9th Av :Tisha B'Av

Hi All, 

Tonight and tomorrow we remember the destruction of the first and second  Temples , so  it's fasting and the book of lamentations to read through, along with various poems and prayers.

Open thread

Hi All,

Usual Shabbat open thread !

Shabbat shalom.

Rabbit surfing

Hi all,

This is sooooo cool

Ruth and Moabites

Hi All,

Someone emailed me to gloat :

"according to the bible, it says that Jews aren't supposed to marry or convert Moabites, yet in the book of Ruth that happens and Ruth is the grandmother of King David! Doesn't this invalidate the whole David story and show what a made up jumble that is the bible?"

I believe that this is a reference to this part of Torah :

לֹֽא־יָבֹ֧א עַמֹּונִ֛י וּמֹואָבִ֖י בִּקְהַ֣ל יְהוָ֑ה גַּ֚ם דֹּ֣ור עֲשִׂירִ֔י לֹא־יָבֹ֥א לָהֶ֛ם בִּקְהַ֥ל יְהוָ֖ה עַד־עֹולָֽם׃

No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the L-rd , not even in the tenth generation.Deuteronomy 23:3

I would say this is unfortunately an example of how people try to study the Bible without the Oral Torah  alongside the written Torah and therefore get things wrong.

Firstly the Torah doesn't forbid a Moabite to convert , only to "enter the assembly of the L-rd" , which the Talmud tells us ,( Yevamot 77b)  means that a Moabite could convert , but could only marry either a Jew of  poor linage  or  another convert rather than a Jew by birth, but because of their historical cruelty to the Jewish people they did not permi their truly becoming a part of the Jewish nation ( see verse 5 of Deut 23) .

Secondly the oral tradition notes that the Torah writes Moabite in the masculine form and this indicates that the previous point only applies to Moabite men. Moabite women could convert and therefore marry into the nation.  Incidentally  in the mystical tradition (Zohar Chadash – Ruth 78a) Ruth's name spelt backward means dove and thus this is symbolic of the Temple sacrifices , indicating that Ruth was permitted to fully become a part of the Jewish people. 

Thirdly this definitely means that Ruth was a  Jew. Ruth converted to Judaism before marrying Boaz and bearing Obed. (Ruth 1:16, where Ruth states her intention to convert). After Ruth converted, she was a Jew, and all of her children born after the conversion were Jewish as well. But even if Ruth were not Jewish at the time Obed was born, that would not affect King David's status as a Jew, because Ruth is an ancestor of David's father, not of David's mother, and David's Jewish status is determined by his mother.

Conversion

Hi all, 

I'm often  amazed at how easy it is to become a Christian :when at uni I was asked  to try an alpha course in two months and that's it, people were  converted . It seemed to me to be based on a type of emotional  reaction  , a sort of temporary mass hysteria. I do NOT mean to be disrespectful in that regard, but I honestly cannot understand how those people made such a (presumably ) life changing  decision in such a short space of time. More importantly would these people maintain their new found faith and how did they know enough to stick with it?

 You see by  contrast in my own faith of Judaism we don't actively look for converts or bums on seats . A  potential convert was traditionally discouraged  three times to make sure they were genuine.

  A convert has to:

1). Undertake a Bris (if male ). If already circumcised prior to conversion a token prick of blood is taken.

2). Be immersed in a mikvah

3). Say that they will adhere to the Mitzvot

The process involves :

1). Being initially sponsored by a Rabbi

2) An initial appraisal by the Beth Din (judicial court) that the candidate can begin training to convert.

3) . Staying with a Jewish family so that question convert can see Judaism in day to day living.

4)intensive study and tutoring  such as:

Learning Hebrew

Understanding Judaism e.g. Shabbat , holidays,  Jewish Synagogue services, basic Jewish law 

5) Finally after all of that a candidate has to go before a Beth Din (religious court) to be interviewed by dayanim (religious judges , extremely learned  Rabbis) and to meet with their approval that the candidate is sincere and meets the criteria for conversion according to Jewish law. Only then and with all the criteria met  will they approve the convert and  issue a certificate of conversion , in which case  the person be considered Jewish. There are also clearly financial costs  to consider of this process.

