#sometimes the assistant rabbi will read Torah

[garlic-and-cloves]

@teeth-will-be-jewish it's where you have congregants leading services rather than having a hired Rabbi or Cantor whose job it is (the congregant who's leading is the ley leader)

[strawberrymeriadoc]

Saturday morning

Merry enjoyed having a bed to himself. Peony would sometimes snuggle with him when he first lay down to sleep or in the morning. On some level, though, Merry missed the feeling of safety and belonging he got from sleeping next to someone. It had been almost a year since his girlfriend, Jamie, had broken up with him. It was funny because he had spent a decent amount of the relationship fantasizing about leaving her. But once it finally happened, he wasn’t prepared. He missed resting his head on her chest and putting his arms around her as they slept.

[To tell the truth, Merry didn’t know if he ever wanted another relationship or not. There was something about being in them that set him into fight or flight mode. For the duration of the relationship. No wonder he didn’t feel like himself during them. But doubt filled his mind: is it just because of my trauma with abusive relationships? Merry knew that he always wanted the closeness of an intense friendship marked by fierce loyalty and love. And that in the past, once he felt such a pull to a person, he’d end up feeling like the next logical step would be to enter a romantic and sexual relationship with that person. He had no choice if he wanted to be that close to someone. Or, at least, that’s what he always thought. Lately, Merry had heard rumors here and there of something called being aromantic. It had come up in passing a few times at the university’s lgbtq organization. But he didn’t want to be that. It’s bad enough I don’t want to have sex with people. Do I have to be wrong about this too?

After pondering all this, Merry felt it was high time to actually get up and start the day. It was Shabbat, so there wasn’t really anything he should do today, but eating breakfast was still a (begrudged) requirement. Merry walked quietly by Pippin’s room and came into the kitchen. For once Pippin wasn’t asleep on the couch and Merry wondered when he would get up as it was already noon. Merry silently hoped that Pippin might want to hang out with him today. He was used to feeling unwanted by Jamie and she would get upset if he suggested an outing, so his hopes weren’t very high. Regardless, it was a perfect day to sit out on the balcony and enjoy some coffee.

Once outside, Merry could hear the chirping of sparrows as well as the sounds of the city. Being Shabbat, it was much quieter than it usually would be at noon, but Merry could still hear the sounds of a plane overhead and a few cars and motorbikes which were somehow the loudest of all. Merry was thankful it was Shabbat. It had been a long week. He spent half his days in the library and the other half cleaning the apartment and just doing the necessary dirty work of making sure life ran smoothly. Merry loathed this kind of busy work most of all. He didn’t want to email his advisor, he didn’t want to get the fridge fixed, he didn’t want to go grocery shopping, he didn’t want to call the pharmacy for the fourth time to make sure his Testosterone prescription had gone through. He just wanted to read his books, write, ride horses, and hang out with his friends. Merry suddenly felt silly for mentally complaining about all these things, even though no one was around to hear it. He half worried that G-d Themself would be angry with him. For not being grateful enough for what he had. Merry didn’t love this relationship he had with G-d. He thought it seemed suspiciously like his relationship with his mother. And as far as he knew, there was nothing in the Torah or the teachings of the rabbis that would support the existence of such a relationship (or, really, for the existence of G-d all together, though that thought also filled Merry with fresh guilt and a feeling of being watched and judged).

Pippin was just waking up from a cozy dream. He half opened his eyes and saw Peony sitting before him, tail wrapped around her paws. She was staring intensely at him. “Up to our judginess early, aren’t we?” he half-scolded her. Peony flicked her tail and continued to look at him, clearly nonplussed. Pippin closed his eyes and thought about what he wanted to do today. Coming up blank, the boy reached for his phone and checked his messages. There was a sweet good morning text from Frodo. And the pictures he posted of the dinner he made last night were fairly popular. He was glad to hear from his friends even if it was just a like on one of his creations. He scrolled through and saw some pictures of lovely handwriting that Frodo often posted. Rosie and her siblings had gone for a day trip to the Sea. Even Bilbo was sharing some photos of his most recent trip to the Lonely Mountain. Pippin felt sad. He really wanted to travel. He was sick of being cooped up in boring old Minas Tirith.

Finally, the boy realized he was quite hungry and made his way to the kitchen. Merry was sitting outside on the balcony. He was looking out and seemed deep in thought and hadn’t noticed that Pippin had woken up. Pippin set to making an omelet. He didn’t hold with coffee like his roommate, but enjoyed a hot cup of green tea instead. As he ate, he thought about Gandalf, his Organic Chemistry professor. Pippin was about to enter his second year of graduate school and as such this would be his first semester assistant teaching. This was all fine with Pippin. Except he had been assigned to assist Gandalf in his Introduction to Environmental Science class. I can hardly stand one class with him, Pippin thought, how am I supposed to endure being his assistant?” Gandalf was an enigmatic figure in the Science Department. He would sometimes disappear for weeks, forcing his teaching assistants to cover for him with no notice. He also had a habit of not explaining his full thoughts to the other members of the department, but Saruman the Chair seemed to manage the department perfectly well despite the wizard’s secrecy. To make matters worse, Gandalf seemed to have a particular chip on his shoulder about Pippin. The boy was one of the finest students in the department despite being a year young for his grade. Perhaps the professor was pushing his pupil because he knew he could handle it. I wish people wouldn't do that, lamented Pippin, why when I’m already doing so well do they keep having to raise the bar? This was really all too much to Pippin. The more he thought about it, the more he became convinced that he wouldn’t be able to make it through the semester, much less the year.

Suddenly the room felt very small and like it was circling rapidly around him. He felt like he couldn’t breathe. To make matters worse, his heart started pounding out of his chest. He wanted to call out to Merry for help but he couldn’t make words come out of his mouth. Pippin could move his arms though and without really knowing what he was doing he threw a pencil that was on the counter at the sliding door. It made a quiet dink sound and clattered to the floor. Merry heard the sound and turned around. He got up and went to the door. He could see Pippin holding his head in his hands. Concerned, Merry came back into the house. “You alright?” he asked. Pippin nodded his head “no”. Merry sat down next to his friend. He didn’t really know what to do but he knew Pippin needed him now. “Hey, it’s alright, it’s ok. Do you want to talk about it?” Pippin nodded his head again. Finally, Merry perceived what was going on. “Here, let’s try this breathing technique together: breathe out for 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8, in 1 2 3 4, hold it 1 2 3 4 5 6 7, out 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8” Merry repeated the set several times.

