Uncategorized
Rugby’s governing body ruled that South Africa’s exclusion of Israel was not discrimination. The Israeli team is skeptical.
(JTA) — Rugby’s global governing body has determined that the South African Rugby Union’s decision to disinvite an Israeli team from an international competition last month was not discriminatory.
But the CEO of the Israeli team isn’t buying the argument that the cancelation had to do with security threats, as South Africa argued and World Rugby concluded.
“We expected World Rugby to take a closer look at the events leading up to the withdrawal of the invitation,” Tel Aviv Heat CEO Pete Sickle told JTA. “We still have not seen tangible evidence of credible and significant threats to public safety. We haven’t seen any evidence of SARU or South African security forces analyzing those threats before making this decision.”
The inquiry by the governing body followed South Africa Rugby’s announcement Feb. 3 that the Tel Aviv Heat team was no longer invited to a March 24 competition. The decision came after pressure from the South African BDS Coalition, an affiliate of the Palestinian BDS National Committee that promotes the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel.
At the time, South Africa Rugby’s CEO said that after listening to “the opinions of important stakeholder groups,” the decision had been made to disinvite Tel Aviv “to avoid the likelihood of the competition becoming a source of division, notwithstanding the fact that Israel is a full member of World Rugby.”
In response, major Jewish groups, led by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights, urged the U.S. team that was tapped to replace the Heat to withdraw from the tournament. The San Clemente Rhinos put out a statement condemning discrimination and saying the team “stands together with Tel Aviv Heat players and coaches” but did not withdraw.
Then, shortly after the tournament, following an investigation into the Israel Rugby Union’s charges of discrimination, World Rugby ruled that the decision had instead been made due to threats of violence, according to a letter obtained by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
In the letter, World Rugby pointed to the public reaction of inviting an Israeli team to South Africa in the first place — including a single Facebook post warning of a “blood bath” at the tournament, and a statement by the BDS coalition claiming that the South Africa Rugby Union would “have blood on its hands” if the Heat participated.
“World Rugby is satisfied with the explanation provided by SA Rugby that the decision to withdraw the invitation to Tel Aviv Heat to participate in the Mzansi Challenge was based on concerns about an increased safety and security threat including the potential threats of violence, disruption and risks to the safety of stakeholders, together with concerns about the ability of SA Rugby to meet its obligations as an event organiser under the Safety at Sports and Recreational Events Act,” reads the letter, which is dated March 29.
South Africa’s department of sports, arts and culture had also released a brief statement in February supporting the decision to disinvite Israel, “to ensure a safe environment” at the tournament.
Jewish groups in South Africa have criticized World Rugby’s ruling, according to the South African Jewish Report.
A spokesperson for South African Friends of Israel said the South Africa Rugby Union “bent the knee to appease political extremists in South Africa who threatened to harm and incite violence should an Israeli team participate in the sport.”
Benji Shulman, the director of public policy at the South African Zionist Federation, called the decision “an attack on our sportsmen and women in South Africa.”
“World Rugby has now confirmed the threats of violence posed by political extremists — in this case, being the antisemitic BDS movement,” he said.
Sickle said the team and Israel Rugby made multiple requests to see evidence of significant public safety risks but did not receive a satisfactory response. “We remain unconvinced, due to a lack of specific evidence, that safety and security was the overriding factor in withdrawing the invitation,” he added.
Sickle said he can appreciate the security implications of hosting an international sports competition. Since SARU and World Rugby determined that safety was a concern, he and his team would “look forward to using the next year to work with SARU” and with local authorities to make the necessary arrangements to ensure that safety is not a concern for his team’s participation in next year’s tournament.
—
The post Rugby’s governing body ruled that South Africa’s exclusion of Israel was not discrimination. The Israeli team is skeptical. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Rabbinical texts reveal surprising links between Yiddish and Ladino
דער דײַטשישער וויסנשאַפֿטלעכער פֿאַרלאַג De Gruyter האָט לעצטנס אַרויסגעגעבן אַ באַנד פֿאָרשונגען וועגן רבנישע כּתבֿים אויף ייִדיש און לאַדינאָ, רעדאַקטירט דורך קאַטיאַ שמיד (מאַדריד), דוד בוניס (ירושלים) און חוה טורניאַנסקי (ירושלים). די עלעקטראָנישע ווערסיע פֿונעם בוך איז צוטריטלעך צו אַלעמען, פֿרײַ פֿון אָפּצאָל.
