Jewish history in the promised land began in Hebron. As the biblical narrative that we read this Shabbat Chayei Sara recounts, Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah to be the burial site for his wife, Sara.
Analysis by Amine Ayoub
Saudi Arabia has long positioned itself as a central player in the Middle East, aiming to influence regional stability and global geopolitics. The Riyadh summit earlier this month, where Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman addressed key issues facing the Muslim world, brought this role into sharper focus. However, as the kingdom seeks to navigate complex geopolitical tensions — such as its evolving relationship with Iran, its criticisms of Israel and its involvement in ongoing conflicts like Yemen — the question arises: Can Saudi Arabia be trusted to broker lasting peace,
especially when its own internal and external challenges, including its human-rights record, remain prominent?
At the heart of the Riyadh summit was a discussion on Palestinian statehood and the ongoing conflict with Israel. In a notable departure from its previous diplomatic trajectory, bin Salman took a more assertive stance, openly condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza and accusing it of genocide against Palestinians. He emphasized the need for the international community to ensure Israel respects Iranian sovereignty, signaling a potential shift in Saudi Arabia’s stance towards Israel and a move toward closer ties with Tehran.
It was in Hebron that David became king of Israel, ruling for seven years before relocating his throne to Jerusalem. So it was that Hebron — the foundation of Jewish life in the Land of Israel — became deeply embedded in Jewish history and memory.
This is anything but “occupied” territory.
For millennia, a tiny and impoverished community of Hebron Jews endured; by the 19th century, they lived in a cramped ghetto, the frequent target of
This stance appeared to mark a clear pivot away from previous talks aimed at normalizing relations with Israel,
which had been a priority under former President Donald Trump’s first administration. While Saudi Arabia had ex-
Shabbat Chayei Sara
Read our rabbis (and Alan Mazurek in Hebron this Shabbat): pp. 16-17
hostile local Arabs. Then in 1929, Arabs rampaging through the Jewish quarter slaughtered at least 68 Jews, after which the British compelled the survivors to abandon their ancient holy city.
Hebron became Arab-occupied territory, and Jews did not begin to return
pressed interest in recognizing Israel in exchange for security guarantees and regional stability, particularly in light of shared concerns about Iran, the kingdom’s rhetoric at the Riyadh summit highlighted growing divisions in its foreign policy. This shift is significant, especially given that Saudi Arabia’s rapprochement with Iran in 2023, brokered by China, has already reshaped the regional diplomatic landscape.
Saudi Arabia’s growing ties with Iran, along with its criticisms of Israel, suggest a more independent foreign policy that is less reliant on the United States than it has been
in recent decades. This makes Saudi Arabia’s role as a potential peace broker more complex.
While Riyadh’s attempts at fostering diplomacy — such as encouraging dialogue between Iran and its regional allies — have been welcomed by some, its ability to mediate without bias, particularly in the IsraeliPalestinian conflict, remains an open question.
The trustworthiness of Saudi Arabia as a mediator in regional conflicts must be assessed in terms of its internal and external challenges.
On the one hand, Saudi Arabia’s geopolitical clout, bolstered See The Saudis on page 2
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Just like the children of Israel, a tree is rooted in the land outside the Machpelah in Hebron. Inside, visitors view — and some pray outside — the tomb monuments of patriarchs Abraham and Jacob and matriarch Sara. Ed Weintrob, The Jewish Star file
JeROld AueRbACH
Our Hebron…
Continued from page 1
until the Jewish state’s stunning victory in the Six-Day War four decades later. In 1968, a group of Jews led by Rabbi Moshe Levinger returned to Hebron to celebrate Passover and restore the Jewish community.
Several hundred Jews now live in a decrepit neighborhood adjacent to a flourishing Arab Hebron that they are forbidden to enter; that larger city, whose sights and sounds can be experienced from the Jewish district, is home to 225,000 Palestinians.
Except on Jewish holy days, Jews have restricted access — enforced by the Israeli government — to the magnificent Isaac Hall which is the centerpiece of the Machpelah, where the patriarchs and matriarchs are interred.
A Hebrew University professor has described the return of Jews to Hebron as “a national disgrace, a genuine sin and crime.” Historian Howard Sachar described settlers as “fanatics” and “zealots.”
Political scientist Ehud Sprinzak insisted that the settlement movement combines “ultranationalism, militarism, ethnocentrism and religiosity” and is “incompatible with modern democratic principles.”
And so it is that Israel is relentlessly castigated for its illegal “occupation” of its biblical homeland.
This article is extracted from several columns by Jerold S. Auerbach, author of 12 books, including “Print to Fit: The New York Times, Zionism and Israel (1896-2016)” and “Israel 1896-2016.” To reach Auerbach, write: Columnist@TheJewishStar.com
The Saudis…
Continued from page 1
by its vast oil wealth and strategic position in the Gulf, makes it an important player in shaping regional outcomes. On the other hand, its internal governance and human-rights issues raise concerns about its ability to advocate for genuine peace that prioritizes the welfare of ordinary people, especially those living in conflict zones.
Internally, Saudi Arabia has faced ongoing criticism for its human-rights record. The government’s suppression of political dissent, its treatment of women and minority groups, and the use of harsh measures against activists and journalists, including the high-profile killing of Washington Post reporter Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, remain major points of contention. These issues have led many to question Saudi Arabia’s commitment to universal human rights, especially when its foreign policy often appears driven by pragmatic, authoritarian priorities.
For instance, the war in Yemen, which Saudi Arabia has led since 2015, has been a focal point of international criticism due to the humanitarian crisis it has created. Tens of thousands of people have died, and millions more have been displaced, yet the conflict shows little sign of resolution. The Saudi-led coalition has faced accusations of war crimes, including indiscriminate airstrikes that have killed civilians and targeted vital infrastructure, further complicating its image as a promoter of peace.
This contradiction — between Saudi Arabia’s role as a peacemaker on the world stage and its repressive tactics at home and in foreign interventions — casts doubt on whether the kingdom is a reliable or impartial actor in conflict resolution.
Saudi Arabia’s recent rhetoric, particularly at the Riyadh summit, underscores its desire to reshape its role in the region. However, it is important to consider whether these efforts are driven by a genuine commitment to peace, or whether they are part of a broader geopolitical strategy. MBS’s condemnation of Israel and his call for international action to protect Iran’s sovereignty may reflect Riyadh’s evolving relationship with Tehran, but they could also be seen as an attempt to consolidate power and influence in a volatile region.
Moreover, Saudi Arabia’s increasing reliance on China as a diplomatic partner has allowed it to broker important agreements with Iran, signaling a shift away from the West. While this shift could help reduce tensions in the region, it also means that Saudi Arabia’s conflict-resolution efforts may be influenced by its strategic alliances, potentially limiting its ability to act as a neutral party.
The kingdom’s role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is another example of this complexity. On the one hand, Saudi Arabia has historically been a vocal supporter of Palestinian rights. Yet, its willingness to normalize relations with Israel in exchange for security arrangements and other benefits underscores the transactional nature of its diplomacy.
The apparent contradiction between MBS’s condemnation of Israeli actions in Gaza and his interest in normalizing relations with Israel only months ago illustrates how Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy is often driven by shifting geopolitical interests rather than a consistent ethical stance.
For Saudi Arabia to be truly trusted as a facilitator of lasting peace, it would need to demonstrate a commitment to resolving conflicts impartially, without ulterior motives, and show a willingness to address its own internal human-rights issues. Until such changes occur, the country’s ability to lead a meaningful peace process, especially in its own neighborhood, will remain a topic of skepticism and debate.
Amine Ayoub is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco.
Bibi to Gazans: Choice is yours
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed on Tuesday to hunt down terrorists who hurt hostages being held in the Gaza Strip, speaking during a visit to the Netzarim Corridor that splits the coastal enclave between north and south.
“To those who are holding our hostages: Whoever dares to harm our captives—his blood is on his own head. We will pursue you, and we will get you,” warned the Israeli leader in a video in Hebrew recorded on Gaza’s beach alongside the Mediterranean Sea.
At the same time, “whoever brings us a hostage will be given a safe way, for him and his family, to leave. We will also give a reward of $5 million for each kidnapped person. You choose — the choice is yours — but the result will be the same. We will return everyone,” he added.
Netanyahu visited alongside Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi and Ronen Bar, director of the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet).
“We are making an effort — from this place and everywhere — to locate our hostages and return them. We are not letting up.
We will continue to do this until we get them all, both the living and the dead,” he said.
“We need to make sure that Hamas does not rule here ‘the day after’,” Katz stated, vowing that the IDF will “complete its mission” in the enclave.
Following the visit to Gaza, the prime minister attended an assessment at the IDF’s Gaza Division, where he was updated on the operational achievements and continued developments in the war, his office said.
On Monday, Netanyahu told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that Hamas continues to frustrate ongoing hostage talks in the hopes of ending the war and returning to power in the Gaza Strip.
“The only thing that Hamas wants is a deal that ends the war and for the IDF to leave the Strip in order to return to power,” the premier said, per Walla. “I am not ready to allow that under any circumstance.”
He told committee members that while there is currently no concrete proposal on the table, various “ideas have come up” in recent days.
The remarks came a day after Netanyahu called an emergency meeting following
Hamas’s rejection of all proposals currently on the table, a senior Israeli security source told the country’s Channel 13 News.
The Qatari-owned Al-Araby Al-Jadeed outlet cited a Hamas source as saying earlier this week that the Islamist organization’s leadership has cut all contact with those actually holding the hostages, due to “strict security measures to protect the important negotiation card.”
The source added that Hamas has refused to provide information on the whereabouts and status of the hostages, in particular those with US citizenship, as it has not been offered “compensation” by mediators.
Also on Monday, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who leads the Religious Zionism Party, told reporters that the IDF should occupy the entire northern part of the Strip until the hostages are released.
Approximately 1,200 Israeli Jews were murdered by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023, thousands more were wounded and 251 others were taken into Gaza. On-and-off indirect talks between Israel and Hamas have dragged on for months, with the United States, Egypt and Qatar acting as intermediaries. —JNS
Hebron on the ‘other side’ : At bottom left, Hebron’s small Jewish neighborhood (population around 900) overlooks the expansive Arab city of Hebron (population 225,000). Other photos show the interior of the Ibrahim Mosque in the Muslim side of the Machpelah. Windows on both the Jewish and Muslim sides open into a common area designated as tomb monuments. Muslims as well as Jews believe that the site holds the remains of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their wives Sara, Rebecca and Leah.
Ed Weintrob The Jewish Star file
Black Friday Weekend Sale Event
Friday, November 29th
Sat, Nov. 30th: 7pm - Midnight!
Sunday, December 1st
Blueprint: How Israel could topple Iranian regime
By Itay Ilnai, Israel Hayom
As opposition leaders craft detailed plans for regime change in Tehran, security experts and Iran scholars warn that the fall of the clerical leadership could usher in an even more radical force — with the Revolutionary Guards poised to seize control.
Dr. Saeed Ghasseminejad believes there’s already a detailed plan to transform Iran’s political landscape. Born in Tehran, he regularly participated in protests against the clerical rule during his university years.
“One day, while driving back from a protest, two Revolutionary Guard members suddenly got into my car,” he recalls in a phone conversation with Israel Hayom from New York. “I drove in silence for several minutes with them inside, until they moved me to the back seat and drove me directly to a detention facility. I spent a month in solitary confinement and received a two-year suspended sentence. Following this, I left Iran, leaving my family behind.”
He relocated to the United States, completed his doctorate in economics, and became a prominent opposition voice. He later joined the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a nonpartisan research institute in Washington.
“Many people say there’s no chance the Iranian regime will fall. I think that’s a mistake,” says Ghasseminejad. “There’s currently great disappointment with the regime in Iran. In the last presidential election, for instance, voter turnout was the lowest ever. The economic situation is fragile, and since 2017, protests have occurred in more than 150 cities across Iran. Since September 2022, there have been over 7,000 demonstrations in Iran.”
These statistics, he believes, indicate that the regime is unstable and the Iranian government stands on shaky ground. According to him, all the Iranian people need to overcome the clerical leadership is some external assistance. That’s exactly why a five-point plan was formulated.
In recent years, Ghasseminejad served as an adviser to Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, son of Iran’s last shah, who has lived in the US since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. The two even visited Israel together about a year and a half ago.
In his role, Ghasseminejad was involved in formulating Pahlavi’s plan to transform Iran’s political system. According to sources who spoke with him, the crown prince doesn’t seek to take control of the country, but rather to return as a unifying, symbolic figure under whom a new republic would be established. Not everyone agrees with this idea.
Ghasseminejad breaks down the plan into five points:
The first point “is applying maximum economic pressure on the regime by outside nations. The Iranian regime has a narrow support base, maintained through money offered to its supporters. If you cut off economic resources through sanctions and other tools, it becomes in-
creasingly difficult for the regime to buy loyalty.”
The second point is what Ghasseminejad describes as the maximum empowerment of the Iranian people.
“Let me give you an example. The regime constantly tries to disconnect the Iranian people from the global internet. Internet access allows people to express their opinions, organize protests, and share information the regime doesn’t want reaching the public. That’s why the regime filters extensive content online. If we could somehow provide free internet access to Iran’s residents, the regime would face serious problems.”
The third point seeks to mobilize Iranian emigrants who have flooded Europe and America since 1979. “We’re talking about five to eight million people, many of them affluent, who can pressure governments in their host countries to act against the regime in Iran,” Ghasseminejad explains.
The fourth point addresses the day after. The crown prince “has a detailed plan for the first 100 days following regime change,” he said.
This brings us to the final point in the plan, which Ghasseminejad calls “maximum defection.”
“To transform the regime, you need some security institutions in Iran to join the revolution, or at least declare neutrality. You need support from insiders. It would be very difficult without this. Such a delicate and complex matter is something foreign governments can greatly assist with. Especially governments with proven
intelligence capabilities inside Iran. Israel, for instance.”
