Ki Mitzion Tetzei Torah

Years ago I stopped iterating the familiar, chanted prayer “ki mitzion tetzei torah”, having considered the weightiness of these words, in light of the current, uninspiring and derisive “torah” coming forth from Zion, the seat of the chief rabbinate. To the people of Israel, Am Yisrael, torah means different things to different people: Torat Kohanim, Torat Hamelech, Torat Korbanot, Torat Hateva, and Torat Imeinu, are but a few of the permutations of torah and its teachings. What most people, however would agree upon is that torah was never intended to be divisive, derisive, exclusive and encouraging prejudicial treatment of a minority seeking equality and inclusion under Torat Am Yisrael. Certainly, Isaiah’s intent when he uttered these words was that a strong moral and ethical message must go forth from Zion; not one laden with the politics of hate.

Over the decades and from the inception of statehood, Torat Am Yisrael has contributed enormously to the welfare of its citizens, placing them at the center of any social and welfare considerations. In many ways Isaiah would be proud of Israel’s accomplishments in the arts, sciences and humanities because of the manner in which these accomplishments have uplifted the human condition and spirit. However Torat Hashem that has been charged to the rabbinic leadership of Am Yisrael leaves much to be desired and if anything has sunk rather than uplifted the human spirit that Isaiah spoke of.

Recently the chief rabbi of Israel, Yonah Metzger (Ashkenazi) criticized the police for questioning Rabbis Yaakov Yosef and Dov Lior regarding their endorsement of the controversial book The Torah of the King. The book deals with the putative halachic position of killing non-Jews during wartime and the author of this inflammatory volume, Rabbi Yitzchak Shapiro is under police investigation for the incendiary content contained in this alleged metaphysically uplifting contribution to Jewish spirituality. Rabbi Metzger defended Shapiro claiming that the same standards, which apply to professors, protected by freedom of expression, ought to be applied to rabbis as well. Apparently, rabbi Metzger’s logic has been corrupted by the pilpulism shared by his acolytes, which graphically demonstrates the widening gap between the academic community and the medieval world he sojourns.

Academia is based not on the regurgitation of text and commentaries punctuated by inane interpretation, but on fundamental original research and thinking by which new ideas are germinated, tested and evaluated for their merit by scholars trained in critical thinking. Not every idea and theory has merit, but it is through consistent methodology, critical thinking and bold experimentation that have generated progress in the way we treat the human being and the world we live in. Haredi and ultra orthodox rabbis on the other hand, locked into medieval theological and halachic positions, have not the room or training to maneuver; intellectually smothered and rendered comatose very early in their development. It is for this reason that Rabbi Nosson Slifkin’s (haredi rabbi) theories and teachings about evolution were beaten back, his books banned, abused emotionally and verbally, as well as being victimized by character assassination in 2005. Original thought within the haredi/ultra orthodox community isn’t tolerated and so mired in anachronism that they can’t manage to move the furniture around in the room, much less replace it.
Rabbi Metzger knows as well as everyone else that the Shapiro book The Torah and the King is incitement to kill non-Jews in time of war. In the Haredi/ultra orthodox world there is a perpetual war raging against Amalek as currently personified by the Muslims. It was this type of incitement that got Yitzchak Rabin assassinated. By that standard, any academic that would incite to kill would be under a similar investigation.

There is no double standard, as Rabbi Shapiro would have us believe. What we do have is a colossal failure of the haredi/ultra orthodox community to study, analyze and critique text in a manner that would reflect intellectual honesty elevating all of us. Rather than ban Rabbi Slifkin’s books on evolution, (incorporating his teachings into the haredi/ultra orthodox curriculum which would have catapulted forward the haredi world into the modern age), they should be banning Rabbi Shapiro’s book, a throwback to the medieval period. By not doing so they have opted to remain suspended in the Middle Ages - the dark ages.

