RSS
The Torah Tells Us We Must Stay Positive to Persevere Through Hard Times
Reading from a Torah scroll in accordance with Sephardi tradition. Photo: Sagie Maoz via Wikimedia Commons.
I heard an unattributed quote some years ago: “Complaining is like bad breath – you notice it when it comes out of someone else’s mouth, but not when it’s your own.”
It’s so true. Complaining is ubiquitous to the point of being a cultural requirement. And in a world in which if you complain hard enough it can result in a payout, the compulsion to complain about anything and everything is simply overwhelming.
A pastor from Kansas has made it his life’s goal to roll back the tide, and to end the complaints culture for good. Reverend Will Bowen never intended to launch a worldwide movement; he simply suggested to his parishioners one Sunday in 2006 how they could improve their lives with the help of a wristband. Today, he’s sent out over five million wristbands to 80 different countries – unwittingly unleashing one of the most significant self-improvement crusades since Dale Carnegie.
Not that he’s complaining, mind you. Because that’s precisely the point. Bowen has given up complaining – well, mostly – and he wants the rest of the world to do the same. Bowen believes there is a direct correlation between an excess of global grumbling and why the world is not how we would like it to be.
What the world needs most, he believes, is for people to stop griping and start focusing on the positive.
It all began in 2006, when he suggested to his congregation of 250 that they give up complaining for just 21 days. According to several studies, this is the length of time that it takes to break a habit.
To reinforce his message, he handed out purple silicone bracelets stamped with the word “Spirit.” Those who accepted the challenge to wear the bracelet would move it from wrist to wrist whenever they caught themselves complaining, and those who managed to keep their bracelets on the same wrist for three straight weeks were issued a “certificate of happiness.”
The no-complaining idea struck a chord. Word spread, and Bowen began getting requests for bracelets from around the world. He set up a nonprofit group, “A Complaint Free World,” and recruited volunteers to fill orders. Soon he was on TV and in the newspapers. Then, after appearing on The Oprah Winfrey Show, Bowen received orders for more than 2 million bracelets. Today, he sends out at least 25,000 wristbands a week.
We live in a world where complaints are omnipresent. Social media platforms, customer service hotlines, and even casual conversations are filled with grievances and criticisms. Expressing dissatisfaction has become a universal pastime. But have you ever paused to think about the implications of our collective proclivity for complaining?
Take, for example, the recent outcry over the quality of airline services. It’s almost become a ritual to grumble about cramped seats, delayed flights, and less-than-palatable in-flight food — if there is food! According to the most recent annual Airline Quality Rating released by Wichita State University, overall complaints about commercial flying increased by 55% in 2022.
The report found that all four performance criteria – on-time arrivals, involuntary denied boardings, mishandled bags, and customer complaints – declined compared to 2021. Or did they? Have things actually gotten worse, or are people simply complaining more? Airlines are scrambling to address the concerns, but perhaps there is something deeper going on: people are complaining about the slightest inconvenience in a way that previous generations didn’t.
And the phenomenon of widespread complaints isn’t limited to airlines. Restaurants, retail stores, and even public services are constantly at the receiving end of criticism. This culture of complaining has created an environment where businesses and service providers are in a perpetual state of defense, always trying to anticipate and mitigate negative feedback.
But what is achieved by our incessant grumbling? Does it lead to constructive changes, or does it just foster a sense of perpetual dissatisfaction and negativity? And how does complaining affect our mental and emotional well-being? Research indicates that frequent complaining rewires our brains, making us more likely to focus on the negative aspects of our lives and less likely to appreciate the positive.
Instead of defaulting to complaints, what if we practiced gratitude and sought constructive solutions? Imagine the transformation if, instead of lamenting a delayed flight, we took a moment to appreciate that air travel connects us to distant loved ones and exciting opportunities. What if, instead of criticizing a meal in a restaurant, we expressed our preferences in a way that helps the chef improve and innovate?
While reading through this week’s Torah portion, Devarim, I was suddenly struck by an idea that I’d never thought of before. Devarim is the first of a series of portions that recall Moses’ final addresses to the Israelites before they embarked on the conquest of the Promised Land.
In his speeches, Moses offered profound lessons on faith, responsibility, and duty. But thrown in among his words of wisdom are recollections of all the many instances when the nation had fallen short. And, notably, every one of those instances involved complaints of one sort or another.
Despite witnessing incredible miracles and experiencing divine intervention that ensured their survival against the odds, the Israelites frequently resorted to grumbling, sometimes when they faced challenges, but often when they had no real cause to complain.
Every commentator raises the same question: why did Moses bring up this aspect of the nation’s behavior? Why dredge up ancient history just as the Israelites were about to realize the promise of a new life in the land God had pledged to their ancestors?
