Uncategorized
The Myth of the Lost Ark of the Covenant — and What It Reveals About Us
So many people love conspiracy theories, fantasies, and lost causes. Best-selling books and movies focus on myths of missing people, cities, and treasures, such as Atlantis and Treasure Island. And going further back in time, to the Golden Fleece or the Ten Lost Tribes.
For centuries, Christians searched for the Holy Cross. Enough pieces of wood were found to launch a whole armada. The Holy Grail has also retained its grip on the imagination. Of course, we have ours too. The Menorah from the Second Temple, which can be seen in Titus’ arch, was carried off to Rome. Some are still convinced it is hidden in the Vatican vaults, despite the number of times Rome was ransacked, and anything of value was shipped off or melted down.
But perhaps the most famous lost item is the Ark of the Covenant. Forgetting Hollywood’s obsession, its disappearance has fascinated people for thousands of years.
The details of the Ark’s construction can be found in several chapters in the Book of Exodus, starting with chapter 25. God commands Moses to “make an Ark of acacia wood, two and a half cubits long, a cubit and a half wide and a cubit and a half high. Overlay it with pure gold inside and out, make a gold molding roundabout …. And deposit in it the tablets of the Covenant which I will give you. You shall make a cover of pure gold, two and a half cubits long and a cubit and a half wide.” On top there were, “Two cherubim of beaten gold facing each other from opposite ends.”
The Ark disappeared at some point during the First Temple era, which ended in 586 BCE with the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem by the Babylonians. However, the Temple was sacked on several occasions even earlier, according to the Bible itself. It is likely the Ark disappeared then.
Had the Ark still been in its usual place when the Babylonians conquered the Temple Mount, they surely would have seized this most valuable and holy possession. But as we know, the ark was removed earlier. Despite this, the myth of the missing Ark continued. II Maccabees claims that Jeremiah hid the Ark in a cave on Mount Nebo, Moses’ final resting place. The precise location of which is unknown.
The Talmud (Yoma 53b) contains many theories. Rabbi Judah said that the Ark was hidden in a subterranean chamber beneath the Holy of Holies by King Josiah. And several priests died when they accidentally discovered the exact spot, and flames shot out and consumed them.
Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Simeon bar Yochai said that the Ark was taken to Babylonia at the time of Yechoniah’s capture and exile (608 BCE). You might get confused over who Yechoniah was if you read the Bible, because he was also known as Conia and Jehoakin. And incidentally, according to II Kings 25:27, 37 years after the exile, he was released from prison by King Evil Merodach, welcomed to court and made the official leader of the Judean community in Babylon.
The Talmud also quotes Josiah’s instructions to the Levites when he restored the Temple after the idolatrous reigns of Manasseh and Amon, to reinstate an Ark to the Holy of Holies (II Chronicles 35:3). But there is no evidence that he did, possibly or probably, because it no longer existed. While other Temple vessels were replaced, when necessary, both in the first and the second Temples, the Ark is never mentioned again.
Some people have suggested that this was because while winged Cherubim in the context of Mesopotamian religions represented a higher, heavenly presence, by the Second Temple era, the authorities feared that the cherubs might be mistaken for idols. And anyway, the Stone Tablets of the Covenant were no longer to be found, so that its symbolism was lost forever. Although even earlier, according to the Bible, King Hezekiah had destroyed the Bronze Serpent on a staff mentioned in the Torah and the Books of Magical Cures, because simple people were worshipping them in an idolatrous fashion.
According to the Talmud (Yoma 52b), there was no Ark in the Second Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE. But even if there had been or it was buried under the Temple foundations, the Romans razed the Temple Mount to its foundations and so there is no Ark on the Arch of Titus. Either way, the original Ark disappeared and was never seen again. And there is not an ounce of logic to suggest that it was spirited away to darkest Africa or the Andes. Why, therefore, would one think it must still exist?
But the stories continue. Myths often have very important messages. So, what possibly could be the message of stories of the Lost Ark? To start with, from the Babylonian exile, there was always a dream that eventually the House of David would return and rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple. It was indeed revived with the Second Destruction as a powerful story of hope for the exiles. But without the Ark.
To this day, rebuilding the Temple remains a significant dream for many. Despite the centuries of tumult and change, many Jews refuse to give up their idea that a Messiah will come who really would bring peace on Earth. We are still waiting.
The author is a writer and rabbi in New York.
Uncategorized
New documentary captures the lively history of Yiddish theater in America
The new documentary Immigrant Songs: Yiddish Theater and the American Jewish Experience, produced by the Milken Archive of Jewish Music, is fast, entertaining and a good introduction to the topic.
