| Yehuda Lave is an author, journalist, psychologist, rabbi, spiritual teacher, and coach, with degrees in business, psychology, and Jewish Law. He works with people from all walks of life and helps them in their search for greater happiness, meaning, business advice on saving money, and spiritual engagement. Love Yehuda Lave Join my blog by sending me an email to YehudaLave@gmail.com A shout out to my sister and brother today, on what would have been our Mom's 105th birthday. Born in 1916 in Weisnenbraun Germany, she was the only member of our family to survive coming to Boston in 1938, by being sponsored by our cousin. I visited the old family house in Weisenbraun in 2019 before the pandemic started or it probably wouldn't have happened. A non-Jewish wonderful woman there keeps the Jewish history of the town alive. Our family game to Germany from Bohemia in Czech several hundred years ago and my Grandfather was the Rabbi and Schochet in the little German town until my Grandfather was killed along with the rest of the family as he was the Rabbi and stood up for the Jews of the town. Ironically I married a girl from Czech so my roots are still going strong. Shout out to my mom in heaven as well as she made it to 96. | | | | | The Three Musketeers at the Kotel | | | | | It's final: Lockdowns don't work By Jemy Gatdula | | | | | | This is becoming repetitive already but it's very much worth repeating: lockdowns don't work and a new study has come out re-confirming that fact. Medical experts Eran Bendavid, Christopher Oh, Jay Bhattacharya, and John Ioannidis published just two weeks ago at the European Journal of Clinical Investigation their research on "Assessing Mandatory Stay-at-Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID-19." They studied "COVID-19 case growth in relation to any NPI [non-pharmaceutical interventions; i.e., lockdowns: mandatory stay-at-home and business closures] implementation in subnational regions of 10 countries: England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, South Korea, Sweden, and the US." They then examined "case growth in Sweden and South Korea, two countries that did not implement mandatory stay-at-home and business closures, as comparison countries for the other eight countries (16 total comparisons)." Their findings? "While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less restrictive interventions." In short: there was no practical difference in effect between countries that locked down and those that didn't. Or even shorter: whatever benefits lockdowns give are dwarfed by their enormous costs. This study was complemented by Canadian infectious disease expert Dr. Ari Joffe in his study "COVID-19: Rethinking the Lockdown Groupthink" (November 2020). Here, he stated that "The costs of lockdowns are at least 10 times higher than the benefits. That is, lockdowns cause far more harm to population well-being than COVID-19 can." And to reiterate: lockdowns "adversely affect many millions of people globally with food insecurity [82-132 million more people], severe poverty [70 million more people], maternal and under age-5 mortality from interrupted healthcare [1.7 million more people], infectious diseases deaths from interrupted services [millions of people with tuberculosis, malaria, and HIV], school closures for children [affecting children's future earning potential and lifespan], interrupted vaccination campaigns for millions of children, and intimate partner violence for millions of women." Why do lockdown policies continue? In two words: fear mongering. As Dr. Joffe points out: the "Popular media focused on absolute numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths independent of context. There has been a sheer one-sided focus on preventing infection numbers. The economist Paul Frijters wrote that it was 'all about seeming to reduce risks of infection and deaths from this one particular disease, to the exclusion of all other health risks or other life concerns.' Fear and anxiety spread, and we elevated COVID-19 above everything else that could possibly matter … we ignored hidden 'statistical deaths' … we preferred immediate benefits to even larger benefits in the future, we disregarded evidence that disproved our favorite theory." And let no one say that these are new findings. People have been warning about lockdowns (including this column) as early as April-May 2020. Just one example: As summarized by Daniel Horowitz, "four professors with backgrounds ranging from medicine to economics attempted to quantify the number of lives lost from the devastation of the lockdown itself — something our government failed to simulate when it embarked on this novel policy. Using health and labor data as well as various actuarial tables, they projected 65,000 lives lost per month of lockdown in the US — greater than the loss from the virus. That number was calculated by dividing the estimated $1.1 trillion lost from economic productivity per month of lockdown by $17 million because the best estimates predict one life lost from