text:
Charles Barron
Charles Barron was born on 7 October, 1950 in Brooklyn, New York, United States, is an American activist and politician. Discover Charles Barron's Biography, Age, Height, Physical Stats, Dating/Affairs, Family and career updates. Learn How rich is He in this year and how He spends money? Also learn how He earned most of networth at the age of 70 years old?
Birthplace Brooklyn, New York, United States
We recommend you to check the complete list of Famous People born on 7 October. He is a member of famous Politician with the age 72 years old group.
Charles Barron Height, Weight & Measurements
At 72 years old, Charles Barron height not available right now. We will update Charles Barron's Height, weight, Body Measurements, Eye Color, Hair Color, Shoe & Dress size soon as possible.
Who Is Charles Barron's Wife?
His wife is Inez Barron
Wife Inez Barron
Charles Barron Net Worth
His net worth has been growing significantly in 2021-2022. So, how much is Charles Barron worth at the age of 72 years old? Charles Barron's income source is mostly from being a successful Politician. He is from United States. We have estimated Charles Barron's net worth , money, salary, income, and assets.
Charles Barron Social Network
Twitter Charles Barron Twitter
Facebook Charles Barron Facebook
Wikipedia Charles Barron Wikipedia
In March 2020, Barron tested positive for COVID-19.
—Charles Barron during an interview in 2010
In response to the New York City Police Department (NYPD) shooting of three individuals—including the fatal shooting of a 23-year-old prospective bridegroom, Sean Bell outside of a Jamaica, Queens strip club in 2006, Barron made a number of controversial statements, including one that implied that members of Bell's community would be justified in exercising non-peaceful or violent methods in response to his death. Barron has publicly stated "we don't shoot anybody, they shoot us."
On November 4, 2013, Barron announced in a Web Video, that he will run for the State Assembly seat, currently vacated by his wife, Inez, who ran for his term-limited City council seat. Barron said that he will fight Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Speaker Sheldon Silver, and the Democratic establishment to raise taxes and to increase Pre-K funding.
Barron announced that he would seek the 2012 Democratic nomination for the House seat due to the retirement of the long-term incumbent, Edolphus Towns. By mid-June 2012, candidate Hakeem Jeffries had raised $700,000 in campaign donations compared to Barron's $50,000.
On June 11, 2012, former Mayor Ed Koch, Congressman Jerrold Nadler, Councilman David G. Greenfield, Assemblyman Dov Hikind gathered with several other elected officials to support Jeffries and denounce Barron. Barron was described as anti-Semitic, and his support of Zimbabwe ruler Robert Mugabe and former Libya ruler Muammar Gaddafi was denounced. Greenfield described Barron as "a hate-monger and an anti-Semite." Barron responded that such attacks had not been raised when he spoke before Jewish groups in Brooklyn, and that his constituents were interested in discussing "bread and butter" issues, not foreign policy. The candidates differed strongly on charter schools. Barron is one of the charter schools' strongest critics, while Jeffries endorses them.
Barron lost the Democratic nomination to Jeffries, with Jeffries taking 72% for the vote to Barron's 28% on June 26, 2012. Barron refused to congratulate Jeffries, accusing the Jeffries campaign of "a smear campaign [and] show[ing] a lack of character". He added: "They had the media. They called us names — The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, the white media — because we were endorsed by the Amsterdam News and Black Star. We had the Wall Street corporate elite, the Democratic establishment, and the media all against us. But we put the state and nation on notice." Jeffries stated in his own victory speech that "The political pundits said that this was going to be a close race, but that was before the people had spoken."
A month after Cuomo began his term as governor, on February 21, 2011, Barron interrupted a Cuomo speech in Brooklyn, leading the crowd in chants of "tax the rich". He criticized Cuomo's budget proposals, which called for deep cuts in health care and education spending, and his decision not to extend the state's so-called millionaire's tax, which expires at the end of 2012.
