Viewing 1 - 9 out of 12 Blogs.

Page:  1 | 2 | Next >  Last >>

From feast, to fast, to feast

---

UZI SILBER , THE JERUSALEM POST Mar. 18, 2008

---

While the Fast of Esther is a day of solemnity, it isn't for me - it happens to coincide with my son Asher's brit mila - only the second to be held in the historic Eldridge Street Synagogue on Manhattan's Lower East Side in the last half- century.

In fact, the 13th of the month of Adar, the date on which the Fast of Esther falls, boasts a distinguished history as a day both jubilant and mournful.

During the early Maccabean era, the 13th of Adar was not the Fast of Esther, but the Feast of Nicanor - at the time one of the happiest holidays in the Jewish calendar.

So who was this Nicanor, why did he merit such an illustrious feast, and were did it go?

The First Book of Maccabees reports that not long after the events commemorating Hanukka, King Demetrius, nephew of Antiochus Epiphanes, dispatched his Jew-hating general Nicanor on a mission to slaughter Judah Maccabee and "The People" once and for all.

The fateful battle between Judah and Nicanor took place on the 13th of Adar. Happily, things didn't turn out as planned: the Jews routed the army of Nicanor, who himself fell in the battle, his head placed in short order on public exhibit in Jerusalem.

Nicanor's Day was decreed in the Second Book of Maccabees as a feast to celebrate this deliverance, and was widely observed in the Land of Israel over the next two centuries - until the destruction of the Temple.

YET DESPITE its onetime prominence, this feast has vanished from our calendar. What then happened to Nicanor's day? Before addressing this question another must be settled: how could such a happy occasion be celebrated on the 13th of Adar in the first place? Wasn't this particular date in the Jewish calendar already taken, and by a well-known fast day at that?

Apparently not. Until Maccabean times, neither Purim nor the fast that precedes it are mentioned anywhere outside of the Book of Esther (which Jewish tradition dates to the 5th century BCE, but was probably written around the time of the first Hanukka). In fact, it would be three centuries before the word "Purim" is first coined - in the Mishna.

The single hint of an emergent proto-Purim is found in the aforementioned decree in the Book of Maccabees II, announcing the Feast of Nicanor on Adar 13th. The text notes that the feast falls one day before a certain "Mordecai Day," a previously unmentioned, but obvious precursor of Purim.

It seems that the holiday later known as Purim arose in the long-established Babylonian/Persian Diaspora, as a Jewish adaptation of a Persian end-of-winter masquerade celebration, similar to Europe's Carnivale and Louisiana's Mardi Gras.

One need look no further for the holiday's Babylonian roots than the names of its heroes: Mordecai is derived from the Babylonian god Marduk; as for Esther, Rabbi Nehemiah explains in tractate Megilla 13a as follows: "Hadassa was her original name; why then was she called Esther? Because Idol worshipers referred to her after the name of the planet Venus, or Ishtar."

Since Mordecai Day was a holiday of the Mesopotamian and Persian Jews, it's not surprising that their brethren in the homeland didn't come around to adopting it for some time. After all, they already had their own established day of national deliverance in the form of Nicanor's Feast.

The ambivalence of homeland Jews with respect to both Purim and the Book of Esther is suggested in the Talmud. Megilla 7a relates a mysterious tale in which the rabbis of Israel receive a letter from Queen Esther demanding that the rabbis accept - the text isn't clear which - Purim, her Megilla, or both.

The rabbis of the Holy land hesitate, wondering aloud whether yet another festival that is sure to upset the gentiles is really necessary. Esther persists in her demands in the face of their resistance, declaring that the King of Persia himself has accepted her holiday.

As it happens, the Talmud records the vigorous rabbinic debates on the merits of admitting the Book of Esther into the Biblical canon. Those rabbis that doubted the Megilla's sacred bonafides took issue with the total absence of God's name from the narrative as well as the spectacle of a Jewish maiden marrying a gentile king.

But as we know, the Jews of Israel did ultimately adopt Purim, and the Megilla was finally allowed into the Biblical canon.

WHICH BRINGS us to the fate of Nicanor Day. Two disastrous Jewish rebellions (in 66-70 and 132-135 CE) against Rome and a destroyed Temple would have rendered the jubilant Nicanor's feast outdated. Under the circumstances, a transformation of the 13th of Adar from Nicanor's jubilant feast into Esther's mournful fast would not have been unreasonable.

With the old feast now a new fast, the Persian Mordecai Day was left to develop into Purim.

That Esther's day replaced Nicanor's does make historical sense: after all, it was the Babylon-based rabbis who would ultimately gain halachic pre-eminence and leadership at the expense of their colleagues in the Land of Israel, deciding which holidays were or weren't observed.

As far as I'm concerned, restoring the now sorrowful 13th of Adar to its original joyous character would suit me fine.
I'll just call it Asher's Day.

The writer is a New York-based author and research analyst. He is now writing a graphic novel about life and loss on the Lower East Side.