suicide, alcohol or drug abuse, or stress-induced illnesses per $17 million lost." (see "The COVID-19 shutdown will cost Americans millions of years of life" Scott Atlas, John Birge, Ralph Keeney, and Alexander Lipton, The Hill, May 25, 2020) And information coming in keeps proving the foregoing. Just take the US States of California and Florida: the former with strict lockdown and mask policies, the latter without. The result? California's deaths per million went up 505%. Florida? Deaths per million up by 53%. Finally, there is the country lockdown lovers love to bash: Sweden. But as IEEE Spectrum's Vaclav Smil points out, "Don't be Too Quick to Judge Sweden's COVID-19 Policy" (Dec. 29, 2020): "In October 2020 the Swedish [excess all-cause mortality] rate was marginally lower than in France, 30% lower than in the United States, only half as high as in Spain — but 2.5 times higher than in Finland and five times higher than in Germany." And by the 45th week of 2020, the "Swedish mortality remained well below the expected level and even below the Norwegian rate." Meanwhile, "France, Italy, Spain and Belgium had, once again, high excess mortalities, and only the Finnish mortality was well below the Swedish rate." The ultimate tragedy of this pandemic may very well be the institution of lockdown measures. Aside from the gross loss of life and livelihood it wrought, there's also sadly the willing acceptance by many to forego their civil liberties rather than confront fear with reason. Jemy Gatdula is a Senior Fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence. | | | | | | | Netanyahu's 5 step Phased Plan to Reopen Israel By Aryeh Savir, Tazpit News Agency Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Health Minister Yuli Edelstein held a briefing for the public on Wednesday night during which Netanyahu presented a five-phased plan for Israel's exit from the Coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis by the end of April. The Public Security Minister, the Israel Police Inspector General, the Health Ministry Director-General, the national coronavirus project director, the head of the Public Health Service, the MDA Director-General, and the heads of Israel's HMOs were all present at the briefing, held ahead of the Purim holiday as part of the effort to prevent a renewed outbreak of the pandemic Netanyahu recalled last Purim when "there was a dangerous outbreak that infected very many and you remember that we had to close down the country. This cannot recur." "We must follow the rules. This is incredibly important because we really are on the verge of exiting from the pandemic," he stated. He said the goal is to reach 6,200,000 people over the age of 16 who have been vaccinated or have recovered from the virus. Israel is 1,200,000 people away from this goal and Netanyahu blamed fake news on the lack of progress. "They say the vaccine is unnatural, that it is a foreign body, that there are side effects, that it has not been tested. They have said this about all of the previous vaccines in the past 150 years. I would like to underscore something: The virus is a foreign body that attacks the body. The virus is an unnatural thing that attacks the body. The vaccines are the defense. This is a mighty gift to humanity," he declared. "I ask you to not believe the fake news. Go be vaccinated. The vaccines save lives. The vaccines prolong life," he emphasized. "Around the world, citizens are waiting for vaccines; in the State of Israel, vaccines are waiting for citizens. This must change immediately," he said. The first stage has already commenced in which 81% of Israeli citizens eligible for the inoculation are vaccinated, at least once, and the Green Passport program to open the economy is in motion. The second stage, the second week of March, is the gradual opening of education for the grades that are still learning from home. The third stage is the second phase of the Green Passport in the second week of March, to further open the economy. The fourth stage is to finish vaccinating the entire population over age 16 by the end of March. The fifth stage and final stage is the full opening of the economy in April. "This Passover we will again ask – why is this night different? And this time we will answer – this night we are all vaccinated," he concluded. Health Minister Yuli Edelstein noted that "it is not certain that we will be able to celebrate Pesach as usual, no one in the world knows the answer because it all depends on each and every one of us. The government and doctors alone cannot guarantee it – only nine million citizens in Israel." The Ministry of Health updated Wednesday night that it documented 4,428 new COVID-19 cases over the past day. Of the 74,374 tests done over the weekend, 6.2% returned positive. 785 of the patients hospitalized with Corona are in serious condition, 261 of them are on life support. Over 4,590,000 Israelis have received the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, some 49.5% of the population. 5,660 Israelis have died of the virus.