אויף ייִדיש זענען פֿאַראַן צוויי ווערטער, וואָס באַצייכענען דעם אונטערשייד צווישן הייליקע ספֿרים און וועלטלעכע ביכער. דער חילוק איז אָבער נישט אַלעמאָל קלאָר. אַ פֿילאָסאָפֿיש, מעדיציניש צי פֿילאָלאָגיש ווערק אויף לשון־קודש אָדער לשון־תּרגום איז גיכער אַ ספֿר, און אַ הלכה־חיבור אויף ייִדיש קאָן מען אָנרופֿן אַ „בוך‟, ווײַל ייִדיש ווערט, בדרך־כּלל, אַסאָציִיִרט מיט דער וועלטלעכער זײַט פֿון דער ייִדישער קולטור, און די סעמיטישע שפּראַכן – לשון־קודש און אַראַמיש – מיט פֿרומקייט.
אויף לאַדינאָ אָדער דזשודעזמאָ איז אַזאַ אונטערשייד נישטאָ, נאָר די ייִדישע אינערלעכע צוויי־שפּראַכיקייט איז בנימצא; די נאַטירלעכע ספֿרים־שפּראַך איז לשון־קודש. אַמאָל האָבן די ספֿרדים אין דער מיטל־עלטערלעכער מוסולמענישער שפּאַניע אָבער געשריבן גאָר ערנסטע רבנישע ספֿרים דווקא אויף אַראַביש.
אינעם נײַעם בוך איז אַרײַן אַבריאל בר־לבֿבֿס אַרטיקל וועגן דער אַשכּנזישער טאָפּל־שפּראַכיקער קולטור. דער פֿאָרשער ווײַזט, אַז די אַלטע ספֿרים אויף אַראַביש האָבן משפּיע געווען אויף הרבֿ משה פֿראַנקפֿורט; ווי באַלד די הייליקסטע ייִדישע טעקסטן, אַרײַנגערעכנט די גרמא און דעם זוהר, זענען אָנגעשריבן אויף אַן אומגאַנג־שפּראַך, אַראַמיש, קאָן מען ממילא שרײַבן ערנסטע ספֿרים אויף ייִדיש. אַזוי האָט אויך געטאָן זײַן טאַטע, הרבֿ שמעון פֿראַנקפֿורט.
אין אַן אַנדער אַרטיקל וועגן דער אַשכּנזישער און ספֿרדישער שפּראַך־פֿילאָסאָפֿיע פֿונעם 19טן יאָרהונדערט ווײַזט מיכאל זילבער, אַז הרבֿ עקיבֿא־יוסף שלעזינגער (1837 – 1922) האָט אויסגענוצט דעם זעלבן אַרגומענט לטובֿת ייִדיש ווי אַ נאַציאָנאַלע ייִדישע שפּראַך אין זײַן ספֿר „לבֿ העבֿרי‟ – לאַנג פֿאַר דער טשערנאָוויצער קאָנפֿערענץ.
אין דער עסטרײַך־אונגערישער אימפּעריע האָבן געוווינט סײַ אַשכּנזים, טיילווײַז דײַטשיש־ און אונגעריש־רעדנדיקע, סײַ לאַדינאָ־שפּראַכיקע ספֿרדים. אַ וויכטיקער צענטער פֿון זייער צונויפֿטרעפֿונג איז געווען ווין. די טראַדיציאָנאַליסטן אין ביידע עדות האָבן געהאַלטן, אַז ייִדן מוזן אָפּהיטן זייער גערעדט לשון; דאָס האָט אויך געשטימט מיטן גײַסט פֿונעם אונגערישן נאַציאָנאַליזם. אין זײַן ספֿר „מעשׂה אָבֿות‟ ברענגט הרבֿ שלעזינגער בײַשפּילן פֿון מיזרחדיקע ייִדן, וועלכע האָבן באַטראַכט זייער ייִדיש־שפּאַניש (לאַדינאָ) און ייִדיש־אַראַביש ווי טראַדיציאָנעלע הייליקע מאַמע־לשונות.