On February 3, 2011, Barron was among hundreds of angry parents and students who protested loudly during a hearing closing 12 schools classified as failing. On March 3, Barron celebrated with supporters as they learned that one of their protests had been successful, and that PS 114 in Canarsie would remain open.
On February 3, 2011, the city council discussed allowing a Walmart into Brooklyn, with East New York one of the neighborhoods being considered by Walmart. Barron called Walmart a "roving plantation" and said "There are no slaves in East New York. We will not be your slave workers."
In November 2011, Barron said that he opposed same sex marriage, but at a June 2012 debate declined to state a position on the issue. Earlier in 2010, while running for governor, Barron stated that he was a strong supporter of civil unions, adding, "I voted positively on all legislation in the City Council regarding civil union and gay rights. I believe homosexuals deserve equal protection under the law, like everyone else."
When asked in 2011 about the argument that the fight for same-sex marriage is the modern-day equivalent of the civil rights struggle, Barron answered, "I don't consider it the civil-rights issue of our time. Comparing it to our struggle when we were stolen from Africa, enslaved, murdered, raped, hung, lynched. I'm not even going to give it the same breath as our movement in this country."
In November 2011, after the end of the Libyan civil war, Barron voiced support for Libyan ruler Muammar Gaddafi, stating "Out there, they don't know that Qaddafi was our brother." [Barron] also rejected claims of Gaddafi brutality, stating "People say 'Didn't he kill all those people?' I say, 'I don't know anything. The man was a freedom fighter.'"
On June 14, 2010, Barron announced he had formed a new party, the New York Democratic Freedom Party, and would challenge Democratic gubernatorial nominee Andrew Cuomo. He noted that Cuomo had picked a white politician to run for the position of Lieutenant Governor and that all the other statewide Democratic Party candidates were white. When speaking about Cuomo, Barron said, "He's done nothing to deserve our support; he's hurt the black community. Remember he was with his father, when his father built more prisons than any other governor in the history of New York State. Andrew was with daddy and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree ... Andrew's arrogant, he's just like his father."
In late 2009, Barron intensified his opposition to Quinn, proposing a "Democratic Reform Movement" with City Councillor Tony Avella to shift power away from the council speaker to rank-and-file members. Barron and Avella proposed electing a black or Latino member as speaker to replace Quinn. Barron challenged Quinn for the speakership but was defeated by a council vote of 48 to 1. Quinn then organized a 47–1 vote removing Barron as chairman of the Higher Education Committee. Barron stated that the move to strip him of the committee chairmanship was racist. Quinn disagreed, stating that the Council needed chairpersons "that are unifying forces." In January 2010, Barron ran against Quinn for the position of Speaker, and lost 50–1. During the vote, his supporters shouted "sellout" and "Uncle Tom" to black members who voted for Quinn.
A leader of the Viva Palestina-USA group, Barron in July 2009 joined 200 other participants, mostly U.S. citizens, as the George Galloway led Viva Palestina relief convoy penetrated the Israeli-Egyptian blockade of Gaza. The convoy brought more than $1 million in medical equipment and supplies to Gaza's one and a half million inhabitants. The U.S.-based Anti-Defamation League asked the U.S. Justice Department to investigate the U.S. Viva Palestina group, but the group stated that it would adhere to U.S. law and not provide Hamas assistance, instead delivering its aid to nongovernmental organizations.
In July 2009, Barron stated that the Gaza Strip section of the Palestinian Territories was "a virtual death camp, the same kind of conditions the Nazis imposed on the Jews." 11 months later he stated, "There's too many children and women and innocent men of Gaza dying because you're isolating them and not allowing anything in. It's like having a concentration death camp. It's horrible, and the whole world is and should be outraged."
In 2009, Barron asked that the City of New York compensate the five men wrongly accused in the Central Park Jogger case.
Barron has criticized crony capitalism, calling it a "deeply-rooted illness" within America. Barron wrote a scathing editorial on the $700 billion bailout package in 2008, calling it the "biggest welfare check in the history of the planet". He said it was "a contradiction of capitalism" to give money to Wall Street during a slump while it had said for years that there was "no money for the people."