Feeling Guilty About Not Feeling Guilty: Reflections on Visiting Berlin

One year ago a friend of mine called to let me know she was going to Berlin. My knee jerk reaction to her was ”couldn’t you find another place to visit”? That was a pavlovian reaction; my guilty conscience talking, not me. As a matter of fact I’ve been struggling with my putative guilty conscience regarding all things German since I was in my early twenties. Until the moment I bought a Karmann Ghia, (a two seater Volkswagen), I never considered the issue of whether or not to buy German products. It was a non-starter because I had never wanted or needed a foreign made product, at least none that I was aware of. But I wanted that car. Being in my twenties, with a mind of my own, a few bucks and the compulsion to live out my fantasies was all I needed to obsess over that green convertible Karmann Ghia, German or not! After all, the holocaust was history, I reasoned and the nefarious nazi murderers of Jews, thank god hadn’t directly impacted my family. Prior to buying the Karmann Ghia I had mentioned it to several friends and their reactions were universally the same: couldn’t you buy another car? Almost the same reaction I had when my friend told me she was going to visit Berlin forty years later. Interesting!

In examining my feelings then I noted no guilt in owning the car. Driving the Karmann Ghia was fun, especially with the top down, but something had been niggling away at me. Stepping into the car guiltlessly always aware of its German provenance I was concerned over my lack of guilt. Why wasn’t I feeling guilty about driving a German car? I should feel guilty –after all, six million of my people were murdered; whether they were my family wasn’t relevant. They were my people. Had I been in Germany or Eastern Europe immediately prior to or during World War II I would have surely been murdered. On the other hand I took note of the German reparations and the apparent ease by which Jews applied for and accepted the money. I also took note of the fact that Israel’s entire fleet of Egged buses were produced and manufactured by Mercedes and that most of the taxi fleet in around the country were Mercedes. It all boiled down to an awareness that I was feeling guilty about not feeing guilty. This was the kind of stuff turning over in my head until on one starry night my Karmann Ghia irreparably broke down and I settled for a Chevy.

Those feelings lay dormant for forty years until we decided to visit Berlin this past August. Interestingly I arranged my visit to Berlin with a visit to Israel first, notably Jerusalem, where I would conclave for 4 days with a very dear friend. Somehow flying to Berlin from Tel Aviv made more sense to me than flying from Chicago since doing so contextualize Berlin. Israel had become my security blanket noting that twice before, on trips to Austria, I arranged flying from Tel Aviv and not from some innocuous point of origination. To enter German or Austrian territory from any other point than Israel seemed sacrilegious. In other words, travelling to Germany or Austria via Israel somehow was ok, as though there was a hechsher. After all, if Israel has relations with Germany and Austria who am I too scoff at these countries?

I never liked Austria or the Austrians. I had been there on two separate occasions discovering that they weren’t a very friendly nation, nor did they care for foreigners, much less Jews. This observation was derived not on the basis of a quick, run through trip, but founded upon two lengthy stays, once in Vienna and the other time in Salzburg and its environs. Even the German I heard on the street was harsh sounding and evoked troubling images of the not too distant past. I felt good about these negative feelings because by having them I was sharing in the same feelings that so many of my people shared. I didn’t have to worry about not feeling guilty. Indeed it was comforting to be able to have an intense dislike for Austrians for no other reason than they had been instrumental in killing my people. Having had these negative feelings in Austria I was bracing for similar feelings in Berlin.

It was a shock to my system when after arriving in Berlin I didn’t experience any of the same feelings that I had in Austria. Berliners were open, friendly and embracing of foreigners and especially Jews and Israelis. During the time I was there I had nothing but positive experiences and good karma. German no longer seemed the harsh language of Nazis barking death orders to their compliant co-conspirators but an inviting, soft sounding language reminiscent of English. Ironically, this didn’t bode well for my complex Jewish psyche. I found myself once again seated in my Karmann Ghia with the top down, cruising Lake Shore Drive. Can life get any better? Yet niggling away at my psyche was the still small voice whispering about the bad things had happened to my people just a short while ago, robbing me of my ability to really enjoy myself. Here I was, sitting in a beergarten, drinking Berliner weisse beer desperately struggling with that small voice buried deep inside, always struggling to pop up and rob me of a good time. I was determined to keep it suppressed and enjoy the moment, knowing anyway that if I don’t feel guilty about celebrating life in Berlin, I will feel guilty about not feeling guilty.