The commentaries offer a range of answers, but perhaps the point Moses was making was simple. Instead of all the complaints they had made moving things in a positive direction, all that had happened was that each incident had brought further misery and further exacerbated the Israelites’ unhappiness. Moses was telling them, “The best route to happiness is to refrain from complaints, and to find the good in every situation! Had you not complained, we could have been here so much earlier, and avoided so much trouble.”
Fast-forward to modern times, and this lesson remains equally relevant. Our tendency to complain overshadows the many blessings and opportunities we have. Just as Moses urged the Israelites to reflect on the fact that their complaints had only made things worse, we, too, can benefit from this perspective.
Finding reasons to be cheerful and grateful is so much better than seeking out problems – and then going on and on about them. While it’s totally natural to feel dissatisfaction and express it, we must be mindful of how we do it. To make complaining a way of life only breeds negativity and discontent. By adopting a mindset of gratitude and constructive feedback, we not only improve our own well-being but also contribute to a more positive environment all around.
The lesson of Moses in Devarim teaches us how our words can affect outcomes. The more negative we are, the more negative our lives will turn out to be. But when we embrace a more positive, solution-oriented outlook, our lives will be so much better. As Dale Carnegie put it so well, “Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain – and most fools do.”
The author is a rabbi in Beverly Hills, California.
The post The Torah Tells Us We Must Stay Positive to Persevere Through Hard Times first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Saudi Arabia Ups Anti-Israel Rhetoric Amid Iran Rapprochement, Raising Questions About Abraham Accords Expansion
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman attends a virtual cabinet meeting from his office in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, May 28, 2024. Photo: Saudi Press Agency/Handout via REUTERS
Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler accused the Israeli military of committing “collective genocide” in Gaza while also pressing Israel to respect Iranian sovereignty, amid reports that Tehran has postponed its planned attack on the Jewish state.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s remarks, made in Riyadh on Monday during a summit of leaders of Islamic nations, underscored the evolving rapprochement between the erstwhile archenemies Iran and Saudi Arabia.
The crown prince, also known by his initials MBS, urged the international community to demand that Israel “respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.”
The two regional heavyweights restored relations last year after decades of animosity.
MBS’s anti-Israel rhetoric came days after Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election. For Israel, the statement from Riyadh may signal a setback to the normalization process with Saudi Arabia, a long-sought goal within the framework of the Abraham Accords, brokered by Trump during his first term in the White House, that has seen Israel establish formal ties with several Arab states in recent years.
According to a Sky News Arabia report published two days later and citing Iranian officials, Tehran has shelved a planned third direct strike on Israel, with the delay attributed to possible forthcoming diplomatic talks with Trump. Israel Hayom published a similar report the following day, citing officials in Jerusalem familiar with the matter.
Iranian First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref expressed his hope that the incoming Trump administration would put a stop to Israel’s campaigns against its terrorist proxies, Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
“The American government is the main supporter of the actions of the Zionist regime [Israel], and the world is waiting for the promise of the new government of this country to immediately stop the war against the innocent people of Gaza and Lebanon,” Aref said at Monday’s gathering.
Observers noted that Saudi Arabia’s shift could stem from both domestic and regional considerations. For the kingdom, improving relations with Iran is a strategic move to de-escalate conflicts in Yemen, where both countries have backed opposing sides. By opening diplomatic channels with Iran, Saudi Arabia also aims to reduce its dependence on Western security guarantees amid growing regional autonomy. According to Dr. Eyal Pinko, a Middle East expert who served in Israeli intelligence for more than three decades, Saudi Arabia is also under pressure from France, a major arms supplier, to maintain a moderate stance and promote regional peace.
“Saudi Arabia understands [it] cannot rely on the Americans” for arms, Pinko told The Algemeiner.
For its part, Iran may be seeking closer ties with the Gulf kingdom as a result of recent Israeli operations that have decimated the senior leadership of Hezbollah, Iran’s most influential proxy in the Arab world that has long served as a strategic partner.
“Iran is spreading its bets all around, not to be on one side or another,” Pinko said.
Hezbollah, along with Hamas in Gaza, had in the past been blacklisted as terrorist groups by Riyadh.
The New York Times last month cited a Saudi tycoon with ties to the monarchy as saying that the war in Gaza has “set back any Israeli integration into the region.”
“Saudi Arabia sees that any association with Israel has become more toxic since Gaza,” Ali Shihabi told the newspaper.
In another blow for Saudi-Israel relations, Riyadh announced it would revoke the license of the Saudi news broadcaster, MBC, after it labeled the late Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar a terrorist.