Pippin started to look a little better. His face wasn’t as pale as it had been earlier and it seemed to do him good to focus on Merry’s breathing exercise. “There you go,” Merry said, smiling gently. Pippin was still not feeling well but he was feeling better. “Was having a panic attack,” he faltered. “It’s alright” Merry encouraged “They just go away with time, we just have to wait it out”. The “we” in that sentence hit Pippin. He didn’t realize before that Merry had committed to helping him with this. “Anything I can do that would help?” Merry offered (as he often did). Pippin hesitated, thinking about what he really needed in this moment. “Could you...would you mind if I held your hand?” he asked quietly. “Sure” said Merry and he stretched out his hand. Pippin took it and gave it a weak squeeze. He used his other hand to hold up his head as the room was still spinning. They sat there for a while in silence.

Merry was happy to be able to help his friend. So often it was Pippin who was helping him. Merry had had his fair share of panic attacks and had spent all of them alone. He didn’t want anyone to have to go through that, least of all Pippin.

After about twenty minutes the room stopped spinning. Pippin sat up and pulled his hand back. Merry waited for his friend to say something or indicate what he wanted to do. “Well, now I’m hungry again!” and with that Pippin stood up and began foraging around the kitchen. Merry laughed. After Pippin had eaten some yogurt with granola he was feeling much more himself again. “Thanks for helping me through that Merry!” Pippin said cheerfully “It meant a lot.” “Oh you’re-you’re welcome” Merry stammered putting his hand behind his head.

[glittergummicandypeach]

‘Cancel Culture’ Is as Old as Religion, And It’s Only a Thing Because of Who’s Doing the Cancelling | Religion Dispatches

I don’t understand “cancel culture.” I mean, I understand what people mean, but I don’t quite understand why those decrying it claim that it’s something new. 

I’ve often thought the term itself is born from social media which portends to inaugurate the democratization of knowledge but really functions to introduce the democratization of opinion. In some way, of course, opinion was always democratized; free speech enables me to say whatever I want (given certain caveats) but it doesn’t, nor did it ever, give me the right to say it wherever I want. 

In some way, cancel culture has always existed, mostly in the hands of editors of opinion pages and letters to the editor; university committees who decide who’s invited to speak and who isn’t; people who evaluate material for publication, etc. That is, there was always a process of vetting, and that vetting was not always pure and without ulterior motives. 

The lines of communication between what I happen to think and your ear have never been unmediated unless you happened to pass by my front lawn as I stood there and expounded on the ills of the world. Before this present moment, for example, would anyone think of accusing a newspaper of “cancel culture” because they rejected one’s letter to the editor (if so, I would have been the victim of cancel culture many times over).

But something has changed. Let me cite a few examples. When I was a young assistant professor at The Jewish Theological Seminary I received many invitations from Conservative synagogues to speak about my research, or on topical matters. I enjoyed such opportunities. Once I began publishing essays criticizing Israel’s occupation, the invitations stopped. Pretty abruptly. As I told a friend at the time, I could close my eyes and envision my name being summarily plucked from the Rolodexes in synagogue offices. Did that disturb me? Not really. While I certainly missed the extra income, I knew that was the price I paid for making my views public on a contentious matter. At no point did I think I was being cancelled. In fact, I was happy that at least they were reading my essays. 

A second example happened more recently. I read an essay in an online journal on a topic I know something about that I felt was very problematic, not because I disagreed with the views expressed therein (although I did), but because the essay contained errors, inaccuracies, leaps of logic, and was poorly argued. I wrote to the editors of the journal to express my dissatisfaction. In response I received a very mean-spirited response from one editor accusing me of “bullying a young writer” (the editor called him “a kid”) and claiming he was just “living his truth” (he was an American who had immigrated to Israel). 

First, I had assumed he was closer to my age. But if readers were meant to account for the writer’s age shouldn’t his work have been presented in a way that reflected this? Second, I had no idea, nor did I care, where he lived. And third, I didn’t quite understand being accused of “bullying” since I never wrote to the author and never made my views of the essay public. To this day, the unnamed author still has no idea how I felt about his essay. I simply wrote privately to the editors. While I wasn’t quite accused of “cancel culture,” that seemed to be the underlying message of the editor’s remarks. In this editor’s view I was, in some way, questioning, by privately discrediting, the right for this author to state his views.

Finally, when someone crosses a line on my Facebook thread I often block them. Before doing so, I write to them to tell them I’m blocking them, and that they have the right to say whatever they want in this world, but they don’t have the right to say whatever they want on my Facebook page. While my page is public, it’s still mine and I have the right to curate it as I see fit. I offer them the opportunity to apologize or retract their remarks and if they choose not to, I block them. I’ve been accused in this instance of “cancel culture”; that is, of preventing him or her from expressing their views and censoring them. The elision of whatever and wherever seems to have grown roots in our psyche.

So in these three moments—one where I’m not invited to speak at venues because of my views (perfectly legitimate), one where an editor accuses me of preventing someone from “living their truth” by privately criticizing their essay (illegitimate), and one where I am accused of ‘cancelling’ someone for saying whatever racist or misogynist nonsense on my Facebook page (necessary, in my view)—we find ourselves in a state of confusion where the right to say whatever we want has morphed into the right to say it wherever we want. Where public space and the democratization of opinion now enables us to confuse whatever and wherever. 

People can be, and continue to be, excluded (cancelled) for all kinds of reasons; race, religion, creed, sexual orientation. We now have legal structures in place to try to alleviate or minimize that kind of illegitimate discrimination. We’ve decided that those criteria for exclusion are unacceptable in our society. 