Medieval Judaism - Uncorked

Witnessing the spectacle of what has become known, as the “Emmanuel prisoners” was an opportunity to experience up close what it must have been like to be a Jew in medieval Europe. I’ve read about it, I’ve fasted and mourned the unspeakable atrocities committed against our people while paradoxically celebrating the ensuing mesirat nefesh and kidush hashem. In fact an entire culture, literature and liturgy justifiably grew out of folk tales of mesirat nefesh. Many of our piyutim introduced into the liturgy were written on the background of mesirat nefesh. But the collective psychological impact resulting from relentless persecution has taken its toll on our nation. Concepts like kiddush hashem and mesirat nefesh over the course of time took on new meaning and were redefined by our rabbis. Indeed the siege mentality, resulting partly from this redefinition was at times a legitimate defense mechanism but unfortunately contributed also to the distortion of the national psyche. An example of this is the recent 11-day imprisonment of the 35 for refusing a Supreme Court order to send their daughters to a non-hassidic elementary school.

The imprisonment and subsequent release of Krimalovski and the pack of 35 has been treated by the haredi community as deliverance; the guiding hand of god intervening once again in history ostensibly justifying their cause. As reported in the Jerusalem Post (July 9 2010), Krimalovski is quoted as saying “the most revered rabbis were coming up to me sobbing, saying how they wished they could take my place in prison, how they envied me the privilege of performing such a great sanctification of God’s word…”

The “Emmanuel prisoners” will be one more link in the long chain of kiddush hashem, representing a classic case of mesirat nefesh. The issue isn’t whether there was any racism on the part of the Ashkenazi haredi toward their Sephardi counterpart. That’s beyond doubt. It is so crystal clear that I defy anyone to seriously challenge that position. After all, racism is part of the culture of haredi Judaism. If enlightened Jews poured out of the ghettoes when the opportunity presented, the haredim preferred a self-imposed ghetto in order to justify their contempt. They are a closed contemptuous community, scorn being a characteristic of their collective nature: scorn for anyone not subscribing to their values, scorn for anyone not being a member of their community, scorn for anyone not having been born into their world, with a reluctance to accept outsiders much less converts. They have an intense dislike, bordering on a phobia for “goyim” viewing them as nothing more than a necessary nuisance to do the dirty work while they do god’s work. If this appears to be a generalization so be it; otherwise how can one explain the massive support of the haredi community in Israel and abroad? What’s fascinating is the prevailing “siege mentality” that has survived even 62 years after we were blessed with a state.

The State of Israel of course is the grist for the siege mentality. Haredim don’t like states or respect their laws unless it benefits their interests. That is why historically they preferred the ghetto. They were barricaded in, minimizing the possibility of a toeva, and contamination from infecting their lifestyle. For them, Israel is just another state. It is a state with laws that are aimed against them (unless of course they can extract money through political shenanigans), and in order to survive they will have to be moser nefesh. So reading about and following the proceedings against Krimalovski and the pack of haredi racists being cheered by their sycophantic acolytes upon their prison release reminded me of all the other “maisalach” tales of haredim being saved or redeemed from prison due to the benevolence of a prince or a miracle.

In light of the Krimalovski Episode my skeptical intuition has been further sensitized. As we pass tunnel through the nine days culminating with Tisha B’av followed shortly by chodesh Elul and its accompanying rich and nuanced liturgy texturing, our tefilot certainly during the Yamim Noraim will take on new meaning. I wonder whether the Krimalovski episode will in a generation or two receive a place of honor in haredi lore and perhaps find honorable mention in the mahzor.

