Sunday, April 24, 2022

PROGRESSIVE IDEOLOGY IS A LIE

PROGRESSIVE IDEOLOGY IS A LIE
David Horowitz throws a cold dash of reality onto the shibboleths of progressive dogma. Are progressives crazy? No, David says, the truth is worse than that.
Crackpot pronouncements that bewilder the politically incorrect.
1. Certainly the most important (and perhaps the most bizarre) of these pronouncements is the progressive claim that, “America is a white supremacist society, which marginalizes and underserves people of color.” This is the kind of statement the White House makes when explaining its “equity” policies which are designed to correct the injustice.3
a. But if this description is accurate, how does one explain the stampede of two million people – mainly “of color” – massing at our border to get into a country, which is said to oppress them?4 How would an estimated two million people, 90% of them “people of color,” decide to risk their lives this year alone to break into a white supremacist country that will marginalize, underserve and oppress them?
b. In a brazen lie on his Inauguration Day, President Biden claimed that “systemic racism touches every facet of American life.”5 It would be his administration’s policy, he promised, to put an end to this alleged injustice – mainly by violating the Constitution and redistributing income and privilege on the basis of race. All “people of color” would be the beneficiaries of this “equity” largesse, while their white-skinned oppressors would be denied the same.6 All this progressive virtue signaling, however, was based on a lie. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 explicitly outlaws “systemic racism.” If there were systemic racism touching “every facet of American life,” as Biden claimed, there would be a tsunami of lawsuits leading to billions in damages. There is no such tsunami. In other words, with one exception there is no pervasive systemic racism in American institutions. Progressive equity payoffs are just racist -and illegal – transfers of wealth.
c. There is one exception. The only real systemic racism in American life is affirmative action. Affirmative action programs required a pass from the Supreme Court precisely because they are racist and therefore unconstitutional. Affirmative action’s discriminatory measures are designed, moreover, to benefit only a handful of select groups of “people of color.” Asians do not quality for affirmative action skin privileges, because they do very well without them.7 The selection of the beneficiary groups was always political. So much for justice.
2. The spectrum of progressive ideology is always seen by those who are drunk on it as a “hierarchy of oppression.” This so-called hierarchy has been turned into an elaborate and lucrative enterprise, generating mountains of hot air in the academy where it is called the “theory of intersectionality.” This ludicrous exercise in intellectual thumb-sucking assigns levels of oppression to individuals who are alleged to have multiple “oppressed” identities, such as black lesbian females who are said to be more oppressed, for example, than heterosexual black males.
A. But are they? Are black lesbian females really powerless in 21st Century America? At the bottom of the totem pole? Victims of multiple oppressions? All the founding organizers of Black Lives Matter were able to engage an estimated 40 million supporters in the summer of 2020, and to orchestrate violent attacks on 220 cities,8 and to collect nearly $100 million in donations from America’s richest corporations and celebrities,9 and were officially endorsed by the President of the United States and the Democrat Party.10 All the creators of Black Lives Matter able to accomplish these feats are black lesbians – and proud of it!11 Victims indeed! More accurately: victimizers.
b. The federal government has spent tens of millions of taxpayers’ dollars on fatuous intersectionality projects without managing to provide a reasonable explanation of what constitutes “oppression” in a free society, or how individuals can be trapped at various levels of a “hierarchy” in a nation in which everyone has equal rights by law. No group in America – except children of abusive parents and the victims of sex traffickers and slavers – is oppressed. No racial, gender or economic group is oppressed. If they are, where is the exodus?
c. Are black Americans marginalized? Blacks have been the center of the nation’s attention since the civil rights movement of the 1950s. Although comprising only 13% of the population they have been able to assert themselves as an unrivalled force in the nation’s media, music and entertainment cultures. Through their dominant roles in sports, black athletes have provided icons and role models for generations of America’s youth – black and white. How marginal is that? Are black Americans underserved? In fact they have been the focus of federal support and privileges amounting to trillions of dollars –more than any other ethnic or racial group. From the point of view of opportunities and benefactions offered to particular groups, there is no greater “skin privilege” than being black.
D. Intersectional hierarchies with an oppressor caste of white males at the top are a progressive illusion. There is no such closed social hierarchy possible in America. The alleged oppressor caste – white males – are only about a third of the population. The putative victims of their oppression not only outnumber them 2-1, they are endowed with the same rights. So how are white males able to control and oppress them? Women preside over courts, run major law enforcement agencies, occupy the vice presidency, sit on the Supreme Court, are the most powerful members of the House of Representatives, have chaired both political parties, and are the chief executives of large American cities. If there hasn’t been a female president yet, whose fault is that? Clearly not white males.
Is there a glass ceiling for women? The adjective itself is a giveaway that there is not. If the ceiling is invisible, it’s because it doesn’t exist. The gender-wage-gap is a long-disproven fiction. Wage discrimination against women was outlawed as a practice nearly 60 years ago by the Equal Pay for Equal Work Act of 1963 – passed by a Congress almost exclusively male. If such a gap existed, and wasn’t outlawed, the remedy would be to do what the Jews and the Irish did when prejudice made them social pariahs. They built their own institutions.
Do women have the resources to create their own economies? Indeed, they do. In America, women’s wealth amounts to $11 trillion, more than enough to build equal pay for equal work institutions if the law didn’t already require it.13