| | | | | | | U.S. Agunot Have Reason To Celebrate By Dr. Rachel Levmore - Although the agunah problem is far from being solved, the state of Israel has stepped up and is freeing dozens of agunot – outside its borders. Let me explain. Outside Israel, batei din have no legal jurisdiction and thus no power to enforce their rulings. Therefore, in the Diaspora, agunot in the modern era have been without recourse as batei din can't end their suffering. A beit din's ruling is only enforceable in secular court if both parties previously signed a binding arbitration agreement naming a particular beit din as the arbiter. The Beth Din of America's Halachic Prenup for the prevention of get-refusal is one such agreement – and it has been 100 percent effective. But until 2018, agunot in the U.S. who didn't sign this prenup had no hope. In July of that year, though, the Knesset in Israel passed what's colloquially known as the "Diaspora Agunot Law." Under certain conditions, it gives legal jurisdiction to the State Rabbinical Court to adjudicate divorce suits between spouses who don't live in Israel, are not Israeli citizens, and may have no connection to the State of Israel. If petitioned by an agunah, the court can summon her get-refusing husband if he is visiting Israel, issue a restraining order, and levy sanctions against him until he gives his wife a get. All the agunah needs to do is show the court that securing a get in the Diaspora has proven to be impossible – either due to her husband flouting the rulings of a local beit din or the absence of a qualified beit din in her locale – and that there are civil divorce proceedings in place. A few months ago, on September 7, 2020, the "Diaspora Agunot Law" was discussed and reviewed in the Knesset's Constitution, Law and Justice Committee. The Directorate of the State Rabbinical Courts noted that over the two years of the law's existence, 119 agunot from all over the world have filed suit for a get from their recalcitrant husbands, and 57 of those suits have been successfully completed with the get delivered! The majority of these cases were expeditiously resolved simply by the Rabbinical Court issuing a restraining order preventing the get-refuser from leaving Israel. The president of the Conference of European Rabbis, Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt, who attended the Knesset meeting via Zoom, praised the legislation effusively. He also announced that due to the law, 25 additional agunot were freed in Europe through local batei din! Apparently the very existence of the "Diaspora Agunot Law" was enough to convince recalcitrant men to give their wives a get. Evidently, with anti-Semitism on the rise around the world, Jews want to leave open for themselves the option of leaving their homes for the safety and freedom of Israel. The specter of being hauled into a Rabbinical Court upon arrival in Israel sufficed to convince a number recalcitrant husbands to reconsider their position. Batei din, Jewish communities, rabbis, and agunot: Take note and disseminate this information! An agunah in the Diaspora should be referred to a professional in Israel. She may not have much of a connection to Israel, but – as the Jewish state – it can help her secure her long-awaited get. Ki miZion tetzei Torah! (Written in honor of International Agunah Day, Ta'anit Esther) | | | | | | | Two 1,800-Year-Old Sarcophagi Discovered in Ramat Gan Zoo By David Israel - An extraordinary discovery was made during the construction of a new wildlife hospital at the Ramat Gan Safari Park last week – two unique sarcophagi (ancient stone coffins), were found in the earthworks. The new hospital complex, designed to provide advanced veterinary services for birds and mammals, includes a specialized operating theater and a large bird nursery that will provide quiet, heated housing for the frequent feeds needed during the chick-rearing seasons. When work on the new facility began a few days ago, Rami Tam, head of the African savanna zone, noticed two coffins jutting out of the soil.
Tam called animal health and management director Shmulik Yedvab, who contacted Alon Klein and Uzi Rothstein at the Israel Antiquities Authority's Theft Prevention Unit. The inspectors were astonished to see the sarcophagi in the middle of Israel's biggest zoo. After a thorough examination, they confirmed the unique find's age.
Veteran Safari workers present at the time recalled that the sarcophagi had been found years ago in the zoo's parking lot. They were moved to a location near the veterinary clinic and the African savanna zone, but over the years were forgotten and were reburied under sand and thick vegetation.
Based on the stones and their ornate decoration, the sarcophagi are thought to have been intended for people of high status. According to Israel Antiquities Authority archaeologists, the sarcophagi are roughly 1,800 years old and date from the Roman period. They are ornamented with symbolic discs – to protect and accompany the soul on its journey to the afterlife – and flower garlands, often used to decorate sarcophagi in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. Between the garlands are oval blanks, which the archaeologists believe were originally intended to be filled with a customary grape-cluster motif, but for some unknown reason, the work remained unfinished. The sarcophagi, made of local stone – probably from the Judaean Hills or Samaria – are locally-produced imitations of the prestigious sarcophagi made of Proconnesian marble from the Turkish island of Marmara. In ancient times the island was called Proikonesos or Prokonnesos, Latinized as Proconnesus. The modern name "Marmara" is derived from the Greek mármaros—crystalline rock, or shining stone because it was famous for the white marble quarried there. Proconnesian marble is used extensively in the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, and exclusively in the Herculean Sarcophagus of Genzano now in the British Museum. It was also used in the Basilica of Maxentius in the Roman Forum. To date, marble remains the island's primary export.