Sour Grapes

In this week’s Forward (July 9, 2010) Jay Michaelson makes an insupportable statement in his article Peoplehood Vs Israel, fallacious at its core and is the quintessential oxymoron. “In principle, the values of peoplehood and Israel are on a natural collision course”, he claims and then spends the rest of the article venting about the lack of inclusion of various interest groups around the Jewish table. This isn’t the first article published in the Forward in which Michaelson sacrifices Israel on the altar of narcissism and Jewish liberalism when his personal comfort level was threatened by a system that wasn’t particularly embracing of his values. Michaelson’s understandable frustration with not having the LGBT community well represented around the Jewish table in no way undermines their place within the community or threatens their place under the peoplehood tent. For him to say Peoplehood Vs Israel is sour grapes, to say the least.

Putting aside all the recent DNA research into Jewish peoplehood there is a litmus test that has been applied throughout the centuries before there ever was genetic research. Israel has always been the glue that kept the Jewish people together as a unified “am”, nation. Our prayers would have rung hollow without the centrality of the Temple and Jerusalem at the center. Our rabbinic literature, midrashic texts, medieval and modern literature would be bare and barely an echo without the centrality of Israel to our existence as a people.

Peoplehood is difficult to define but there are certain qualifiers at the heart of it that without inclusion would undermine the principle and definition of who we are. Peoplehood assumes that we are all bound together by certain common values that either we possess or aspire to. Land, language, culture, values, music, art and literature are but a few of those characteristics. They aren’t necessarily quantifiable nor is there a yardstick as to how much of any of these traits or qualities one needs to subscribe to in order to be a member of the tribe. For the most part, most Jews share some of these traits to one degree or another, either in theory or in practice. For example, the love of Israel isn’t quantifiable. In generations past there were those who merely gave lip service to the idea of the rebirth and reclamation of Israel. Others were passionate, but mostly all Jews recognized the centrality that Israel played in our culture.

Just as Michaelson is unhappy with the lack of voice appropriated to the LGBT community, many others and I are unhappy with the disproportionate voice given to the haredi community in Israel as well as the disproportionate amount of resources allocated to them. I do not however claim that as a result of the political architecture of Israel, which makes me uncomfortable, I am removing Israel from the Jewish equation. It smacks of the spoiled schoolyard kid who not liking to loose, picks up his marbles and goes home! Thus, one may disagree vehemently with a particular position of Israel’s politics, but one must also draw the line when Israel’s security is at the point of being compromised and Jewish life lost. To cavalierly submit that Israel’s position aren’t comfortable and therefore Israel needs to be conveniently (albeit uncomfortably) removed from the Jewish equation is vapid and narcissitic.

The American Council for Judaism formed in 1942, by reform rabbis was established for the express purpose of sanitizing Judaism by removing Israel from the equation. It can’t be done. Judaism isn’t a religion. We are a people, an “Am” (nation), as our bible says: “Asher bocah banu mechol ha’amim” we were chosen from all the other amim. And even if one doesn’t accept the Bible as divine, is irrelevant. The Bible, divine or otherwise, through historical imperative is one of our national literary treasures that has defined to a great degree who we are as a people. The ACJ wasn’t comfortable with having to deal with issues such as dual allegiance, as apparently Michaelson isn’t comfortable with either, perhaps for different reasons. But he is trying to put forth the same thing that was tried in the past and failed. It can’t be done, because we as a people refuse to let anyone, redefine who we are. For thousands of years gentiles and anti-Semites have tried to redefine us and failed; I doubt that those of Michaelson’s ilk will have the slightest success in debunking Israel by trying to manufacture a schism between Israel and her people. Instead of writing off Israel, Michaelson should persist in the righteous cause of lobbying on behalf of the LGBT community, because one day they will receive their rightful recognition and place under the big tent.