But according to Pinko, the chance of Saudi-Israel normalization is not entirely lost, pending a ceasefire.
“If nothing extreme happens with Iran until Jan. 20 [when Trump takes office], I believe that the Abraham Accords will come back to the table,” he said.
The post Saudi Arabia Ups Anti-Israel Rhetoric Amid Iran Rapprochement, Raising Questions About Abraham Accords Expansion first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Germany Opposes EU Foreign Policy Chief’s Proposal to Suspend Dialogue With Israel
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock speaks during a session of the lower house of parliament Bundestag, in Berlin, Germany, Oct. 10, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Lisi Niesner
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Thursday publicly rejected a proposal by the European Union’s foreign policy chief to suspend regular political dialogue with Israel in response to the Jewish state’s ongoing military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza.
“We are always in favor of keeping channels of dialogue open. Of course, this also applies to Israel,” the German Foreign Office said of top EU official Josep Borrell’s plans, according to the German news agency dpa.
The Foreign Office added that, while the political conversations under the EU-Israel Association Council provide a regular opportunity to strengthen relations and, in recent months, discuss the provision of humanitarian aid to Gaza, severing that mechanism would be counterproductive.
“Breaking off dialogue, however, will not help anyone, neither the suffering people in Gaza, nor the hostages who are still being held by Hamas, nor all those in Israel who are committed to dialogue,” the statement continued.
Borrell on Wednesday proposed the suspension of dialogue in a letter to EU foreign ministers ahead of their meeting this coming Monday in Brussels, citing “serious concerns about possible breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza.” He also wrote, “Thus far, these concerns have not been sufficiently addressed by Israel.”
The regular dialogues that Borrell is seeking to break off were enshrined in a broader agreement on relations between the EU and Israel, including extensive trade ties, that was implemented in 2000.
“In light of the above considerations, I will be tabling a proposal that the EU should invoke the human rights clause to suspend the political dialogue with Israel,” Borrell wrote.
A suspension would need the approval of all 27 EU countries, an unlikely outcome. According to Reuters, multiple countries objected when a senior EU official briefed ambassadors in Brussels on the proposal on Wednesday.
While some EU countries, such as Spain and Ireland, have been fiercely critical of Israel since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, others such as the Czech Republic and Hungary have been more supportive.
Hamas, which rules Gaza, launched the ongoing conflict with its invasion of southern Israel last Oct. 7. During the onslaught, Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists murdered 1,200 people, wounded thousands more, and kidnapped over 250 hostages while perpetrating mass sexual violence and other atrocities.
Israel responded with a military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military and governing capabilities in neighboring Gaza.
Israel says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, noting its efforts to evacuate areas before it targets them and to warn residents of impending military operations with leaflets, text messages, and other forms of communication. However, Hamas has in many cases prevented people from leaving, according to the Israeli military.
Another challenge for Israel is Hamas’s widely recognized military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations, direct attacks, and store weapons.
Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said last month that Israel has delivered over 1 million tons of aid, including 700,000 tons of food, to Gaza since it launched its military operation a year ago. He also noted that Hamas terrorists often hijack and steal aid shipments while fellow Palestinians suffer.
The Israeli government has ramped up the supply of humanitarian aid into Gaza in recent weeks under pressure from the United States, which has expressed concern about the plight of civilians in the war-torn enclave.
Meanwhile, Borrell has been one of the EU’s most outspoken critics of Israel over the past year. Just six weeks after Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks, he drew a moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas while speaking to the European Parliament, accusing both of having carried out “massacres” while insisting that it is possible to criticize Israeli actions “without being accused of not liking the Jews.”
Borrell’s speech followed a visit to the Middle East the prior week. While in Israel, he delivered what the Spanish daily El Pais described as the “most critical message heard so far from a representative of the European Union regarding Israel’s response to the Hamas attack of Oct. 7.”
“Not far from here is Gaza. One horror does not justify another,” Borrell said at a joint press conference alongside then-Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen. “I understand your rage. But let me ask you not to let yourself be consumed by rage. I think that is what the best friends of Israel can tell you, because what makes the difference between a civilized society and a terrorist group is the respect for human life. All human lives have the same value.”
Months later, in March of this year, Borrell claimed that Israel was imposing a famine on Palestinian civilians in Gaza and using starvation as a weapon of war. His comments came a few months before the United Nations Famine Review Committee (FRC), a panel of experts in international food security and nutrition, rejected the assertion that northern Gaza was experiencing famine, citing a lack of evidence. Borrell’s comments prompted outrage from Israel.
In August, Borrell pushed EU member states to impose sanctions on some Israeli ministers.
Monday’s meeting in Brussels will be the last that Borrell will chair before ending his five-year term as the EU’s foreign policy chief.