What is true for glass ceilings is also true for concepts like “unconscious racism” and “unintentional racism,” weasel words deployed to justify the aggressive racism of the diversity industry. If the racism is unconscious and unintentional, then it is in the eye of the beholder.
These “triggering” moments are not oppressions of groups trapped in a rigid hierarchy from which they cannot escape. If too many black Americans are poor, the source of their poverty is themselves. In fact, only 20% of blacks are poor.14 Better if it were less, but that figure poses the question: If 80% of blacks are not poor, how can racism be the explanation for the failure of 20% to avail themselves of the advantages that are open to the 80%? Especially when there are millions of people here illegally, who don’t speak the language and still manage to earn a decent living.
Among the more obvious holes in the progressive world view is the fact that there is no place for history, except as a locus of bad practices which can be manipulated to indict the present. The fact that American slaves were first enslaved by black Africans who sold them at auctions in Africa, and that white Americans died in the hundreds of thousands to free blacks, and also inspired a global movement for equal rights, is either missing from progressive narratives, or disparaged.
The progressive outlook also has no place for the crucial roles that psychology, family structure, or criminal behavior play in the destinies not only of individuals but of groups. E.g., if inner cities lack amenities, it is because criminals “of color” scare legitimate businesses and services away. The progressive outlook also has no room for the idea that attitudes can change and not only under threat. Above all, it has no appreciation for the long-term benefits of a society, like America’s, which fosters upward mobility and was dedicated in its founding in a hierarchical world to provide equal rights for all.
Between 1940 and 1950 the earnings of the average black male increased 75%, which was about twice the rate at which white incomes grew.16 This was before the civil rights movement, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Great Society welfare programs that, in any case, failed to reduce poverty at all. Between 1940 and 1960, black incomes for males and females more than doubled.17 By 1971, oppressed, marginalized and underserved black couples with two working spouses were earning 5 percent more than white couples of the same description in every part of the United States except the South.18
Inflation-adjusted per capita black income in 1973 was more than 125 percent higher than twenty-five years earlier.19 Since 1981, black families with two college-educated, working spouses have earned slightly more than white families of the same description in every age group and in every region of the country.20
Why have 20% of the black population failed to climb out of poverty, while 80% have succeeded? Here are some statistics that help to explain. In 2019 the poverty rate in traditional two-parent families of all races was 4.0 percent, compared with 22.2 percent in families headed by a female with no adult male present.
Why are 70% of black families in inner cities single-parent, female-headed households?21 Because 60 years ago progressives devised a welfare system that disqualifies families with a father in the house from receiving welfare benefits. The progressive ideological prism has no window for this, so for 60 years progressives have blocked every change to the system that would free black welfare families from poverty. Progressive ideology – not race – is the oppressor of black poor people in America.
The statistics show that income equality is within the power of blacks to achieve by themselves. Whites are richer not because they oppress blacks but because whites are more successful at forming traditional nuclear families and completing a college education. The educational system is public and largely free, especially to government-privileged minorities. Black failure is concentrated in urban centers where minorities are a majority and blacks occupy positions of power in private philanthropies, public institutions and governments.
In this situation, the chief obstacle to black Americans’ success is the epidemic of anti-white racism present in the Biden White House, the Democrat Party, the Black Lives Matter movement, the leftwing media and corporate culture, universities, philanthropic institutions, the Diversity Industry and the K-12 teacher unions. The sinister message to blacks from all these race-infected institutions is: You don’t control your destiny, racist whites do.
This lie has planted the seeds of violent hatred, triggering a national crime wave whose perpetrators (and victims, ironically) are mainly black. Why are black racists targeting Asians? Because Asians have shown that a minority that suffers persecution can succeed if it embraces the right values. Asians are in fact the richest ethnic group in America – significantly richer than whites.22
The chief effect of anti-white racism is to inculcate a sense of powerlessness among blacks that feeds the hate and encourages them to put their faith in the corrupt urban leaders who have lined their own pockets with trillions of federal dollars intended to advance black interests. Al Sharpton and ambulance-chaser Benjamin Crump, attorney for the Black Lives Matter’s fake martyrs, come immediately to mind.23
There is no hierarchy of oppression in America. But there are such hierarchies in the socialist societies admired by progressives – Cuba, China, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Russia. The social hierarchy in these progressive countries is determined by the hierarchy in the ruling party that bills itself as the savior of the people, which is precisely how progressives see themselves.
16 Stephan Thernstrom and Abigail Thernstrom, America in Black and White (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997), pp. 81-82.
17 Ibid.
18 Thomas Sowell, The Economics and Politics of Race (New York: Quill, 1983), pp. 190-
20 Tony Snow, “Blacks Should Not Abandon King’s Dream,” Conservative Chronicle (September 7, 1994), p. 28; (2) Walter E. Williams, “White People Are Divine,” More Liberty Means Less Government (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1999), p. 6.
22https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income
23 David Horowitz, I Can’t Breathe: How a Racial Hoax is Killing America, 2021