A Body Without a Soul

There is a strange and cold wind blowing through the American Jewish community. I first took note of it during the presidential primaries when so many of our illustrious liberal Jews fell in love with Obama. Having at the time confronted several acquaintances who pledged their everlasting love and support to Obama I questioned them regarding Obama’s vague and sketchy position on Israel as well as his long-term association with that notoriously anti-Semitic putative reverend Wright. The answer I heard was disturbing: American interests trumped Israel. I should have understood that the winds of change were about to descend on the Jewish landscape in a way that would change forever Israel’s relationship with America as well as with Jews living in the Diaspora.

Recently I read a disturbing article in the New York Times, “American Jews Who Reject Zionism Says Events Aid Cause ” by Samuel G. Freedman, and was so infuriated that I decided to wait till the calm returned. I’m still waiting. That article confirmed my suspicions that indeed the winds of change are at our doorstep with a growing movement within the liberal Jewish community supported by their rabbis to eviscerate Israel from Judaism, the core, the heart of our peoplehood. Allan C. Brownfeld, a longtime member of the American Council for Judaism and editor of its magazine maintain that Jews are American by nationality and Jews by religion. In support of this anachronistic and fallacious statement he and others of his ilk have distorted Jewish history in order to buttress this position.

What is the American Council of Judaism? It is an organization of apologetic Jews founded in 1942 by a group of Reform rabbis preferring to adhere to the principles of the Pittsburg platform, rejecting the idea that Jews are a nationality (peoplehood) but merely a religious group. They opposed the Reform movements position that endorsed the support of a Jewish army in Palestine. This is the same organization that supported the efforts of William Fulbright to have the lobbyists for Israel in the United States register as foreign agents. Support for the organization came mainly from Jews of German decent, socialists and others uncomfortable with Judaism such as Hannah Arendt, Eric Fromm and Hans Kohn.

I was raised on the motto that the Jewish People without Israel is like a body without a soul. Everything in our history points to that regardless of those revisionist historians and theologians who seek to distort the truth in order to promote their political agenda. Some of our prayers dating back twenty five hundred years references Zion as the heart and soul of the Jewish people. Our Temples and significant sections of our Bible is testament to the centrality of Israel to Jewish life. And when we were sent into exile the significant portion of our collective soul was left in Zion and it wasn’t till 1948 that our soul was once again made whole.

There were some orthodox leaders who rejected Zionism. There may have been those who rejected secular Zionism but they didn’t reject the concept as evident by the fact that Agudas Israel as well as other right wing orthodox groups fought for certificates in order to enter Palestine. Some Hassidic courts rejected Zionism because of the control exercised by the secular leadership. But many courts such as Gur as well as Slonim were advocates of Zionism prior to World War II. One only has to study Jewish history to glean these facts.

The traditional Jewish community never ever rejected Israel as the heart and soul the Jewish people. The traditional Jewish community never, ever treated Judaism as a religion. We always identified ourselves as a people, with a land, language, religion and culture. It was only the reform Jews of Germany who, ashamed of what they were sought to be like their Christian neighbors and re-identified Judaism as a religion. They refashioned their synagogues to resemble churches and introduced the vernacular and sermons into the service to comport to the style of their Christian neighbors. They were intent on assimilating themselves into Germany and hadn’t wanted the albatross of dual allegiance around their necks. They were willing to trade away their peoplehood in exchange fro being accepted as Germans. They miscalculated.

They miscalculated then and they are miscalculating again. Some people never learn from history and they are destined to repeat it. Interestingly, those same Reform Jews ashamed of who they were, are at it again today. So intent are they to thoroughly assimilate into American culture they are willing once again to trade away their inheritance.

Troubled Waters

These are troubling times for our tribe regardless of whether one is living in America or Israel (Jews living in Western Europe are further down the road and I don’t see a bright future for them either). Since Obama was elected President a cloud seems to be hovering over us, making me feel queasy. It’s not the kind of cloud that accompanied us in the dessert and over troubled waters, but a threatening cloud, one that doesn’t appear to be providing the kind of cover enjoyed by our ancestors. I don’t think I’m over reacting; I believe that I’m trying to decipher the writing on the wall.