What it seems “cancel culture” is introducing is another layer; political or ideological discrimination. And in doing that, weaponizing something that’s existed for a long time: exclusion for other reasons. Kind of like how white people who oppose affirmative action do so because suddenly they are disadvantaged, though they had no problem for centuries when it was reversed. But is political discrimination valid? If I edit a journal and reject an essay because I find its political or ideological foundations unacceptable, is that discriminatory? Should it be? The expansion of discriminatory practice to include political or ideological differences in regard to who gets to say what, where, is perhaps the place to get a deeper sense of what’s going on.

Yes, even the Talmud

Recently, Will Berkovitz, a rabbi and CEO of Jewish Family Service in Washington State published an opinion piece arguing that, as the headline states, “The Talmud has a lesson for our cancel-culture world.” In it, he argues that the Talmud, a product of a small cadre of Jewish sages in Babylonia from the third to sixth centuries CE, can be a model for the tolerance and diversity of opinions that our present moment needs. That it can teach us a lesson about cancel culture. 

Others have made similar arguments that the Talmud is a lesson in pluralism as its pages contain legal discussions that include minority and rejected opinions. In fact, one of its tractates called Ediyot (‘Testimonies’) even discusses why minority opinions remain inside as opposed to being relegated to the dustbin of history. This of course, is not unique. U.S. Supreme Court decisions contain dissenting views that are continually analyzed by legal scholars. 

On the Talmud, Berkovitz concludes: 

“As our ancient rabbis understood, debate—and the people who engage in it—is vital to advancing society; it doesn’t degrade it. We gain nothing by turning debates on ideas into attacks on people. Both are part of the arc of the human story, but only one will elevate our community.” 

How can one argue with that?! 

And yet, the example of the Talmud fails to support Berkovitz’s claim. Jews, Christians, and Muslims may have entertained a variety of opinions on matters of great urgency. But not all. In fact, maybe not even most. They had their own “cancel culture.” It’s called heresy. Heresy constructed the limits of legitimate debate. In a sense heresy constructed Orthodoxy. 

So who formulated heresy? That’s a complex historical question beyond the scope of this essay. But typically it was ecclesiastical authorities, or sometimes regional leadership. And what constituted heresy? Also beyond the limits here, but suffice it to say that these were largely theological or ideological determinations that extended beyond simple “errors” of belief, but required pertinacity, which is a willful or deliberate act of deviance, even after being warned. 

In Christianity it often applied to the rejection of Church doctrine or dogma, while in Judaism it often consisted of either a rejection of rabbinic authority, or its construction of monotheism or claims of the divine origin of the Torah. One guilty of any of those “fallacies” was excluded from the debate; that is, they were canceled.

While the Talmud indeed includes multiple voices, it’s the product of a fairly small and exclusive fraternity of sages, each of whom passed the requisite initiation to be included. Of course, Babylonian Jewry was much more diverse than the included views would suggest. The Talmud doesn’t include those other voices, not necessarily because they thought they were heretics, but because they weren’t part of the club and thus their views had little if any authority. If all we had was the Babylonian Talmud we’d know very little about Babylonian Jewry in this period. All we’d have is the record of a thin slice of the society in a small number of academies. 

Today, Talmudic scholars are exploring the wider vistas of the context of the Talmud, not only to show how it may have been influenced by its surroundings, but also in some cases to examine those the Talmud “cancelled”; those who engaged in magic bowl incantations, perhaps Zoroastrian fire worship, and other manner of religious practices that didn’t find favor in the sages of the Talmud. Were the sages being discriminatory by excluding these people and ejecting heretics from their midst?

One could say, and many have, that heresy is an old idea that’s no longer relevant. That modernity has thankfully moved us beyond heresy toward a more pluralistic world. French sociologist Emil Durkheim didn’t think so. Author of many works, including the influential The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912), Durkheim held that categories like heresy do translate into secular societies. In an essay “Concerning the Definition of Religious Phenomena,” Durkheim writes:

It is a fact that there are general beliefs of all kinds which appear to be relevant to secular objects, things like the flag, one’s country, some form of political organization, some hero, some historical event or other…They are obligatory in a certain sense, because of the very fact of their being in common…they are to some extent indistinguishable from religious beliefs proper.

Durkeim is talking about things common in a society but the same would apply if we diversify it to apply to venues, universities, churches, synagogues, and mosques, social communities, even Facebook threads. To take an example straight from Durkheim, a 2017 poll found that 60% of Americans believe that professional athletes should be required to stand during the playing of the national anthem. Groups are able to hold deep-seated convictions like this one, the rejection of which is a kind of secular heresy meaning they are excluded from their discourse. Protesting that norm is an act of “heresy” to counter a norm. If successful it can change the norm. But it can do so only by acting outside it. 

This doesn’t deny that a group can hold a diversity of views on a particular issue, just as the Talmud records some of the views it ultimately rejects, but the Talmud in its diversity is also exercising cancellation (those outside the academy or those deemed to hold heretical views). Free speech enables us to say anything we want, but it doesn’t give us the right to say it anywhere we want. The Jewish heretic in late antique Babylonia could espouse any theological view he or she wanted, but if it didn’t find favor with the rabbis it wasn’t recorded in the Talmud. And thus, for all intents and purposes, it was cancelled.

Anything, but not anywhere

In light of the Harper’s Magazine letter, I find it curious that many now decrying cancel culture are the very beneficiaries of precisely that culture before it was named. That is, beneficiaries of all kinds of other people being excluded from the public sphere because of their religion, race, sexual orientation, or political views (communists, for example). 

Thankfully our society is slowly rectifying those sins. But now to raise the issue of ideological discrimination as if to say, you cannot prevent me from saying that I want to say in your newspaper, or at your university, in your church, or even on your Facebook page, seems like protesting too much. That kind of freedom was never given, nor should it be foisted on, any community, publication, or platform. 

In addition, the “cancel culture” police seem to be playing both sides of the wager. That is, they decry being “cancelled” but maintain their state of privilege and thus use their “cancellation” as proof they’re saying something important. 