Tuesday, April 19, 2022

Democrats' support for Israel has cratered under Biden

 April 5, 2022

Democrats' support for Israel has cratered under Biden

After a year in office, it is clear to most Americans, and much of the free world, that President Biden is no Reagan, Trump, or even Clinton. 

Putting it kindly, Biden is no originalist.  He doesn't have one uniquely Biden policy.  Biden is merely the front man, the mouthpiece for the background bureaucrats who set America's course and craft America's direction. 

That's why he has little to say about the disaster at America's southern border.  This is a policy set by radical socialists and the cynical wing of the Democrat party to flood the country with millions of people who will be dependent on a socialistic government for eternal handouts. 

Biden is silent on this issue.  He has not been issued with cue cards to explain away the tsunami of destitute people, the massive import of deadly drugs and sex-traffickers, the result of a borderless America.  It's a stealth operation, and the president has been told not to take questions and not to talk about this huge problem that will debilitate the American economy and its social fabric for decades. 

That's just one aspect of the failure of the current president to face up to domestic problems that weren't there before he took office. Another is the economy.  A third is the way they educate — read: indoctrinate — kids these days.

When it comes to foreign policy, Biden is the puppet of his handlers. 

We saw that played out in Afghanistan, where his military, intelligence, and State Department set him on a course that was doomed to fail.

If there is a common theme that connects Biden's domestic and foreign failures, it is the Cancel Trump policy. 

Whatever Trump succeeded in doing, cancel it. 

On his first day in the Oval Office, Biden canceled the Keystone Pipeline and lifted sanctions off Russia's Nord Stream pipeline to Europe.  How is that working out after Putin invaded Ukraine? 

Sponsored by Revcontent

This Clever Device Can Lower Your Monthly Electric Bill by 90%

USA Trend Buzz

Retirement Question #1: What's a "Fiduciary"

Smart Asset

Psoriatic Arthritis Common Signs - Most Wish They Hadn't Ignored Them

PsoriaticArthritis

Prime is Now $139, but You Can Save with This Hack

Online Shopping Tools

Trying to do things better than — or should I say differently from — Trump was seen in the bungled, deadly Biden withdrawal from Afghanistan. 

