RSS
The Light has Dawned
The Four Questions from The Haggadah. Łódź, 1935. Source: Irvin Ungar
JNS.org – Jews have always been fond of answering one question with another. In fact, Golda Meir was once asked by a journalist, “Why do Jews always answer one question with another question?” She replied, “Why not?”
So here’s Question 1: Moses is the hero and main protagonist of the story of Pesach and the Exodus from Egypt. Yet the Haggadah hardly mentions his name at all. There is only one passing mention of him in a quotation of the verse, “And they believed in God and in Moses, His servant.”
That’s not exactly getting his name in lights. But surely, Moses is the “star of the show” and deserves to be highlighted throughout the narrative. Why is he all but absent from the Haggadah?
Allow me to answer that question with another.
One of the most famous passages from the Haggadah recounts a story: Some of the greatest sages of the time gathered in Bnai Brak for the Pesach seder. “They were discussing the Exodus from Egypt all that night until their students came and told them: ‘Our Masters, the time has come for reciting the morning Shema.’”
Question 2: If your rabbi was giving a shiur (“lesson”) and he was going on a bit, sunset was approaching, and it was time to daven Mincha, would you interrupt and tell him? I can say with certainty that if I was listening to my teacher and mentor—the Lubavitcher Rebbe—and he was giving a talk and sunset was approaching, I would remain absolutely shtum. I would never have the chutzpah to interrupt my saintly teacher.
And the Haggadah story involves some of the greatest sages of their generation: Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Yehoshua, Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah, Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Tarfon. How did these young students have the cheek and audacity to show them their watch and tell them to hurry and finish their discussions as it was getting late to recite the Shema?
I once came across an interpretation that answers this question beautifully. It is somewhat tangential, but it is in the classic mode of drush, what we call “homiletics.” It is where the word drosha comes from—meaning a sermon. In sermons, rabbis often employ the methodology of drush to expound on and interpret a Torah verse in an original, creative way. This gives the congregation a meaningful message beyond the simple, straightforward explanation of the Torah verse.
Now, in the Haggadah passage, if we move a comma just one word forward, it sheds completely new light on the story. The traditional understanding is that the rabbis were discussing the Exodus all night and in the morning their students arrived and said, “Our Masters, the time has come for reciting the morning Shema.”
However, if we move the comma just one word later, the passage would read: “The rabbis were discussing the Exodus all that night, until their students came and our rabbis told them, the time for the morning Shema has arrived.”
In other words, the statement about the time for the morning Shema was not made by the students, but by the rabbis themselves.
You see, these great rabbis were awake all Pesach night discussing the Exodus story, and its deepest meaning and interpretation. Night symbolizes darkness. Indeed, they were living in the dark, depressing era after the Romans had destroyed the Second Temple and were brutally occupying Israel. No doubt the rabbis were bemoaning the state of the Holy Land and its Jewish community in that terrible era. Would there be a future for Judaism? Could the Jewish people rebuild and regenerate after such a calamitous tragedy? These must have been the questions they were grappling with.
Then morning dawned, and their students arrived. Suddenly, the rabbis were encouraged, and their mood lightened. The arrival of a group of young Torah scholars hungry to learn brought the rabbis new hope for the Jewish people. They saw a brighter future, assured by a new generation of dedicated students eager to keep the faith and study the Torah. “The morning has arrived!” the rabbis gratefully proclaimed. They beheld a new light that gave them new hope for and confidence in the Jewish future through the dawning of a new generation.
Thus, we can better appreciate the absence of Moses’s name from the Haggadah story. While there is barely any mention of him, there is another prophet who does feature prominently at the seder table: Eliyahu Hanavi, Elijah the Prophet. He is prominent in every Jewish home on seder night. There is the very visible Fifth Cup of Elijah, and in the latter part of the Haggadah recital, we open the door for Elijah.