That’s because, ironically, the mere fact that they can say they’re being cancelled means, in part, that they’re not. They just take the position of privileged opposition and wear it as a badge of honor. If they were really cancelled, we wouldn’t hear their voices at all. 

If you want to see real “cancel culture,” look at the myriad women, Black, gay, and other writers who lived their life in obscurity because they couldn’t get published and thus had no voice. For every Langston Hughes, James Baldwin, or Toni Morrison there are hundreds, maybe thousands, whose names we will never know.

In a free society, I may have to tolerate your views, but I’m under no obligation to publicize them, nor to let them pass without criticism. My right to criticize you publicly is no less important than your right to pontificate publicly. As Durkheim said, secular societies and subgroups, like religious ones, get to choose what is sacred and what is heretical. The former is included, the latter excluded. There may be no better example of that very limited diversity, and equally strong exercise of exclusion, than the Talmud.

Shaul Magid is a Professor of Jewish Studies at Dartmouth College, Kogod Senior Research Fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America, and Contributing Editor to Tablet magazine. His forthcoming book Meir Kahane: An American Jewish Radical will be published by Princeton University Press.

This content was originally published here.

[quranreadalong]

Notes before we get started

Here’s some stuff you need to know before we actually get into the Quran itself.

ORDER OF THE QURAN

The Quran isn’t in chronological order. Instead, the longest suwar (chapters, singular=surah) are generally in the first half, and the shorter ones are in the second half. No one knows the exact chronological order, as in which of Mohammed’s “revelations” came first, but the suwar are generally divided into Mecca and Medina suwar.

The Mecca suwar were from Mohammed’s earlier years as a “prophet” (610-622 AD), while the Medina suwar were from many years later, after he had gathered followers and established a Muslim base of power in the city of Yathrib, which he called Medina (622 AD+). Some suwar are a combination of “revelations” from both eras! In a small number of cases, it’s hard to tell where/when the majority of a surah came from, but I’ll point those out along the way. As a general rule, the Medinan suwar contain lists of rules and descriptions of events in Mohammed’s own life, whereas the Meccan ones are mostly just Mohammed yelling at people and telling them to stop being polytheists; most are devoid of rule-and-regulation stuff.

The reason why I tend to use the word surah rather than just “chapter” is because of this--suwar that directly follow one another aren’t necessarily from the same time period or concern the same topic. Each one is pretty self-contained. A surah in the second half of the Quran is usually earlier than one in the first half of the Quran.

The Quran is fairly intolerant and extremely repetitive. I’m serious: it is not laid out like a mythological history book like the Torah is, so if that’s what you’re expecting, then... don’t... expect that! It’s just a long collection of Mohammed’s rants. If you have never read it before, and the only thing you know about it is that Muslims believe it is the most beautiful book of all time, please temper your expectations now.

Mohammed’s early “revelations” (ayat, singular ayah) are noticeably more poetic than the later ones from Medina, which are often tedious lists of rules, Biblical stories, and chastisements of The Disbelievers, which get worse and worse. We’ll see that right away in the second surah. Don’t worry, though, it’s not all tedious crap. There’s plenty of interesting stuff to discuss within the Quran’s pages.

Finally, because there are so many suwar and they come from different points in Mohammed’s lifetime, some parts of the Quran seem to contradict one another. But never fear: the Quran contains a handy-dandy provision in which seeming contradictions are resolved by Allah abrogating older ayat/verses with new and “better” ones: the later verse replaces the earlier one. As we go along, we will keep that in mind.

Wikipedia lists two suggested chronological organizations of the Quran, though as you can see, there’s some variation. I’m going to be reading the Quran in its standard order, but I’ll note whether it is an early, middle, late Mecca or Medina surah at each one’s introduction.

THE AHADITH

While Islam requires one to believe that every word of the Quran is true, there is another element to the religion called the ahadith (“traditions”, singular hadith) which are basically collected sayings about Mohammed and his followers. Essentially, if a subject is not directly addressed in the Quran, Muslims turn to the ahadith collections to figure out what is or is not permissible. Allah forgot to mention a lot of stuff in The Perfect Book, apparently. So occasionally I’ll need to link to some ahadith.

The problem, of course, is that many of the ahadith passages are full of shit and blatantly made up. Early Muslim scholars dedicated their entire lives to figuring out which ahadith were reputable, and when I quote a relevant hadith, it will almost always be from one of the two most reputable collections, called Sahih Muslim and Bukhari. Maybe we’ll read some of the collections later, at least the sahih or “strong”/highly reputable ones. My Big Fat Ahadith Read-Along would be…. an experience.

TAFSIR & SIRA & HISTORY

Some things in the Quran are incomprehensible without consulting outside sources that explain what a particular verse is about and what the historical context of the verse is. There is a genre of Islamic literature called a tafsir that collects ahadith relevant to a certain verse, and sometimes I will link to one of several highly-regarded tafsir collections when a part of the Quran requires it.

Every now and then I’ll also bring in excerpts from a sira (a “biography”/hagiography of Mohammed and his followers; the one I'll quote from is by Ibn Ishaq and was written in the 8th century) or a history book (usually al-Tabari’s) for the same reason. It is impossible to read the Quran without referencing these things at some points, because people, places, and events are mentioned but never explained. Understanding the changing situation and power dynamics between Mohammed and his various enemies is also crucial for understanding why the Quran gets progressively more violent and intolerant chronologically.

The tafsir collections, as well as the history and sira books that I link to, occasionally give more than one explanation for a certain verse/incident. When there is historical disagreement about a situation or reason to doubt any of the sources I listed above, I will be sure to mention that.

CHRISTIAN AND JEWISH SOURCES

Much of the Quran involves rehashed stories from Judaism and Christianity--but often the details are strange and don’t come from the Bible/Torah. This is because Mohammed enjoyed collecting and then copying stories he heard from the sects around him, and not all of those stories had any basis at all in the Bible. Some parts of the Quran are clearly pulled from the Talmudic writings of rabbis, while others are clearly pulled from Christian apocryphal texts. I will link to the sources of those non-Biblical stories when they come up.