Focusing mainly on the musical side of the story, but covering ‘straight plays’ as well, the film opens with a superb ‘warm-up act’: “Hu Tsa Tsa,” a stock Yiddish vaudeville number performed by the widely mourned Bruce Adler, who died in 2008 at age 63. Bursting with charm and talent, Adler, scion of a top Yiddish vaudeville family, demonstrates that Yiddish theater used to be pretty damned lively.
What follows is the oft-told story of the rise and decline of the American Yiddish theater, beginning with its prehistory in the Purimshpiels — the annual performances that for centuries served as the only secular entertainment in the Ashkenazic world. From there the film takes us to Yiddish theater’s 1876 birth in Romania, courtesy of Avrom Goldfadn, a.k.a. “The Father of Yiddish Theater.”
The film also describes Yiddish theater’s arrival in America, which, thanks to massive Jewish immigration, quickly became its capital. We learn of its influence on American theater’s styles of acting and set design. And the film describes the decline of its audience, due to assimilation and the immigration quotas of the 1920s.
There’s an excellent section on “The Big Four” Yiddish theater composers — Joseph Rumshinsky, Alexander Olshanetsky, Abe Ellstein, and Sholom Secunda. All in all, the documentary does a fine job of teaching the aleph-beyz, the ABCs, of the history of Yiddish theater to the uninitiated.
The most impressive aspect of Immigrant Songs is its well-crafted pace. Though there are a few snippets of vintage Yiddish cinema (Yiddish theater’s “kid brother”), most of the film consists of recent concert footage, some well-selected photographs and ephemera, and a lot of talking heads. Almost every prominent Yiddish theater historian was interviewed for it, along with several musicologists, an archivist, Yiddish actors, directors, producers, etc. (Full disclosure: I am one of them.) Director Jeff Janeczko cuts between the interviewees so smoothly — sometimes in mid-sentence — that it feels like they’re in the same room and feeding off each other’s energy. The movie just flies by.
There are a few errors. Marc Chagall is described as an important designer of Yiddish theater; actually he designed one minor production in Russia in 1921, and never did another. In a bizarre, and biblically illiterate, statement, one interviewee claims that Jews hadn’t developed a theater culture earlier because the Second Commandment’s prohibition of “graven images” forbade the construction of sets. (Actually it’s about idol worship.)
Another interviewee claims that the Yiddish play Der Yeshiva Bokher; oder, Der Yudisher Hamlet — The Yeshiva Student; or, The Jewish Hamlet (Yiddish plays then often had subtitles), is closely patterned on Shakespeare’s tragedy. In truth, the play — written by Isidore Zolotarevski, the prolific writer of shund (“trash”) melodramas — is not only awful, but is as close to Shakespeare as baked ham is to your grandmother’s kreplach.
The film’s biggest fault, however, is its short running time (45 minutes). This is a rich topic, and too much is left by the wayside in the interest of brevity. There’s nothing about what shund melodramas felt like, why they appealed to their audiences, and why they became the only thing a lot of people know about Yiddish theater.
There’s also nothing about the World War I-era wave of shtetl plays, which reflected immigrants’ homesickness without indulging in nostalgia, and provided some of Yiddish theater’s shining moments with plays like Green Fields, The Empty Inn and Tevye. And the most important play in the Yiddish canon, The Dybbuk, is never mentioned.
Perhaps most surprisingly, considering the film’s emphasis on music, there is no examination of Yiddish theater’s influence on Broadway’s music. (Cole Porter — ironically, the only gentile among the major composers of Broadway’s Golden Age — had a pronounced Jewish lilt in a number of his songs, and he actually attended Yiddish theater regularly.)
The film’s last section is about the renewed interest in Yiddish that began in the 1970s and ’80s with the klezmer revival. Much of it focuses on the 2018 Yiddish production of Fiddler on the Roof in Yiddish, whose success was predetermined the moment the production was announced.
For the overwhelming majority of American Jews, from the Orthodox to the unaffiliated, Fiddler is all they know about the lives of their ancestors. And though it’s a world-class piece of musical theater, as a work of social history Fiddler is as phony as a glass eye. Nevertheless, for American Jews it’s a sacred text.
Fiddler was a huge hit, but it was a gimmick, a one-off, whose success does very little for the future of Yiddish theater. Worse, the Yiddish — not the text, but the lines spoken by most of the actors — was often mispronounced and had the wrong intonation. (One elderly gentleman of my acquaintance, a native Yiddish speaker from Czechoslovakia, told me he didn’t understand a word the actors said, and spent the whole evening reading the English supertitles.)