Barron's name was floated with death threats on NYPD Rant, an internet forum, during 2007. Barron and the 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement called for a prompt investigation, and security detail was increased.
Barron held a mortgage crisis forum in 2007 to address concerns from residents who were in danger of house foreclosure. Barron said the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007 predominantly hurt African-Americans, who were lied to by predatory business practices.
In January 2006, Barron was the only Council member to vote against Christine Quinn for the speaker position. Quinn moved his seat in the chamber to one next to a statue of the third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, whom Barron has criticized. Barron told reporters, "I don't think it was deliberate, but it does bother me to be placed so near Jefferson, who was a slaveholder, a hypocrite, and a rapist."
In 2006, Barron expressed his disaffection from the Democratic Party, disappointed by the large number of cross-endorsements Bloomberg received from Democrats. He said the Party was in need of a "political audit" and had "moved so far to the right that they might as well be called Republicrats." He told the Amsterdam News, "Black folks need to consider a mass exodus from the Democratic Party and build a new party of their own, because the Democrats have turned their backs on them on too many occasions. We should not give any party blind loyalty and support. Instead, we should really form a grassroots, Black-agenda-based third-party option."
In 2006, Barron ran for a House seat representing the 10th district, which includes East New York. He ran against the 24-year incumbent, Democrat Edolphus Towns, and lost by 8 points. Although considered a potentially strong contender in the 2008 Conrgressional election, he chose not to run.
Barron, appearing on the Fox network television program The O'Reilly Factor in April, 2006, stated that opposition to present-day immigration involves skin color. He argued that Germans, Jews, Poles, Greeks, and Italians who immigrated to the United States during the late 19th century were welcomed because of the color of their skin. In contrast, "All of a sudden when the complexion of immigration changes, now it's 'these people'." He stated to host Bill O'Reilly that the original European immigrants had received preferential treatment: "They had enough black people here already that were skilled and couldn't get the jobs that your people [i.e., European-Americans] were able to get." Many viewers responded to the episode, upset that Barron did not concede that white immigrants were also discriminated against.
A self-described "elected activist", Barron ran for Mayor of New York City in 2005. In 2006 he was narrowly defeated by Edolphus Towns in the Democratic Party primary for the U.S. House of Representatives (10th Congressional District). He ran again in the Democratic primary for the 8th District Congressional seat being vacated by Towns, but lost to State Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, 28% to 72%.
Barron entered the race for mayor of New York city in 2005. According to the New York Post, he stated that one of his reasons for running was to redress an unfair balance of power between Whites and blacks in New York City: "White men have too much power in this city". He raised funds and campaigned but in early February 2005, dropped out and threw his support to C. Virginia Fields. His campaign funding amounted to about $49,000, far less than that of some of other Democratic candidates; Fernando Ferrer raised $1.2 million in six months, and Gifford Miller raised $1 million in 6 months. Barron chose to endorse Fields rather than attempt a long-shot campaign. "I think two blacks in the race cancel each other out", he said, indicating a fear that the black vote would be divided and weakened by the choice of two candidates. Barron vowed that he would run again, saying "I will be back. I will be mayor of New York City before I leave this planet. It may be in 2009 or it may not be until 2013, but I will be mayor someday."
Barron says he does not salute the flag or believe in the Pledge of Allegiance, stating that the pledge's assertion that there is equality and justice for all is a lie that is not true for African-Americans. In 2004, he strongly objected to a move by the City Council that would begin each meeting with a voluntary Pledge.
In 2002, Barron was appointed chair of the city council's Higher Education Committee. As chair, he criticized the City University of New York (CUNY) for eliminating remedial courses and raising admission standards, claiming CUNY raised the standards in order to restrict minority student access. He argued that students should not be denied admission to CUNY because of their performance at the pre-college level, adding that when the CUNY ended open admissions the number of black students declined while changes in the proportions of other ethnic groups were minimal.