My question is :

 which system is "better"? The quick approach in which (presumably you learn the basics after conversion) or the Jewish approach of knowing what is expected of you from the off, but which takes much longer ?

The peace of Jerusalem

Hi All,

אֲלוּ שְׁלֹ֣ום יְרוּשָׁלִָ֑ם יִ֝שְׁלָ֗יוּ אֹהֲבָֽיִךְ׃

'Pray for the Shalom of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee '(Psalm chapter 122)

 Jerusalem- the eternal &  undivided capital of Israel,  the historic and current homeland of the Jewish people - is unfortunately the centre of more unrest. This time it is to do with the recent murder of two Israeli policemen by terrorists on what is called the Temple Mount - the place of the Holy Temple of Jerusalem, Beit HaMikdash,  or what's left of it stands, the dwelling place of  God on earth. When the Muslims conquered Jerusalem they built a mosque on the Temple mount and continue to use it today.

In response the Israeli authorities have installed metal detectors as a security measure, in line with most other world important places (including Mecca). But because this is Israel (i.e. Jews) doing this the Arabs have kicked up a fuss and rioted etc.  Then , during  Shabbat , a Palestinian terrorist entered the home of a Jewish family and stabbed to death three people and wounded another  before being shot. The family  were not only celebrating Shabbat, but the birth of a grandson.  As we celebrate new life,  others were taking it! More murder and terrorism . God help us!

May God heal the wounded survivors of the attack, may He comfort the family, and may He avenge the dead. And may we never hear of such things again. Amen

On Toilets and changing rooms

One of the many controversies in the realm of gender and sexuality is that of transgender people and toilets, namely the right or not to use the room not of their current physical state but of how they identity in their mind (e.g. pre hormone therapy and operations) especially in colleges , universities and workplaces.

This means you could identify as a woman , but have all the bits of a man because you haven't had an operation yet which can lead to justified worry by women( including fully transitioned transgender women)  that any man could go into  women's toilets and use the excuse they're transgender , even though they could just be perverts or up to other nefarious matters.  

The obvious solution to my mind is for people to have passes for the toilets and these to be issued by security.  However what seems to be happening in the name of equality is gender neutral unisex  toilets  , in other words one bloc for men and women. Problem solved , except it doesn't ally any of my concerns. Interestingly they've done this at my  university and it's fascinating how the cubicles have been informally divided into a man's part and a woman's part (you can tell by which ones have the lid up).

I've noticed the same thing with the public swimming baths. They are also unisex and again I feel distinctly uncomfortable with showering next to men (note with swimming costumes on! Another inconvenience as bathing clothes stink of chlorine so there's not much point in showering).  Unless you are Muslim , in which case there's a special women's only night. Why this isn't extended to other faiths with modesty requirements ( eg Judaism) I don't know. Maybe the powers that be think we should all be like the shower scene in star ship troopers , where everyone showers naked, both male and female.  I just don't like the thought of it. 

Maybe I'm just too prudish or it could be my upbringing. Of Shomer Negiah . I don't have an issue with  mixed swimming or beaches as I've left a lot of my ultra orthodoxy. I don't   agree with the fifty foot high and beach long wall they built in Eilat Israel for the Haredi (to divide the sexes, thankfully there are lots of other nice beaches in Eilat) .  But neither do I like mixed sex toilets or changing rooms. 

 Inconsistent yes, but am I alone in feeling that there are some boundaries to push and others  to be left alone?

French Jews

This article from the Times of Israel is a must to understand why so many French Jews are leaving France for Israel and Britain.

Who will it be?

Hi All,

I  can't wait to see who's going to be the new who after the mens Wimbledon final this afternoon. Will it be Kris Marshall or Phoebe Waller-Bridge ?Or someone else ? 