צו דער גאָר אינטערעסאַנטער אינפֿאָרמאַציע קען איך צוגעבן דעם בײַשפּיל פֿונעם מונקאַטשער רבין חיים־אלעזר שפּירא (1868 – 1937). אין זײַן רוף צו רעדן דווקא אויף ייִדיש האָט ער אויך באַטאָנט, אַז די ווינער ספֿרדים דאַרפֿן ווײַטער רעדן אויף זייער אייגן לשון. כ׳האָב געשריבן וועגן דעם אינעם פֿאָרווערטס.
משה טאַובע באַהאַנדלט די אינטערעסאַנטע קשיא: צי קען מען אָננעמען די אַלט־ייִדישע גבֿיות־עדותן אויף ייִדיש ווי אויטענטישע מוסטערן פֿון דער גערעדטער שפּראַך? למשל, הרבֿ בנימין פֿון סלאָניק, פּוילן, האָט אינעם יאָר 1605 ציטירט אָט אַזאַ גבֿית־עדות: „איך אונ׳ איין וועלשער יהודי זיין גיזעסין צו יאס אין דער וואלח״יי אונ איז גיוועזין בייא אונז איין יהודי פון לעלוב ושמו היה אייזיק גלעזער, ער האט גערביט חמאה וגבינה‟. אויפֿן הײַנטיקן ייִדיש מיינט עס: „איך און איינער אַ רומענישער ייִד האָבן געוווינט אין יאַס, רומעניע, און בײַ אונדז איז געווען אַ ייִד פֿון לעלעוו, וועלכער האָט געהייסט אײַזיק גלעזער; זײַן מלאָכה איז געווען פֿוטער און קעז.‟ צי האָט יענער ייִד טאַקע גערעדט ממש אַזוי, מיט גאַנצע לשון־קודשדיקע אויסדרוקן, אָדער האָט דער בית־דין זיי אַרײַנגעשריבן? זיכער האָט יענער עדות געזאָגט „אַ ייִד‟, נישט „איין יהודי‟.
אינעם בוך דערציילט קלאַודיאַ ראָזענצווײַג אַן אַנדער מעשׂה וועגן דעם זעלבן פּוילישן רבֿ, בנימין סלאָניק. זײַן פּאָפּולער ייִדיש הלכה־ספֿר פֿאַר פֿרויען, „סדר מצות לנשים‟, איז אַרויס אינעם יאָר 1577 אין קראָקע און דערנאָך אין עטלעכע אַנדערע שטעט. דער איטאַליענישער רבֿ יעקבֿ היילפּרון האָט עס איבערגעזעצט אויף ייִדיש־איטאַליעניש און אַרויסגעגעבן אין 1616 אין ווענעציע. היילפּרון איז געווען אַ מחבר פֿון ייִדישע ספֿרים, אַרײַנגערעכנט אַ געגראַמטע איבערזעצונג פֿון שלמה אבן גבֿירולס מיסטישער פּאָעמע „כתר מלכות‟. אבן גבֿירולס היימישע שמועס־שפּראַך איז געווען אַראַביש – נאָך אַ בײַשפּיל פֿון אַשכּנזיש־ספֿרדישע פֿאַרבינדונגען. אַגבֿ, אינעם ייִדישן דיאַלעקט פֿון איטאַליעניש איז אויך פֿאַראַן דאָס וואָרט „ספֿר‟.
בנימין הוניאַדיס פֿאָרשונג איז אויך געווידמעט דעם פֿריִער דערמאָנטן הרבֿ עקיבֿא שלעזינדער. ס׳רובֿ אַנדערע אַרטיקלען זענען געווידמעט דער רבנישער ליטעראַטור אויף לאַדינאָ. ייִדיש ווערט דאָרט עטלעכע מאָל דערמאָנט, אָבער נישט צו אָפֿט. צום בײַשפּיל, ד״ר אַנאַבעלאַ עספּעראַנצאַ פֿאַרגלײַכט די תּחינות און חסידישע ניגונים מיט די ספֿרדישע „קאָפּלאַס‟ אָדער „קאָמפּלאַס‟ – פֿרומע לאַדינאָ־לידער.