As the time of writing this piece, we see America dangling by a thread being pulled by Iran and Russia, who are having fun embarrassing Biden in Vienna.  At least four members of Robert Malley's negotiating team have walked off the job, with one reporting, "What is going on in Vienna is an absolute disaster." 

If that is what a top American negotiator is feeling, how do you expect Israel to feel?  After all, Iran's almost inevitable nuclear weapon will be aimed first at Israel.

So what happened to the United States who once looked on Israel as its staunchest ally? 

Under Biden, those days are over. 

How did that happen?  It began before Biden became president. 

Biden likes to talk about how fond he was with Golda Meir.  That's how far he goes back.  But he wasn't so fond of Menachem Begin, or of Benjamin Netanyahu.  He raked both over the coals to be rebuked by Begin, when Biden, then a Delaware senator, threatened to cut off United States aid to the Jewish State in 1982. 

Don't threaten us with cutting off your aid. It will not work. I am not a Jew with trembling knees. I am a proud Jew with 3,700 years of civilized history. Nobody came to our aid when we were dying in the gas chambers and ovens. Nobody came to our aid when we were striving to create our country. We paid for it. We fought for it. We died for it. We will stand by our principles. We will defend them. And, when necessary, we will die for them again, with or without your aid.

Biden's relationship with Netanyahu soured several times during Bibi's premiership.  In 2019, Biden accused Israel's prime minister of being "counterproductive" and an "extreme right" leader. 

But the harshest anti-Israel cut of all was when Obama recruited Biden, his vice president, and his point man to Ukraine, to bring that country onboard in their United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334, which condemned Jewish people living in Judea and Samaria and parts of Jerusalem as being illegal occupiers, according to the Obama-Biden vindictive new international law. 

This was their last spiteful act, stabbing Israel in the back, as they left the White House in December 2016. 

It was payback time against Netanyahu's vocal opposition to Obama's infamous Iran nuclear deal. 

Now Biden is attempting to cancel Trump's sanctions against the rogue regime in Tehran, a state sponsor of terror that has deceived the world about its covert uranium enrichment progress — the Iranians are now up to 60% and within reach of 90%, making Iran a nuclear threshold state — by concocting an even worse deal than Obama's. 

Biden's deal will release the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps from the United States list of foreign terrorist organizations despite their deplorable record of deadly attacks against Israel, the UAE, other Gulf States, and Saudi Arabia as they try to usurp power in Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon. 

For no solid commitment from Iran to stop its nuclear development or expansion into the region, Biden is prepared to reward the unrepentant ayatollahs with billions of dollars in sanctions relief and the green light to export oil production that will enrich Iran's intercontinental ballistic missile program, the vehicle that will deliver the doomsday weapon to Israel and potentially to the United States.

Biden can say he overrode yet another Trump policy, but that gives little comfort to an Israel, smaller than New Jersey, faced with both a nuclear threat and Iranian forces and their proxies with 300,000 powerful precision missiles aimed at us over our northern, eastern, and southern borders.

Biden's animosity toward Israel also expresses itself in a new directive.  His administration is offering a million-dollar bounty to any group reporting Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians.  This reward is not reciprocal.  He is not demanding evidence of Palestinian deadly human rights crimes, even war crimes, committed by their terrorist armies and individuals against Israeli citizens, nor their blatant anti-Semitic indoctrination programs clamoring for a world without Israel.  Biden is not even prepared to offer money to Palestinian human rights groups who want to report human rights crimes committed by their own leaders in Ramallah or in Gaza in which their citizens are summarily arrested, taken to detention centers, tortured, and killed for protesting their cruel and corrupt rule.  

It's only Israel they are after.

Attention must be brought to the administration's determination to break international law by revoking Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem, our eternal capital.  The State Department is determined to open a consulate in Jerusalem to exclusively serve Palestinians.  This is an affront to the dignity and sovereignty of the nation-state of Israel and against all international principles.  Antony Blinken is determined to press ahead with this Palestinian mission in the heart of Jerusalem over strenuous Israeli objections.

Biden could open his consulate in either Ramallah or Gaza City, where the competing and warring Palestinian leaderships administer their divided populations, but he won't.

It is yet another example of Biden's antagonism against Israel. 