On September 12, 2002, Barron hosted an event at New York City Hall honoring Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe, whom Barron praised as the liberator of Black Africans in then-Rhodesia. In 2008, he again voiced support for Mugabe, who had allegedly committed crimes and atrocities in Zimbabwe. Specifically, Barron said, "In the year 2000, when he said one farm, one farmer, he was vilified", arguing that Mugabe was popular internationally only while his government "didn't take the land from the whites". He added that in South Africa, whites "still own 80 to 90 percent of the land," which is why international powers support South African leaders such Nelson Mandela. Barron stated he had seen no evidence which tied the Mugabe government to any attacks on supporters of the Zimbabwe opposition.
In 2002, Barron was criticized for stating at a reparations rally,"I want to go up to the closest white person and say, 'You can't understand this, it's a black thing' and then slap him, just for my mental health." Barron explained that the remark was hyperbole and not to be taken seriously.
Barron has twice sought clemency for individuals he described as "political prisoners". For example, In 2002, he asked that Anthony Bottom, Albert Washington, and Herman Bell be released. Although they were convicted for killing two police officers in 1971, conflicting evidence surfaced through COINTELPRO that suggests questionable government tactics in the prosecution of the three men. The bill was hotly debated and rejected. Barron asked in 2005 that Assata Shakur, a fugitive wanted by the federal government, be granted clemency for the alleged 1973 killing of a state trooper.
In 1997, Barron ran for the city council. He attacked the incumbent, East New York councilmember Priscilla Wooten, for supporting Mayor Rudy Giuliani, saying her politics were out of date and she did not take enough initiative for neighborhood and community development. Barron was endorsed by black leaders David Dinkins and Al Sharpton, but he ended up losing to Wooten. Barron ran again in 2001, when term limits prevented Wooten from running. He defeated her son, Donald Wooten, and became City Councillor for the 42nd District. Barron was re-elected in 2005 and 2009, each time with over 85% of the popular vote.
One successful accomplishment of Barron and his allies was preventing the construction by the city of a wood-burning incinerator in the neighborhood. In 1996, Barron and community groups also fought the building of a natural gas generator. Barron said his opposition to the incinerator is what catapulted him into electoral politics.
In 1988, Barron published two children's books: Up You Mighty People, You Can Accomplish What You Will and Look For Me in the Whirlwind, written about the life of Marcus Garvey.
On December 21, 1987, Barron participated in a "day of outrage" to protest racism in the New York City Police Department and local courts. The protest involved blocking traffic during the evening rush hour, including eastbound traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge, as well as stopping subway trains in several stations. More than 70 protesters were arrested; most were charged with obstruction of government administration and disorderly conduct. Among the few who actually stood on the subway tracks included Barron, Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Benjamin Chavis, Rev. Timothy Mitchell, Assemblyman Roger Greene, and lawyer C. Vernon Mason, who were additionally charged with criminal trespass. All were held overnight in jail, which elicited further claims of racial bias. Sharpton, Mitchell and Barron were convicted in February 1990, with Mitchell and Barron being jailed for 45 days. Barron spent another 25 days in jail, with Sharpton, for a protest related to the Tawana Brawley rape allegations.
Shortly after the incident, Barron was appointed chief of staff to the Reverend Herbert Daughtry, chairperson of the NBUF and minister at Brooklyn's House of the Lord Church. In 1983, Barron moved to East New York, where he and his wife founded the Dynamics of Leadership Company. He spoke at many organizations and schools, including Harvard and Yale, teaching principles of negotiation, team-building, emotional intelligence, and leadership. From 1982 to 1987, Barron served as secretary general of the African Peoples Christian Organization (APCO). He traveled across the United States visiting college campuses, churches, prisons and communities "organizing around international, national and local issues."