Israel, Ghasseminejad adds, has already enabled the beginning of the journey toward regime change.
The current war has revealed the Islamic regime “as a paper tiger,” he said. “It’s losing many of its proxies in the Middle East, its intelligence organizations are deeply compromised, and its military power hasn’t impressed. When you put all this together, you discover the regime is at a very weak, fragile point. We have an opportunity to transform it.”
When Ghasseminejad is asked if Israel is involved in some way in his efforts to transform Iran’s political landscape, he responds diplomatically, “I believe all stakeholders who see the regime’s fall and its replacement with a responsible government as aligned with their national interests should improve their coordination and cooperation beyond current levels.”
“Regime change in Iran wasn’t on the agenda in the last ten years,” says a former senior official in Israel’s diplomatic system. “It was never Israel’s objective to change the regime, or even engage with it. All kinetic activities carried out by the Mossad in Iran, such as eliminating scientists, stealing the nuclear archive, and more, were excellent operations, but they focused on the nuclear program. There wasn’t even one significant operation aimed at regime change targets.”
Last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the Iranian people directly, saying in a recorded message that “there is one force putting your family in grave danger: the tyrants of Tehran. That’s it.”
Netanyahu went further and repeated, in Persian, one of the protest slogans against the Tehran regime: “Zan, Zendegi, Azadi (Women, Life, Freedom)!”
“Israel needs to be involved, or at least formulate a plan, regarding the possibility of regime change in Iran, but in my opinion, it’s not doing enough,” says Sima Shine, an Iran expert who previously served in Military Intelligence’s Research Division and headed research at the Mossad.
“Probably because regime change is a Sisyphean process, it’s hard to measure its success, and it’s difficult to know if it will bring the desired outcome,” says Shine, co-founder of Forum Dvorah and head of the Iran program at the Institute for National Security Studies.
These statements align well with comments from a former Mossad senior official who dealt with Iran in his role.
“Regime change has been an operational topic for years, but I’m skeptical about whether it’s even possible,” the fromer Mossad office said.
“In terms of territory, Iran is 74 times larger than Israel. In terms of population, Iran is seven times larger than Israel. It’s an enormous country with two armies — the Iranian military and the Revolutionary Guards — and its people have endured more than 50 years of totalitarian rule. Not simple. …
“This process is complex, takes years, and needs constant recalibration. This doesn’t mean the Tehran regime won’t fall — even Communism and the Roman Empire collapsed — I just don’t know if it’s something that can be done from the outside and through coercion.”
Most Iranian exiles, Iran researchers in Israel, and former security system officials agreed in interviews that regime change is not an achievable objective in the near term. Worse still: They point to the possibility that when the clerical leadership is eventually removed from power, their successors might be even more extreme and combative.
The popular revolution of 1979 didn’t end as many Iranians expected. “No one dreamed that the revolution that led to the Shah’s removal would ultimately lead to the establishment of an Islamic republic,” Goldberg explains.
“Those who led the street demonstrations weren’t religious figures, but rather secular economic and class elites, usually liberal ones as well. The entire Islamic story is a product of the political chaos that emerged after the shah’s departure. That’s why, by the way, Iranians today fear regime change. When they look at the Middle East and see what happened following the Arab Spring in Syria, Libya, and Yemen, many of them calculate that maybe the current situation isn’t so bad.”
The Islamic Revolution of 1979, which brought Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to power, gave birth to the “Islamic Republic of Iran,” which is effectively a religious dictatorship. Dr. Tamar Eilam Gindin, an Iran specialist at the University of Haifa’s Ezri Center for Iran & Persian Gulf Studies, says, “Ostensibly, Iran has a democracy with separation of powers, a body that oversees the Supreme Leader, and free elections. But ultimately, Khamenei rules Iran absolutely, and his word is final.”
Khamenei, designated as the Republic’s “supreme leader,” rules through the “Guardian Council,” a 12-member body that approves all candidates for political positions in the country, including the president, as well as the laws enacted by the Majles, the Iranian parliament. Khamenei personally appoints the six religious clerics who serve on the council, as well as the head of the judiciary, who in turn appoints the six jurists who serve on it. Through this, the supreme leader effectively controls all branches of
Continued on next page
Iranians protest in Sanandaj, Kurdistan Province, Nov. 16, 2022.
@FSeifikaran, Twitter
Protesters on Keshavrz Blvd. in Tehran on Sept. 20, 2022. Darafsh, WikiCommons
lic — executive, legislative, and judicial.
“I haven’t heard of any confrontations between Khamenei and anyone in Iran’s political leadership,” Eilam Gindin says. “When former president Ahmadinejad tried, for example, to do things on his own initiative, he received an angry phone call from the supreme leader, was sick for 11 days, and never tried to defy his orders again.”
Other presidents elected to lead Iran have also found themselves powerless against the supreme leader’s authority.
“The current president, Pezeshkian, is the one who disappointed the fastest of them all. After he was elected, committees sat for four weeks, each in its field, developing recommendations for ministers to fill various government ministries. In the end, there was no connection between these recommendations and the actual appointments. The government he presented was almost identical in composition to the previous government, including the interior minister who was involved in violent suppression of protests. The ministers’ identities were imposed on the president from above.”
The Revolutionary Guards also stand ready to assist the supreme leader, being Iran’s strongest institution and the one charged with preserving the regime. The Revolutionary Guards have been granted authority to suppress riots, prevent Western cultural infiltration, capture regime opponents, and more. Their loyalty to the regime is absolute.
According to Goldberg, the Iranian regime controls the country not only through force, but also through cunning and wisdom. “In Israel, this is less recognized, but within the Iranian regime there are significant differences of opinion,” he says.
“The republic reflects a variety of political views and perceptions about Iran’s future, and in the corridors of power, they place great importance on public opinion and sentiment. In Iran, the rulers always know something that former Egyptian President Mubarak, for example, didn’t know – that the people can always take to the streets and remove them.
“While Khamenei makes the decisions, he knows where the public stands, and within the leadership, there are constant discussions about how to improve relations with citizens and increase their loyalty. One reason for this is that Iran’s rulers don’t come from a disconnected elite – quite the opposite. The religious leaders succeeded in taking control of the country precisely because they had direct connection with Iranian citizens, a connection that exists to this day.”
The Iranian regime is certainly a fortified target, but in recent years its walls have begun to crack. Since 2009, civil unrest has been common in Iran, manifesting in several waves of political protests.
The peak came in 2022, during what was called the “Hijab Protests,” which erupted after the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini. For a moment, it seemed the turbulent demonstrations across the country, ignited in response to strict enforcement of hijab laws, threatened regime
stability. The revolutionary spirit of the Iranian people was felt in the streets.
However, once again the “republic” managed to silence the protest: according to opposition group estimates, about 500 people were killed in Iran during the suppression of the riots. Thousands more were injured or arrested. The clerical leadership’s suppression machine proved its effectiveness.
“In 2022, the protest was strong, the world’s eyes were on the demonstrations in Iran, and for the first time the Iranian protest movement became something global that people talked about worldwide,” says an Iranian regime opponent living in the US, who asked to remain anonymous.
“If regime opponents living outside Iran, led by Crown Prince Pahlavi, had managed to capitalize on the momentum, Oct. 7 wouldn’t have happened, because we would have changed the regime in Iran two years ago. When Khomeini overthrew the shah, he had a plan, networking, internal organizations. The Iranian opposition had 40 years to build such a system, and they didn’t do it.”
When asked whether Israel can be part of such a process, the regime opponent said,
“I always thought that Israel, which was historically our best friend, could help. We are much closer to Israel than to our Muslim neigh bors – Arab countries, Pakistan, or Afghanistan. It took time for people in Iran to understand that Israel is our best ally in the region.”
Not everyone agrees with this. After the sup pression of the Hijab Protests, Pahlavi again tried to form a coalition of Iranian exiles to exert in ternational pressure on Iran, but this too quickly fell apart. One of the reasons was Pahlavi’s visit to Israel in April 2023, at the invitation of thenIntelligence Minister Gila Gamliel.
The crown prince’s cooperation with Israel was not well-received among all members of the coalition he had built around him, and beyond. “The visit was a major embarrassment,” says a source familiar with the details. “They took him to private Likud party gatherings, threw him cel ebrations that weren’t exactly fitting for a royal. It also became clear that he would be a puppet king, because if he was already a puppet of the intelligence minister, how could he be expected to rule an entire country?”
Indeed, one of the reasons why Iran’s Islamic regime hasn’t fallen yet is the absence of a single leader who could unite a broad coalition of sec tors and classes in Iran under his leadership. Ac cording to Goldberg, “Iran is an enormous coun try, very diverse in human terms, with a very sophisticated and complex society. There isn’t necessarily one element that could control the country by itself.
“Historically, what’s common to all revolutions in Iran, including that of 1979, is that they were coalition revolutions. They only occurred when different groups within Iranian society, with different interests and different priorities, managed to connect and form a platform through which they acted together. The problem is that currently in Iran there’s no feasibility for such a coalition that could unite together to change the regime.”
Pro-Israel students among 700 at ZOA’s gala
By Rikki Zagelbaum
Summarizing the sentiment speakers at Sunday night’s Zionist Organization of America gala in New York, ZOA National President Morton Klein said they focused on how important it is “to not permit a Palestinian state, as it will be a terrorist state,” as well as not “to end the war before the mission of destruction of Hamas and Hezbollah is fulfilled.”
“Appeasement of Palestinian Arabs and land concessions won’t resolve the issue,” Klein said. “This is a religious war, and we oppose onesided concessions or ceasefires until groups like Hezbollah and Hamas are dismantled.”
The event, which drew nearly 700 people including many students to Cipriani 42nd Street, honored former US ambassador to Israel David Friedman, and Gilad Erdan, the global Magen David Adom president and former Israeli envoy to the United Nations.
Erdan, who received the Dr. Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Defender of Israel Award, told the audience that the UN was “meant to be a body for peace” but “has become a tool in the terrorist arsenal, attempting to restrain Israel and falsely label us as human rights abusers.”
“It has been hijacked by regimes that plot genocide,” he said. “The UN has betrayed its mission, and worse still, it is funded by you — the United States. Almost $20 billion a year goes to this institution that weaponizes lies against Israel.”
“It’s time to defund the United Nations,” he added.
Philanthropist Gary L. Schottenstein, who received ZOA’s Justice Louis D. Brandeis Award, told attendees that “it must be clear: ‘Let my people go’ and ‘Never again’ are indisputable and non-negotiable credos that define us as a people.”
Pace University junior Daniela Cassell attended the gala as part of Students Supporting Israel, where she is president of the school’s chapter.
“We’re here to represent New York and the Zionist community on campus,” Cassell said. “It’s crucial to combat antisemitism and anti-Zionism on campus.”
Steve Feldman, executive director of ZOA’s Greater Philadelphia chapter, said that Jewish students who may fear for their future should “have hope” but prepare “to work hard for it.”
“Learn from reputable pro-Israel sources, develop informed policies and share them with your peers, family and even in the halls of government,” Feldman said. “Use social media, educate younger and older generations and spread the truth wherever you can.”
“It’s a two-way street,” he added. “We must encourage and support young people as they take the lead. Together we can prevail, just as we always have.”
Kami Salman, an opera singer and a representative for Masa Israel’s career and college programs for North America, said she attended the gala “to support the ZOA and be a loud and proud Jew.”
“It’s important for Jewish people to come together during these times and recognize, now more than ever, the need for Israel to stay as Israel. Nobody’s going to scare us out of having our homeland,” she said. “We’re Jewish, we’re proud and it’s so important for us to be together at this time.”
“We Jews did not come to Israel as colonialists. We came back home, and yet the world still denies our rights to our holy land,” Klein said in his closing remarks.
“Jews should take the offensive against countries, institutions, colleges and groups that display antisemitism or fail to support Israel,” he said. “We must use the power we’ve earned in finance, media, politics and society to make an impactful difference.”
Yeshiva University junior Shoshana Fisher, co-president of YU’s Political Action Club, told JNS that protesters outside the event, and some who heckled Erdan during his speech, “high-
light the importance of this organization.” (The former Israeli ambassador asked the crowd to ignore the interruptions, as he proceeded with his speech. The protesters were removed.)
“Their strong anti-Israel presence is a reminder of the necessity for an equally strong pro-Israel response,” Fisher told JNS.
“We need to respond by being strong, proud and powerful Jews. Build more Jewish institutions. Celebrate Jewish holidays. Teach your children to be proud Jews, and never stop fighting back.”
Rikki Zagelbaum is news editor at The Commentator newspaper at Yeshiva University.
Teaching OPPORTUniTieS :
inSTRUcTOR Of Science and inSTRUcTOR Of MaTh (positions can be combined), Maternity Leave Position, december 16 - february 13th, 2024-2025
The first position is for two high school introductory chemistry classes (10th Grade) and one high school introductory biology class (9th Grade). The courses follow the New York State Regents curriculum. The second position is for two periods of Algebra II math (11th Grade). The curriculum for the two classes is similar, with small changes to account for differing tracks. Appropriate candidates should know and feel comfortable with Algebra II material and be able to follow a curriculum that will be provided. All classes are taught in the afternoons between the hours of 1:23 and 5:10 pm, four days a week, MondayThursday. Teachers are asked to be in the building by 12:45 for department meetings and preparation.
The ideal candidate will first and foremost be passionate about student growth as well as the teaching of Science and/or Math, and have a warm and engaging personality that can be used in developing meaningful relationships with each student. They will have mastery of educational pedagogy and the subject matter, but will also be strongly motivated by continued opportunities to grow and develop as an effective educator. We are looking for an experienced teacher leader who is comfortable working with both students and colleagues, and who is intentional about his/her educational approach.
are you interested in joining our team? Please send a cover letter and resume to sschenker@yuhsb.org
Teaching OPPORTUniTy: Science (BiOlOgy/PhySicS) inSTRUcTOR 2024-2025 School year
We are looking for a dynamic, caring, organized, knowledgeable and thoughtful Science teacher to teach in a full time capacity for the remainder of the 24-25 academic year. The ideal candidate will first and foremost be passionate about student growth, and have a warm and engaging personality that can be used in developing meaningful relationships with each student. They will have mastery of educational pedagogy and the subject matter, but will also be strongly motivated by continued opportunities to grow and develop as an effective educator.
