Please read these two posts.
http://atthebackofthehill.blogspot.com/2006/05/press-release-from-ajaan-hirsi-ali.html
http://atthebackofthehill.blogspot.com/2006/05/holland-small-minded-dung-heap.html
No, I'm not a happy camper at this point.
But at least I am not Dutch, so there is something that is very right in my life.
Understandably, I take great pride in partially belonging to the tribe at those times.
There are many more times when I am embarrassed as all git out to be associated with that bunch of narrow-minded cheese-whacking pustules, and would rather not even be on the same planet as them. Well, half of them.
Such as when Dutch politicians prove, once again, that they are cretins.
They do this often enough that it's a permanent sore, but what those blinkered bastards did recently takes the cake.
They have demanded that Ayaan Hirsi Ali turn in her Dutch passport. Apparently errors regarding name and birthdate on forms are mortal sins in the Netherlands
[These are the same people who consistently mis-spelled MY name when I lived there? The same bunch of muddle-headed twats who DID NOT EVEN WRITE MY NAME CORRECTLY ON MY DIPLOMAS!!!???!]
To refresh your memory, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the Dutch mp who has been receiving death threats from both the right wing and the left wing, as well as the hard-core Islamist camp and the neo-Nazis. A courageous woman. A woman worth emulating. A far better Dutchwoman than Rita Verdonk will ever be. A credit to her party. Who by their recent actions have proven themselves unworthy entirely of such credit. The skunks do not deserve her.
Please read these two posts.
http://atthebackofthehill.blogspot.com/2006/05/press-release-from-ajaan-hirsi-ali.html
http://atthebackofthehill.blogspot.com/2006/05/holland-small-minded-dung-heap.html
No, I'm not a happy camper at this point.
But at least I am not Dutch, so there is something that is very right in my life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
SCENES OF OTTER MADNESS
My apartment mate is reading about otters and muttering in Russian. Well, something that souns like Russian. These are highly trainable otte...