Both sarcophagi about to be shipped from the zoo to the IAA treasure repository, Feb. 16, 2021. / Yoli Schwartz / Israel Antiquities Authority
Found together, the two sarcophagi bear identical ornamentation and they may have been made for a husband and wife. The exact provenance of the sarcophagi is unknown, but they were probably buried near the site of ancient Bnei Brak in the Roman period. The wealthy owners of the sarcophagi, buried with their personal artifacts, had no idea that the coffins would find a place of honor alongside giraffes, elephants, and a bird nursery. Last Tuesday, their sarcophagi were transferred to their rightful location in the Israeli National Treasures repositories.
| | | | | | An Essay on Parshat Terumah "And I will dwell in their midst"There is a well-known interpretation of the Torah's instruction to erect the Tabernacle, cited by Alshich: "'They shall make Me a sanctuary, and I will dwell in their midst'1 – it does not say 'in it' but 'in their midst.'" With this statement, the matter of the Tabernacle is reduced to its most significant, fundamental point. The Tabernacle is in the midst of the Jewish people – it is "the tent He had set among men"2 – and the people's presence is essential for its existence. The notion that G‑d will dwell "in their midst" invests the physical Tabernacle with inner meaning. Its sanctity is not due to its structure or to the materials from which it is built, but to the fact that the Jewish people resides around it.In essence, this is true of every sacred object. Every holy vessel presents an opportunity to establish a holy connection, but this does not happen automatically; the sanctity exists only when the object is used. The sanctity becomes meaningful only in connection with a member of the Jewish people; if that factor is missing, while the object must still be treated with respect, it has no sanctity.There is a story that illustrates this point: A young rabbi was once imprisoned and tortured by the Russians. When, after a while, he was unexpectedly released, it was discovered that one of the reasons given for his release was that he was insane. The authorities had seen him putting on tefillin, and when they asked him what this was, he answered that it was a communication device through which he spoke with G‑d. After examining the tefillin inside and out and not finding any batteries or antennas, and particularly after seeing him put this device on his head and begin to talk, they came to the conclusion that he was definitely insane.Obviously, the tefillin themselves are not some kind of magical communication device. But the truth is that, like every sacred instrument, tefillin are instruments for connecting with G‑d, but they only receive their inner essence when combined with one's performance of the mitzvot associated with them.What is true of sacred objects is equally true of the Tabernacle. The real meaning of the Tabernacle, its inner essence, is G‑d's presence in the midst of the Jewish people: "I will dwell in their midst." Therefore, while it is certainly important to deal with the construction of the physical Tabernacle, it is particularly critical to deal with its inner aspect as well: the human tabernacle.One whose heart moves himWhat is the Tabernacle made of? In the opening of the parshah, G‑d commands the people to donate the materials for the Tabernacle – "Let them bring Me a donation."3 "Every person whose heart moves him" participates in the construction of the Tabernacle, the building of holiness; everyone gives as much as he wants.The funds required for the Tabernacle could have been collected in a variety of ways, but G‑d specified that they be donated – "one whose heart moves him." In parallel situations in the Torah, different methods are prescribed. In the case of the gifts given to the Priests and Levites, for example, the process of giving is defined and obligatory – one must give a certain percentage of one's produce. Another possible option was graduated taxation: One who has a certain amount of assets pays two percent, one who has more pays three percent, and so on. The collection of funds for the Tabernacle could have been done in any of these ways, yet G‑d required that each person give not according to a specific prescribed measure but according to his generosity.There is a difference between money that a person donates out of generosity and a set sum of money that he is obligated to payEven the money that was collected not by donation but by set measure, like that of the shekel dues, was used in the Tabernacle for specific purposes. None of the service vessels was made from the silver of those coins; rather, this silver was used only to form the bases for the wooden boards of the Tabernacle and the sockets and hooks for the pillars. The service vessels were made of copper and gold donated by the People of Israel, "every person whose heart moves him."The distinction between silver and other materials is not essential. At the time of the Temple, for example, this distinction did not exist. The Mishna provides a detailed description of the bringing of the Pesach offering in the Temple, of the rows of golden receptacles and the rows of silver receptacles.4 We see, then, that there is nothing precluding service vessels from being made of silver. Hence, the fact that none of the service vessels in the Tabernacle were made of the shekel silver constitutes an essential statement: There is a difference between money that a person donates out of generosity and a set sum of money that he is obligated to pay.It appears that the reason for the difference between the shekel silver and the donated money is that there is a limit to how far money that is collected and not donated can reach in the realm of holiness. The problem is not that people were unwilling to make the obligatory payments; it is unlikely that the police had to collect the half-shekel against the people's will. Nevertheless, a service vessel cannot be made from this silver.What is more, the use of the Tabernacle donations