What I find particularly worrisome however, are the trends within the putative Jewish community and the manner in which they have reacted to the goings on over the past several months. Their refusal to recognize the disturbing signs is deeply concerning. Commentary magazine has devoted an entire issue to this new phenomenon of Jewish support for a democratic president intent on causing Israel irreparable harm. Based upon the current polls over 50% of those Jews who voted for Obama in 2008 would vote for him again. Shocking, in view of Obama’s performance vis a vis Israel since entering office. Obama is apparently getting away with it which I find disheartening, to say the least. This past week I had a conversation with one of Obama sycophants who would vote for him again, a “committed Jew” and pro-Israel who is in his twenties and probably representative of Jewish liberals of his generation. His tenuous attachment to Israel is in the spirit of Obama: it has to make political and strategic sense. Challenging him he asserted that my position was antiquated and irrelevant to his generation. To this new generation of Jews who voted for Obama, the holocaust has no bearing, nor does our historic connections to the land of Israel have any true relationship to realpolitic on the ground, here and now in the twenty first century. He wasn’t perturbed in the least by Obama’s cavalier treatment of Benjamin Netanyahu.


Snubbing Netanyahu on his Washington visit Obama demeaned Israel and the broader Jewish community. An attitude seems to be gaining traction in Washington that the relationship between Washington and Jerusalem is no longer special. Israel is no different than any other ally and may even be considered a liability as evidenced by remarks made by General Petraeus last month. This attitude is becoming more manifest as was played out most recently over the ridiculous brouhaha resulting from Israel’s exercising her right to enforce a blockade against the rule of Hamas in Gaza and ending with Helen Thomas’ outrageous, hurtful and mean spirited remark that the Jews should move back to Poland and Germany.

Helen Thomas is no fool, nor is she senile. She may have assumed that Obama’s nuanced shift away from Israel gave her the license to stridently make her position clear. She obviously misread public opinion, forcicng her to end her career ignominiously. However, I’m beginning to think that perhaps we Jews have become too comfortable in America, too complacent and too secure. Judging from the blogosphere comments surrounding Thomas’ fall from grace there are a hell of a lot of people that agree with Helen Thomas. Perhaps her crude and coarse comment and reactions ought to serve as a wake up call to all the yefe nefesh in America.

A Zionist’s Guide To The World Cup

My nephew Doug Klein(through marriage to Debra),an avid sportsman (and wrestler) asked me to post the following Guide to the World Cup:



A Zionist’s Guide To The World Cup


A famous non-Zionist, Leon Trotsky, once said: “You may not be interested in strategy, but strategy is interested in you.” Likewise, you may have no interest in international soccer (or “football” as those snooty foreigners call it), but you should. Not necessarily for the soccer, but for the politics.

Suffice it to say that the most important event for the majority of the world’s population for the calendar year 2010 will be next month’s FIFA World Cup in South Africa. The whole world will be watching, and every participating nation’s collective self-esteem will be at stake. As such, the eternal question arises: “Is it good for the Jews?” Quite simply stated, we want our friends to do well on the world’s biggest stage, and we want are enemies to suffer embarrassing and ignominious defeat by others wearing short pants and cleats.

(One note about methodology: democracies tend to be better for the Jews than authoritarian regimes.)

To that end, here is your convenient guide for whom to root for and for whom to root against.

Group A: South Africa, Mexico, Uruguay, France.

South Africa: The great struggle for freedom and against apartheid notwithstanding, the Republic of South Africa has been no friend of Israel in recent years. Moreover, it has been one of the strongest non-Arab supporters of the Palestinian cause. Nobel Laureate Desmond Tutu, a strident anti-Zionist, is a national hero. The vote is no.

Mexico: On the whole, Mexico is a bit pareve on Israel issues, shading slightly in favor of the Arabs. On the other hand, Mexico boasts a vibrant Jewish community. The Mexicans are the arch-rivals of the USA, though, so probably best to take a pass on them.

Uruguay: Well, it’s never been much of a democracy and, like its neighbors, has played host to any number of escaped Nazi war criminals, so Uruguay is a no.