Barron began his career working as a community activist in the East New York neighborhood of Brooklyn in the 1980s. He became chief of staff for Rev. Herbert Daughtry before running for the New York city council, where he served from 2001 to 2013.
In 1979, Barron joined the National Black United Front (NBUF), and was the founding chairperson of its Harlem Chapter. In 1982, as head of the Harlem Chapter, Barron was arrested with Preston Wilcox from the Institute of African Research because they, with roughly 12 to 20 other protesters, attempted to "forcibly remove" Robert Morris, a white historian, from the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture. Morris had been appointed chief archivist of the center. The members of the group were charged with harassment and criminal trespassing.
In 1969, when he was 18 years old, Barron was recruited to the Harlem branch of the Black Panther Party by a member named Mark Holder. Barron distributed newspapers for the party, and developed an interest in politics. He studied the Third World independence movement and the ideas of African leaders as Kwame Nkrumah (president of Ghana) and Ahmed Sékou Touré (president of Guinea). Barron became increasingly critical of U.S. foreign policy. He opposed the Duvaliers in Haiti, Pinochet in Chile, Marcos in the Philippines, Pahlavi of Iran, and Somoza of Nicaragua. He recalled in 2010, "It was strange, because everybody I was against, America was for."
Charles Barron (born October 7, 1950) is an American activist and politician who currently represents the 60th District of the New York Assembly. Formerly, he represented Brooklyn's 42nd District on the New York City Council from 2001 to 2013.
Barron was born on October 7, 1950. For six years his family lived in Corona, Queens, then moved to the Lillian Wald housing project in Lower Manhattan. He attended Seward Park High School in Lower Manhattan, but left before graduating, but later earned his GED. He went on to attend New York City Technical College (then known as New York City Community College), earning an associate degree, and Hunter College, where he graduated with a B.A. in Sociology.
Charles Barron fans also viewed:
Louis Mermaz
Annemarie Huber-Hotz
Juan José Imbroda
Zdravko Tomac
Stanislaw Mikolajczyk
Giorgio La Pira
T.K. Wetherell
Kalevi Sorsa
Beryl Platt
Friedhelm Busse


As one of the last scratch bakeries, we pride ourselves in the fluffy, delicate texture of our handmade pastries. Truly, these are not something you can pick up just anywhere. So enjoy without guilt - these are not empty calories but a quality eating experience.
Whether its a loaf of fluffy grandma-style white bread for sandwiches, dense rye for amazing grilled sandwiches, cinnamon bread that acts as aroma-therapy as well as morning toast, or cranberry bread for a late night snack - our variety of breads will fill your tastes and needs.
Cranberry Bread Cooled and Ready To Be Wrapped.


text:
The Misogyny of Weiss and Benioff Is a Dark Cloud Hanging Over 'Game of Thrones'
Evangeline Van Houten
Normally, at this point between episodes, we would make predictions as to what's going to happen next on Game of Thrones. These predictions are usually based on the things that influence good writers: history, character arcs, foreshadowing, realistic human behavior, and a smattering of fan service. This week, with season eight, episode four, "The Last of the Starks," all those things have been thrown out the window, and I don't know how to make predictions without recourse to logic, or even to the story's structural integrity.
So, instead, gather round: we're having circle time. Let's talk about how this clown parade ended up coming to town. We all know that, in its final seasons, Game of Thrones has been forced to depart from its source material, given that the book series is incomplete. Still, even before the show overtook the books, there were telltale departures that foreshadowed how the show would end as well as any of Melisandre's prophecies ever did. So let's talk about the dark cloud that hovers over the show: the creators' misogyny.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'll never argue that George R. R. Martin is a perfect feminist, or even a role model for men who are trying to unlearn misogyny. His writing shows an overall respect for women that is ultimately muddled by deeply ingrained negative attitudes about sex and gender. Martin's Cersei Lannister is a complex and compelling character, but she is also the intellectual inferior of most of the men that surround her. Martin's Sansa Stark is not raped by Ramsay Snow, but instead, she is forced by Littlefinger to rewrite her entire personality and literally become a different person to survive. And Martin's Daenerys, even more than the show's version, lets her ruthless ambition undermine all her interpersonal relationships until she is completely isolated. These are problematic tropes…but they've got nothing on the show.