I am certain it is not Biden inventing these provocative policies.  It is, for sure, the anti-Israel, dare I say anti-Jewish, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and activists who have been allowed to insert themselves into positions of power and decision-making in Congress, the White House, the State Department, and other government offices and are now being foisted onto a president attempting to appease the radical anti-Israel base within his administration and his party. 

Remember this the next time you hear Democrats saying how much they stand with Israel. 

These are troubling times for Israel. 

Barry Shaw, international public diplomacy director, Israel Institute for Strategic Studies.

Monday, June 29, 2020

Israel is NOT illegally "OCCUPYING" some else's land : annexation

Israel is NOT illegally "OCCUPYING" some else's land . It is time to annex the areas of Jewish communities. Predictably the Democrats in Congress are against Israel on this and the Republican support Israel. Predictably also weak-need Aipac won't defend Israel on this
1) Palestinians are trying to steal Jewish land
a. Jews are the Indigenous people
b. Palestinians are unrelated to any ancient inhabitants. Made up phony people. Never existed before 1950. They are simply Arabs being used as phony people to steal Jewish land.
c. The land of Israel was awarded to the Jews BY a. bible, b. the 1917 Balfour, c. 1920 League of Nations, d. 1922 Remo Conf, e. UN vote 1947, f. victory 1948 war started by Arabs g. victory 1967,
d. They want it all. PLO 1964. 1964 Jordan controlled West bank and Egypt Gaza. What did the PLO want to liberate exactly then? All of Israel from Jewish rightful ownership.
e. Arab league The Khartoum Resolution of 1 September 1967 was issued at the conclusion of the 1967 Arab League ... what became known as the "Three No's": "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it.
f. US State Dept says now the area of West Bank not illegally occupied by Israel
1) 8x sovereignty was offered to Palestinians. They rejected it everytime.
a. In 1937, the Peel Commission proposed the partition of Palestine and the creation of an Arab state.
b. In 1939, the British White Paper proposed the creation of a unitary Arab state.
c. In 1947, the UN would have created an even larger Arab state as part of its partition plan.
d. The 1979 Egypt-Israel peace negotiations offered the Palestinians autonomy, which would almost certainly have led to full independence.
e. The Oslo agreements of the 1990s laid out a path for Palestinian independence, but the process was derailed by terrorism.
f. In 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to create a Palestinian state in all of Gaza and 97 percent of the West Bank.
g. In 2008, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered to withdraw from almost the entire West Bank and partition Jerusalem on a demographic basis.
h. In addition 1948 to 1967, Israel did not control the West Bank. The Palestinians could have demanded an independent state from the Jordanians. On the contrary whilst Jordan was in control Arafat said there was no longer a claim as it was no longer part of Palestine. Once it was back in Israeli hands it miraculously became disputed land again! This is one of many reasons Jews and Israelis are cynical.
The Palestinians have spurned each of these opportunities. A variety of reasons have been given for why the Palestinians have in Abba Eban’s words, “never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity”.

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Did Rambam believe every letter of Torah as we have was given at Sinai?