UPDATE: [someone else] Jodie Whittaker. Who??!

Gut Shabbes

I bet you will all be pleased to know that I haven't gone anywhere, suffice to say that I was busy with my university exams and now they are all done , I can focus..   on this blog.

If Hannah's looking to do some Torah study notes (we'll do the whole Torah after  Rosh Hashanah ) and science fiction "stuff" , I'm not entirely sure where this will leave I . 

In many Jewish blogs, women talk about cooking and maybe have a moan about the excessive creep of modesty strictures.  But cooking blogs been done so many times and I  have no real problem with modesty , except to say the fundamentalist attitude toward defining it.

Note to readers , I use fundamentalist  in this post NOT in a pejorative sense . My parents are fundamentalist Jews. They aren't bad people , they aren't violent. They simply follow and study the Torah to the letter and the more stricter the better. They believe this gives maximum glory to God.  Torah was handed down from heaven to Moses and the Jewish nation at Sinai which binds every Jew in a covenant until the end of time (which incidentally all Ashkenazi Orthodox accept as do Sephardim). I say this as one who was told to leave the house as a teenager for coming out as gay. Incidentally after years of reflection , I don't blame my parents for that  as rightly or wrongly they were sticking to their beliefs. I guess I do too, it's a Charedi  thing. You're in the camp. You're outside the camp. No middle ground, it's black and white , right and wrong.

Hannah's sister in law (the French Israeli) is from a Chasidic & religious Zionist, Ashkenazi - Sephardi background. The combination of the fiery passionate charismatic mystical approach to God,  the Jewish people, The Torah and life, the alternative to the Charedi legalism , with a belief in settling the historic land of Israel -is also a fundamentalist.   not in a pejorative way, but in the sense of doing the fundamentals of one's observance.

They're all true to themselves just as I am being true to myself.  Honesty and truth come  with a price. There was a time when I was somewhat ashamed of being Jewish, especially when anything happens in Israel and I stopped saying Psalms , reading Torah and observing  shabbos and ignored vile comments about Israel and Jews. 

 Today I'm not ashamed to be a Jew and I do defend Israel. I do enjoy studying Torah, keep kosher  and celebrate& observe Shabbos again. Although eating Sephardic and Mizarhi food, Mediterranean and spicy middle eastern food,  did take  some getting used to and I was mortified Hannah never served up the chicken soup. Jewish penicillin and key dish in any Shabbos meal. So  I remembered how to cook. There's nothing like a combo of Ashkenazi and Sephardic home cooked food.

As it is the eve  Shabbos or Shabbat , I would wish you all a Shabbat Shalom and a gut Shabbes.

And a song sent to us by Hannah's sister in law :

One verse of Torah is interesting

Hi all

In the comments section below, there’s a conversation about how boring it is to study Torah and more generally the Tanach via a plain meaning ( peshat ). As my sister explained because we as Jews believe that the Torah is the divine document from God, it is incumbent (and logical) that we first study the text’s plain meaning. Why are some words used and why aren’t others ? There’s a particular reason why the words used are the words used.

An example was given by my sister  of Genesis 4:1.

אוְהָאָדָם יָדַע אֶת חַוָּה אִשְׁתּוֹ וַתַּהַר וַתֵּלֶד אֶת קַיִן וַתֹּאמֶר קָנִיתִי אִישׁ אֶת יְהֹוָה:

A transliteration

Veha adam yada et ishtov; chavvah vattahar vatteled et kayin vattomer kaniti Adonai

A translation would be something like this :

And the Man knew [et] Eve his wife and she conceived and bore [et] Caine and said “I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord”

A more modern day translation would- to trendy Church of England types- be something like this :

Adam and Eve shagged and she got preggars and gave birth to Caine and said “ I have a man with the help of the Lord”.