France: Traditionally, this would be a no-brainer. From the Dreyfus Affair to Francois Mitterand, France has been one giant bummer for the modern Jewish experience. The election of Nicholas Sarkozy, though, is a little bit of a game-changer. In this World Cup, better the French than the Brits (see below). Root for France to win the group.

Group B: Argentina, Nigeria, South Korea, Greece

Argentina: Even more ex-(and not-so-ex-)Nazis than Uruguay. Throw in the government’s apparent involvement in obstructing the investigation in the 1990s bombings of the AMIA headquarters and the Israeli embassy, and it becomes nearly impossible to ever root for Argentina in good conscience.

Nigeria: Typical for a Third World country, Nigeria generally takes the Arabs’ side in international forums. Add in the fact that the country is usually run by some form of authoritarian government. Take a pass on Nigeria.

South Korea: Aside from Jewish servicemen serving in Korea, there has not been much connection between Korea and the Jewish Question; therefore, Korea is the obvious choice for Group B.

Greece: The Jewish community of Salonika was almost totally wiped out by the Nazis during the Shoah. To this day, Greece has done little to come to terms with the near total destruction of its pre-war Jewish community. No. (Let’s not forget, either, that the Greek squad ended Israel’s best chance to qualify for the World Cup since 1970.)

Group C: Algeria, England, Slovenia, United States

Algeria: This is a no-brainer.

England: Also a no-brainer. The home of polite anti-Semitism and Vanessa Redgrave. Never mind that they speak English and David Beckham is into kabbalah.

Slovenia: Although Slovenia lacks the anti-Semitic reputation of its Balkan neighbor Croatia, this is probably because Slovenia historically possessed less Jews to hate. No.

United States of America: A.K.A. Sweet Land of Liberty. Of thee I sing. Let’s just hope that Landon Donovan can find a way to score two goals per game. Oh, yeah, and somebody to play left back. But I digress….

Group D: Australia, Germany, Ghana, Serbia

Australia: Home to one of the most vibrant Jewish communities in the world, the English tradition of disdain for all things Jewish was not entirely transported here with its convict-settlers. Besides, Mel Gibson is not really Australian. The Socceroos get the old okey-dokey.

Germany: While Germany has done more than any other European country to come to terms with its recent past, it is still Germany. I know it is not fair to visit the sins of the grandfathers onto their descendants, but seeing proud Germans singing their national anthem (which has the same tune as “Deutschland Uber Alles”) just doesn’t feel right. Oh well. Tough #$&%.

Ghana: Though there has been a history of positive diplomatic relations between Israel and this west African state, it remains a Third World country with an anti-Israel voting record at the UN. Nothing to see here, sports fans.

Serbia: One of the few countries in the world more unpopular than Israel. The Serbs deserve much credit for putting up such fine resistance to Nazi occupation during World War II. In doing so, many Serbian Jews managed to survive. Still, Serbia is a proud Slavic country, and that never seems to be good for the Jews.

Group E: Cameroon, Denmark, Japan, the Netherlands

Cameroon: (See Ghana, above.)

Denmark: Famous for saving most of their Jews during the Nazi occupation, Denmark is the only country in Scandinavia that allows shechitah. Also, the whole controversy about the cartoons of Muhammad originated here, so it can’t be all bad. No doubt, Denmark is home to a lot of snooty Nordic anti-Semites and anti-Zionists, but one could do much worse than root for them to win.

Japan: Bataan Death March…Sugihara. Sugihara…Bataan Death March. Japan is problematical, but from a Zionist perspective, ultimately okay.

The Netherlands: Yes, they have a huge problem of a growing indigenous Muslim population, but they know they have a problem. Root for them while you still can. Besides, it’s hard not to have a soft spot for the plucky Dutch after their Queen rode her bicycle during the Arab Oil Embargo of 1973.