We are part of Yeshiva University, and benefit from the academic and cultural opportunities of teaching on the university campus. Our general studies faculty hours are 11:30 AM to 6 PM Monday through Thursday (no sessions on Friday), and we offer competitive salary and benefits packages.
Benefits include:
• Highly subsidized medical and dental plans
• Employer matched retirement plans
• Health and dependent care flexible savings accounts
• Commuter, Transit, and Parking plans
• Employer Paid Basic Life Insurance
• Tuition Remission Benefit
yeshiva University Tuition Remission Benefit: Do you want to pursue a degree while working at MTA? The YU tuition benefit covers 100% of tuition costs for employees enrolled in any YU program, 75% tuition costs for dependents in undergraduate programs, 50% for graduate programs, as well as generous tuition discounts for spouses. See tuition benefits document for more information.
are you interested in joining our team and becoming an MTa lion? Please send a cover letter and resume to lsilvera@yuhsb.org
Former US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman addresses the ZOA gala in Manhattan. ZOA
Influencers meet families of hostages in NYC
By Amelie Botbol, JNS
Over a dozen influencers participated in an intimate conversation with families of hostages being held by Hamas, in New York City on Nov. 7.
“The objective of this event is to foster understanding of why we need people to continue supporting the issue of the hostages and why the hostages should be a priority and come first,” said Leat Corinne Unger, the cousin of Hamas captive Omer Shem Tov’s mother Shelly.
“It’s hard with the Lebanese front and the election, all these different things that are taking away a lot of the attention from the issue which should be the priority and that’s human life,” she told JNS.
“Unfortunately until now the Biden administration has not secured the release of my cousin so maybe with the election of Trump we will see a change,” she said.
“To the Israeli people I say continue to love and fight for each other, stay united and don’t let the noise drown out the important part of what we are standing for, and that’s never leaving anyone behind.”
Speakers included relatives of Hamas captives Oded Lifshitz, Omri Miran and brothers Eitan and Yair Horn.
“We have had a hard fight. I really appreciate all the work you’re doing and I really think that emphasizing the hostage situation is essential,” said Daniel Lifshitz, the grandson of Oded Lifshitz.
“We killed [Hezbollah lead-
er Hassan] Nasrallah, we killed [Hamas leader Yahya] Sinwar, we killed [Hamas military leader Mohammed] Deif, we fought in many places and won. While we can’t forget Oct. 7 now is our time to push to bring our people back home,” he continued.
While Lifshitz’s grandfather remains in Hamas captivity, his grandmother Yocheved Lifshitz, who was also kidnapped by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023, was released in late October last year.
“My grandmother suffered so much. I wish the world would see how she was kidnapped, an
86-year-old woman on her stomach on a motorbike, she looked back and saw my grandfather lying … on the ground, unconscious, injured by a bullet, a man who fought for peace all his life,” said Lifshitz. “We still have 29 hostages from Kibbutz Nir Oz.”
The gathering was organized by Dana Cwaigrach, head of the New York Hostage and Missing Families Forum.
“There’s nothing more important than bringing our people home,” Cwaigrach said. “We can’t let them rot in there, it’s immoral and it is not a Zionist thing.”
Influencers participating in the event included Columbia University professor Shai Davidai and social media personality Lizzy Savetsky.
“I think we’ve had a lot of distractions lately with the elections and everything else happening in the world. We need to remember that our top priority should be our hostages,” Savetsky told JNS at the event. “I am here tonight to ground myself in the fight for our hostages. We still have over 100 in Gaza.”
Savetsky’s advocacy journey started in 2021 after Hamas targeted Israel with a barrage of rockets, she said.
“Instead of sympathizing with Israel and all the innocent civilians that had been killed, the world jumped to demonize Israel and Jews all over the world simply because of Israel’s response,” Savetsky explained. “By the time Oct. 7 came, I was in Israel in a bomb shelter with my family on that day, and I knew already exactly how it would play out.”
“I felt I had a critical role to play to use my voice to spread truth and [combat] lies,” she added.
Stand-up comedian Daniel Ryan Spaulding, who is not Jewish, also participated in the event.
“Hopefully when the hostages are released they’ll know that there are people that cared,” he said.
“I was born in Damascus, Syria. I came to the United States in 1994 with my family. Jews weren’t allowed to emigrate prior to 1992, prior to the United States reaching a treaty with Damascus that freed the Jews of Syria,” said Abraham Hamra, who attended the event.
“For us Jews, life is everything, and the lives of our hostages mean everything to me. It’s our obligation to continue fighting for the release of our hostages. I am here to show my support for the hostages and to the Israel Defense Forces to finish the job, to get our hostages back and defeat this enemy,” he said.
“The election just ended, everybody has different feelings of how it went but I think it’s important to refocus and understand the mission at hand — redeem the hostages and defeat our enemy once and for all.”
Note the ACCOLADES from our CLIENTS
RE: SYNAGOGUES and YESHIVOS
Dear Rabbi Leiner,
Thank you for replacing the Insurance for our Synagogue, with a Savings of almost 50%.
B.F. Executive Director
RE: REAL ESTATE CORPORATION
Dear Rabbi Leiner, You and Your Experts, have saved our Corp. Very Substantial Sums, with your Quality Insurance Replacement on our Real Estate Buildings. Thank you, M.B. Pres.
RE: HOMEOWNERS
Dear Rabbi Leiner, Our Insurance Company Refused to renew our Insurance Homeowners Policy. However, You and Your Experts were able to Secure for us other Insurance Coverage, even at a much lower Premium, than the Prior Canceled Insurance Policy. Thank You So Much. Mrs. D.S.
Influencers meet families of Israeli hostages in New York City on Nov. 7.
Amelie Botbol
The Orthodox shul in Brooklyn Heights presents
TEHRAN
Israel Is Using Sabotage, Cyberwarfare, Assassination (and Secret Diplomacy) to Stop a
Nuclear Iran and Create a New Middle East
Sunday! Nov 24 • Israeli brunch 11 am Lecture and discussion Noon
Live from Israel, Ilan Evyatar, co-author of “Target Tehran” and former editor-in-chief of Jerusalem Report, will talk about “Israel at War: Fighting the Iranian Axis,” presenting an up-to-date analysis of the wars in Gaza and Lebanon and Iran’s involvement on those fronts and elsewhere. His book was named a Wall Street Journal “Top 5 Books in Politics” for 2023.
Moderated by Jewish Star Editor Ed Weintrob
RSVP for a FREE Israeli brunch in Brooklyn Heights (or request a Zoom link)
www.BnaiAvraham. org/form/Israel
“Israel Today: Culture and Conflict” series is hosted by Congregation B’nai Avraham 117 Remsen St, Brooklyn Heights • Rabbi Aaron Raskin, spiritual leader • No solicitations
Huckabee: Sovereignty decision is up to Israel
By David Isaac, JNS
The decision to extend Israeli sovereignty to Judea and Samaria is one “for Israel to make,” according to Mike Huckabee, who was tapped by President-elect Donald Trump last week for the post of US ambassador to Israel.
Speaking to Israel National News on Nov. 15, the former Arkansas governor said the decision is not one the United States will impose.
“I don’t think Donald Trump is the kind of president that wants to tell other countries what to do and how to do it. He wants to accommodate, help, encourage peaceful endeavors, strengthen alliances,” said Huckabee.
His remarks echoed those he made during an interview with Israel’s Army Radio last week, when he said that “of course” annexation was a possibility during Trump’s second term.
However, Huckabee, a Southern Baptist pastor whose pro-Israel bon fides go back decades, emphasized during the INN interview that he doesn’t set policy.
“As an ambassador, you don’t get to do what you want. You carry out the wishes and the directions of the president, and it will be his policies, not mine, that we will implement,” he said. “But I’m very pleased that his policies have been the most pro-Israel policies of any president in my lifetime,” he added.
The US-Israel relationship needs to be consistent and strong, with both nations benefiting from the alliance, he continued.
“With Donald Trump there is a certainty in the sound of his voice and in the meaning of his message, and I think it’s going to be a very different approach, and one that will show that alliances and having a friend truly mean something, and it’s not inconsistent,” he said. Iran, he continued, will be “held accountable” for funding terror in the region.
At the Gush Katif Museum dinner in 2013, Gov. Mike Huckabee received a Baruch Nachshon painting. From left: Rivka Goldshchmidt, a Gush Katif evacuee; Assemblyman Dov Hikind; Rabbi Sholom Dov Wolpo; Huckabee; Dr. Paul Brody of Great Neck; Helen Freedman; and Odeleya Jacobs. File photo
“President Trump has strength. He’s got a strong history of making it clear to foreign countries that want to do evil things that they’ll pay a price for it,” he said.
At the same time, he continued, the United States can help expand the 2020 Abraham Accords, the normalization agreements between Israel and four Muslim states brokered by Trump in his first term.
“I want to be a part of making sure that the Abraham Accords that he launched continue to grow — bring more people into those agreements and create a more stable, more peaceful climate in the Middle East, but also a much better and more hopeful future for everyone,” he said.
“[E]verybody wins when there are agreements that foster trade, tourism, business relationships and diplomatic relationships,” he added.
With regard to his nomination for the post of envoy to Israel, Huckabee said he hadn’t lobbied for the position and was surprised when he received the call from the president-elect.
In announcing the appointment on Nov. 12,
Trump said Huckabee “loves Israel and the people of Israel and likewise, the people of Israel love him. Mike will work tirelessly to bring about peace in the Middle East.”
Huckabee described the US-Israel relationship as “incredibly important” to him.
“That’s why there is a great level of not only excitement but a deeply emotional reaction that I have had to this, because I see it as a calling. An opportunity to do something that I hope will be instrumental in helping to bring a greater level of security and certainty in policy for the people of Israel.”
Asked by INN whether he intended to alter his language with regard to Judea and Samaria, referred to in much of the world as the West Bank, Huckabee said:
“I can’t be what I’m not. I can’t say something I don’t believe. As you well know, I’ve never been willing to use the term ‘West Bank.’ There is no such thing. I speak of Judea and Samaria. I tell people there is no ‘occupation.’ It is a land that is ‘occupied’ by the people who have had a rightful deed to the place for 3,500
Huckabee in ‘13: Build houses!
Here’s what Gov. Mike Huckabee said as the featured speaker at a Gush Katif Museum dinner attended by nearly 500 people in Crown Heights in 2013, as reported then by The Jewish Star:
“Rather than say to the Israelis, ‘Stop building in Judea and Samaria,’ I would suggest that you build as rapidly as you can, and as much as you can, and as many houses as you can!
“And tell the Palestinians that if they don’t like that, the way they can fix it is to sit at the peace table and sign an agreement that they recognize Israel’s right to exist — within the borders that G-d gave them and to exist with safety and security!
“That, my friends, will probably never happen. So I say, pour the concrete, build the houses and let Israel be strong! That is the message we need to give to the world!”
years, since the time of Abraham. “A lot of the terms that maybe the media would use, even the people who are against Israel would use, are not terms that I employ, because I want to use terms that live from time immemorial, and those are the terms like ‘Promised Land’ and ‘Judea and Samaria.’ These are biblical terms, and those are important to me, and so I will continue to follow that nomenclature unless I’m instructed otherwise, but I don’t think that’ll happen.”
Media whitewashes the pogrom in Amsterdam
The violence perpetrated against Israelis in Amsterdam two weeks ago was no less than a full-throated pogrom reminiscent of Kristallnacht, with roaming Muslim gangs hunting down and beating Jews. Yet, in the face of this horror, Western media promoted a sanitized narrative in which Muslim involvement was hidden, antisemitic violence was minimized, and Israelis themselves were blamed for the rampage.
Outrageously, many media downplayed the antisemitism that inspired the Jew hunt in the first place. NPR, for example, posted the headline, “Violence broke out after a soccer match in Amsterdam,” omitting the fact that the violence was directed by Muslims towards Jews.
Some media outlets implied that Jews themselves brought on the violence since a day earlier, a group of Israeli soccer fans chanted antiArab slogans and tore down a Palestinian flag. In other words, chanting offensive slogans and removing a flag justifies riots and assaults.
Moreover, this pogrom was premeditated — planned well before any slogan chanting or flag removal — and coordinated on social media. You’ll be forgiven if you didn’t learn of these salient details since legacy media omitted them as inconvenient to their narrative that Jews are responsible for provoking violence against themselves.
The media also omitted the fact that the primary actors in the Amsterdam pogrom were Muslims. Many Western newsrooms adhere to a narrative informed by critical race theory, which considers all two billion Muslims to be an oppressed class. Hence, they cannot be blamed for violent responses to their environment. The same perverse theory holds the world’s 17 million Jews to be members of the oppressor class;
thus, any violence done to them is deserved.
Indeed, those who object to Muslim violence against Jews often fall prey to the accusation of Islamophobia.
With such cases of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish media bias — all too typical among mainstream news outlets — we gain insight by asking who the media is serving and who the media is fighting when they twist the truth.
The violence that occurred on Nov. 7 had all the hallmarks of an antisemitic pogrom. Jews were intentionally targeted by Muslim mobs armed with knives, clubs and fireworks. As one victim described: “They jumped on us. They stabbed people. They beat them. They did horrible things. We hid in the hotel until it was safe outside.” One person tried, unsuccessfully, to avoid being beaten by telling his attackers, “I’m not Jewish!” What happened during the pogrom was enough to persuade Israel’s government to dispatch planes to rescue the victims.