Moses is described as our first redeemer. Elijah, however, represents the final redemption. In Jewish tradition, Elijah is the harbinger of the Messiah. The prophet will arrive and announce the great redeemer’s imminent arrival, please God. “Behold, I will send you Elijah the Prophet before that great, awesome day,” says the verse from the Book of Malachi that we read on Shabbat Hagadol just before Pesach. Elijah will be the herald of the final redemption.
The rabbis of old were comforted and reassured by the arrival of a new crop of young Torah students. At our own seder tables, we want to focus our attention not only on the past but on the future—not only on the redemption from Egypt, but on the final redemption of the Messiah. Hopefully, this can help us to better understand why, at the seder, Elijah gets more coverage than Moses.
Like Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues, we also live in the shadow of destruction—in our case, that of European Jewry and the Holocaust. Nor are we yet finished with Hamas, Iran & Co. But despite all our challenges, we are heartened by the emergence of a new generation dedicated to Torah study and Jewish continuity. Like the rabbis at their seder, we, too, have reason to be confident that a new dawn has risen, a generation that will proudly proclaim the Shema Yisrael and the eternal Oneness of God.
I wish all my readers a chag kasher v’sameach. Wherever we may be celebrating Pesach this year, may we all be together “Next Year in Jerusalem!”
The post The Light has Dawned first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Wikipedia’s Serious Problem: Bias Against Israel
An aerial view shows the bodies of victims of an attack following a mass infiltration by Hamas gunmen from the Gaza Strip lying on the ground in Kibbutz Kfar Aza, in southern Israel, Oct. 10, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Ilan Rosenberg
The report that Wikipedia’s volunteer editors are labeling the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as an unreliable source of information on certain topics — including antisemitism related to Israel and Zionism — is a much more serious problem than an attack on a particular institution. Instead, it speaks to how much the bias against Israel and the indifference to antisemitism has spread to other organizations and informational platforms in this country.
There are those in the Jewish community who go so far as to claim that any criticism of Israel is really a cover for antisemitism. This is absurd. Israel is a country like any other, and its policies are subject to criticism, and even condemnation, as we see taking place within the country itself. Serious people, including those at ADL, reject outright the idea that Israel is beyond criticism, and that when criticism of Israel appears, it is a manifestation of antisemitism.
On the other hand, equally absurd — but much more dangerous because it is accepted in certain mainstream institutions — is the notion that any form of criticism of Israel can never be classified as antisemitism. This is a dangerous and misinformed idea, which underlies the spread of hate that we have witnessed since October 7. The most extreme manifestation of this was the rationalization or outright denial of the barbaric Hamas massacre of October 7. This attack — the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust — was supposedly framed in terms of legitimate resistance to Israeli policies. In other words, nothing Israel could do to defend itself is defensible.
While the distortion embodied in these justifications for the murder of 1,200 Israelis, the rape of scores of women, the taking of more than 200 hostages is so obvious, it wasn’t the most perilous form. Even a person with hostile views toward the Jewish State could see through the immorality of justifying one of the worst acts of terrorism since 9/11.
Far more dangerous, because of its respectability, is the concept that no criticism of Israel can ever be antisemitism. This is often expressed with phrases like, “we don’t hate Jews, we hate Zionism.” And those sources — such as the ADL — which identify areas where hostility toward Israel can be a form of antisemitism and a generator of antisemitic incidents, are treated as biased and unreliable by Wikipedia and other groups and publications.
In fact, the manifestations of anti-Israel activity and the explosion of anti-Jewish behavior in a multitude of areas of society cannot be separated from classical antisemitism.
Jews were demonized for centuries — from being accused as “Christ killers,” to charges of blood libels and murders of children for ritual purposes, to sinister conspiracy theories as embodied in the fraudulent Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion document, which accuses Jewish leaders of plotting to take over the world.
All of this deeply embedded hatred culminated in the Holocaust, the Nazis’ systematic murder of two-thirds of the Jews of Europe.
After the horrors of the Nazi extermination of the Jewish people, outright Jew-hatred was stigmatized — but millennia of prejudice against the Jewish people did not suddenly disappear. Over time, it transformed itself into something more legitimate: hatred of the only Jewish state in the world.