Does anyone remember season one? I know it's been several years, plus an additional two million Trump years, since then, but let's go over a few details. Remember how Dany was forcibly married off to Khal Drogo, who raped her on their wedding night? This is a telling moment when compared to the scene in the book, wherein Drogo seems aware of Dany's vulnerability and goes out of his way to gain her explicit consent, a touching moment that immediately separates him from the brutal men of Westeros in the most positive of ways. You may remember other details: background "lesbians" in Littlefinger's brothel, for example, or the original character Ros, a prostitute who was eventually killed by Joffrey. Why add these things, when there was plenty of rich material with ample shock value that was cut from the books? Why replace an emotionally satisfying and titillating sex scene from the books with a lazily written rape scene?
Because D.B. Weiss and David Benioff have been telling us who they are from the beginning. They've been telling us that their interest in Martin's fantasy world lies not in its expansive complexity, not in the way it explores human nature within a sprawling adventure narrative, but rather in its appeal to a very specific, very dull kind of cishet male fantasy. Sex and violence: particularly, a world in which men express their power through violence, the gorier and crueler the better, and are rewarded by the use of women, which are objects that exist for their aesthetic and sexual gratification. Ros tried to rise above her station as a prostitute and become a political player, and was brutally murdered for it, her naked corpse displayed for Joffrey's enjoyment. Missandei, a character Martin created, was able to escape imperialistic male control with the help of another woman, and flourished with access to freedom and power. Then, on the show (where she was the only surviving female character of color), she died in chains, killed by a man on the orders of a woman who fears Daenerys as the "younger and more beautiful" Queen that was prophesied.
And yes, that prophecy is from Martin's books. That's what allowed Weiss and Benioff to hide their hateful attitudes toward women for so long. "How can you criticize the show when the books do the same things?" defensive fans often ask. But they don't do the same things. Martin certainly has his share of misogynistic moments, (Jon Snow 'inventing' cunnilingus; Lysa Arryn's whole arc; bisexual female characters feeling guilt about lesbian sex and fantasizing about men; Bronn's wife Lollys, whom he married for her money after she was driven insane by the trauma of a gang rape), but he also gives us shades of gray. He finds spaces where his female characters — at least the main ones — can flourish. He builds a background history of Westeros that includes numerous powerful and revered female figures. He gives us large portions of the story from Cersei's, Daenerys', Sansa's, Arya's, and in the early books Catelyn's, points of view. He stumbles, sometimes unforgivably, but he tries. And, because he's a good writer, he doesn't mistake women's trauma at the hands of men for real character development.
So let's get to the scene from this week's episode that people are angriest about: Sansa's conversation with the Hound. In it, the Hound observes that if she had left King's Landing when he offered to help her escape in season two, she would not have suffered at the hands of Ramsay and Littlefinger. Sansa responds that, if she had not been subjected to that trauma, she would still be the "little bird" the Hound once named her. The implication is that Sansa could not have become the strong and intelligent woman she is today without having been the victim of horrific crimes. While some have pointed out that abuse survivors often turn to this logic to comfort themselves, and that there's nothing wrong with that, the framing of the scene undercuts any complexity it might have had. In a word, the scene frames Sansa's statement not as a coping mechanism, but as the objective truth. Sansa was always strong, and the Hound was in a perfect position to say so. He knew her at one of the worst times in her life, when she was a captive and abused child, and he saw the dignity and self-respect with which she conducted herself. So did we all, yet we easily forget that and demonize Sansa for her rigidness in the face of constant pressure to submit politically to Jon and, through him, Daenerys.