The media downplayed the antisemitic hatred that inspired the pogrom. Much of the media described the violence as simple soccer hooliganism. One Associated Press headline, for example, read, “Maccabi Tel Aviv fans clash with reported pro-Palestinian protesters at Ajax Europa League match.”
The BBC published a similar headline: “New arrests made in Amsterdam over violence after football match,” though all those arrested were attackers of Jews.
When media outlets did mention the antisemitic nature of the attack, they did so only in the context of allegations that it was antisemitic. A headline in The New York Times, for instance, read, “Violent Attacks in Amsterdam Driven by Antisemitism, Israel Says,” as if Israel alone called the violence antisemitic. The pogrom was condemned as antisemitic by many world leaders, including the Dutch king, who said, “We failed the Jewish community during World War II, last night, we failed again.”
The media outrageously implied
that Israeli fans bore some responsibility for the violence. Sky News led its report on the pogrom with Israeli fans pulling down Palestinian flags and chanting anti-Arab slogans. Similarly, The Independent reported, “The violence started when the Maccabi fans reportedly tore down a Palestinian flag, engaged in vandalism and assaulted taxi drivers.” Columnist Owen Jones at The Guardian claimed that Israelis provoked violence by singing “genocidal songs.” What much of the media didn’t report is that violence was going to happen no matter how Israeli fans behaved because it was planned well in advance.
The Amsterdam pogrom was premeditated. Plans for the pogrom were made in advance on social platforms like Telegram and WhatsApp. For example, The Telegraph reported
seeing messages from a group chat posted the day before the pogrom. One message read: “Tomorrow after the game, at night, part 2 of the Jew hunt.”
The media refuse to identify those who planned and staged the pogrom as Muslims. Rather, they label as racists those who called out Muslim violence. For example, Reuters recently referred to Geert Wilders, who leads the largest party in the Dutch government, as an “anti-Muslim” politician. In fact, Wilders is one of the few politicians brave enough to talk about the dangers associated with Europe’s growing Muslim population. Two other prominent Dutch figures — politician Pim Fortuyn and film director Theo van Gogh — were murdered for doing so. As political commentator Leon de Winter wrote in The Wall Street Journal, the Amsterdam pogrom “proves that the Netherlands has imported the cultural-religious problems of North Africa and the Middle East.”
What motivates the pro-Muslim, anti-Israel narrative? Such media bias is consistent with the radical, neo-Marxist narrative by which Jews and Israel are oppressors and Muslims are oppressed. What’s behind this bias — what policies or endpoints are these media promoting? Are they propping up the Netherlands’s failed cultural diversity? Are they supporting Muslim indignation caused by Israel’s sovereignty over its ancient homeland? Or are they supporting the Islamization of Europe (or the entire Western world), which is preached by many European and North American imams? Conversely, are they supporting the defeat of Israel (and of Western civilization, which the Jewish state so clearly represents)? Perhaps all of the above? In any case, the Amsterdam violence on that dark night in Western Europe of Nov. 7 was not a clash of soccer fans with wrongdoers on both sides. It was a premeditated pogrom — a campaign by Muslims to target and harm Jews simply because they were Jews.
James Sinkinson is president of FLAME To reach him, write: Columnist@TheJewishStar.com
Police officers detain a protestor during a proPalestinian demonstration on Dam Square in Amsterdam on Nov. 13. Nick Gammon, AFP via Getty Images
WINE AND DINE
Before meal begins: Thanksgiving leftovers
Kosher Kitchen
There is a Norman Rockwell painting of a grandmother holding a platter filled with what must be a 30-pound turkey. The “everyone’s-grandmother” has rosy cheeks a loving smile and, apparently, the strength of a body builder! Everyone must have memories of their grandmother making Thanksgiving dinner. Right?
Not necessarily.
I cannot ever remember either of my grandmothers making a Thanksgiving dinner. My maternal grandmother was born in America, had a live in cook for her family and didn’t really cook much at all.
My paternal grandmother was born in Belarus and emigrated here as a young adult. She spoke a lot of Yiddish and by the time I was three, I was convinced my name was shayna maidel. She cooked for us for every holiday — that is every one that began with lighting candles at sundown. She gladly turned Thanksgiving over to the “kids.”
That meant a lot of Thanksgivings at lots of relative’s houses from Connecticut to Newton, Roxbury and beyond. It also meant no Thanksgiving leftovers and I had a feeling — based on what my friends said — that I was missing out on something! Apparently, my dad agreed, because, when I was a bout 12, he started making a turkey on Friday and coerced my mom into making all the side dishes. It was lots of fun!
Eventually, Thanksgiving landed at our house. What became my favorite part of the holiday happened long after the guests were gone and the good dishes put away. At about 8 o’clock, my dad would take out the turkey carcass (all large pieces of leftover turkey had been sliced and wrapped separately) and we would sit at the table and begin the fine art of stripping the carcass of all edible scraps.
My dad would make us laugh — he was the funniest person I ever met — and we would eat and talk far into the night. The next day, there would be a rather pathetic looking turkey skel-
eton in the refrigerator, sometimes decorated or comically posed sitting or reclining with a celery cigar in its orange or apple head!
So, don’t discard that carcass. You CAN make soup, but I much prefer a carcass, some napkins and my kids all together. You’d be surprised how talkative teens can get while gathered round those turkey bones.
Enjoy this American holiday with roots, perhaps, in our own Sukkot, and enjoy the leftovers in new and delicious ways.
Pulled Turkey Barbecue Sandwiches (Meat)
• 1 cup tomato puree
• 1/4 cup apple cider vinegar
• 3 Tbsp. (generous) dark brown sugar.
More to taste
• 1 tsp. chili powder, to taste
• 1/4 tsp. ground cumin, to taste
• OPTIONAL: cayenne pepper or Tabasco Sauce for heat
• 2 to 3 cups shredded cooked turkey
Place the tomato puree in a medium saucepan. Add the rest of the ingredients and bring to a boil. Reduce the heat and simmer for about 5 minutes. Add any spices and any amount of heat you like and taste and adjust sugar.
Shred the turkey with a fork and add to the sauce. Simmer for about 5 more minutes or until the turkey is heated through. Makes enough for about 4 sandwiches.
Turkey Sub Italiano (Meat)
• 1 or 2 long Italian or chiabatta bread, about 15 to 18 inches long
• 1/3 cup extra virgin olive oil
• 1/8 to 1/4 cup red wine vinegar
• 2 to 3 cloves garlic pressed through a garlic press
• 1 tsp. Italian seasoning or oregano (Italian seasoning is best)
• 1/2 tsp. kosher salt
• 1/3 to 1/2 tsp. freshly ground black pepper
• 1 red onion, very thinly sliced
• 1/2 to 1 head lettuce, any kind, shredded or torn into pieces
• 1 red or green pepper, cut in half and very thinly sliced
• Turkey, sliced thinly, dark and white meat
• 1 lb. thinly sliced bologna or any other meat you like such as thinly sliced roasted beef or even corned beef or a mix
Garnish: hot peppers, olives, red pepper flakes, apple slices
Cut the bread in half lengthwise but do not cut completely through. Leave one side hinged. Pull out some of the bread’s interior, so that there is a hollow in both sides.(Use the insides to make homemade croutons.) Set aside.
Mix the olive oil, vinegar, garlic, seasoning, salt and pepper together in a small cup. Use a spoon and drizzle the dressing over both sides of the bread.
Place the lettuce in one side of the bread. Top with the meats and then the sliced onions, pepper, tomatoes and any garnishes you like. Drizzle with a bit more of the dressing, if you like. Close the bread over the top and gently press down.
Cut 2- to 3-inch slices on the diagonal. Serves about 4 to 6.
Turkey Scaloppini with Mushroom Sauce (Meat)
This is a variation of an Italian dish usually made with veal. It does not remotely taste like leftovers.
• 8 turkey slices from the breast, about 1/2-inch thick and about 4 to 5 inches across.
• 3 Tbsp. extra virgin olive oil
• 10 ounces white mushrooms sliced (you can also use baby bella or a mix)
• 2 cloves garlic, finely minced
• Fresh thyme, chopped
• 1/4 cup dry white wine
Vegetable
• 1 cup leftover turkey gravy
• 1/2 cup unbleached flour
• 1 tsp. onion powder
• 1 tsp. garlic powder
• 1/4 tsp. salt
• Freshly ground black pepper, to taste
• 1/2 cup breadcrumbs
• 2 extra-large eggs
• 1/4 to 1/2 cup canola oil
• Leftover cranberry sauce
• Salad of your choice
• Fresh minced parsley or chives for garnish
JoNI SchocKETT Jewish Star columnist See Thinking Thanksgiving on page 14
Soup with Angel Hair Pasta. twokooksinthekitchen.com
Thinking Thanksgiving leftovers before feast…
Continued from page 12
Slice the turkey and set aside. Heat a skillet and add the olive oil. Add the garlic and mix. Add the mushrooms and sauté until the mushrooms have absorbed all the liquid. Add the thyme and heat through. Add the wine and the gravy and heat until bubbly. Let simmer for about 10 minutes or until the gravy thickens. Set aside.
Heat another large skillet and add half the canola oil. Heat until the oil gets shimmery. Meanwhile, beat the eggs in a bowl. Place the flour in the bowl and mix with the garlic and onion powders. Place the breadcrumbs in another bowl.
Dip a turkey slice in the flour and shake off any excess. Dip to coat in the egg and finally in the breadcrumbs. Place in the hot oil and repeat with the rest of the slices. Cook until golden brown, turn and cook on the other side until golden. Place on a paper towel lined plate. Place two slices on a plate and drizzle the gravy over the turkey. Add the salad (maybe some other leftovers) Scatter fresh minced parsley or snipped chives over all for garnish. Serves 4.
NOTE: To save some calories, you can omit the gravy and just use the sautéed mushrooms.
Turkey Vegetable Soup with Angel Hair Pasta (Meat)
You can make this even if the turkey carcass has been picked clean. Use turkey broth or chicken broth if there is really no meat at all left on the bones
• 1 turkey carcass
• 1-1/2 quarts turkey, chicken, or veggie broth, or water
• 2 large onions, whole, 1 peeled, one washed and unpeeled, ends trimmed.
• 3 leeks, white part only
• 1 lb. carrots, cut into small pieces
• 4 stalks celery, cut into small pieces
• 2 cloves garlic, minced
• 1 parsnip, diced
• Salt and pepper to taste
• 2 bay leaves
• 1/8 cup fresh parsley, minced
• 1 nine ounce package fresh angel hair pasta
• OPTIONAL: Cayenne pepper to taste
• 1 can whole tomatoes, drained, seeded and diced
Carefully break up the turkey carcass to fit in a large stock pot. Add the stock or water, leeks and onions, and bring to a boil. Reduce heat and add the carrots, celery, parsnip and garlic. Cover and simmer for about 2 to 4 hours.
Carefully remove the carcass and bones from the soup and simmer, uncovered, for another 20 minutes. If you want to add the tomatoes, add them just after removing the bones from the soup. Remove the turkey from the cooled bones and return the meat to the soup. Add the parsley, salt and pepper.
Add the angel hair pasta, cook until the pasta is al dente (about 2 to 3 minutes) and serve. Be careful to remove the Bay leaves before serving.
Sweet Potato Soufflé (Pareve)
This is another recipe that does not taste like leftovers.
• 3 cups leftover sweet potatoes
• 4 extra-large eggs
• 4 Tbsp. pareve trans-fat-free margarine, melted
• 2 Tbsp. amaretto or peach liqueur (most fruit or nut flavors work)
• 1 tsp. cinnamon
• 2 Tbsp. dark brown sugar
• 1 Tbsp. pure maple syrup
• OPTIONAL: You can add some finely chopped pecans and cranberries, if you like, about a half-cup total.
Preheat the oven to 350 degrees. Place the eggs in the bowl of an electric mixer and beat until light and fluffy, about 2 to 3 minutes on medium-high. Add the rest of the ingredients and mix on slow.
Generously grease a 2-quart casserole dish or soufflé dish. Mix the cinnamon and sugar together and sprinkle as much as you like over the top of the soufflé. Drizzle with a bit of maple syrup and add the pecans if you like.
Place in the oven and bake until puffed and golden, about 40 to 50 minutes.
Cranberry Trifle Dessert (Dairy)
A great way to embellish vanilla yogurt or ice cream!
Place the juice and sugar in a small saucepan and bring to a boil. Reduce heat and simmer, stirring often, until reduced by about 1/3 to 1/2. Remove from heat to cool.
Soften the cranberry sauce if it has jelled and is firm. You can do this in the microwave in 15-second bursts until just softened, but not hot.
Slice the cake and break up the pieces. Set aside.
Place the chilled cream in the bowl of an electric mixer and beat on high until frothy. Add the extracts and then add the sugar by spooonfuls while still beating. Continue to beat until stiff peaks form.
Place a layer of cake on the bottom of a deep bowl or trifle bowl. Drizzle with some of the cranberry juice sauce.
Spoon cranberry sauce over the cake and add some spoons of ice cream. Repeat the cake and
cranberries. Top with the whipped cream and a dollop of cranberry sauce. Cover the bowl and freeze for about 30 minutes. Serves 6 to 10.
NOTE: Want simpler? Heat the cranberry sauce and serve over vanilla ice cream! To reach Joni Schockett, write: Columnist@ TheJewishStar.com
Cranberry Trifle Dessert. seriouseats.com
Turkey Scaloppini with Mushroom Sauce.
blackberrybabe.com
Sweet Potato Soufflé. spoonfulofflavor.com
Giving Birth? Look No Further than the South Shore’s Only High Performing Hospital for Maternity Care
Mothers looking for a hospital at which to give birth should consider the quality indicators used by U.S. News & World Report ® to determine institutions deemed High Performing for Maternity care.
Mount Sinai South Nassau is the only South Shore hospital to earn the rating of High Performing based on eight key measures:
One of the most striking features about Judaism in comparison with, say, Christianity or Islam, is that it is impossible to answer the question: Who is the central character of the drama of faith?