Is it possible that a scribe somewhere in the history of time accidentally copied a dalet as a reish and the error remained, copied faithfully through the millennia until it appears in the Torah scrolls that we read from today?
This is clearly a heretical suggestion. After all, Maimonides, in the eighth of his 13 Principles states:
I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah that is now in our possession is the same that was given to Moses our teacher, peace be upon him.
This seems explicit. The entire Torah, including every letter, every kotzo shel yud, that we have today is identical to that which Moses received.
But actually, this formulation of the 13 Principles was not written by Maimonides, but by an anonymous author, who translated, summarized and simplified what Maimonides wrote and included it in the Ashkenazi prayer book. But this is not what Maimonides actually wrote. In fact, it is not even what the Sefardim have in their prayer book. For example, the eighth principle according to the Ish Matzliach Siddur is:
That the entire Torah is given from Heaven
Here there is no mention of our Torah being identical with the Torah of Moses.
Similarly, the Yigdal prayer, which is another formulation of Maimonides’s principles reads:
God gave the true Torah to His people through His prophet, who was the faithful of His house.
Maimonides actually wrote his principles in Arabic, in his Commentary on the Mishna (Introduction to Chapter Hekel). There he writes:
The Eighth Principle: That the entire Torah in our possession today was given [to us] by the Almighty through Moses, our teacher, by means of the medium we metaphorically call “speech.” No one knows the real nature of this communication except Moses, to whom it was transmitted. He was like a scribe receiving dictation. He wrote the history, the stories, and the commandments. Therefore, he is called [the] inscriber…
Someone who says that some of these verses and stories were written by Moses from his own mind, such a person is considered by the Sages and prophets to be a denier [of Torah] and more brazen than all the other deniers. Because such a person thinks that the Torah has an [important] core surrounded by [less important] coverings. [He thinks] that the history and stories have no purpose and they are from Moses.
Maimonides’s point is not referring to the Torah scrolls that we have today, but to the original Torah scroll that Moses wrote. The fundamental principle of belief is that Moses did not add or subtract anything to that which God dictated to him.
Similarly, in Mishne Torah, Maimonides’s legal compendium, written in Hebrew, he writes:
There are three categories of people who are called ‘deniers of Torah’: Someone who says that Torah is not from God – even a single verse, or a single word – if he said that Moshe added it by himself he is considered a denier of Torah.
And there is a very good reason that Maimonides does not claim that the Torah we have today is identical to the one that Moses wrote. Because (despite what many people think or claim) it is clear that this is not the case.
For example, in Masechet Sofrim (6:4) Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish states that there were three Torah scrolls kept in the Temple and each of them was slightly different than the other two. The rabbis followed the principle of majority and wrote their Torah scrolls according to the word contained in two of the Temple Torahs.
This means that even in the time of the Temple scribal errors had crept into the Torah. Following the majority is the best way of resolving doubt, but does not mean that the resulting Torah scroll – which was different than all three of the Temple Torahs – was identical to the original.
The Talmud (Kiddushin 30a) gives a count of the number of letters and verses in the Torah. An anonymous editor added a marginal note showing that this is different than the number of letters and verses that we have in our scrolls today. Rav Yosef, a third century Babylonian scholar, admitted that the earlier generations were experts in the correct spelling of words, but by his time their scrolls were no longer accurate.
Several times it is clear from Rashi’s commentary on the Torah that he had slightly different words than we have in our scrolls today (e.g. Exodus 25:22).
Tosefot in their commentary on Shabbat 55b and Nida 33a point out that the Talmud had a slightly different version of the Bible than they did.
Our Talmud disagrees with our Torah scrolls.
But they did not suggest altering the text of their modern Torah to align with the Talmud.
Rabbi Akiva Eiger in his gloss to Shabbat 55b lists dozens of places in rabbinic literature where the text differs from our modern Torah scrolls.
Rambam himself admitted that most of the Torah scrolls and books about how to write them were wrong (Hilkhot Sefer Torah 8:4):
Because I saw great confusion in all the Torah scrolls that I have seen… and the experts in tradition who write and compile lists of the open and closed portions disagree on these matters… I saw fit to list all the portions of the Torah, the closed and the opens… to fix all the scrolls and correct them.
Maimonides explained that he relied on the tradition of Aharon ben Moses ben Asher, a 10th century scribe who lived in Tiberias. He was the scion of a family of scribes known as Ben Asher which was considered the most reliable and authentic. They wrote the masorah (a commentary on the Bible noting linguistic peculiarities), so they became known as the Masorites.
There was another family of Masorites called Ben Naphtali who had their own version of what they considered the authentic text. Some, including Rav Sa’adia Gaon, considered the Ben Naphtali version more authentic.
The actual text Maimonides used to write his Torah (as he states in Hilkhot Sefer Torah 8:5), is almost certainly the book known today as the Aleppo Codex (the story of that Bible, including how it went from Cairo to Aleppo and eventually Jerusalem is interesting and controversial, but not for now).
The Torah scroll I relied on in these matters is the well-known scroll in Egypt… which was in Jerusalem for many years previously… which everyone relied on because ben Asher corrected it and edited it for years…
The Aleppo Codex text, also known as Keter Aram Tzova, was printed in the past few decades. Ironically, the text that Maimonides considered to be the most authoritative was banned by many ultra-Orthodox Jews because it different substantially from the Torah scrolls and printed versions of the Chumash that most communities use nowadays. I remember in 1995, seeing posters in Mea Shearim banning that Bible, and I thought that was beautifully ironic.
The very same text that Maimonides said was the only one that is kosher, was declared not kosher by modern-day rabbis.
Yet, their argument would be that of Tosefot. Our scrolls differ from those of the earlier rabbis. But that does not mean we change our Torah scrolls. We stick with the ones we have.
If the text of the Torah has changed so much over the centuries, how come we often hear that one of the “proofs” of the authenticity of Judaism is that all the scrolls, throughout the world, are identical?
Firstly, that is not entirely true. Yemenite Torah scrolls have 24 differences from the scrolls used by Ashkenazi and Sefardi communities.
But it is true that the vast majority of Jews in the world use a scroll with only one difference (the word “daka” in Deuteronomy 23:2 is written in some scrolls with an aleph and in others with a heh).
And this is due primarily to Rabbi Meir ben Todros HaLevi Abulafia, who lived in Spain from about 1170 – 1244. He collected as many Torah scrolls as he could, and based on the rule of majority, compiled what he felt was the most accurate version. He published his findings in Masoret Siyag La-Torah, and scribes came from as far as Germany and North Africa to copy his text of the Torah.
Of course, nowadays, we have computers that can check there are no words or letters missing in the Torah. But we cannot guarantee that the version programmed into the computer is the most accurate. It is almost certainly not identical with the one Moses received.
But it is the one we use, so it our tradition. And therefore, whether it is the same as Moses’s Torah or as Maimonides’s Torah makes not one iota of difference.
————————
* Nahmanides explains that Eliasaph’s father was known by two names. He was called De’uel because he knew God, but also known as Re’uel because God put ideas into his head. Hizkuni also notes the difference of name. But I didn’t find any earlier source which addresses this point.
David Sedley lives in Jerusalem with his wife and children. He has been at various times a teacher, translator, author, community rabbi, journalist and video producer. Born and bred in New Zealand, he is usually a Grinch, except when the All Blacks win. And he also plays a loud razzberry-colored electric guitar.
  