The post Germany Opposes EU Foreign Policy Chief’s Proposal to Suspend Dialogue With Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pro-Hamas Groups Planting Seeds of Domestic Terrorism in US, New Report Says
Pro-Hamas activists gather in Washington Square Park for a rally following a protest march held in response to an NYPD sweep of an anti-Israel encampment at New York University in Manhattan, May 3, 2024. Photo: Matthew Rodier/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
Domestic terrorism may be the end game for the over 150 pro-Hamas groups operating on colleges campuses and elsewhere across the US to foster anti-Israel demonstrations, according to a new report by the Capital Research Center (CRC) think tank.
“The movement contains militant elements pushing it toward a wider, more severe campaign focused on property destruction and violence properly described as domestic terrorism,” researcher Ryan Mauro wrote in the report, titled “Marching Toward Violence: The Domestic Anti-Israeli Protest Movement,” which was published last week. “It demands the ‘dismantlement’ of America’s ‘colonialist,’ ‘imperialist,’ or ‘capitalist,’ system, often calling for the US to be abolished as a country.”
He continued, “These revolutionary goals are held by the two different factions of the anti-Israel extremist groups. The first faction combines Islamists, communists/Marxists, and anarchists. The second faction consists of groups with white supremacist/nationalist ideologies. They share Jew-hatred, anti-Americanism, and the goal of sparking a revolutionary uprising.”
The group that is most responsible for the anti-Israel protest movement is Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), according to the report.
Drawing on statements issued and actions taken by SJP and their collaborators, Mauro made the case that toolkits published by SJP herald Hamas for perpetrating mass casualties of civilians; SJP has endorsed Iran’s attacks on Israel as well as its stated intention to overturn the US-led world order; and other groups under its umbrella have called on followers to “Bring the Intifada Home.” Such activities, the report explained, accelerated after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7, which pro-Hamas groups perceived as an inflection point in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and an opportunity. By flooding the internet and college campuses with agitprop and staging activities — protests or vandalisms — they hoped to manufacture a critical mass of youth support for their ideas, thus creating an army of revolutionaries willing to adopt Hamas’s aims as their own.
The result has been a series of the kinds of incidents seen in academia during fall semester.
Last month, when Jews around the world mourned on the anniversary of Oct. 7, a Harvard University student group called on pro-Hamas activists to “Bring the war home” and proceeded to vandalize a campus administrative building. The group members, who described themselves as “anonymous,” later said in a statement, “We are committed to bringing the war home and answering the call to open up a new front here in the belly of the beast.”
On the same day, the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) issued a similar statement, saying “now is the time to escalate,” adding, “Harvard’s insistence on funding slaughter only strengthens our moral imperative and commitment to our demands.”
More recently, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) student wrote a journal article which argued that violence is a legitimate method of effecting political change and, moreover, advancing the pro-Palestinian movement.
In September, during Columbia University’s convocation ceremony, Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), a group which recently split due to racial tensions between Arabs and non-Arabs, distributed a pamphlet which called on students to join Hamas.
“This booklet is part of a coordinated and intentional effort to uphold the principles of the thawabit and the Palestinian resistance movement overall by transmitting the words of the resistance directly,” said the manifesto, distributed by CUAD, an SJP spinoff, to incoming freshmen. “This material aims to build popular support for the Palestinian war of national liberation, a war which is waged through armed struggle.”
Other sections of it were explicitly Islamist, invoking the name of “Allah, the most gracious” and referring to Hamas as the “Islamic Resistance Movement.” Proclaiming, “Glory to Gaza that gave hope to the oppressed, that humiliated the ‘invincible’ Zionist army,” it said its purpose was to build an army of Muslims worldwide.
“Groups in the pro-terrorism, anti-Israel movement co-exist as our concentric circles of increasing malevolence,” Mauro said of the level of support for revolutionary violence on college campuses. “Groups in the outermost circle avoid risks as they recruit new protest members and seek to integrate as many political causes as possible under the anti-Israel umbrella … Some militants aspire to incorporate the campaign into a broader wear on law enforcement if not an insurgency.”
As The Algemeiner has previously reported, pro-Hamas activists have already demonstrated that they are willing to hurt people to achieve their goals.
Last year, in California, an elderly Jewish man was killed when an anti-Zionist professor employed by a local community college allegedly pushed him during an argument. At Cornell University in upstate New York, a student threatened to rape and kill Jewish female students and”“shoot up” the campus’ Hillel center. Violence, according to a report by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), was most common at universities in the state of California, where anti-Zionist activists punched a Jewish student for filming him at a protest.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Pro-Hamas Groups Planting Seeds of Domestic Terrorism in US, New Report Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.