Michael Vick and Forgiveness
White and Fluffy has some strong views about Michael Vick!
If you can't trust me....
Friday, December 31, 2010
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Friday, December 24, 2010
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Parsha Shemot - What's in a name?
A name is important in so many ways. In the case of God’s name, we are struck by the notion that God is infinite and unknowable, so that we can never really know his name. We can only name him by his attributes and his deeds. As a judge he is Elohim. When he wages war he’s called Adonai Tzevaot. When he tolerates the sins of Man he is El Shadai. There are actually seven holy names for God, but let’s leave this where it is.
When Moses asks "What shall I tell the Israelites your name is?", God responds “tell them that my name is Eh-he yeh,” which means “I am”. Now in this case, God is not being described by one of his attributes, but with his essence, his eternality. Interestingly, this name is not considered by our sages to be one of God’s holy names.
But what about us? Are we infinite and unknowable as well? Maybe not, but at a minimum, we are at least a little mysterious.
Our names generally come from our parents. Sometimes they are what they hope for us – like my son Asher (the laughing one). Sometimes we are just named for dead relatives – good or bad.
And we can add to our names in some cases. We can be MD’s,PHD’s,Rabbi’s,LLD’s, Patrolmen, Detectives, etc. But do those additions really tell anyone more about our essence? Not a lot.
In my case I am without any additions. I am Mayer Zusha ben Eliezer ha Kohain – or just Marc Stanley Bromberg. Oh wait a minute – I’m a Kohain. Someone who has only one chance in seven to get called to the Torah. Is that my essence? I think not. Is it my identity?
Maybe – if someone calls out “hey Mayer-Zusha!” – I will certainly turn around, wondering who knows me so well that they know my Jewish name.
If they look at my English last name, they might guess that I am Jewish.
I hope it’s not my social security number – even though in these days it seems to be the most important or inescapable.
I certainly hope that no one tries to name me by my attributes. Would I be…
• The Impatient One,
• The Intolerant One,
• The Bossy One,
• The Loving One,
• The Cheap One
I’m sure that those who come into contact with me have some good ideas (for instance Josh might think of me as “The Rambling One”.)
But at this point I would guess that only God and my wife could name me by my true attributes (and I hope that neither of them are talking).
But nevertheless, I think we should all think about ourselves as though our names did include our attributes, because in many ways we will be known by those attributes and our deeds. To our spouses maybe, but to God certainly.
So I submit that we have to be our names, and continue to be those names, as we will ultimately be known. Shall we be?
“The Just”
“The Wise”
“The Loving”
“The Kind”
or “The Jerk”
“The Goniff”
“The Brutal”
“The Unfeeling”
Think about what you’d like your name to be. And be your name.
When Moses asks "What shall I tell the Israelites your name is?", God responds “tell them that my name is Eh-he yeh,” which means “I am”. Now in this case, God is not being described by one of his attributes, but with his essence, his eternality. Interestingly, this name is not considered by our sages to be one of God’s holy names.
But what about us? Are we infinite and unknowable as well? Maybe not, but at a minimum, we are at least a little mysterious.
Our names generally come from our parents. Sometimes they are what they hope for us – like my son Asher (the laughing one). Sometimes we are just named for dead relatives – good or bad.
And we can add to our names in some cases. We can be MD’s,PHD’s,Rabbi’s,LLD’s, Patrolmen, Detectives, etc. But do those additions really tell anyone more about our essence? Not a lot.
In my case I am without any additions. I am Mayer Zusha ben Eliezer ha Kohain – or just Marc Stanley Bromberg. Oh wait a minute – I’m a Kohain. Someone who has only one chance in seven to get called to the Torah. Is that my essence? I think not. Is it my identity?
Maybe – if someone calls out “hey Mayer-Zusha!” – I will certainly turn around, wondering who knows me so well that they know my Jewish name.
If they look at my English last name, they might guess that I am Jewish.
I hope it’s not my social security number – even though in these days it seems to be the most important or inescapable.
I certainly hope that no one tries to name me by my attributes. Would I be…
• The Impatient One,
• The Intolerant One,
• The Bossy One,
• The Loving One,
• The Cheap One
I’m sure that those who come into contact with me have some good ideas (for instance Josh might think of me as “The Rambling One”.)
But at this point I would guess that only God and my wife could name me by my true attributes (and I hope that neither of them are talking).
But nevertheless, I think we should all think about ourselves as though our names did include our attributes, because in many ways we will be known by those attributes and our deeds. To our spouses maybe, but to God certainly.
So I submit that we have to be our names, and continue to be those names, as we will ultimately be known. Shall we be?
“The Just”
“The Wise”
“The Loving”
“The Kind”
or “The Jerk”
“The Goniff”
“The Brutal”
“The Unfeeling”
Think about what you’d like your name to be. And be your name.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Turn The Other Cheek? Whose Cheek?
So what would you do if someone you knew was hurtful to someone you loved?
Easy - you'd take care of it right?
But what if the person you loved didn't want you to do anything about it?
And what if the hurtful jerk was married to a dear friend?
So the pressure is on.
It's never easy to rise above the fray.
But it's even tougher when you wind up rising up to a level where you can more easily see your loved one's pain and the jerk apparently benefiting. And when it would be so easy to settle the score (or so you think).