TRANSLATIONS

corpus.quran.com is my go-to translation site. It lists seven highly-regarded English translations, all side-by-side. I’ll be using the Pickthall translation. In the event that Pickthall’s translation is noticeably different from the others, I’ll make a note of it and explain the controversy over the word in question. (There are some people who will tell you that you cannot read the Quran in any language other than Arabic or else you won’t understand it. These people are full of shit and you can feel free to ignore them. Hundreds of millions of the world’s Muslims cannot understand Arabic. Any debates over the meaning of a certain word also apply to the original untranslated Arabic word. All the translations on that site are regarded as very well-done and scholarly.)

THE HISTORICAL QURAN

Regarding the historical validity of the Quran itself, the content has remained mostly unchanged since the 7th century. There is a debate about how much of was altered between the time of Mohammed and the last years of the 600s AD, but it is generally agreed that the majority of it has remained the same.

There is, however, evidence that during Mohammed’s lifetime, the Quran was a changing document, and some verses were removed from it on Mohammed’s orders, both in the early and late periods of his prophetic career. Some were once believed to be part of the Quran but were later deemed non-revelatory. This is a form of naskh, or abrogation, a concept that is addressed within the Quran itself. The other form of naskh involves a later verse superseding an earlier one, but both remaining in the Quran. We’ll get to all that.

It is less clear whether anything major was added to the Quran after Mohammed’s time. The first written Quran was compiled only after Mohammed’s death, and it wasn’t fully edited and standardized until the time of the third caliph. The written Quran itself also changed over time, as the Arabic script of early Islam was not the Arabic script we use today. For example, diacritics (little dots above or below Arabic letters: ت/t and  ب/b) were not in use in the early days. Identical letters were used for different sounds, which was, as you might imagine, somewhat of a problem. So eventually they were added in to help people read the damn thing. In general it is believed that the addition of diacritics did not alter the meaning of the Quran in any huge way, as the Quran in its verbal forms (there were multiple different ones, though Mohammed said that was fine as long as the meaning remained the same) had already been memorized by several people, but it really isn't possible to know for sure.

We do not know who was the first to compile the Quran into one book, as there are conflicting ahadith on the matter. We do know that one of the first to compile a written Quran was a scribe named Zayd ibn Thabit, who put it together in the year after Mohammed's death by bringing multiple fragments of text together and supplementing it with the assistance of those who had memorized some verses. The caliph Uthman used Zayd's text a base for the “official Quran” and had variant texts burned (a fragment of one surviving older copy is here; it does have some added words, subtracted words, a missing verse, etc compared to the Uthmanic text). It’s generally believed that this is more or less identical to the Quran that we have now, but the earliest surviving near-complete copy that we have dates to the mid-eighth century at earliest. If any significant material was added to or removed from it in the preceding century+, we have no way of knowing it.

(I finally wrote a post on this whole process that u can read here if you want!!)

So we're just gonna ignore those problems, since neither we nor anyone else can answer the questions they bring up. For the purpose of this read-along I’ll be treating every word of the Quran as something Mohammed actually said. Now settle in and get ready to read the most beautiful book of all time.

Without further ado, I present: How To Burn Your Kafir: The Noble Quran

⇚ previous day | next day ⇛

[comepraisetheinfanta]

I was so busy this weekend that I forgot to tell you all about Torah study on Saturday.

First of all parking was a NIGHTMARE, there was an event going on in the park across the street from the church where Torah study is being held while the synagogue is being remodeled and everyone and their mother decided to use the church parking lot. 

I ended up having to park at the High School on the other side of the church building and as I was walking over to the church I bumped into Norman who I remembered from the previous week (I mean how could I POSSIBLY forget the name of a little old Jewish South African* man named NORMAN). 

Norman asked me if I was a student and I told him I was (didn’t get into the whole leave of absence thing because it’s a long story) and he asked me how I was connected/affiliated to the congregation (SHM) and I told him that I was in the process of conversion and that SHM was the closest reform synagogue to my house and I figured why not. Norman got pretty excited that I was converting so that was amusing.

Last week the assistant rabbi (Rabbi D) had been in charge of the class but this week Rabbi S was in charge and he was happy to see me and he (re-)introduced me to the class and told everyone “Raquel is studying with me” and honestly that sounded so fucking cool... my nerd ass was like “fuck yeah, I’m studying with the rabbi” (totally living the Tevye dream of hanging with the learned men hahaha).

I didn’t contribute to the discussion this time around, just did a lot of listening and thinking and I was totally fine with that (because sometimes you just have nothing to say but plenty to think about, you know? Even though right this second I’ve realized that I could have had an excellent thing to share, specifically about becoming a “Jew by choice”, but my brain wasn’t there when we were having the discussion).

Oh oh oh and I totally memorized the blessing you’re supposed to say before studying Torah like a frickin boss. I was a little worried about my ability to memorize it (along with other stuff) but then I reminded myself that I can write and read Hebrew so I wrote the blessing down in Hebrew on a dry erase board in my room and (not surprisingly) it was extremely helpful (way more helpful than just trying to memorizing it by reading the transliteration over and over again), hooray muscle memory!.

I’m also proud of myself for remembering some of the names of other people in attendance (Norman, Adrian, and Joe) because I’m usually super bad with names and it’s important to me to get to know members of the congregation because I can’t continue to keep myself isolated the way I usually do.

*[At first I had thought he was Australian because I hadn’t gotten a good listen at his accent but I had my suspicions that he was South African, a fact which was confirmed in class]

[rebbestorah]

An Hour with Rabbi Binyomin Klein, the Rebbe’s Secretary

In honor of Yud (10) Shevat, yahrzeit of the Frierdiker Rebbe, Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn (also known as the Rebbe Rayatz), and his enormous religious, practical and literary achievements. Yud Shevat is also the day when the seventh Lubavitcher Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, assumed his father-in-law’s leadership and turned the struggling spark of postwar Judaism into the roaring flame of Chabad today.

With special thanks to Rabbis Yitzchok Holtzman and Rabbi Nissen Mangel, eulogizing

by Rabbi Manis Levin

Rabbi Klein’s tasks included top-secret liaison with the defense establishments in both Israel and the U.S. and the critical physical and spiritual rescue missions for threatened Jewish communities around the world.