Israel 's Foreign Minister says no to Palestinian state  

The Torah Response to an act of Terrorism


An Excerpt from the 2002 film by Jewish Educational Media, "Pioneers."

The story of Chabad Chassidic settlement in the Holy Land from the 1700's, and
the broad frontiers of today's Chabad.

The Torah Response to an act of Terrorism


An Excerpt from the 2002 film by Jewish Educational Media, "Pioneers."

The story of Chabad Chassidic settlement in the Holy Land from the 1700's, and
the broad frontiers of today's Chabad.

Attack will be seen in Messianic terms

---

Amir Mizroch , THE JERUSALEM POST Mar. 7, 2008

---

While defense establishment officials sitting in the Kiriya military headquarters in Tel-Aviv ponder the diplomatic-security implications of last night's attack, a totally different analysis will be taking place this weekend around Shabbat dinner tables across Jerusalem and most West Bank settlements.

The people directly affected by the deadly terrorist attack on the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva are not just the students, their relatives and friends, but the much wider larger segment of the religious Zionist public. This segment of the population, already seething with anger, which started with the Disengagement in 2005, the Amona pullout, the government promises to America remove illegal outposts, the continued diplomatic process launched at Annapolis and its emphasis to talk about all topics, including Jerusalem, is going to be extremely unhappy about this attack. Together with the grief and sorrow, there is going to be a lot of angry talk about good and evil, about a religious war over the Holy Land.

This attack was aimed specifically for the religious Zionist and settler population, and the terrorists knew that by speaking in this language, to these people, their message could only be interpreted in one way. This will be seen in terms of Ishmael and Isaac.

Being messianic religious people, the religious Zionists are going to see this attack through the prism of messianic prophecy. Already I am hearing on religious Zionist radio stations people talking about the attack in prophetic terms, such as Isaiah 59 verse 20: And a redeemer will come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord.

Settler radio talk- show hosts are interpreting this prophecy by saying that if the Jews don't stop Hamas, the Palestinians, Hizbullah and any other Islamic fundamentalists God will force the Jews to do it. The talk-show hosts blame Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and President Shimon Peres, and several callers into the broadcasts are unanimous in their condemnation of the Israeli government and calling on its removal.

The fact that the Foreign Ministry has already come out with a formal statement saying the attack won't derail the talks with the Palestinian Authority will only fuel the anger of the settler population this weekend. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the Knesset from Sunday and the implications on the coalition. Shas will come under immense pressure to bolt the government.

At the funeral procession speeches Friday at the Yeshiva, Chief Sephardic Rabbi Shlomo Amar began his comments with the Psalm for Assaf: "They have spilled blood like water around Jerusalem."

Many of the top leadership of the religious Zionist movement, speaking at the funerals, spoke of revenge of the blood. The fact that the Jewish students were killed in a house of God touched the most basic nerve of many Israelis, and especially of the religious Zionist public.

The rabbis called on the students not to carry out acts of revenge, saying that judgment is in God's realm. "God's vengeance will come swiftly," Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu's secretary cried out in his rabbi's name. The eulogists also praised the deceased for their studiousness and deep connection to Torah and entreated those in attendance not to falter in their study of the sacred writ.

Very few people outside the religious Zionist population have even heard of Mercaz Harav, let alone know somebody who studies there. This was not an attack aimed at the wider Israeli public, but a strategic attack against a very vocal public who will be demanding action of the government. There may even be some on the fringes of the settlement movement who will want to take the law into their own hands and carry out a revenge attack, maybe even against targets in East Jerusalem, where it looks like the killer came from.

The fact that the attack was carried out in the way it was - live fire, chasing down the students and shooting them at point blank range, as well as confirming the kills - and not by a suicide bombing, will add to the sense of brutality, of the narrative of good versus evil.

For more of Amir's articles and posts, visit his personal blog Forecast Highs

To My New Friends.........HAVE A GREAT SHABBAT!!!

Synagogue Bloopers

 

These announcements were found in shul (synagogue)
newsletters and bulletins.  Even spell check wouldn't have helped.



  1.   Don't let worry kill you.  Let your synagogue help.
Join  us for our  Oneg after services.  Prayer and medication to follow.
Remember in prayer the many who are sick of our congregation.

  2.  For those of you who have children and don't know it,
we have a nursery downstairs.



  3.  We are pleased to announce the birth of David Weiss,
the sin of Rabbi and Mrs.  Abe Weiss.



  4.  Thursday at, there will be a meeting of the Little
Mothers Club. All women wishing to become Little Mothers please see the
rabbi in his private study.



  5.  The ladies of Hadassah have cast off clothing of every
kind and they may be seen in the basement on Tuesdays.



  6.  A bean supper will be held Wednesday evening in the
community center.  Music will follow.



  7.  Weight Watchers will meet at 7 PM at the JCC. Please
use the large double door at the side entrance.



  8.  Rabbi is on vacation.  Massages can be given to his
secretary.



  9.  Goldblum will be entering the hospital this week for
testes.



  10.  The Men's Club is warmly invited to the Oneg hosted
by Hadassah.  Refreshments will be served for a nominal feel.



  11.   Please join us as we show our support for Amy and
Rob, who are preparing for the girth of their first child.



  12.  We are taking up a collection to defray the cost of
the new carpet in the sanctuary.  All those wishing to do something on the
carpet will come forward and get a piece of paper.