What follows the Fiddler section in Immigrant Songs is mostly bromides. But the best current Yiddish theater reflects the kind of fresh thinking that keeps the form alive.
An occasional well-presented museum piece, like the Folksbiene’s 2016 revival of Rumshinsky’s operetta The Golden Bride, is a very worthwhile project (though it, too, suffered from poorly spoken Yiddish). But the most dynamic contemporary Yiddish theater is, in Jeffrey Shandler’s apt phrase, “post vernacular” — i .e., the use of Yiddish is self-conscious, a deliberate choice rather than something that’s done automatically, as it would have been a century ago when there were a lot more Yiddish speakers in the world.
An example of this is the 2017 neo-realist film Menashe, which could far more easily and conventionally have been made in English. Or a well-known piece done in Yiddish translation, like Shane Baker’s stunning Yiddish translation of Waiting for Godot, can become something much more valuable than a mere stunt. The Yiddish version, under Moshe Yassur’s straightforward direction, humanized the play, stripping it of the encrusted pretentiousness that had hidden its soul. (When it was presented in the International Samuel Beckett Festival in Ireland, multiple audience members approached the cast afterwards with the same reaction: “I don’t speak a word of Yiddish. But I’ve seen Godot five or six times, and this is the first time I understood it.”)
There’s a lot to be learned from Immigrant Songs. If you find yourself hungry for more, you couldn’t do better than to seek out YIVO’s online Yiddish theater course “Oh, Mama, I’m in Love!” But by all means, start with Immigrant Songs. It’s a very entertaining and informative appetizer.
The post New documentary captures the lively history of Yiddish theater in America appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
UK PM Starmer Says There Could Be New Powers to Ban Pro-Palestinian Marches
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer gives a media statement at Downing Street in London, Britain, April 30, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Jack Taylor/File photo
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the government could ban pro-Palestinian marches in some circumstances because of the “cumulative effect” the demonstrations had on the Jewish community after two Jewish men were stabbed in London on Wednesday.
Starmer told the BBC that he would always defend freedom of expression and peaceful protest, but chants like “Globalize the Intifada” during demonstrations were “completely off limits” and those voicing them should be prosecuted.
Pro-Palestinian marches have become a regular feature in London since the October 2023 attack by Hamas on Israel that triggered the Gaza war. Critics say the demonstrations have generated hostility and become a focus for antisemitism.
Protesters have argued they are exercising their democratic right to spotlight ongoing human rights and political issues related to the situation in Gaza.
Starmer said he was not denying there were “very strong legitimate views about the Middle East, about Gaza,” but many people in the Jewish community had told him they were concerned about the repeat nature of the marches.
Asked if the tougher response should focus on chants and banners, or whether the protests should be stopped altogether, Starmer said: “I think certainly the first, and I think there are instances for the latter.”
“I think it’s time to look across the board at protests and the cumulative effect,” he said, adding that the government needed to look at what further powers it could take.
Britain raised its terrorism threat level to “severe” on Thursday amid mounting security concerns that foreign states were helping fuel violence, including against the Jewish community.
“We are seeing an elevated threat to Jewish and Israeli individuals and institutions in the UK,” the head of counter-terrorism policing, Laurence Taylor, said in a statement, adding that police were also working “against an unpredictable global situation that has consequences closer to home, including physical threats by state-linked actors.”
Uncategorized
War Likely to Resume After Trump’s Rejection of Latest Proposal, Says IRGC General
Iranians carry a model of a missile during a celebration following an IRGC attack on Israel, in Tehran, Iran, April 15, 2024. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
i24 News – A senior Iranian military figure said that fighting with the US was “likely” to resume after President Donald Trump stated he was dissatisfied with Tehran’s latest proposal, regime media reported on Saturday.
The comments of General Mohammad Jafar Asadi, one of the top Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders, were relayed by the Fars news agency, considered as a mouthpiece of the the powerful paramilitary body.
“Evidence has shown that the Americans do not not adhere to any commitments,” Asadi was quoted as saying.
He further added that Washington’s decision-making was “primarily media-driven aimed first at preventing a drop in oil prices and second at extricating themselves from the mess they have created.”
Iranian armed forces are ready “for any new adventures or foolishness from the Americans,” he said, going to assert that the Iran war would prove for the US a tragedy comparable with what was for Israel the October 7 massacre.
“Just as our martyred Leader said that the Zionist regime will never be the same as before the Al‑Aqsa Storm operation [the name chosen by Hamas leadership for the October 7, 2023 massacre in southern Israel], the United States will also never return to what it was before its attack on Iran,” he said. “The world has understood the true nature of America, and no matter how much malice it shows now, it is no longer the America that many once feared.”