Group F: Italy, New Zealand, Paraguay, Slovakia

Italy: Okay, so they were on the wrong side of World War II, the Italian Jewish community made out better than most communities in Allied countries, such as those in Poland, France, and Greece. Moreover, their President likes Israel almost as much as he likes attractive young women. Viva Italia!

New Zealand: On the one hand, the Kiwis have a snowball’s chance in Johannesburg of winning a match. On the other hand, the obsessively anti-Israel Helen Clarke and her Labor Party were voted out of office and replaced with the pro-Israel Conservatives. Okay to cheer for; just don’t expect them to win.

Paraguay: Nearly as many Nazi war criminals there as in Argentina. Absolutely no.

Slovakia: What? The more anti-Semitic half of the former Czechoslovakia? You must be joking.

Group G: Brazil, Ivory Coast, North Korea, Portugal

First, a note on Group G. Every World Cup has--in the pleasant, soothing terms of international soccer—a “Grupa Del Muerte”—a “Group of Death” so called where all four teams are good and anyone of them is capable of advancing. If one is talking solely about soccer, Group G is not the Group of Death, as Brazil should have a field day. It is a different story for us Zionists.

Brazil: Haven for ex-Nazis. Current President curries favor with the Iranians. Better they should lose.

Ivory Coast: Yet another member of the Third World bloc in the UN which routinely votes to condemn Israel. Also has a democracy deficit. The only reason to cheer for the Ivory Coast is that the other members of this group are such cholerias.

North Korea: A Stalinist dictatorship that sells nuclear weapons technology and Scuds to Syria, Iran, and other lovely places. I think not.

Portugal: Most people remember that 1492 was the year the Jews were finally expelled from Spain. 1493 was the year they were expelled from Portugal. May they merit an early exit from the World Cup.

Group H: Spain, Switzerland, Honduras, Chile

Spain: Anti-Semitic then, anti-Israel now. There is nothing new under the Spanish sun.

Switzerland: The Swiss did everything they could to profit from the Nazis both during and after their tenure in Germany. Now, they are attempting to do the same thing with our friends in Iran. No.

Honduras: No real history of anti-Semitism here and a history of cordial relations with the Zionist entity. They are the pick of the litter in Group H.

Chile: Although it has the strongest democracy and the best economy of any country in South America, it is still hard to cheer very much for countries from that region. Still, if you must, you may do so without much enthusiasm.

In the final cheshbon, let’s pull for a USA-Australia final. Enjoy!

A Muse: Shavuot 2010

Historically the religious community in Israel and in the Diaspora associates Shavuot with the Giving of the Law, the standing of our ancestors at Sinai (or Horev) on Shavuot. It is a holiday marked as the culmination of the freedom process that began on Pesach, completing the cycle with the receiving of the Law. Our rabbis tell us that it is customary to decorate the synagogue with “greens” or flowers because Sinai was surrounded in shrubbery and flowering plants at the moment that the Law was given.

Upon closer examination it may appear as though there may have been a distortion made by our esteemed sages and rabbis as to the meaning of the holiday. In reality, Shavuot is a national festival celebrating the offering up of the “bikkurim” at the Temple. The holiday is centered on ownership of land and nationhood.

This makes sense. Passover is the freedom holiday marking the beginning of a trek through the desert to claim the land promised to the patriarchs, and reaffirmed at Horeb. It was at Horeb that God gives the charge to take possession of the land promised to the patriarchs. Shavuot then, is the culmination and fulfillment of the promise. It is on Shavuot that the Israelites can bring the “bikkurim” to the Temple; the time determined by the counting of 49 days from Passover. It is a mitzva t’luya ba’aretz; a mitzvah that can only be fulfilled when living on the land.

The sages and rabbis in their wisdom, not wanting the holiday to fall by the wayside attributed a new significance to Shavuot as a result of the new reality. Living in the Diaspora it became impossible to fulfill the biblical commandment of bringing the “bikkurim” to the Temple. Without the viability of the command, the holiday would have lost it purpose had the rabbis not made the new connection, the celebration of the giving of the Law.