To those who cared, like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., it was obvious that delegitimizing the Jewish State was merely a post-Holocaust form of antisemitism.
While these ideas existed for decades, it was October 7 that gave them new life. Beyond the rationalization of the Hamas terrorism itself, the anti-Israel protests on campuses were characterized by classic demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish State and its Jewish supporters.
Denial of the fundamental right of the Jewish state to exist — as embodied in the popular protest phrase, “From the river to the sea” — is along the historic lines of delegitimizing Jews through conspiracy theories.
Demonization of the Jewish State through denying what Hamas did, or justifying or labeling Israel’s struggle to defend itself after the worst day since the Holocaust as genocide — or accusing Israel of deliberately targeting children, in the spirit of blood libel charges — are only some of the ways in which expressions have not been mere criticism of Israel.
And the effect of all this — the attacks on Jews on campuses and elsewhere — was highly predictable. Hate speech, whether from the right, the left, or Islamist, inevitably leads to hate incidents.
In deeming ADL reporting as “unreliable,” this subset of Wikipedia’s editors has ignored all these forms of antisemitism that have emerged over the last eight months. For us, we will continue to do our work, always recognizing the distinction between free speech and criticism of Israeli policies and the demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish state, which fits into the pattern of historic antisemitism.
It is important that leaders in society make clear that they know what’s going on here — that it’s exactly this kind of thinking that has produced the opportunity for antisemitism to openly raise its ugly head in a way that we haven’t seen for decades. If people don’t confront the reality, this hatred — legitimized by mainstream sources — will spread and create even greater dangers for American Jews and American society.
The first step in standing up against this spreading support for hate is to express support for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism, which articulates when legitimate criticism of Israel becomes antisemitism.
Ken Jacobson is Associate National Director of ADL.
The post Wikipedia’s Serious Problem: Bias Against Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Members of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah Party Say Jews Cannot Live in Israel
People hold Fatah flags during a protest in support of the people of Gaza, as the conflict between Israel and Hamas continues, in Hebron, in the West Bank, Oct. 27, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Mussa Qawasma
Whoever thinks the current war is an isolated conflict in the Gaza Strip — think again. The war is being cheered by members of Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas’ political party, Fatah, as leading to a “return to Acre, Jaffa, and Haifa.”
In other words, “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
One Fatah member stated recently what Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) has documented for decades — that the conflict with Israel is not over land, but much more. It is “existential, not just a conflict over borders.”
Fatah Revolutionary Council member Muhammad Al-Lahham: “This is my opinion as [a member of] Fatah: That my conflict against this occupation [i.e., Israel] is an existential conflict, not just a conflict over borders. It’s either me or him on this land.”
[Al-Arabiya TV (Saudi Arabia), Facebook page, June 15, 2024]
Another top member and official of Fatah, Nablus Branch Secretary Muhammad Hamdan, said that Palestinians dying in the war in Gaza serve as “fuel” for the Palestinian “return,” and taking over of all of Israel. As he put it, Israel is “transient”:
Fatah Nablus Branch Secretary Muhammad Hamdan: “We say to the entire world that this blood that is being shed will be the fuel for our return to Acre, Jaffa, and Haifa, and certainly the Israeli occupation is transient and indeed the State of Palestine will be established, whether the occupation [i.e., Israel] and this world want it or not. All this national and mass activity emphasizes that we are returning, whether the occupation wants it or not.”
[Official PA TV, May 15, 2024]
The Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Education showed a map and worded it as explicitly as possible on its Facebook page: “Palestine — the entire land is ours, from the [Mediterranean] Sea to the [Jordan] River”
Facebook, PA Ministry of Education, Nov. 16, 2021
This echoes many similar statements before it by other top Fatah and PA officials, such as Fatah Revolutionary Council Secretary Majed Al-Fatiani, who said that all the “transients” who came to “Palestine” must return “to where they came from,” and that only the Palestinians will have “sovereignty” over the land:
Fatah Revolutionary Council Secretary Majed Al-Fatiani: “There will be no sovereignty over this land except for the Palestinians … even if there is a foreign and transient case as the transients who came in the history of Palestine and returned to where they came from… [The Israelis] must understand that Palestine between the [Mediterranean] Sea and the [Jordan] River – every Palestinian man and woman has a right to it, and we will pursue them to take this right … Every year a generation arises among us that says: My home is in Jaffa, my home is in Tantura, my home is in the Upper Galilee, in Al-Bassa, in Lod, my home is in Ramle, Umm Al-Rashrash [i.e., Eilat; all the places are in Israel], and everywhere.”