ווי עס זעט אויס, איז דאָס פֿיל־קולטורעלע עסטרײַך־אונגערן געווען די וויכטיקסטע קאָנטאַקט־זאָנע צווישן די אַשכּנזים און ספֿרדים. אויף דעם שפּראַכלעכן באַוווּסטזײַן פֿון ביידע ייִדישע גרופּעס האָבן משפּיע געווען די נאַציאָנאַלע באַוועגונגען פֿון אַנדערע באַלקאַנישע און מיזרח־אייראָפּעיִשע פֿעלקער. דאָס נײַע בוך איז אַ וויכטיקער, אינפֿאָרמאַטיווער שטאַפּל אין פֿאַרגלײַך־פֿאָרשונגען פֿון ביידע לשונות, ווי אויך אין דער אַלגעמיינער ייִדישער געשיכטע פֿון „היימישע‟ עסטרײַך־אונגערישע מקומות און צענטראַל־אייראָפּע בכלל.
The post Rabbinical texts reveal surprising links between Yiddish and Ladino appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Why Poland’s president canceled his menorah lighting — and how the West helped make that happen
As we grapple with the horrific massacre of Jews celebrating Hanukkah in Bondi Beach, Australia, another assault on a Jewish holiday tradition is occurring halfway across the world. It’s not violent, thankfully, but it sure is ominous.
This Hanukkah, the night is darker over Warsaw.
For the past decade, each December, a menorah burned in Poland’s presidential palace. It was a gesture of tolerance and interfaith friendship as well as a token of recognition for the five million Jews killed in Poland during the Holocaust.
But this Hanukkah, the candles remained unlit as Karol Nawrocki, the country’s new president, fulfilled a key campaign promise: end the menorah lighting. “I take my attachment to Christian values seriously, so I celebrate holidays that are close to me as a person,” he said.
“I take my attachment to Christian values seriously, so I celebrate holidays that are close to me as a person,” Nawrocki said, when explaining why he wouldn’t continue the tradition, a move seen as pandering to the country’s far right.
It’s never a good sign when a European leader rides to power by turning his back on Judaism. Unfortunately, Nawrocki’s decision is only the latest in a series of disturbing events. Last month, his political ally delivered a speech at the gates of Auschwitz, proclaiming “Poland is for Poles, not Jews.” Meanwhile, this July, plaques blaming murdered Jews for their fate were erected at the site of an infamous 1941 massacre.
It’s an astonishing turnaround for a country that only a few years ago was extolled as a paragon of Holocaust remembrance, but it didn’t come from nowhere. Indeed, it’s what happens when the West ignores warning signs of antisemitism in an ally.
Nawrocki became president this summer after beating a pro-EU opponent in a tight election. His candidacy alone raised alarm bells. A historian by trade, Nawrocki had supported legislation whitewashing the fact that some Poles killed Jews in the Holocaust; he also denounced respected scholars who brought up Poland’s dark past as purveyors of “disgusting attacks” on the country’s reputation.
Then came Nawrocki’s decision to ally himself with Grzergorz Braun, an openly antisemitic member of the European Parliament who’d accused Jews of controlling Poland and conducting ritual sacrifices of Christians. In 2023, Braun physically extinguished a menorah in the Polish parliament, proclaiming the sacred Jewish ceremony a “Satanic cult.”
In order to triumph in the extraordinarily close presidential election (the final vote was decided by less than two percentage points) Nawrocki courted Braun, turning the antisemitic firebrand into a kingmaker. In order to prove his bona fides to Braun’s supporters, Nawrocki said he would end the annual presidential menorah lightings.
Last month, several prominent figures including Poland’s justice minister decried Braun’s diatribe at Auschwitz. Nawrocki, however, has remained notably silent.
Western silence enabled this
How could such disquieting developments occur, especially in an EU and NATO member? Part of the reason has to do with a crucial mistake made by Israel and international Jewish groups.
In January 2018, Poland’s parliament passed a law making it a crime to accuse Poles of complicity in the Holocaust. This salvo against Holocaust remembrance triggered condemnations from the US State Department, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Jewish organizations.