In both of the other Abrahamic monotheisms the answer is obvious. In Judaism, it is anything but.
•Is it Abraham, the founder of the covenantal family?
•Is it Jacob, who gave his name Israel to our people and its land?
•Moses, the liberator and lawgiver?
•David, the greatest of Israel’s kings?
•Solomon, the builder of the Temple and the author of its literature of wisdom?
•Isaiah, the poet laureate of hope?
And among women there is a similar richness and diversity.
It is as if the birth of monotheism — the uncompromising unity of the creative, revelatory and redemptive forces at work in the universe — created space for the full diversity of the human condition to emerge.
So Abraham, whose life draws to its close in this week’s parsha, Chayei Sara, is an individual rather than an archetype. Neither Isaac nor Jacob — nor anyone else for that matter — is quite like him. And what strikes us is the sheer serenity of the end of his life. In a series of vignettes, we see him, wise and forward-looking, taking care of the future, tying up the loose ends of a life of deferred promises.
First, he makes the first acquisition of a plot in the land he has been assured will one day belong to his descendants. Then, leaving nothing to chance, he arranges a wife for Isaac, the son he knows will be heir to the covenant.
Astonishingly, he remains full of vigor and takes a new wife, by whom he has six children. Then, to avoid any possible contest over succession or inheritance, he gives all six gifts and then sends them away before he dies. Finally we read of his demise, the most serene description of death in the Torah:
Then Abraham breathed his last and died at a good old age, an old man and full of years; and he was gathered to his people. Gen. 25:8
One is almost tempted to forget how much heartache he has suffered in his life: the wrench-
Lot, who assimilated, was scorned. Abraham, who maintained his difference, was respected.
ing separation from “his father’s house,” the conflicts and aggravations of his nephew Lot, the two occasions on which he has to leave the land because of famine, both of which cause him to fear for his life; the long drawn-out wait for a son, the conflict between Sarah and Hagar, and the double trial of having to send Ishmael away and seemingly almost to lose Isaac also.
Somehow we sense in Abraham the beauty and power of a faith that places its trust in G-d so totally that there is neither apprehension nor fear.
Abraham is not without emotion. We sense it in his anguish at the displacement of Ishmael and his protest against the apparent injustice of the destruction of Sodom. But he places himself in G-d’s hands. He does what is incumbent on him to do, and he trusts G-d to do what He says He will do. There is something sublime about his faith.
Yet the Torah – even in this week’s parsha, after the supreme trial of the Binding of Isaac — gives us a glimpse of the continuing challenge to his faith. Sarah has died. Abraham has nowhere to bury her. Time after time, G-d has promised him the land: as soon as he arrives in Canaan we read, ‘The L-rd appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land” (Gen. 12:7).
Then in the next chapter after he has separated from Lot, G-d says “Go, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I am giving it to you” (Gen. 13:17). And again two chapters later, “I am the L-rd, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to take possession of it” (Gen. 15:7).
And so on, seven times in all. Yet now Abraham owns not one square inch in which to bury his wife. This sets the scene for one of the most complex encounters in Bereishit, in which Abraham negotiates for the right to buy a field and a cave. It is impossible in a brief space to do justice to the undertones of this fascinating exchange. Here is how it opens:
Then Abraham rose up from before his dead, and spoke to the Hittites, saying, “I am an alien and a stranger among you. Sell me some property for a burial site here so I can bury my dead.” The Hittites replied to Abraham, “Hear us, my L-rd. You are a prince of G-d among us. Bury your dead in the choicest of our tombs. None of us will refuse you his tomb for burying your dead.” Genesis 23:3
Abraham signals his relative powerlessness. He may be wealthy. He has large flocks and herds. Yet he lacks the legal right to own land. He is “an alien and a stranger.”
The Hittites, with exquisite diplomacy, reply with apparent generosity but deflect his request. By all means, they say, bury your dead, but for that, you do not need to own land. We will allow you to bury her, but the land will remain ours. Even then they do not commit themselves. They use a double negative: “None of us will refuse . . .” It is the beginning of an elaborate minuet. Abraham, with a politeness to equal theirs, refuses to be sidetracked:
Then Abraham rose and bowed down before the people of the land, the Hittites. He said to them, “If you are willing to let me bury my dead, then listen
to me and intercede with Ephron son of Zohar on my behalf so he will sell me the cave of Machpelah, which belongs to him and is at the end of his field. Ask him to sell it to me for the full price as a burial site among you.” Genesis 23:8
He takes their vague commitment and gives it sharp definition. If you agree that I may bury my dead, then you must agree that I should be able to buy the land in which to do so. And if you say no one will refuse me, then surely you can have no objection to persuading the man who owns the field I wish to buy.
Ephron the Hittite was sitting among his people and he replied to Abraham in the hearing of all the Hittites who had come to the gate of his city. “No, my L-rd,” he said. “Listen to me; I give you the field, and I give you the cave that is in it. I give it to you in the presence of my people. Bury your dead.”
Again, an elaborate show of generosity that is nothing of the kind. Three times Ephron said, “I give it to you,” yet he did not mean it, and Abraham knew he did not mean it.
Again Abraham bowed down before the people of the land and he said to Ephron in their hearing, “Listen to me, if you will. I will pay the price of the field. Accept it from me so I can bury my dead there.” Ephron answered Abraham, “Listen to me, my L-rd; the land is worth four hundred shekels of silver, but what is that between me and you? Bury your dead.”
Far from giving the field away, Ephron is insisting on a vastly inflated price, while seeming to dismiss it as a mere trifle: “What is that between me and you?” Abraham immediately pays the price, and the field is finally his.
What we see in this brief but beautifully nuanced passage is the sheer vulnerability of Abraham. For all that the local townsmen seem to pay him deference, he is entirely at their mercy. He has to use all his negotiating skill, and
in the end he must pay a large sum for a small piece of land. It all seems an impossibly long way from the vision G-d has painted for him of the entire country one day becoming a home for his descendants. Yet Abraham is content. The next chapter begins with the words: Abraham was now old and well advanced in years, and the L-rd had blessed him in all things. Genesis 24:1
That is the faith of an Abraham. The man promised as many children as the stars of the sky has one child to continue the covenant. The man promised the land “from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates” has acquired one field and a tomb. But that is enough. The journey has begun. Abraham knows “It is not for you to complete the task.” He can die content. One phrase shines through the negotiation with the Hittites. They acknowledge Abraham, the alien and stranger, as “a prince of G-d in our midst.”
The contrast with Lot could not be greater. Recall that Lot had abandoned his distinctiveness. He had made his home in Sodom. His daughters had married local men. He “sat in the gate” of the town implying that he had become one of the elders or judges. Yet when he resisted the people who were intent on abusing his visitors, they said, “This fellow came here as an alien, and now he wants to play the judge!” (Gen. 19:9).
Lot, who assimilated, was scorned. Abraham, who fought and prayed for his neighbors but maintained his distance and difference, was respected. So it was then. So it is now. Non-Jews respect Jews who respect Judaism. Non-Jews disrespect Jews who disrespect Judaism.
So, at the end of his life, we see Abraham, dignified, satisfied, serene. There are many types of hero in Judaism, but few as majestic as the man who first heard the call of G-d and began the journey we still continue.
If everything can change, what really counts?
Eternity. What does it mean? Does anything really last forever?
Many years ago, in the pre-dawn darkness on an empty Jerusalem road, I discovered just how fleeting life can be. After a very late night studying with my students after a prolonged trip overseas, as I was headed home for what I thought would be a peaceful Shabbat and a chance to reconnect with my wife and kids, I fell asleep at the wheel. I was awakened when my tiny Peugeot 104 wrapped itself around an electric pole.
The impact was so powerful that my wife
would later describe the steering wheel as completely bent by the force of my body crashing into it. The steel pen in my shirt pocket was bent in half.
While I did not know this at the time, I had broken almost all my ribs, and my spleen had been ruptured. All I knew was that in all the pain I was experiencing I could not move my arms or legs, so I was convinced I had been paralyzed. I had bitten down and cut open my tongue (which would later require almost 40 stitches) and was bleeding profusely.
The irony was not lost on me: After all of my experiences in Lebanon, it was a careless driving accident that was going to be the end of me.
It is impossible to describe the intense wave of sadness that washed over me: Who would walk our eldest daughter Maayan, then aged five, to her wedding chuppah? Would Yonatan,
then aged two, even remember me at his Bar Mitzvah? Who would come to the door and tell my wife the news; how would she manage? What little had I even accomplished in my life?
At age 31, had I left the world much different than when I found it?
Eventually, someone found me, the ambulance came and after two days in the ICU (along with my father-in-law’s intervention which saved my life) Hashem gave me a second chance to get it right.
What, in the end, really matters in this world? This week’s parsha, Chayei Sara, finds Avraham contemplating this as he prepares to bury his beloved wife Sara.
The Torah devotes an inordinate amount of time to Avraham’s attempts to bury his wife; up until this point in the Torah, people simply died. When Noach died (Bereishit 9:29), it was concisely reported that he
was 950 years. The commentaries note that Avraham uses a fascinating turn of phrase in his negotiations with the Hittites to secure a burial site: “Ger ve’Toshav anochi imachem” (literally, “I am a stranger and an inhabitant amongst you”). Is he a stranger, or is he a resident?
Rav Shlomo Riskin notes that we find this exact phrase in the parsha of Behar when the Torah tells us that in the jubilee (50th or yovel) year, the land must return to its original owners: “And the land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine, for you are strangers and settlers with me” (“Ki Gerim ve’ ve’Toshavim atem imadi”) (Vayikra 25:23).
The Torah is challenging us to consider what really lasts in this world: what do we really own?
The first chapter of tractate Baba Metzia
Finding proof of life even as we recall death
I am spending this Shabbat Chayeii Sara in Hevron at the Mearat HaMachpela, with several members of my family and thousands of other Jews from around the world.
For those of you who have never spent a Shabbat Chayeii Sara in Hevron and prayed at the Meara, the Cave of the Patriarchs, I urge you to put it on your “bucket list.” It is an exhilirating experience that will stay with you for a lifetime. In fact, you’ll probably come back again and again, as I did.
It is interesting that the two parshiyot of the Torah that deal most prominently with death have variants on the Hebrew word Chayim (life) in their name.
I’m talking about this week’s, parsha Chayeii Sara, that of course deals with Sara imeinu’s and later Avraham avinu’s passing, and parshat Vayechi, that deals with Yaacov avinu’s passing, as well as his son Yosef‘s passing. Furthermore, the deaths of Rivka and Leah are not explicitly mentioned, but also alluded to, by mentioning the site of their burial in the same parsha of Vayechi. To further connect the theme, all with the exception of Yosef, are buried in the Mearat HaMachpela in Hevron.
While other parshiyot mention the deaths of Yitzchak and Rachel (Vayishlach), Nadav
v’Avihu (Shmini), Aharon and Miriam (Chukat) and Moshe (v’Zot Habracha), those deaths are arguably not the most prominent feature of the narrative, but do lend themselves to a discussion all their own, which we will not address here. Since no cognate of chayim is used as the name of any of those parshiyot, the cynics among you would argue that simply is because the reference to life or living is not found in their first verses, and so are not readily available as a shorthand title for the parsha. I would argue that davka the deaths of certain individuals are pointedly referred to as “life” for a reason. (I do not intend to get into the Talmudic discussion of whether Yaacov truly “died” (Taanis 5b), since the Torah does not use the word vayamot (and he died), but rather
will accept that when we speak of death, we are talking about actual death.
It is apparent that the Torah is making a point of specifically referring to the lives of both Sara and Yaacov, even when talking of their deaths. Even in death, we talk about life. Why is this so?
Moshe Rabenu, in Sefer Devarim 30:19-20, instructs B’nei Yisrael:
“I call heaven and earth today to bear witness against you: I have placed life and death before you, blessing and curse, and you shall choose life, so that you will live, you and your offspring. To love Hashem, your G-d, to listen to His voice, and to cleave to Him, for He is your life and the length of your days, to dwell upon the land that Hashem swore to your
a living Sara in parsha with her name
The opening verses in this week’s parsha, Chayei Sara, inform us of the death of Sara:
The span of Sara’s life came to one hundred and twenty-seven years. She died in Kiryat Arba — now Chevron — in the land of Canaan; and Avraham came to eulogize Sara and weep for her. (Verses 1 and 2)
A bit later we are told “Then Avraham buried his wife Sara in the cave of the field of Mach-
pelah, facing Mamre — now Chevron — in the land of Canaan.” (Verse 19)
After that, there is no mention of Sara in the entire parsha! How can I possibly dedicate my weekly column (I call the series “Person in the Parsha”) to a woman whose name appears only after her death, and who plays no active role in this week’s narrative?
But wait! She is indeed mentioned much later in the story, when her son Isaac takes a bride, Rebecca. There we learn that “Isaac then brought her into the tent of his mother Sara, and he took Rebecca as his wife. Isaac loved her, and thus found comfort after his mother’s death.”
(Chapter 24, verse 67)
Nevertheless, how can I justify choosing Sara
Every year, Shabbos Chayei Sara is accompanied by a special Jewish gathering in Hevron, the “City of the Patriarchs.” The source for this is our parsha, in which we find Avraham purchasing the “field, and the cave which is in it,” to serve as an “acquisition” and a burial plot for his family.
The strange verse that describes the moment after the purchase is finalized begs for explanation:
Ephron’s field in Makhpelah adjoining Mamre arose. [This included] the field, its cave, and every tree in the field, within its entire cir-
cumference. (23:17)
The word which is odd is “arose” (in Hebrew, vayakam) and it appears again in 23:20.
The Midrash Aggadah takes a very literal angle, claiming the land was elevated onehalf a cubit so it would be recognizably distinguished from the other fields. One can argue that this is the most plausible explanation. After all, every time the word vayakam appears in the Torah, it means “and he got up.” Usually the person described is going somewhere or heading to do something.