It’s been said that you were assigned responsibility for the Rebbe’s high-level links to Israeli government and defense circles. How did that come about?

That I was born in Israel may be relevant but, since I left when I was nine, it’s far from the main reason. First of all, I was always in the Secretariat from morning until the Rebbe left 770. I never had “working hours”; I was on call constantly.

Secondly, I was the intermediary between Rabbi Hodakov and the world at large, and later on, between Rabbi Hodakov and the Rebbe. For that reason all the confidential missions and high-security links that Rabbi Hodakov directed became my responsibility: I was already “inside.” That’s how the link was created to delegations, defense figures, diplomatic personnel, and the media.

Can you describe the extent of the Rebbe’s involvement in Israeli government decisions?

Without using examples, I can relate a basic fact: I know clearly that over the years there were government ministers, who before reaching a decision, would ask, “What would the Lubavitcher Rebbe say about this?” Before finalizing anything they contacted the Rebbe. All this began from the establishment of the State. There were Mapai members who maintained close links with the Rebbe.

How did that happen?

Those that had a direct personal link with the Rebbe looked upon him in a unique manner. They knew, they understood, that the Rebbe’s active interest in Israeli affairs was apolitical. This was someone who truly cared. For that reason they attached enormous significance to their relationship, and to the Rebbe’s thoughts on pressing topics.

Can you give examples of people you’ve described?

General Aharon Yariv, head of Army intelligence, was here. When he came out of the Rebbe’s room, he asked me candidly: “You’re sure the Rebbe’s never been to Israel? I start presenting arguments why it’s pointless to hold onto the West Bank, and the Rebbe hits me with geography to explain why withdrawal is so dangerous: ‘Here there are mountains; here there are hills; here there’s a valley.’” He was stunned. The same thing happened with Arik Sharon.

What were the Rebbe’s information sources for events in Israel?

First of all: the Rebbe is a Rebbe. Secondly, when the Rebbe read reports sent to him, he saw at once between the lines – what was actually happening behind the scenes. And, the Rebbe had covert information ties.

Maybe you could reveal one of those covert activities?

I’ll give you an example of something I did in the “Who is a Jew” campaign. Together with the public struggle that was unfolding, the Rebbe was very active behind the scenes. Through the efforts of the scholarly Rabbi Shlomo Yosef Zevin, the Rebbe attempted to influence the Interior Minister of the time, Mr. Moshe Chaim Shapira. I remember that once in the thick of the conflict, I was instructed to telephone one of Shapira’s intimates. I read to him over the phone a ten-page letter whose contents he was to tell Shapira urgently, in the Rebbe’s name.

Many clandestine activities were carried out for shleimus haAretz, the territorial integrity of the Holy Land, as well as completely secret campaigns for the rescue of Jewish communities in Tunisia and parts of Europe.

A substantial number of the connections existing with government figures was under wraps, as well. One day a messenger from the King of Morocco arrived secretly and, before entering the Rebbe’s room, asked me which regal modes of conduct were appropriate here: how does one put out his hand? An emissary of the King – well versed in courtly matters and very aware of having arrived at a palace – he wanted to abide by the royal protocol.

What was discussed inside?

I don’t know. I can only say that he conveyed the King’s gratitude for Chabad’s efforts on behalf of Morocco’s Jews.

On what other occasions did the Rebbe assist Jews in troubled countries?

Many events involved Russia. Some have already been revealed; many are still hidden. The Rebbe personally sent thousands of packages of sefarim and Jewish materials to Russia’s Jews. It was known that only a portion of the shipments reached their destinations, and for this reason such large quantities were sent. Rabbi Binyomin Gorodetsky organized the shipments via Europe and other routes.

Let’s get back to Israel. On the 25th of Nissan, 1990, when the Rebbe spoke abruptly about information that the PLO was poised to attack Jews, what exactly was happening?

Prime Minister Shamir had called me two hours earlier with this absolutely confidential report. But when the Rebbe went to minchah, he openly described receiving this news and gave instructions for everyone to increase their endeavors in Torah, tefillah, and tzedakah. And that nullified the threat. The next day’s New York Times described intelligence reports of the PLO’s plans to strike at Israeli targets worldwide.

What did the Prime Minister ask when he passed the information to you?

He asked me to inform the Rebbe that he had received intelligence reports that today – now – they were expected PLO terrorist attacks on numerous Israeli population centers throughout the world, and he asked for the Rebbe’s berachah [blessing]. I gave this message at once to the Rebbe who, well aware of the situation’s gravity, worked to immediately nullify it.

Did defense personnel pass classified material to the Rebbe on their own initiative? Wasn’t this a security break?

Clearly not. It was within authorized operational procedures. The government recognized that the Rebbe wasn’t coming from some personal agenda. They wanted him to know.

Did you personally carry out missions to Israel?

Yes. At times I wouldn’t know about my trip until an hour before. On one occasion, traveling on a shlichus [mission] from the Rebbe to Israel, I landed in the morning and took off the same night for home. When I arrived at Lod Airport for the return trip, the border guard checking my passport asked me why I came for only one day. “I came to visit someone,” I answered.

Not satisfied by this, he called over his security supervisor. In the interrogation that followed, when I said, “I’m the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s secretary,” the questions stopped and they waved me through immediately.

By the way, the Rebbe instructed me to visit the Holy Places on each trip.

Were you a visitor at the Kiryah [government and security headquarters] in Tel Aviv?

(smiling) Isn’t that where the State is located?

Every time I came back from a trip to Israel, the Rebbe wanted detailed reports. If I visited a school he wasn’t satisfied with general impressions. He wanted to hear everything: How many students? What’s the morning curriculum? What’s the evening curriculum? Whom did you meet? Whom not?

When I presented these reports to the Rebbe, he gave his complete attention. Sometimes he wanted a written report as well.

On the subject of secrecy, were there also links with directors of the Mossad [Israel’s secret service]?