A few months later, Warsaw softened the law by making it a civil offense, reducing the penalty from imprisonment to a fine.
Netanyahu, eager to restore relations with Poland, touted the downgraded law as a victory; several Jewish groups joined him.
But the legislation itself, not the penalty, was the problem. Whether criminal or civil, Warsaw was still institutionalizing Holocaust revisionism, arming itself with a mechanism to persecute those who challenged its narrative.
The West essentially acquiesced to government-sponsored Holocaust distortion, as long as it didn’t carry prison time. Yehuda Bauer of Israel’s central Holocaust museum succinctly described this capitulation as a “betrayal.”
Is it any wonder Nawrocki felt emboldened to get in bed with an overt Holocaust denier, pledged to end menorah lightings, and had chosen to say nothing in response to Braun’s chilling anti-Jewish tirade two weeks ago? If we in the West stay silent, why shouldn’t he?
A menorah is merely a symbol, of course, but given the explosion of antisemitism across Europe, even a symbolic light would be welcome.
“To discontinue the tradition of lighting the Hanukkah candles by the President would meant to give in to the demands of antisemites and more broadly, to further undermine the respect for minorities in Polish society,” Rafal Pankowski, Warsaw-based political scientist and head of the “Never Again” anti-hate organization told me.
There are still a few nights left in Hanukkah – perhaps there’s still time for Western leaders to ask Nawrocki to dispel the darkness. We could sure use it.
The post Why Poland’s president canceled his menorah lighting — and how the West helped make that happen appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Saudi, French, US Officials Push Hezbollah Disarmament Plan
Lebanese army members stand on a military vehicle during a Lebanese army media tour, to review the army’s operations in the southern Litani sector, in Alma Al-Shaab, near the border with Israel, southern Lebanon, Nov. 28, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Aziz Taher
French, Saudi Arabian, and American officials held talks with the head of the Lebanese army on Thursday in Paris aimed at finalizing a roadmap to enable a mechanism for the disarmament of the Hezbollah terrorist group, diplomats said.
Israel and Lebanon agreed to a US-brokered ceasefire in 2024, ending more than a year of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah that severely weakened the Iran-backed terrorists.
Since then, the sides have traded accusations over violations with Israel questioning the Lebanese army’s efforts to disarm Hezbollah. Israeli warplanes have increasingly targeted Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and even in the capital.
Speaking after the meeting, France’s foreign ministry spokesperson Pascal Confavreux said the talks had agreed to document seriously with evidence the Lebanese army’s efforts to disarm Hezbollah as well as strengthening the existing ceasefire mechanism.
CEASEFIRE AT RISK
With growing fear the ceasefire could unravel, the Paris meeting aimed to create more robust conditions to identify, support, and verify the disarmament process and dissuade Israel from escalation, four European and Lebanese diplomats and officials told Reuters.
With legislative elections due in Lebanon in 2026, there are fears political paralysis and party politics will further fuel instability and make President Joseph Aoun less likely to press disarmament, the diplomats and officials said.
“The situation is extremely precarious, full of contradictions and it won’t take much to light the powder keg,” said one senior official speaking on condition of anonymity.
“Aoun doesn’t want to make the disarming process too public because he fears it will antagonize and provoke tensions with the Shi’ite community in the south of the country.”
With the Lebanese army lacking capacity to disarm Hezbollah, the idea would be to reinforce the existing ceasefire mechanism with French, US, and possibly other military experts along with UN peacekeeping forces, the diplomats and officials said.
The parties agreed to hold a conference in February to reinforce the Lebanese army, Confavreux said.
ISRAELI STRIKES
As officials convened for the talks, multiple Israeli strikes hit towns in southern Lebanon and areas of the Bekaa Valley on Thursday, Lebanon’s state news agency NNA reported.
The Israeli military said it struck Hezbollah targets across several areas, including a military compound used for training, weapons storage, and artillery launches, saying the activity violated understandings between Israel and Lebanon and posed a threat to Israel. It also said it struck a Hezbollah militant in the area of Taybeh in southern Lebanon.
Commenting on the attacks, parliament speaker and Hezbollah-allied Amal Movement leader Nabih Berri said the strikes were an “Israeli message” to the Paris conference, NNA added.