However, since we are talking about a piece of land that is not moving, we have to try to find a more suitable way to explain this word.
Rashi suggests that the word vayakam comes from the word tekumah (rebirth). This reflects the Midrashic approach that Ephron was considered to be a simpleton who happened to own the property, but when it trans-
as a “person in the parsha” when she plays no “living” role in the entire episode?
I insist that she does, but to prove it, I will have to return to the opening verses above, where we learn of her grief-stricken husband’s hesped and bechi, “eulogy” and “weeping.”
To demonstrate the “presence” of the deceased person even after that person’s death, I must first define the terms eulogy/ hespedand “shedding tears”/bechi and then distinguish between them.
For this purpose, I will share three comments upon the opening verses of our parsha by three great mid-nineteenth century commentators, all contemporaries with each other but with three different approaches to the text. They are Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, and Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg, Zecher tzaddikim l’vracha, of blessed memory.
Let me begin with Rav Hirsch, Rabbi of
ferred to Avraham’s hands, Avraham, a prince of G-d (23:6), the deed was elevated in ownership. (Midrash Aggadah, Pesikta)
Another possibility is that it comes from the word kayam or l’kayem (to establish). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan translates the phrase “vayakam s’deh Ephron” to mean “Ephron’s field … thus became [Abraham’s] uncontested property.”
This is the view of the Midrash Sechel Tov, who quotes the verse in Vayikra 25:30 — “v’kam habayit asher ba’ir” (“then the house in the walled city shall become the permanent property of the buyer). (See a similar usage in Vayikra 27:19, and Devarim 18:15. This is also the view of Targum Yonatan, Radak, HaKtav Ve’Hakabalah.)
The easiest way to explain this “establishment” approach is Rashi’s second one, which is affirmed by Ibn Ezra, that verse 17 is only half a statement, very importantly connected to verse 18. In this light, the word vayakam modifies
the word mikneh (purchase), and it demonstrates that the purchase was established.
There is another viewpoint that the first vayakam indicates an affirmation of the sale, while the second vayakam indicates an agreement by the seller(s), ie, the Hittites, that the land could be used a burial ground. (R Chaim Paltiel, Riva, Bkhor Shor, Tur He’Arokh)
Finally, some commentaries focus on the different methods of acquisition.
For example, the Meshekh Hokhmah notes the law in Shulchan Arukh that when a Jew buys from an idolator, he needs to establish the transfer of property through multiple kinyanim, or methods of acquisition (see the Sha”kh as well). The first method, the transfer of money, has the property exit the ownership of the idolator, but the Jew does not yet own it unless there is a document or a chazakah, an act through which owner-
t heJewishStar.com
Honest Reporting • Torah-True • Kosher and Fat-Free
Published weekly except during certain religious and civil holidays by The Jewish Star LLC New York City office: 5676 Riverdale Ave Suite 311, Bronx NY 10471 • LI office: 2 Endo Blvd, Garden City NY 11530 here’s how to reach t he Jewish Star — Write: Editor@t heJewishStar.com. Call: 516-622-7461 ext 291
Editor & Publisher: Ed Weintrob
516-622-7461 ext 291
Jewish Star associate: Nechama Bluth, 516-622-7461 ext 241.
Content: The Publisher endeavors to ensure that our content is within the bounds of normative halachah and hashkafah. Anyone who feels anything we publish may be inappropriate in this regard is urged to bring the item in question to the attention of the Publisher.
advertising is accepted at the sole discretion of the Publisher and should conform to standards appropriate for distribution in an Orthodox community.
Send us your news! Editor@TheJewishStar.com
advertising: Publisher@TheJewishStar.com
Kashrut: The Jewish Star is not responsible for the kashrut of any product or establishment featured in its pages. If you have questions regarding any establishment or product, including its supervision, please consult your rabbi for guidance.
Submissions: All submissions become the property of The Jewish Star and may be edited and used by the Publisher, its licensees and affiliates, in print, on the web and/or in any media that now exists or will exist in the future in any form, including derivative works, throughout the world in perpetuity,
without additional authorization or compensation. The individual or entity submitting material affirms that it holds the copyright or otherwise has the right to authorize its use in accordance with The Jewish Star’s terms for submissions.
opinions: Views expressed by columnists and other writers do not necessarily reflect the position of the Publisher or of The Jewish Star LLC.
Distribution: The Jewish Star is available free in kosher food establishments, stores, synagogues, and curb-side newsboxes on Long Island, in New York City and elsewhere. To request free delivery to your location, write Publisher@TheJewishStar.com.
Copyright: All content is copyright and may not be republished or otherwise reproduced without written permission by The Jewish Star LLC; to do so without permission is against the law and halacha. For content reproduction write to Publisher@ TheJewishStar.com.
The Jewish Star subscribes to the JNS news service. It, or its contributors, own the copyrights on material attributed to them. The length and content of JNS material and all other submitted material may be edited by The Jewish Star. This newspaper contains words of Torah. While it is not considered shaimos, please dispose of it properly.
Sorry symbolism of a failed pro-Israel rally
Only a couple thousand people were in Washington’s Nationals Park on Nov. 10 for an event billed as “Stand Together: An Event of Unity, Strength and Resilience.” And maybe as many as half of that number were associated with the organizations sponsoring the gathering rather than rank-and-file members of the Jewish community who responded to the appeal.
So, as photos of the much-ballyhooed rally illustrated, it might be said that most of those who attended it came disguised as empty seats. (See “Small group, big message,” in last week’s Jewish Star.)
The largely vacant ballpark was more than a measure of the disappointing turnout for a pro-Israel gathering a year after an estimated 290,000 people showed up for a previous unity rally held on the National Mall a year ago on Nov. 14, 2023. It was an apt metaphor for the equally disappointing response of both American Jewry and the leading organizations that purport to represent them during a genuine crisis.
Some hoped that the horrors of Oct. 7 might galvanize American Jewry in the way that both the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 Yom Kippur War did more than a half-century ago. The initial response to the massacre in southern Israel carried out by Hamas terrorists and other Palestinians was promising in terms of fundraising and public actions like the unity rally on the Mall.
But what followed in the ensuing months — even as the surge of antisemitism in the United States steadily grew in the streets of major cities and on college campuses — demonstrated that the Jewish community was far too divided by politics to stand together against a deadly threat to not just Israel but to their own security and
A year after Oct. 7, an empty ballpark is a metaphor for American Jewry’s weak response to the war on Israel and the resulting surge in antisemitism.
that of their children.
The current war on Israel continues into its second year, with Hamas terrorists seeking to retake parts of the Gaza Strip in the south, coupled with the launching of rockets and missiles into the Jewish state from Hezbollahcontrolled Lebanon to the north. Their paymasters in Iran also still present a deadly threat. But most American Jews spent this year far more focused on domestic partisan politics and debating whether Israel deserved their support than rallying to aid it.
Just as depressing has been the response of the Jewish world to a surge of antisemitism here in the United States. The takeover of numerous college campuses by pro-Hamas demonstrators advocating for Israel’s destruction has had a devastating impact on many Jewish students. But again, the reaction from the organized Jewish world has been largely low-key, and more importantly, mostly ineffective in demonstrating a willingness to fight back against open antisemitism or even to force change at institutions that were unable or unwilling to defend Jewish students.
It’s true that the organizers of the event at Nationals Park were not seeking to rival last year’s rally in terms of attendance. Instead, they apparently just wanted to have something that would serve as a pep rally for those who were attending the annual General Assembly of the JFNA. Yet by choosing a venue that can accommodate up to 41,000 people for such an event and deliberately hyping it as a major event, they set themselves up for both failure and ridicule at a moment in time when that is the last thing the pro-Israel community needed.
To be fair, anyone who thought American Jewry could duplicate or even come close to the responses to crises in 1967 and 1973 was dreaming.
Changes in the community since then made that impossible.
In the 1960s and 1970s, memories of the Holocaust were still fresh. Israel’s vulnerability and the possibility of its Arab foes making good on their pledges to create another Shoah by destroying the Jewish state was very much on the minds of American Jews, who didn’t just speak up with one voice in response to those wars but also raised astounding amounts of money to aid it.
But the American Jewish world of that era is gone.
Part of it is generational, as many of the Jews who came of age since then think of Israel as a regional superpower rather than an embattled and besieged nation. The most common expressions of Jewish identity in the first decades after World War II were about remembrance of the Holocaust and support for Israel. But that has been largely discarded. Jewish peoplehood can only be instilled in young people through education and
a positive vision of Judaism. That doesn’t involve solely recalling a tragic past or living vicariously through the deeds of Israelis, who are built up as larger-than-life heroes, such as those in Leon Uris novels that were once influential in America but are now ignored.
More troubling is the fact that more Americans have been subjected to decades of media bias against Israel as well as the indoctrination in woke ideologies that falsely label it an “apartheid” or “white” oppressor state in educational settings.
Criticism of Israeli policies and settlements — and, of course, of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — has been blamed for a decline in interest and even support for the Jewish state among the majority of American Jews who are neither Orthodox nor politically conservative.
Yet the real problem is demographic, not political.
The American Jewish population has become increasingly assimilated. That’s due to reasons such as widespread intermarriage, and the fact that more and more Jews are unaffiliated with synagogues, organizations and causes. Many now define themselves as “just Jews,” or as the demographers put it, “Jews of no religion.”
The ties of those who fit in this category to other Jews, let alone Israel, have been frayed to the point of disintegration. That is the price of liberty as Jews are free in contemporary America to leave the community and disappear into the rest of the population.
Yet despite that, the initial response to Oct. 7 was encouraging.
The success of last year’s rally was remarkable, even if the tone of the gathering was deliberately kept as politically neutral as possible to allow the participation of groups and religious denominations that have been critical of Israel.
The Jewish Federations of North America, which along with the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations were the principal co-sponsors of this year’s disastrous rally, must also get credit for stepping up and prioritizing Israel in their fundraising efforts. The $850 million raised for JFNA’s Israel Emergency Fund was impressive, given the general decline in giving to federations in recent years, indicating that their core donors were capable of understanding the threat to Jewish life and acting on it.
But whatever enthusiasm for Israel’s cause that existed a year ago has been diminished by the events of the last 12 months during which the Jewish state has been falsely accused of “genocide” of Palestinians during its counteroffensive against Hamas in Gaza.
Rather than being able to mount a strong response to the takeover of so many college campuses by pro-Hamas mobs, the organized Jewish community found itself unable to speak with one voice on the issue.
Just as Jewish students were sometimes told to “shelter in place” rather than vocally confront the Jew-haters, so were all too many in the Jew-
Jonathan S. tobin
JnS Editor-in-Chief
A participant at the “We Stand Together” rally for Jewish unity and Israel at the Nationals Park baseball stadium in Washington on Nov. 10. Abby Greenawalt
Media magazine gets the Gaza war all wrong
For a magazine that prides itself on journalistic standards, Editor & Publisher seems to throw those standards right out the window when Israel is the subject of their reporting.
A feature story in the October issue of E&P — the leading trade magazine of the US news media industry — described the difficulties faced by some reporters covering the war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. But the biggest difficulty with the article was its parroting of blatant anti-Israel falsehoods.
Its author, Gretchen A. Peck, who is a contributing editor, set the tone in her introduction, by describing how Hamas “militants” (she never calls them terrorists) attacked Israel, resulting in a “brutal” response from Israel (she never uses such adjectives about Hamas).
Peck states as fact that “at least 41,020 Palestinians have been killed, according to the Ministry of Health in Gaza,” without explaining that the “Ministry of Health” is, in fact,
Is citing unproven rumors a professional way of reporting?
controlled by Hamas. She also fails to note that about half of the casualties in Gaza have been terrorists, not civilians.
Peck proceeds to interview several journalists based in the Middle East. She repeatedly quotes them making false statements but never corrects them.
First up is Julian Borger, world affairs editor for the British newspaper The Guardian. He refers to what he calls “the mass killing of civilians” by Israel, using terminology that makes it sound as if Israel is perpetrating another Holocaust.
Borger emphasizes that journalists have been among the dead in Gaza. He puts it this way: “There have been suspicions that journalists have been particularly targeted [by Israel]. That may be true, but it’s unproven.”
If it’s unproven, if it’s just a “suspicion,” then why is Borger saying it in public, and why is E&P giving him a platform to spread it? Is that an appropriate professional way of reporting — to cite unproven rumors?
Borger recalls that he was reporting from Jerusalem during the 2000 Camp David Summit. “Negotiations broke down,” he recalls. In fact, they didn’t just “break down” — Yasser Arafat rejected Israel’s offer of wide-ranging concessions, and then launched the massmurder spree known as the Second Intifada. But for some reason, Borger and E&P didn’t think that was relevant to mention.
Peck, summarizing her conversation with Borger, notes that “Hezbollah has joined the fight, firing rockets into Israel’s northern towns in retaliation for Israel’s campaign in Gaza.” Even the most minimally experienced
fact-checker could have caught that bonehead error; Hezbollah began firing on Oct. 7, in conjunction with the Hamas attack, not in response to any “Israeli campaign in Gaza,” which had not yet even begun.
Peck then turns to Nabih Bulos, Middle East bureau chief for the Los Angeles Times. Among the “challenges” Bulos faces, Peck writes, is the fact that “aid convoys are routinely ambushed and robbed.” But she doesn’t inform E&P readers that Hamas is the one doing the ambushing and robbing.
Bulos says that “it’s a big challenge to make sure the people you’re working with are not problematic,” and he acknowledges that he is “reliant on local journalists” in Gaza. What he means is that he relies on “journalists” who are almost certainly part of Hamas or at least pro-Hamas, since there are no anti-Hamas journalists in Gaza. You see
the pattern: Neither Bulos nor Peck acknowledges facts that make Hamas look bad.
The editors of E&P then compound the problem by littering Peck’s feature with photographs that hammer home the idea that Israel is the aggressor.