  13.  If you enjoy sinning, the choir is looking for you!



  14.  The Associate Rabbi unveiled the synagogue's new
fundraising campaign slogan this week: "I Upped My Pledge.  Up Yours!

John McCain aspires to take the presidential oath to "preserve, protect and defend, the Constitution," but some of his actions have raised doubts about whether he would do that. Two controversies, one now before the Supreme Court and the other perhaps headed there, raise questions pertinent to his grasp of constitutional values.

One case challenges the "millionaires' amendment" to the McCain-Feingold legislation that rations political speech by restricting the financing, content and timing of it. The other case concerns the right of SpeechNow.org to speak freely against people like McCain. If he still supports the former and does not support the latter, he should not take that oath.

McCain-Feingold's purported purpose is to combat corruption or the appearance thereof. The Supreme Court has said that it will be deferential to the legislative branch if but only if the restrictions it puts on political activity have the purpose of preventing corruption.

The millionaires' amendment, however, obviously has nothing to do with preventing corruption. Its patent purpose is to assuage the legislators' dread of self-financing opponents. It says:

When a self-financing House candidate spends more than $350,000, his opponent gets three benefits. The opponent can receive contributions of $6,900, triple the statutory limit of $2,300 per election (primary or general). Second, the donors' tripled contributions are not counted against those donors' aggregate contribution limits for the two-year cycle. Third, the opponent is permitted to coordinate with his party committee unlimited party expenditures that otherwise would be limited by statute. Senate campaigns are subject to even more generous provisions for candidates with self-financing opponents.

This incumbent-protection measure mocked McCain-Feingold's pretense of being concerned exclusively with corruption—candidates cannot corrupt themselves by spending their own money on their own behalf. The Supreme Court says corruption arises from quid pro quo arrangements connecting contributions with particular actions of a public official. Hence, self-financing candidates have minimal susceptibility to coercive pressures and serve McCain-Feingold's purported purpose.

McCain, who is easily aggravated and sometimes seems to think that whatever aggravates him should be illegal, said "all of us are aggravated" by high-spending self-financing candidates. He seemed aghast that under the amendment, "A millionaire can spend $1 million and immediately the other person can raise $50 million in coordinated and direct party expenditures." So McCain understood that the amendment punishes self-financing candidates who use their noncorrupting money to disseminate their political speech. And it punishes them by increasing their opponents' access to supposedly corrupting money. But McCain voted for it. Perhaps he, like many other legislators, wanted to "level the playing field." The court, however, has held that it is unconstitutional to legislate equal quantities of speech.

SpeechNow.org, which accepts contributions only from individuals (no corporations or unions), has been formed to urge voters to support candidates who oppose, and oppose candidates who support, restrictions on political speech, such as McCain-Feingold. SpeechNow says that because it will not give a nickel to any candidate or campaign, it is not a "political committee" and should not be subject to the $5,000 limit on contributions from any individual. The Federal Election Commission, which exists to administer restrictions and hence is unsympathetic to SpeechNow.org's mission, fortunately lacks a quorum to answer this question, so SpeechNow has asked a federal court to answer it.

A billionaire—say, George Soros, a supporter of McCain-Feingold and donor to John McCain—can spend $1 million to disseminate his enthusiasm for campaign restrictions (on others). But 100 individuals could be forbidden to exercise their First Amendment right of free association by organizing through SpeechNow to pool $10,000 apiece in order to exercise their right of free speech to refute Soros. Does McCain think that would be fair?

He could assuage some doubts about his judgment, and about his capacity to rethink his pet ideas when they have perverse consequences, if he would file two amicus (friend of the court) briefs. One, to the federal court in the SpeechNow case, should defend that organization's right to speech as unrestricted as Soros's. McCain's other brief, to the Supreme Court, should argue that the millionaires' amendment is unconstitutional.

McCain has not been bashful about advising the Supreme Court. He filed a brief urging it to uphold McCain-Feingold's "blackout" period, as applied in 2004 to Wisconsin Right to Life, a small citizens' group that posed no threat of corruption. WRTL wanted to run an ad urging Wisconsin's senators, Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold, not to participate in filibusters against the president's judicial nominees. But because Feingold was running for re-election, the ad was declared an "electioneering communication" because it referred to a candidate for federal office. McCain-Feingold bans such ads 30 days before a primary or 60 days before a general election—when ads matter most.

Fortunately, the court rejected McCain's argument for suppressing WRTL's speech. If he will not file briefs in the cases of the millionaires' amendment and SpeechNow, voters can judge if he would "preserve, protect and defend, the Constitution."

Page:  1 | 2 | Next >  Last >>