themselves was not arbitrary. Each donation was used for a specific purpose; each donation had its own destination. What the "one whose heart moves him" donated was assessed and sent to the proper destination, according to his particular case. "From every person whose heart moves him" dictated, for example, that the laver was made from the mirrors of the dedicated women,5 and as a result, the laver itself actually assumed the character of those mirrors. According to our sages, it is no concidence that the sota (suspected adulteress) was made to drink from the water of this very laver: The laver was made by women who were dedicated to holiness, and it is therefore fitting that it was used to test women who deviated from holiness.6The following humorous story can serve as an analogy for this idea: A rebbe was once asked why he conducts his court with such pomp and splendor, considering that his forebears, who were great men, lived frugally and in poverty. He answered: "There are people who give a pidyon nefesh7 for the sake of Heaven and with great holiness, and their intention is that it should truly serve as redemption for their soul. When I receive such a gift, I use it only for actual mitzvot – Torah study and charity. There are also people whose giving is tinged with other intentions as well, and in that case the money goes toward food, drink, and clothing. However, there are donations that people give as a bribe – if not to bribe me then to bribe G‑d – and such money can be used only for horses. My grandfather's Hasidim were, for the most part, holy people, and most of the money they gave was for the sake of Heaven. Hence, it went to charity. My Hasidim are mostly of the sort whose money can only be used to buy horses."Each item was assigned a particular function, depending on the giverThe same basic idea appears here. Every donation has a certain character that depends on the nature of the giver, and this character determines the donation's destination. In the plans for the Tabernacle's construction, a specific order had to be followed: Certain materials were meant for the roof, while others were meant for the floor. Some materials belonged inside the Sanctuary, while others remained outside. Each item was assigned a particular function, depending on the giver.When it came to the donations for the Tabernacle, no one was approached and asked to give more than he desired. If a person's heart moved him to donate a piece of wood, then he was a man of a piece of wood, and apparently that is what he can and should give. Hence, each person was asked what he, according to his standards, wanted to give. A person could say, "I want to give gold," and he can also say, "I want to give a piece of wood." Another person might have given three simple copper coins, while still another person might have donated processed hides or precious stones.The whole spectrum builds the Tabernacle"This is the gift that you shall accept from them: gold, silver, and copper."8 Since this was a gift, there was no specific gift that could be demanded of everyone equally. Each person had to evaluate himself, and as a result, each person gave a different donation. A glance at the list of donations indicates that the gifts ranged greatly in value. On the one hand, some gave precious stones, some of which – considering their required size – were no doubt priceless. On the other hand, some gave materials that were almost worthless, including dyed wool and goat's hair, the coarsest material that can still be considered a garment.This notion – that no one member of the Jewish people could claim a disproportionate role in the construction of the Tabernacle – is precisely what enabled G‑d to truly "dwell in their midst."The difference between the gifts lies in the question of how much a person is willing to give, and apparently, the construction of the Tabernacle required the whole range of materials. It required not only the precious stones, but the goat hair as well. It required rare materials, for which one must search deep underground or travel all over the world, but it also required acacia wood, which can be found near one's home. For the construction of the Tabernacle, there was no one equal standard for measuring the value of a person's donation. The entire community of Israel participated in building it, and each person contributed his share, from the simplest materials to the most precious. It was impossible to make demands of anyone, because it was impossible to know what each person's share was in the building. This notion – that no one member of the Jewish people could claim a disproportionate role in the construction of the Tabernacle – is precisely what enabled G‑d to truly "dwell in their midst."The Talmud says regarding the seemingly excessive quantity of materials in the Tabernacle that "there should be no poverty in a place of wealth."9 Why, then, does G‑d need goat's wool, from which sacks are made? We could instead have used three covers of scarlet wool, and over them another thirty processed hides.Apparently, the Tabernacle was based precisely on the totality of what the people have inside them, on each person's generosity and capacity for giving: the small and the great, the rich and the generous. From the combination of all of them together, from top to bottom, a sanctuary is made, and in the entirety of what is built, G‑d's glory resides.FOOTNOTES1. Ex. 25:8.2. Ps. 78:60.3. Ex. 25:2.4. Pesachim 5:5.5. See Rashi's commentary to Exodus 38:8.6. Numbers Rabba 9:147. Lit., "redemption of a soul," a sum of money donated by a Hasid to his rebbe.8. Ex. 25:3.9. Shabbat 102b.By Adin Even-Israel (Steinsaltz) More by this authorRabbi Adin Even-Israel (Steinsaltz) (1937-2020) was internationally regarded as one of the leading rabbis of this century. The author of many books, he was best known for his monumental translation of and commentary on the Talmud. To learn more visit his website. | | | | | See you tomorrow bli neder We need Moshiach now! Love Yehuda Lave | | | | |
No comments:
Post a Comment