Easy - you'd take care of it right?
But what if the person you loved didn't want you to do anything about it?
And what if the hurtful jerk was married to a dear friend?
So the pressure is on.
It's never easy to rise above the fray.
But it's even tougher when you wind up rising up to a level where you can more easily see your loved one's pain and the jerk apparently benefiting. And when it would be so easy to settle the score (or so you think).
Sunday, December 12, 2010
American Jews and Israel
In the past few months I've heard and read a lot about the controversy among American Jews about whether or not they should criticize the Israeli government for it's problems and decisions - mostly as they apply to the "Peace Process" and to the treatment of non-Jews and also the apparent dominance of the ultra orthodox in setting Israeli policy that affects all Jews.
On the one side there is the apparent position of AIPAC which presents an "Israel - Right or Wrong" approach. On the other is J Street which feels comfortable criticizing the Israeli government whenever it sees their behavior to be below the standards they would hold Judaism up to. J Street is primarily a liberal organization (in terms of its US political orientation) and AIPAC leans more to the right.
Concern about alienating young American Jews is frequently cited as a rationale for supporting the positions of J Street, since most young American Jews are liberal. Many young Americans (regardless of religious affiliation) tend to lean towards the liberal side. Were responsible adults to base their decisions on not alienating their children, I submit we would be in even more trouble as a nation than we appear to be. So I think this is a silly argument. I don't think we should ignore our children's points of view, but we can't base our actions on it.
As to being comfortable criticizing the Israeli government's behavior, I think that's fine, as long as we don't try to interfere in their internal politics (nor believe we have the right to), any more than we as Americans would welcome Israeli meddling in our politics.
Most importantly, I would like to address the "settlement" issue. The United States government has been critical of new settlements because they say it hurts the peace process. While I am sure that is superficially true (all one has to do is hear that Palestinians refuse to negotiate while Israel continues to build new settlements), in fact I would question whether it makes any difference whatsoever. Israel has given up land before, and it has made no difference. Does anyone believe that this time it will? Or is it simply an accommodation Israel needs to provide to keep the Palestinians at the bargaining table? If that is the case we need to look at ourselves and our government in the eye and question what the true issues dividing the Palestinians and the Israelis are and focus on those. Since settlements don't seem to have a thing to do with it, focusing on them seems to be just setting up another straw man.
As to the Haredim's apparent control over so many religious issues important to worldwide Jewry, I believe that Israel's structure as a state as well as a Jewish homeland means they will have to work out the best way to handle these things. I find many of their decisions questionable at best, but I think Israel will have to work its way through these, and hopefully come up with solutions that will be best for all Jews. In the meantime, unless I am prepared to move there and become an Israeli citizen I will pray they reach the right conclusions, and will continue to feel comfortable criticizing or praising the Israeli government's actions in those areas, but recognize that my opinions are only that - that I don't get a vote.
No matter how high a road I try to take on judging the Israeli government, I can't do it in isolation from my judgement on how the Palestinians are running their side of things.
On the one side there is the apparent position of AIPAC which presents an "Israel - Right or Wrong" approach. On the other is J Street which feels comfortable criticizing the Israeli government whenever it sees their behavior to be below the standards they would hold Judaism up to. J Street is primarily a liberal organization (in terms of its US political orientation) and AIPAC leans more to the right.
Concern about alienating young American Jews is frequently cited as a rationale for supporting the positions of J Street, since most young American Jews are liberal. Many young Americans (regardless of religious affiliation) tend to lean towards the liberal side. Were responsible adults to base their decisions on not alienating their children, I submit we would be in even more trouble as a nation than we appear to be. So I think this is a silly argument. I don't think we should ignore our children's points of view, but we can't base our actions on it.
As to being comfortable criticizing the Israeli government's behavior, I think that's fine, as long as we don't try to interfere in their internal politics (nor believe we have the right to), any more than we as Americans would welcome Israeli meddling in our politics.
Most importantly, I would like to address the "settlement" issue. The United States government has been critical of new settlements because they say it hurts the peace process. While I am sure that is superficially true (all one has to do is hear that Palestinians refuse to negotiate while Israel continues to build new settlements), in fact I would question whether it makes any difference whatsoever. Israel has given up land before, and it has made no difference. Does anyone believe that this time it will? Or is it simply an accommodation Israel needs to provide to keep the Palestinians at the bargaining table? If that is the case we need to look at ourselves and our government in the eye and question what the true issues dividing the Palestinians and the Israelis are and focus on those. Since settlements don't seem to have a thing to do with it, focusing on them seems to be just setting up another straw man.
As to the Haredim's apparent control over so many religious issues important to worldwide Jewry, I believe that Israel's structure as a state as well as a Jewish homeland means they will have to work out the best way to handle these things. I find many of their decisions questionable at best, but I think Israel will have to work its way through these, and hopefully come up with solutions that will be best for all Jews. In the meantime, unless I am prepared to move there and become an Israeli citizen I will pray they reach the right conclusions, and will continue to feel comfortable criticizing or praising the Israeli government's actions in those areas, but recognize that my opinions are only that - that I don't get a vote.
No matter how high a road I try to take on judging the Israeli government, I can't do it in isolation from my judgement on how the Palestinians are running their side of things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)