The reader is shown flames billowing “after Israeli forces hit a high-rise tower in Gaza,” as if Israel attacks high-rise towers for no apparent reason. There’s a burned field, due to “an Israeli attack on south Lebanon.” Notice — not a strike against Hezbollah terrorists, but rather an “attack on south Lebanon.”
Another photo shows “wreckage of a mosque targeted in an Israeli strike on Jenin’s refugee camp” — you know, because Israel is devoted to destroying mosques — and “a road destroyed by frequent Israeli incursions on Jenin’s refugee camp” — because, I suppose, Israel just hates refugee camps, not because it pursues terrorists there, and terrorists plant mines under the roads.
Editing and publishing are not easy in wartorn parts of the world. But editors and publishers have an obligation to report the facts objectively, not slant the news against those whom they dislike. And they need to have some fact-checkers on staff. Clearly, Editor & Publisher needs to hire a few of those.
The Jewish Star reached out to E&P Publisher Mike Blinder and Gretchen A. Peck for comment. Any response will be appended to this article at TheJewishStar.com
Moshe Phillips is national chairman of Americans For A Safe Israel, a leading pro-Israel advocacy and education group. To reach him, write: Columnist@TheJewishStar.com
Hearing the echos of Amsterdam’s broken glass
RABBI STEVEN BURG
CEO, AISH
Iam horrified and outraged by the antisemitic attacks against Israeli soccer fans in Amsterdam.
The events in Amsterdam mark a dark moment for European Jewry and demand our immediate attention. Jews were beaten, chased, hit by cars, stabbed and assaulted.
What makes this incident particularly haunting is its timing — mere days before the anniversary of Kristallnacht, the “Night of Broken Glass.” In November 1938, Europe watched as synagogues burned and Jewish businesses were destroyed. Two weeks ago, we saw Jewish soccer fans hunted through the streets of Amsterdam, forced to shelter in place and requiring planes from Israel to be sent to rescue them.
This is not merely a security incident. It is a warning sign that demands immediate action. When Jews require emergency flights to escape European cities in 2024, we must acknowledge that antisemitism has reached a crisis point that requires decisive action.
As CEO of Aish, I call on European leaders to move beyond condemnations to concrete action. The arrest of 62 perpetrators was a start, but we need comprehensive strategies to combat this rising tide of hatred. The safety of Jewish communities must be non-negotiable in any democratic society.
These attacks continue to happen throughout the Western world, and they are only growing in intensity.
Among the recent incidents, a Jewish man was slashed in the face in Brooklyn; a large protest threatened Jews in Bergenfield, NJ; and masked men attacked Jewish students at DePaul University in Chicago.
The attacks in Amsterdam showed a new level of attack in their widespread nature. The images of individuals being purposely run into by cars, stabbed and repeatedly assaulted, as well as
their Israeli flags, soccer scarves and uniforms being ripped away while they were subjected to antisemitic slurs, showed that we are quickly approaching darker times reminiscent of some of the horrors of European history.
As a rabbi and a Jewish leader, I grapple with a sense of déjà vu. We must all heed the warning of history. Never again means taking action now, before it’s too late.
These events emphasize the growing need for Jews to consider aliyah, not only in response to this surge in antisemitism but also because there is an urgent need to build a better society in Israel, as we are seeing more and more that it is the only safe haven for the Jews.
What happened in Amsterdam serves as a stark validation of these concerns.
We must stand firm, proud of our heritage and unafraid to display our identity.
We need a strong and vibrant Israel, and we need Jews from around the world to not only support Israel by sending donations but by sending themselves. Israel is the place where all Jews can freely express their Jewish identity without fear of persecution and where we can build together a better future for our people.
The existence of Israel should not mean that Jews must fear to live in the Diaspora. We have the right to live safely and proudly in any country we choose. The responsibility lies with governments and societies to combat antisemitism vigorously and protect their Jewish citizens.
I commend the Dutch authorities’ swift response in condemning the attacks and launching investigations. Yet, more needs to be done.
We need comprehensive educational programs to combat antisemitism, increased security measures for Jewish institutions and a zerotolerance policy for hate crimes. Some politicians
have even demanded that perpetrators of hate crimes be deported, as some of these crimes in Europe are being committed by migrant asylum seekers, refugees who came from other war-torn countries and often brought their prejudices and hate with them. The violence that was perpetrated against them in their home countries they are now perpetrating against Jews — and that is unacceptable.
To our Jewish family in Amsterdam and across Europe: Know that you are not alone. The global Jewish community stands with you, and we will continue to advocate for your safety and right to live openly as Jews without fear. We must stand firm in Israel and in our current homes, proud of our heritage and unafraid to display our identity.
To our non-Jewish allies, we call upon you to stand with us against this tide of hatred. Antisemitism is not just a Jewish problem; it’s a
societal one. When Jews are attacked for their identity, the very fabric of a free and open society is threatened.
Let us draw strength from our history of resilience. We have faced darker times and emerged stronger. Let the lights of our soon-to-be-kindled Chanukah menorahs serve as a beacon of hope and a reminder that light will always triumph over darkness.
The path forward is clear: education, solidarity and an unwavering commitment to combating hate in all its forms. From Amsterdam to Jerusalem, let us work together to build a world where such attacks become nothing more than a distant memory.
Rabbi Steven Burg is CEO of Aish and executive board member of the Rabbinical Council of America. To reach him, write: Columnist@TheJewishStar.com
Assessing some of the damage after Kristallnacht, “The Night of Broken Glass,” in Germany on Nov. 9-10, 1938. US Holocaust Memorial Museum
The top of Editor & Publisher magazine’s fourpage spread on the Gaza war.
Shabbat: An affirming response to antisemitism
JAMIE GELLER
In the wake of Oct. 7 and the subsequent surge of antisemitism worldwide, many have asked how we should respond to this darkness. The answer, I believe, lies in one of our most powerful traditions: Shabbat.
The great Hebrew essayist Ahad Ha’am famously observed, “More than the Jews have kept Shabbat, Shabbat has kept the Jews.” Today, these words resonate with unprecedented urgency.
As Jewish people face increased hostility and isolation, Shabbat stands as our most potent tool and a beacon of hope for unity, resilience and pride.
The Jewish people have always found strength in unity and tradition. Shabbat is a unifying force that brings Jews from all backgrounds together. It’s a beautiful testament to the power of our shared heritage, transcending geographical boundaries and levels of religious observance.
Consider this: every Friday night across Israel, something remarkable happens. In a country where more than half the population identifies as secular, more than 70% of Jewish families still gather for Shabbat dinner. It’s a weekly ritual that is kept by the majority of the population regardless of their level of religious observance.
This isn’t just tradition — it’s resistance through existence, and it is laying the foundation of our spiritual and communal future brick by brick.
My own journey to living a more Jewishly inspired life began with Shabbat. It is what I fell in love with, and it is what helped me fall in love with Judaism as a way of life. I started keeping Shabbat after attending a Discovery Shabbaton run by Aish, and my life has never been the same since.
For me, Shabbat is that “moment” in time during the week when I can finally exhale and breathe. It’s an always-scheduled and nevermissed 25-hour opportunity to meditate, contemplate and connect while reinvesting in my family, my friends, and myself. It is the day that I refuel and recharge for the next great week and the very fuel on which a continued life of greatness runs.
On a larger scale, the power of Shabbat lies in its ability to create community. When we gather for Shabbat dinner, whether in Jerusalem or Johannesburg, we’re not just sharing a meal — we’re witnessing and sharing in each other’s lives in the most supportive and meaningful ways. In a world where the social fabric is increasingly fraying, where family gatherings become rarer and community bonds weaker, Shabbat provides a revolutionary answer: a consistent weekly connection.
Shabbat serves as our best response to antisemitism and our best hope at building a Jewish future. When hatred seeks to isolate us, Shabbat brings us together. When fear threatens to silence us, our Shabbat candles illuminate the darkness. Shabbat gives us a chance to pass our traditions down to the next generation while also
encouraging each family to invite guests, others who may not have what to eat or may not yet connect to the day or their faith, and celebrate the day together. Our unified celebration of Shabbat demonstrates our unshakeable resilience.
Last week, I participated in two challah bakes leading up to Shabbat in South Africa. More than 5,000 women are expected to participate in two events, one in Cape Town and the other in Johannesburg. Despite the country’s antagonistic political stance towards Israel, Jewish communities come together every year and make this profound statement of Jewish pride and resilience.
Thousands of Jewish women gathered to celebrate one aspect of Shabbat in a very public event. We showed that not only will we stand up for our way of life but that no amount of hatred or violence will ever silence us and that we will continue to build our families to ensure a Jewish future. Each batch of challah braided, each candle lit and each blessing recited becomes an act of resistance against those who would prefer we hide our identity.
These are powerful statements of Jewish pride and communal strength, and by making them, we pass on the message to those who
may be scared or sitting on the fence, as well as to future generations that we have a rich gift and message to share with the world.
The beauty of Shabbat as a response to antisemitism lies in its accessibility and its passivity. Shabbat is a passive time when we refrain from creation, and this is true for creating strife as well. Shabbat doesn’t require confrontation or political action. Instead, it invites us to strengthen ourselves, our families and our communities through ritual and connection. Whether you’re traditionally observant or exploring Jewish traditions for the first time, Shabbat welcomes you with open arms.
The goal of Shabbat is to take time away from continually creating and instead foster understanding, build bridges within our diverse community, and really see one another. It is an opportunity to strengthen our bonds and reaffirm our shared identity with those around us.
We need Shabbat more than ever. It provides a much-needed, powerful antidote to the isolation and fear that many Jews are experiencing. By coming together, whether physically or in spirit, we remind ourselves and the world of the beauty and resilience of Jewish life.
See Geller on page 22
Anti-Israel bias trashes Wikipedia’s credibility
Facts and Logic About Middle East (FLAME)
If you search for “Zionism,” you’ll quickly find this bizarre definition on Wikipedia: “Zionism is an ethnocultural nationalist movement that emerged in Europe in the late 19th century and aimed for the establishment of a Jewish state through the colonization of a land outside Europe.”
In other words, Israel is an ethnonationalist colonial movement — precisely what they scream in pro-Palestine demonstrations on university campuses all over America. Zionism is apparently not the self-determination struggle of the Jewish people to repatriate their ancient homeland in the Land of Israel.
Wikipedia has, over the decades, become the Internet’s go-to encyclopedia, known for its comprehensiveness and crowd-sourced objectivity. But lately, it has been hijacked by groups working to turn the online platform into a leftist propaganda machine, especially to smear and delegitimize Israel.
A recent study by Pirate Wires found that a cadre of some 40 Wikipedia editors, working singly and in small groups, has completely rewritten most articles covering Israel. They have created a damning narrative of colonialism and Palestinian oppression that rivals the perversions promoted as doctrine in many university humanities departments.
The bias of these articles violates Wikipedia’s “Neutral Point of View” policy, not to mention other policies that are supposed to prohibit anyone from exercising disproportionate control over the platform.
Online activists who try to combat anti-Israel, antisemitic content on Wikipedia by editing articles and complaining to administrators are most often ignored and sometimes even punished for challenging the narrative preferred by the vast majority of the platform’s editors.
Jewish entities have also challenged Wikipedia for anti-Israel bias, but their complaints have fallen on deaf ears. Leaders of the not-for-profit Wikipedia Foundation that owns Wikipedia wash their hands of the problem, saying they don’t exercise power over their platform’s content, thus contradicting the group’s alleged commitment to neutrality.
If Wikipedia fails to uphold its own policies, those who rely on the platform — particularly, supporters of Israel — would be well-advised to stop using and funding it. Surely, more reliable resources are available or will emerge.
Radical far-leftists have banded together to smear Israel on Wikipedia.
Among them is a group of 40 mostly veteran Wikipedia editors who are responsible for editing more than 10,000 articles on topics related to Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a fashion that delegitimizes the Jewish state. In many cases, the group’s edits account for upward of 90% of the content in an article, giving them complete control of the topics.
Wikipedia content is rife with outright lies and false accusations against the world’s only Jewish state.
For example, the article on Zionism wrongly states that the Palestinians became a minority in Israel “primarily due to expulsions by Zionist forces, and later the Israeli army.” In fact, most Palestinian refugees were not expelled, and none would have lost their homes if Arab leaders had accepted the 1947 UN Partition Plan that allotted
states to both Jews and Arabs.
Furthermore, if you type “Zionism” into Wikipedia’s search box, the platform’s auto-fill returns entries like “Zionism as settler colonialism,” “Zionism from the standpoint of its victims,” and “Racism in Israel,” implying that Zionism is a racist, colonial movement, when it is a movement for indigenous self-determination that has created a paradise of freedom for Israel’s 2 million Arab citizens.
An even more blatant example of Wikipedia’s anti-Israel bias can be found on the platform’s Arabic edition, which is headed by Wikipedia’s logo draped in the colors of the Palestinian flag and a statement reading: “In solidarity with the rights of the Palestinian people, no to genocide in Gaza … no to killing civilians…”
Any attempt to combat anti-Israel bias on Wikipedia is quickly quashed.
Anti-Israel editors gang up on pro-Israel users and drown them out with superior numbers. For instance, when some editors proposed adding the qualifier “Hamas-run” to describe the Gaza Health Ministry, which is 100% controlled by Hamas, other editors voted by a 3:1 margin to ban it.
Challenging the anti-Israel narrative can even get users banned from the platform. In one case, Magde Qasim, an Israeli Druze, attempted to edit misinformation in different articles. He said, “I would correct very small issues; for instance, some Arab cities inside Israel were written under Palestine. So, I changed it to Israel and soon found out that it was changed back again to Palestine. They ended up blocking my account for two years.”
Jewish groups have also attempted to combat Wikipedia’s anti-Israel bias to no avail. Earlier this year, more than 40 Jewish groups penned a letter to the Wikipedia Foundation calling on it to override a decision by editors to declare the Anti-
Defamation League an unreliable source on Israel and Zionism.