Immediately you can see- from 1 verse of Torah-  how translating the text in English can alter the way you come to conclusions about the text and secondly there are multiple queries and questions for study .

I’ve listed a few , below off the top of my head : 

1) Is this the first time Adam and Eve have had sex or the first time outside of Eden? 

2) This occurs just being kicked out of Eden. Where are they and why is sexual intercourse the first thing they do or is emphasised?

3) Was there any other children Adam and Eve had in Eden or was this the first birth?

4) Why is it that ‘Yada’- the verb ‘to know’- is used (among others- could this be a hint for this passage?) , when people have or want to have sexual intercourse in the Bible? As an aside the Christian translators of the KJV were being faithful to the text here, it literally does mean ‘to know’ . Just out of curiosity I checked out some of the newer translations of the Hebrew Bible and they use euphemisms for sexual intercourse. But they don’t actually use the term.

5) Why does Eve refer to her newborn as a man (ish) and not an infant ?

6) What does Even mean when she says “I have acquired a man with YKVK (‘the Lord’)” ?

7) The word et is used in the verse three times, discuss why.

You see that using the original Hebrew and understanding the language helps for a more in depth study and studying in itself the Torah isn't dull and boring ....!

Sephardi tradition

Hi all,

I see so clearly now why there's a Sephardic tradition and why there's multiple Ashkenazi one. The world can change Jews  or Jews  can change the world.  It's worth the risk.In short Torah , precisely because it is God's gift and is divine is strong and powerful enough to withstand whatever the world says . I've never really understood Ashkenazi Orthodox, especially the Ultra Orthodox  Haredi  desire for isolationism as much as possible.

I believe that  tradition and halachic approach can adapt and change throughout time,  without the concept or the law  being made irrelevant or denying the Torah . Rabbis are free to rule with leniency rather than ruling strictly and of course  the community itself is the keeper of the tradition it wants to keep.

This was the tradition and Mesorah as it was taught to me by my grandparents when I was not at my boarding school or at my uncle's farm in Yorkshire (I was orphaned from birth , hence these three were my biggest influence growing up ). They even studied the Torah in the traditional Sephardi way and not the current Lithuanian Ashkenazi Haredi  school which is dominant today. I was brought up with a more open inquisitive approach to the non Jewish world without a sense of wanting to abandon Judaism or Torah. My grandparents were particularly concerned that we received a broad education combining Limudei Kodesh (study of Jewish sacred Texts) with Limudei  Khol (that is general studies  i.e. "secular education" ).    

But can Judaism change ? Yes it can.  But sometimes we don't see it or don't want to see it. Maybe we are also guilty of contemporary linking to 3,000  years ago   , if we  think our teacher  Moses stood at Sinai with a black hat . Or maybe ripped jeans and trainers. But it does change and it doesn't change. That's a paradox. Our community  prefers to ignore paradoxes and we think what we tbobk was always the way , so we can not get headaches over the fact that Torah is from God and God and the Torah don't change, even when they do.  Let's live with the paradox.

For example Abraham argued to save Sodom , Jonah to not preach to the Goy and got swallowed by a whale.  Was not God open to be challenged ? In a more seemingly mundane example,  Jewellery isn't supposed to be worn on shabbat according to the  Sages of the Talmud.   Yet the tradition since the Rishonim, has been that  women are permitted to wear jewellery on Shabbat. Chazon Ovadia (Rabbi Ovadia Yoesf )  also confirms this to be the case.

In the 19th century , Rabbi  Mani  ( chief Rabbi of Hebron) had  visited India and helped the Mesopotamian Jews who had immigrated  there (including some of my forebears)   decided that the streets of Bombay couldn't be considered public domain on shabbat "de'orayta" ( from written Torah)  but   public domain only " de'rabannan" (from Rabbinical decree) .