Friday, September 2, 2016

Rabbi Jonathan Ginsburg Chicago North Shore and NW Suburbs Inexpensive High Holiday Reform Services

Chicago North Shore and NW Suburbs Rabbi  Jonathan Ginsburg
Inexpensive High Holiday Reform Services
Dear Worshipper,

Congregation B’nai Chai invites you to celebrate the coming of the New Year 5777/2016.
The cost of tickets has remained the same as it was for the past several year, only $85 per person for those over 13 years of age. Members of the family, 12 years and younger, will be admitted at no charge but must have a ticket.

As in past, services will be held at Caruso Middle School, 1801 Montgomery Rd, Deerfield (Northeast of 294 and Deerfield Road. We use the 1996 edition of the New Union Prayer Book Gates of Repentance. Buy it at Rosenblums in Skokie on Gross Point Road or from their online store http://www.alljudaica. com/Gates-of-Repentance-p/53. htm and copies can be borrowed at the door.

L’Shana Tovah



You can cut and paste this form and mail it in.

Congregation B’nai Chai North Shore

2016 High Holiday Ticket Order Form

Name  _____________________________ _________________________
Street Address  _____________________________ _________________
City__________________________ __________  Zip Code ___________
Email Address ______________________________ _________________

Everyone attending services must have a ticket.

Number of tickets at $85.00  ___________________________
Number of free tickets for children under 13 years of age  _______
Please enclose this form with your check, payable to: Congregation B’nai Chai
Mail in the enclosed envelope to: Congregation B’nai Chai
                                       c/o Jerry Block
                                       2759 The Mews
                                       Northbrook, IL  60062
Yizkor List
List names of family members whom you wish to be recognized during the Yom Kippur Service.  There is no charge, but a donation would be welcome.
Deceased’s Name                                           Relationship
______________________________ _____                   ______ ____________      
______________________________ _____                   ______ ____________      
______________________________ _____                   ______ ____________      
______________________________ _____                   ______ ____________      
Donation: $________________________
Spread the word to friends and family. Great services, very affordable tickets
They can get information about the services at http://bnaichai.blogspot. com/p/high-holidays.html