Before the appointment it was always known over here who would be head of the Mossad, and we were always in touch with him. I’m not able to say more than that. I’ll only note that in recent times, it was common knowledge that Mr. Nachum Admoni maintained close contact with the Rebbe, as did Mr. Yitzchak Chofi. When, for example, we learned that he was hospitalized in Minnesota, the local shaliach was a visitor at his bedside.

How did you know?

More questions?

What was the nature of the Rebbe’s contacts with Israeli government and military figures?

The government received both advice and assistance. For example, after learning of Norway’s willingness to sell oil, the Rebbe advised the Israeli government to make an agreement to acquire it. There was advice and guidance regarding weapons purchases. Another example: Israeli intelligence needed something from Belgium. I called up the shaliach there and asked him to verify certain matters, though he himself never knew that the request was related to intelligence gathering. The Israeli government sought the Rebbe’s feedback on many issues.

In this, too, the Rebbe insisted on extraordinary secrecy. I would receive their correspondence via diplomatic pouch. Secret channels were used for the Rebbe’s written responses: either they dispatched their couriers, or I would send our own.

Was there yechidus [audience] with these high-security figures?

Yes, certainly. The government called me up once in the 1980s to say that someone top-secret wishing to meet with the Rebbe would arrive in the U.S. in a day or two. It wasn’t possible, they said, to give his name. They requested that I ask the Rebbe if he would be prepared to meet with him. It was very strange: never before had it happened that they declined to use a name.

Myself, I’m only a pipeline. I went in to the Rebbe with their question. The Rebbe immediately instructed me to tell them. Yes. When this individual reached here two days later, he was in the Rebbe’s room for two hours. On leaving, he identified himself to me (he was a senior Mossad staffer), only because of the necessity to maintain close connections regarding the matter for which he had come.

Could you describe the personal relationships the Rebbe had with the secretaries?

From time to time the relationships were on a very personal level. Family simchas, for example. After a wedding in the family the Rebbe wanted to know which guests arrived; who was honored with the ceremonial participation known as kibbudim. Before weddings he instructed to whom – among people I was in touch with in the Rebbe’s name (including the Prime Minister) – to send invitations. Plus advice: “It would be appropriate to give kibbudim to so-and-so . . . .”

That was also the case in times of sadness. At the shivah after my father passed away in Jerusalem, the Rebbe asked me which customs were observed regarding the time when the matzeivah [tombstone] was placed. He was interested in all the details. I wanted to go back to Israel for the first yahrzeit, which was going to be on Shabbos, but I didn’t want to miss Shabbos here. I told the Rebbe that I’d leave motzaei Shabbos in order to arrive in Israel on Sunday.

The Rebbe responded, “What, and make a point of arriving there after the yahrzeit?” I replied that I didn’t want to miss Shabbos here, and the Rebbe answered, “So don’t go!” I didn’t.

Only Twice in 30 Years

Did you ever have occasion to call the Rebbe at home at night?

Throughout all the years of my work, this happened only twice.

The first occasion was related to the illness of the Gerer Rebbe, of blessed memory, the author of Beis Yisrael. That evening, when I brought the Rebbe to his home, he had asked me to find out how the Gerer Rebbe was feeling and to update him every hour. Late at night I got through to the court of Ger in Jerusalem and then passed on to the Rebbe what I had been informed.

The second occasion resulted from a telephone call from Australia. An elderly man refused to undergo what the physicians defined as emergency life-saving surgery, unless the Rebbe gave his consent. This the Rebbe did when I called him at home.

And did the Rebbe ever call you at home?

At times the Rebbetzin would call to say that the Rebbe wanted to speak to me, and he would then take over. This would generally concern something that I had been told during the day. At any rate, I never once saw the Rebbe dialing a number.

No Excuses

Once the Rebbe asked me to do something and then to report to him what had taken place. The Rebbe expected to receive the report in the morning, but since at any time I did not enter the Rebbe’s study before davenen [prayer] and on that day the opportunity to do so did not arise after davenen either, I entered his study in the day and reported what had been done.

The Rebbe immediately asked why I had not reported back earlier. “Though I was certain that you did it,” he said, “because there is a chazakah [halachic presumption] that an emissary fulfills his mission, we nevertheless learn from Moshe Rabbeinu that the proper practice is to report back on what in fact was done.”

And indeed, throughout all those years, I never once offered excuses to the Rebbe. This was one of the unwritten rules of work in the Secretariat – no excuses and no apologies. Chassidim tell that the Rebbe Rashab [fifth Lubavitcher Rebbe] once rebuked a Chassid for something that he had done and the Chassid offered his excuses.

The Rebbe Rashab replied: “Your explanation is fine, but the query remains intact.” (Yiddish: obber di kasha blaibt a kasha.)

[reb-shlomo-blog]

On Finding God

Please "like" and "share" this page.

On Finding God: Without faith or religious knowledge

By Reb Shlomo © June 06,2013

Many people have sought God through religion, dogmas, 'cults', and so on. Many of these people have been disappointed. While those who have a personal relationship with the Creator are often blessed by participation in the various religions, embracing the official dogmas, practicing the mitzvot and the like, those without this inward certainty often feel lost and confused by them. They sense that there must be a Creator and yet they are skeptical of those who claim to know Him. When hearing religious people talk about God they scratch their heads.

Others approach spirituality as they might explore the physical sciences. Seeking objective evidence of God's existence often leaves these people disappointed and skeptical as well. Do we really have to give up reason and science to have a meaningful spiritual life? Must we accept ancient beliefs that modern knowledge seems to have disproven?

So, how can one with serious doubts and/or spiritual scars 'find God'? Here's my suggestion:

With religion and spirituality the evidence is not generally so consistent nor controllable. Spirituality (regardless of the path) brings us into a place of inner peace, something that is not directly objectively demonstrable. This is a key element of having a meaningful personal spirituality. A person who is spiritually well grounded will be a peaceful person regardless of external realities. This is an indication of true spiritual maturity.