We don't have space to go into much detail on how Brienne's character has shrunk in the face of male attention, how the flattening of Daenerys' character makes her current arc feel cheap and forced, or how even Arya's refusal of Gendry — one of the few in-character moments in the episode — came off as a callous dismissal. You were all there. You know you left the episode feeling as though you'd barely been in Westeros at all. And that brings me to our updated prediction for how the show will end.
We spoke last week of how many of the show's prophecies and instances of foreshadowing were undercut by the method of the Night King's death. There is still, however, one thing that has been foreshadowed from the beginning and still seems likely to bear out: that, when it comes to female characters, the showrunners are destined to let us down. The production quality of the show, its excellent acting and juicy political drama, have led us all to be fooled into expecting what the show never promised to deliver. Game of Thrones will have enthralled us all for years, and it will have made ample money, but when all is said and done, it won't have changed a thing. While Martin's books focus on subverting fantasy tropes that have been and continue to be harmful to society, Weiss and Benioff will end the show with a firm reinstatement of a patriarchal status quo.
The only thing left to predict is how they'll do it, and frankly, we're not all that interested.
Daughter of a high school English teacher and an English professor, Evangeline is a survivor of Academia and an aspiring elegant person. She lives in St. Louis with her family and a lot of books.
'Game of Thrones' Season Eight, Episode Six Recap: Queen of the Ashes
Valar Misogynis: 'Game of Thrones' Season Eight, Episode Five Recap
'Game of Thrones' Season Eight, Episode Four Recap: Cold As Ice
Cersei Is the Real Winner of the Battle of Winterfell — But Will She Get Her Elephants?
The Night's Over: 'Game of Thrones' Season Eight, Episode Three Recap
We Might See Some Old Friends at the Battle of Winterfell

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Description The Current Trends in Biomedical Engineering & Biosciences is an Open Access journal publishing Original research articles, Reviews, Mini reviews, Short communications, Opinions and Letter to editors. The Journal is enthusiastic in the development and dissemination of knowledge concerning Biomedical Engineering & Biosciences: seeks to close the gap between engineering and medicine, coalesce the design and problem solving skills of engineering with medical and biological sciences which helps in development of sophisticated instruments which are used for the advance health care treatment, including diagnosis, monitoring, and therapy. Bio sciences cover the significant developments in the broad field of biology and biological aspects of living organisms. It includes the topics Animal Sciences, Cell Biology and Life Sciences.


Last Sunday we loaded the qamotiq with our dog Sola and headed 15 km out towards Angiuqqaaq, Boss Mountain. There's a great "ski bowl" area we found a few weeks ago that retains good conditions and offers tons of great skiing (in Baffin terms). Also, there are few rocks (yay). We were accompanied by other ski nuts from town: Kendra, Devin, Jerr and Lee. And a few more dogs. This was the largest gathering of skiers and ski dogs we've had in a while. Conditions were beautiful despite weeks of very dry conditions. Everywhere else the snow has turned hard - but not in this area. We called it Icing Bowl because it's sugar sweet.
Everybody had a blast and the dogs were completely exhausted - at least our dog was - after doing laps on the hill. Personal highlight: dropping off a few cornices with Devin, nothing like in ski movies but exciting nevertheless. More of that to come, hopefully.
I experienced a slight epiphany after performing ski maintenance. What a difference! All we did was clean the bases and sharpen the edges. In our world, that's considered "tuning" because we never do anything with our skis except drive them on rocks. I think I'm going to tune a bit more, perhaps even put some wax on.
Sola: pooped after skiing. I had to lift her off the snow to the qamotiq, wouldn't budge.
If you like to ski and you have a dog, I strongly recommend you give this sport a try. So simple to get started, and lots of fun! Kendra and I have been going out together every week. Her little dog, Takuliq, is quite the racehorse!


We have been livng here alm...Review From Modern Messagesubmitted by Hassan S. - Dec 06, 2018 |Recommended: YesWe have been livng here almost 2 years and we found this place quite amazing. All the neighbours are nice, management is awesome too. We have new property manager Lisa she is very nice and friendly. We love to stay here more if the management will not increase the rent. It is a quiet place.