In response, the foundation responded, “This letter represents a misunderstanding of the situation and how Wikipedia works,” referring to its practice of not interfering in decisions made by its volunteer editors, despite the fact that this decision violates Wikipedia’s own “Neutral Point of View” policy.
Wikipedia has failed to enforce its policies.
The organization’s executives have irresponsibly ignored not just the policy on neutrality but other policies designed to prevent groups from dominating content on Wikipedia to promote a specific agenda.
These policies include prohibiting editors from “engineering ‘victory’ in a content dispute,” discouraging tag teaming when “editors coordinate their actions to circumvent the normal process of consensus” and forbidding canvassing — secret coordination with the “intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way.”
The cynical use of Wikipedia by pro-Hamas radicals to delegitimize Israel destroys the platform’s credibility.
Those who control Wikipedia have the power to stop the insertion of hateful bias, but until now, they have not done so.
Wikipedia cannot be trusted on any topic related to Israel. If it fails to act against extremists hijacking the platform to promote a narrative that delegitimizes the Jewish state, then users should abandon it and patronize more reliable sources. Those whose donations fund the platform would do better by supporting more credible media outlets.
Jason Shvili is a FLAME contributing editor. To reach him, write: Columnist@TheJewishStar.com
JAson shvILI
A Shabbat Project celebration in Woodmere this month.
The Shabbat Project, Shield Communications
We are Jews. We are Zionists.
We are the indigenous people of the land of Israel. Zionism is our national liberation movement.
Seventh Step outside the Machpelah. For 700 years, before Hebron was liberated, that’s as close as Jews got to this holy site, where our matriarchs and patriarchs are buried.
Photo by Ed Weintrob
Freedman… Weinreb…
Continued from page 17
deals with cases involving conflicts of ownership. Two individuals are arguing over the ownership of a parcel of land. Each claims to have inherited the property, but neither can prove ownership — they have no witnesses, no contract, and not even a provable status of possession. So they ask the local rabbi to resolve their dispute.
The rabbi, after hearing both sides, responds: “I have heard both of your arguments neither of which is stronger than the other, so let’s ask the land!” Whereupon he bends over cupping his hand to his ear as it were, trying to “hear” what the land has to say.
“The land says it’s not yours, and it’s not yours; you’re its!” he declares. In other words, we don’t really own anything in this world; if anything, the world owns us. (For you are from the dust and you will return to the dust — Bereishit 3: 19.)
A close reading of the verses in our parsha indicate that the Hittites don’t really take Avraham’s desire for a burial plot seriously. After all, who is Avraham? An old man with one son who is not even married and a crazy system of belief that no one in the world has bought into. They offer to give him the land for free, perhaps recognizing that eventually they can reclaim it for own purposes, once Avraham, already an old man, is gone.
But much as the Torah is reminding us that in the jubilee year property and ownership is not what lasts, Avraham is making a point here — we are only temporary dwellers on this earth and are merely strangers and travelers passing through. Eternity is about the things we accomplish that can never be undone — the kindnesses we do, and the meaningful life messages we leave behind for our children and those we loved to carry on.
In short, all that Sara came to represent.
Hence we bury our dead in the ground, because the earth cannot be destroyed.
One of the great challenges in life is to remember that money, power — all the “things” we accumulate — are not what bring us happiness. Really lasts is the good that we do, and the people we touch.
The burial plot Avraham acquires is actually the first time a Jew actually owns a portion of the land of Israel. In the diaspora, despite the growing acceptance of Jews, we would do well to ask ourselves: are we really toshavim, full-fledged citizens accepted as equals, or are today’s “Hittites” reminding us that we are really gerim, strangers?
Perhaps there is only one place a Jew can truly be at home, and that’s what makes Israel such a powerful and meaningful place for Jews. It is the same home where, 4,000 years ago, the first Jew made a statement challenging us all to consider what really matters in this world.
Rabbi Freedman is rosh yeshiva at Yeshivat Orayta in Jerusalem. To reach him, write: Columnist@TheJewishStar.com
Mazurek…
Continued from page 17
forefathers, to Avraham, to Yitzchak and “U’vacharta ba chayim (you shall choose life),” the choice is yours!
“Ki Hu chayecha v’orech yamech (for He is your life and the length of your days),” He, Hashem is your Life!
As we read Chayeii Sarah this week, and in several weeks parshat Vayechi, we must remember we are a unique people. Though we have faced more death and persecution than any people, we continue to love life, to yearn for life, even as we sometimes must bring terrible death and destruction to our enemies to defeat them for our own self-preservation.
In short, choose life, so that we, our children, all of Israel, and yes, all of life-loving humanity may live.
Continued from page 17
Frankfurt, Germany, who wrote his commentary on the Pentateuch/Chumash in German, but which I study in a Hebrew translation.
Rav Hirsch is often very creative in his interpretations, sometimes daringly so.
He comments on the phrase “and Avraham came to eulogize and weep.” “Came from where?”, he asks.
This is a question that many much earlier commentators ask as well, and they generally answer that Avraham had come from Beersheba to Chevron, since, as we read in the final chapter of last week’s parsha, he had returned to Beersheba directly from the akedah, from the “binding of Isaac.” It was in Beersheba that he learned of Sara’s demise in Chevron, and so he “came” there to bury her.
Rav Hirsch strongly rejects this approach. He insists, as was his wont, that the word vayavo/”and he came” often means “he withdrew”, or “he secluded himself”. Thus, Avraham withdrew from the public that sought to comfort him so that he refused to address an audience. Instead, his “eulogy” was his own inner response to his personal tragedy, and he secluded himself in a place where he could tearfully and emotionally grieve for his life-partner. The “eulogy” was not a performance before an audience. Rather, it was his self-expression of torment. His “tears” were shed in the presence of the One Above alone. Only in his own private space could he “shed tears” and “eulogize” his beloved, and only afterwards could he “go public” and negotiate for a proper burial place for Sara.
Rav Mecklenburg takes an entirely different approach. He reports that in his experience, the mourner first “sheds tears” and only afterwards presents a “eulogy.” First, there is a deeply emotional and wholly personal reaction, tears of pain and heartful grief. Then, the mourner composes himself somewhat and formulates a verbal description of the person he lost so that others can know who the deceased was in his or her lifetime.
But Avraham reverses the sequence: first, the relatively calm public assessment of his wife’s life of great account, and only then, the bitter tears of personal loss and bereavement. “Why this reversal?” asks the author of HaKsav V’HaKabbalah, the rabbi of the town of Koenigsburg.
His answer is a profoundly religious one. Avraham, he correctly assumes, faithfully believed that “the righteous in their death are greater than in their lifetimes” (Chulin7b). His priority was to convey Sara’s life of piety, compassion, and achievement to a wide audience. That was and remains the purpose of a eulogy in Jewish tradition. It is an assertion of the valuable life that the deceased lived and not primarily an expression of grief.
Only after the eulogy accomplished its mission did Avraham allow himself a tear or two, and perhaps, suggests Rav Mecklenburg, that is why the letter “kaf” in the word “to weep for her”/v’livkosa is reduced in size in the Torah scroll.
Rav Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin, the Dean of Volozhin, the “mother of all yeshivos,” and author of Haamek Davar, has yet another approach to our concern. He sees the “tears” as the mourner’s expression of his or her own reaction to the loss of a loved one, and the “eulogy” as a kind of biography of the deceased for the benefit of those who did not know much about the person who just died.
Avraham did not “lose” Sara when she passed away. She left behind a son, a heritage, a model of a way of life. His tears were thus secondary to the educational message that he felt he needed to convey and that he knew that Sara would have wanted him to continue to propagate.
Sara, although no longer among the living, is nevertheless a “person in this parsha.” She plays a vital role even after her demise. She is still “present” for Avraham, for his very wide and diverse audience, and for her beloved son Isaac, who attributes the joy he experiences with his new wife to the fact that she reminds him of his mother!
To reach Rabbi Weinreb, write: Columnist@ TheJewishStar.com
Billet…
Continued from page 17
ship is established.
The Seforno suggests that the word vayakam indicates the use of a document. The Meshekh Hokhmah concludes his explanation suggesting that the first appearance of vayakam demonstrates the field going out of Ephron’s ownership, while the second vayakam appears after Avraham actually buried Sara, an act of chazakah — establishing his eternal rights to the property.
It is this chazakah which is reaffirmed every Shabbat Parshat Chayei Sara in Israel and which is the basis for the Jewish People’s intent to never leave our eternal homeland.
The security situation in Israel today is a reflection of an irony of huge proportions. Two peoples lay a historical claim to a national homeland, in a land that has a very troubled history. One people are more directly connected to the exiled nation that had an established nationstate, while the other claims ancestry to nomads who never had a state but who may or may not have actually lived in the land.
There is no question as to which of these peoples did more for the growth of the land and the establishment of a modern culture over the last 100 years. And, as indicated by the lost opportunity that the 2005 Gaza withdrawal showed the world, the other people are more interested in maintaining a culture of destruction than a culture of productivity.
There is a tale told about Golda Meir — I cannot ascertain its veracity, but the message has nonetheless proven true — that she was pressed at a talk at Princeton in the 1970s as to why UNESCO had rejected Israel and accepted an affiliation by the PLO.
Ms. Meir answered, “As you know, UNESCO stands for the United Nations Education, Science, and Culture Organization. We must assume that these gentlemen, after due consideration, came to the conclusion that the PLO has more to contribute to education, science, and culture than Israel does.”
We are standing on the shoulders of the chazakah established by Avraham. With G-d’s help, we pray we will see the day when the world will acknowledge that the people who have the rights to the land are those who have established a true rebirth in the land.
The Jewish people have proven the ability to bring the best out of the land, something the Arabs have never done throughout history, and that like Hevron, the land belongs to the descendants of the Prince of G-d who was gifted the land by G-d and who, in turn, bequeathed to his children the ability to make the desert bloom.
Avi Billet, who grew up in the Five Towns, is a South Florida-based mohel and rabbi of Anshei Chesed Congregation in Boynton Beach. This column was previously published. To reach Rabbi Billet, write: Columnist@TheJewishStar.com
Tobin…
ish establishment. Groups such as the Anti-Defamation League, which should have been at the ramparts challenging haters of Israel, were hampered by their past endorsement of the same toxic woke ideas that have been fueling the surge in Jew-hatred.
Perhaps the real problem for those seeking to mobilize American Jewry is that they remain hampered by an institutional need for consensus that allows those least interested in a robust expression of support for Israel’s war against Iranian-backed Islamist terrorists to have a veto over the message that is being sent to the administration and the world.
This is a terrible mistake — not just because it undermines Israel at a moment when it needs its foreign friends and the Jewish community to speak up against the smears and blood libels that the left is hurling at it. It’s wrong because it misunderstands the current dilemma facing American Jewry.
All too many leading Jewish groups are still
stuck in the mindset of supporters of a Middle East peace process begun in Oslo in 1993 that was literally blown up by the Palestinian terrorism in the Second Intifada from 2000 to 2005, and whose death was further confirmed by what happened in Gaza after Israel withdrew every soldier, settler and settlement from it in the summer of 2005.
The atrocities of Oct. 7 were the final confirmation for anyone who is paying attention that the old arguments about settlements, borders and a two-state solution that divided Israelis and American Jews for decades are officially obsolete. The only argument about Israel that matters is the one about whether one Jewish state on the planet is one too many or if the plans of Israel’s foes for Jewish genocide (for which Oct. 7 was only the trailer) will be allowed to be fulfilled.
Yet instead of focusing on the debate over the legitimacy of Israel and its right of self-defense, the Jewish community seems more worried about being labeled as accomplices to Netanyahu and the lies about “genocide” in Gaza. Rather than taking a bold stand in favor of the justice of the Zionist cause, some are on the sidelines judging the Jewish state’s life-and-death battle against enemies that want to slaughter all Jews and defeat the West.
Just as bad is the fact that many in the community are more worried about virtue-signaling their opposition to the incoming second Trump administration. That’s a stand that is all the more mistaken given the clear pro-Israel tilt of all of Trump’s choices for his foreign-policy team.
Failure of leadership
The result of all these factors is an American Jewish community that has demonstrated an inability to stand up for itself against an unprecedented attack from antisemites and Israel-haters that threaten its own security more than that of Israel.
Institutions that fail to lead in a crisis have lost their credibility and reason to exist. If the organized Jewish world and its establishment can’t shed their consensus-ridden inability to act decisively in defense of both Israel and American Jewry, then they won’t have to wait for their critics to topple them. They will have destroyed themselves.
If an empty ballpark is an apt metaphor for the failure of American Jewry, then it is the fault of those who have been tasked with leading the community. That’s a tragedy since American Jews currently have neither the time nor the resources to build new institutions to represent them. In the coming year, it’s up to the Jewish establishment to prove that it is worth saving.
We can only pray that they succeed; however, given the evidence of the last 12 months and so much else that has happened in recent years, it’s hard to be optimistic about their future.
To reach Jonathan S. Tobin, write: Columnist@ TheJewishStar.com
Continued from page 20
Our response to those who hate us should be to embrace our traditions more fully, to celebrate our identity more openly and to strengthen our communities more intentionally.
•Every Shabbat dinner table is a fortress of resilience.
•Every challah braided is a link in our chain of tradition.
•Every candle lit is a beacon of hope and defiance.
Shabbat isn’t just a set of rituals — it’s our weekly reminder that we belong to something greater than ourselves. Shabbat is our declaration that we will not only survive but thrive. The call to action is clear: Make Shabbat your personal response to antisemitism.
Whether it’s joining a community dinner, hosting friends for the first time or simply lighting candles with your family, each act of Shabbat observance strengthens our collective resistance. Because, in the end, the strongest response to those who wish to extinguish our light is to make it burn brighter.
Jamie Geller, a producer and marketing executive, is Aish’s chief media and marketing officer. To reach her, write: Columnist@TheJewishStar.com