But what of those for whom religion seems to be a justification for hate and violence? Its too easy to say "that's not real religion" or to brand them 'fanatics' or radicals. With religious truth we deal in shades of gray. Things are seldom 'black or white' and sometimes one plus one does not equal two. Ultimately spirituality is personal. Each of us must determine how to commune with the Infinite and the Holy One Chooses whom to accept and whom, if any, to reject. Surely love transcends hate. This is the essence of faith.

People who desire inner peace and light but are unable to realize it often turn to God. Turning to man made religions, sects, dogmas, etc. seldom results in this desired inner peace. Finding/developing a personal relationship with the Creator does.

So, how to do this...

A good way to begin is with what we (Jews) refer to as Hitbodedut: Seclusion. Set aside a few minutes a day for spiritual nourishment. Preferably find a secluded place for this. The rabbis often recommend somewhere outside if possible, a park etc. but your bedroom can work just as well.

Make yourself comfortable. Sit down and allow yourself to become inwardly and outwardly quiet. Breath in and out, releasing any residual stress etc. Stay this way for a few minutes. Just mellow out.

Then in a quiet voice talk to the Creator as you would a friend or trusted confidant. "God, as you know I'm not sure you are really even there. I have sought you before only to be disappointed. This time I am coming to you, just you, not religion, not dogmas. Its just you and me. Please hear and answer me."

Do this in your own words of course. For Hitbodedut you don't need Hebrew etc. Its just a conversation between you and the Infinite.

Then continue with whatever is on your heart. Just talk to God in your own words according to your present realities and understanding. Honestly share your doubts, your hopes and desires. Discuss whatever is on your mind. HaShem is our Counselor and Guide.

There is obviously a degree of faith needed for this: faith that at least maybe there is Someone present in your seclusion with you who cares. Don't be concerned with doubts however. Faith is necessary for everything we do. When you get in a car and turn the key you have faith that the car will start. I've had cars where it took a lot of faith because the cars didn't always start! The faith to turn the key, to try, is enough. Prayer takes no more faith than that. Just turn the key.

Invest some time like this, say once a day for two weeks, maybe an hour or so, or a half hour if an hour seems like too long. Ten minutes a day is better than nothing. Find what works for you. Sometimes you will be talking, sometimes listening, sometimes just soaking up the peace and quiet. At the end of the two weeks ask yourself if this test was successful. Not if you "found God" etc. That's too abstract. Ask yourself if your life has gone more smoothly for establishing this quiet time. If so, then continue. The Way of God is not based on visions, hearing voices, having dreams etc. The Way of God is manifested in daily becoming the person you want to be: A human being of love, peace, openness, and integrity, towards others, towards God, and towards yourself. By investing a little time each day with the Eternal One -- however you conceive of God -- you will find your faith increasing and blossoming. Prayer and meditation are powerful tools.

As London's Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks explains:

Prayer is the language of the soul in conversation with God. It is the most intimate gesture of the religious life, and the most transformative. The very fact that we can pray testifies to the deepest elements of Jewish faith: that the universe did not come into existence accidentally, nor are our lives destined to be bereft of meaning. The universe exists, and we exist, because someone -- the One God, Author of all -- brought us into existence with love. It is this belief more than any other that redeems life from solitude and fate from tragedy -- From the Koren Siddur, page XVII.

As you continue this practice you will probably be drawn to know this Presence better, even as one desires to know ones beloved ever more completely over time. This desire may well lead you to reading Torah or other spiritual writings. Gradually you may feel inclined to study the religious aspects of Judaism (or whatever religion you feel drawn to). Perhaps you will discover the joy of spiritual music, song and dance and begin making new like-minded friends. The possibilities are limitless. Every journey progresses one step at a time. Just walk and enjoy.

The Tanakh (or Hebrew Bible) says, "Taste and see that I am good." Hitbodedut is one effective way to do this. Taste, experience intentional seclusion with God for a couple of weeks and see if you do not develop a taste for the Sacred Presence.

Then, continue walking the Path. Remain open to new insights while holding firmly to your developing inward certainties.

As Rebbe Nachman of Breslov teaches:

You should hold these conversations in whatever language you speak best. Our set prayers are said in Hebrew, but if this is not one's native language, it is difficult to use it to give expression to all one's innermost thoughts and feelings and the heart is less drawn after the words. It is easier to pour out your heart and say everything you need in your own language.

You should tell God everything you feel, be it contrition and longing to repent over the past or requests and supplications to come truly close to God from now on, each person according to his/her level.

Be very careful to get into the habit of spending time every day on your personal prayers and meditation. Fix a regular time for this and then be happy for the rest of the day!

Hitbodedut is of the greatest value. It is the way to come closer to God, because it includes everything else. No matter what you lack in your service of God, even if you feel totally remote from His service, tell God everything and ask Him for all that you need.

If at times you find yourself unable to speak to God or even open your mouth, the very fact that you are there before Him wanting and yearning to speak is itself very good. You can even turn your very inability to speak into a prayer. Tell God that you feel so far away that you cannot even speak to Him! Ask Him to have mercy on you and open your mouth to tell Him what you need.

Many great and famous Tzaddikim [i.e. saintly people] have said that all their achievements came only through Hitbodedut. Anyone with understanding can recognize the supreme value of this practice, which ascends to the most sublime heights. This advice applies to everyone equally, from the very least to the very greatest. Everyone is capable of practicing it and can attain great levels. Happy are all who persist in it.

It is also good to turn Torah teachings into prayers. When you study or hear a teaching of a true Tzaddik, make a prayer out of it. Ask God when you too will be able to fulfill this teaching. Tell Him how far from it you are and beg Him to help you attain everything contained in the lesson.

A person of understanding who wants the truth will be led by God in the path of truth, and he will learn how to practice Hitbodedut and offer words of grace and sound arguments to persuade God to bring him to true service.

Hitbodedut rises to a very high place. This applies especially to turning Torah teachings into prayers, which creates the greatest delight above.

Hitbodedut is the highest level: it is greater than everything. -- Likutey Moharan II, 25

I hope this helps. If I can be of any assistance to you please do not hesitate to contact me.

Got Questions or Comments? Let me know

Be the Blessing you were created to be And Don't let the perfect defeat the good