[Fatah-run Awdah TV, Special Coverage, May 29, 2022]
The idea of Israel as a colonial “implant” and “a temporary ruler” is expressed in the following video, which was broadcast by official PA TV hundreds of times for almost a decade. It shows the rise and defeat of different rulers in “Palestine” over time. It ends with Israel’s defeat and the arrival of a “new” Muslim conqueror, Saladin, who defeated the Crusaders, thus representing the coming Muslim savior who will “liberate Palestine” from Jewish-Israeli rule:
The author is a senior analyst at Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article was originally published.
The post Members of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah Party Say Jews Cannot Live in Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Did Jamaal Bowman Primary Bring AOC & Nick Fuentes Together?
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on March 21, 2024. Photo: Craig Hudson/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Far-right white supremacist Nick Fuentes recently found common ground with progressive New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), taunting her with their political and ideological “similarities.” And the Internet caught fire.
What started as Ocasio-Cortez’s distaste for “big money” election spending ended with an exchange that Fuentes created to match her with anti-Israel rhetoric.
While it is evident that both Fuentes and Ocasio-Cortez are clearly anti-Israel, one accepted definition of antisemitism would also indicate that their rhetoric and their actions in turn make them both antisemitic.
AOC is more America First than 99% of Republicans. https://t.co/VDgdMZr4N6
— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) June 19, 2024
No matter how hard she tries, AOC cannot separate herself from being associated with Jew-haters. Her standpoint appears to be mainly made of ignorance, angelic naïveté, and her alliance with two of the most antisemitic Congresswomen, Ilan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).
Now, Fuentes has managed to rile her up in one tweet and expose their similarities. Fuentes, of course, is an open antisemite and white supremacist.
You are a white supremacist and I want nothing to do with you nor the world you imagine. I believe in a multiracial democracy, one of economic rights, civil liberties, and that affirms the working class and the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people.
These are not small differences.…
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 20, 2024
But that is exactly the point, polar-opposites of the spectrum are supposedly adversaries in their values. Yet extremes on either side are like a horseshoe spectrum — they meet at the bottom where the ends almost touch.
As for the “most expensive primary” that AOC criticized, Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) suffered a resounding defeat. He also did so in a way that singled out the Jewish community. And despite critics’ claims, the results also proved what HonestReporting wrote: this primary race was about more than “the Benjamins.”
A beloved county-executive and more moderate Democrat, George Latimer won 58.6% of the vote, and his voters were motivated by many issues. However, The New York Times put out a disturbing headline, later changing it amid criticism.
Actually, @nytimes, there was far more to it than “the Benjamins,” as we made clear the day before Bowman’s defeat. https://t.co/rhyGHVDv94 https://t.co/sTdLl8aWNT
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) June 26, 2024
Hmmm seems @nytimes thought better of their headline placing the blame for Bowman’s loss on the Jews, oops I mean “pro-Israel money.” https://t.co/k5PvLFrvwi pic.twitter.com/DB4sc2YVGy
— Dr. Laura Shaw Frank (@shawfrank) June 26, 2024
Of course, the Jewish people will be blamed for this “upset.” And not just by AOC.
Many allies of Fuentes and KKK leader David Duke also blamed the result on Jews. One former UFC fighter took to X to blame “Israel” for meddling in elections. He made the mistake of retweeting a post referencing Jewish people.
Once again, we often see that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Did Jamaal Bowman Primary Bring AOC & Nick Fuentes Together? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.