Rabbi Somekh , the Rosh Yeshiva (that's the Jewish equivalent of an Oxbridge Don) and  communal leader of Mesopotamian Jewry disagreed in discussion- because such as ruling went against The Shulchan Aruch  ,  but did accept Rabbi Mani's rationale . This  was to help the community's undertaking and observance of Shabbat  :in short so  non Jews  could carry parasol and other items  in the hot weather , for the community to attend synagogue , rather than them doing so themselves and thus violating Shabbat and to keep the community together ,even though his ruling was different and contrary to previous Sephardi ruling. There was no crises and no split .

In respect of women and whether we are second class citizens in Judaism. Haredi may think so. I have no needs to look for ancient tomes to argue with them. My tradition clearly states that women can have the right to vote,  be leaders and secular judges. From a 70 year old source

Rabbi Uziel was chief Rabbi of Mandatory Palestine and Israel and was a key influence in arguing for women to vote, be leaders and enter public offices. 

Rabbi Uziel in part of his responsa , asked rhetorically were women not "creatures created in the image of God and blessed with intelligence?" Are they not subject to the decisions made by the elected assembly? "How can you grab both ends of the rope at the same time: impose disciplinary obligation [the obligation to obey the decisions of the elected representatives] on them but deny them the right to vote?"

And in addition :

"Reason allows us to say that in any serious and productive conversation there is no [case for restriction] on the basis of licentiousness, for every day men meet women in commercial transactions and negotiate, and there is neither breach nor outcry. And even those who have a proclivity for promiscuity would not think of prohibited relations while focusing in earnest on their trade. And our Sages did not say “do not extend conversation with a woman” (Mishna, Avot 1:5) but [only] with respect to an idle conversation that has no [valid] purpose, and such discourse does lead to transgression, but not an exchange of debate in important and public matters. And it is not the case that sitting in shared space and proximity for the sake of public service, which is עבודת הקדש, habituates towards wrongdoing and leads to light-headedness…”

Shabbat Slalom! 

Taking Aliens to court for abduction

Hi all

Whilst I'm on a roll , this opening scene could make an excellent story or maybe series  (nb, in the Babylon 5 storyline it didn't,it was an opening credits scene).

The doctor falls

Hi all,

Some random thoughts:

1)I think the issue with this one was that there was a lot to finish in an hour and maybe they should have done 10 episodes and done a two hour tv movie , so there was a new reboot of Dr Who, fully regenerated by 25th December.

2) If this was a part two of three then maybe it wasn't so bad, but it looks like not. I wish they'd have actually solved the actual issue i.e. saving the children and people on that level of the space ship . The master actually said that even successfully moving them to the next level wasn't going to work because the cyber men would get through eventually. The doctor agreed. But with the ending, why couldn't Bill's girlfriend save them ? Either by TARDIS or by the fact she's this all advanced space ship herself? As it is nardol and co have been left to die .

3)The master and missy had some classic lines , but were under utilised and were just sideshows, which was disappointing given the arc about the vault. In fact why couldn't they have all made a break for the master's TARDIS? I thought the sexual flirting between what in plot terms was the same person , was highly weird and unnecessary.

4) The cybermen were not really the creepy threat of last week. All they did was stomp around and get blown up. They just didn't feel like a menace and I couldn't get into the defence of the farm thing which they'd done before anyway with Matt Smith. Incidentally why didn't the cybermen simply burrow directly into the farm building ?

5) If cyber Bill cut through to the next why was it underground? I thought that was where the cybermen were? Surely they'd would have to try to get to the sky.??

6). I was waiting for the girl to be revealed (somehow) as a young Bill or her daughter.

7). The thing with Bill's girlfriend just popping up was pure Deus ex machina . And if that was so , why didn't they save the others? In fact didn't they do the same thing with Clara last year?

8) . If Bill wanted to die because of being a cyberman , why didn't she sacrifice herself instead if the doctor (and if needs be get saved anyways by her girlfriend).

9). How did "the pilot" pilot the TARDIS? Will this ever be resolved properly?

10). I wonder what they'll change about the first doctor now he's in effect going to be the "companion" next time.