Great Place to livesubmitted by David F. - Nov 30, 2018 |Recommended: YesGreat location, apartment layouts and management.
Management has been friendl...Review From Modern Messagesubmitted by Emily D. - Nov 16, 2018 |Recommended: YesManagement has been friendly and accommodating so far but haven't interacted with them much as of yet. I think it's fantastic that we will have maintenance living in the building.
Great Place To Livesubmitted by Dominique M. - Nov 04, 2018 |Recommended: YesI feel very fortunate to live here. It's a friendly community, an animal friendly building, and, despite being able to hear the neighbors above me a bit too well, the amenities here are great. I love my river and hill view, and I really enjoy they modern vibe of the building. All in all, I love living here.
Major improvement over past...Review From Modern Messagesubmitted by Doug M. - Oct 30, 2018 |Recommended: YesMajor improvement over past management company. I see improvement s starting to happen Lisa and John are great to work with. I look forward to seeing how life here progresses.
Our experience in this apar...Review From Modern Messagesubmitted by Archana P. - Oct 29, 2018 |Recommended: YesOur experience in this apartment has been overall a great experience. The people are kind. One reoccurring issue is the power outage that has happened over a dozen times.
I like the location and man...Review From Modern Messagesubmitted by Bree M. - Oct 26, 2018 |Recommended: YesI like the location and many of the residents, but I feel the quality has diminished for the cost of living there. The gym is outdated, the cleanliness of the building is not as good as it used to be.
Great apartment complex. Wo...Review From Modern Messagesubmitted by Shashank N. - Oct 24, 2018 |Recommended: YesGreat apartment complex. Wonderful amenities. Prime location right in front of the Fox river. Appliances are all new and the rooms get new carpets almost every year.
The building is quiet. The ...Review From Modern Messagesubmitted by Christine G. - Oct 21, 2018 |Recommended: YesThe building is quiet. The tenants my neighbors are friendly and courteous. I have a gorgeous view of the river. The process to move in was very simple.
Disappointed that I pay suc...Review From Modern Messagesubmitted by Jennifer M. - Oct 19, 2018 |Recommended: YesDisappointed that I pay such high rent and then have to pay extra for 2 parking spots have a 2 bedroom and for a cage in garage. Also hope new management keeps the building in good shape. Jose was wonderful. Bring him back.


Push your limits while staying dry on your next mountain bike tour with the 900 Mountain Bike Rain Jacket, designed with expert riders in mind. It's crafted from a waterproof material with watertight seams and is resistant to wear. A cool extra, there's a hole on one wrist so you can see the dial of your watch without having to adjust your sleeve.
Waterproof It has it all: 5000 mm material, cuffs, thermo-bonded seams, watertight zip.
Pockets The chest pocket is secured with a zip.
Ventilation Air circulates through the vents with zip openings under the arms.
Breathability The fabric's membrane is breathable.
Stability Enjoy the elastic at the lower back and the wrists with rip-tab adjustments.
Abrasion resistance The material is resistant to rubbing against vegetation or a hydration backpack.
Waterproofing is a fabric's capacity to prevent penetration of rain water. A fabric's resistance to water pressure is determined by measuring the pressure exerted by a water column in mm (test based on ISO 811 standard). The higher the pressure, the more waterproof the fabric.


The information on the 19.99 DIRECTV, OR 29.99 IS A SCAM . Yes, you said it right, bend over. Sadly, I experienced a similar situation Lin Jan 2016 also. I should have known , IT'S TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE. IN the fine print, it probably covers a multitude of covert fees ,slamming customers ,blackmailing them to keep the flow of money going. Be prepared for the bills..I was shocked..
I have attempted to post this comment. Unfortunately, something is not allowing it. Interesting. Spell check time.
Start submitting complaints to the FCC at https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/requests/new?ticket_form_id=38824.
I did after I was forced to change from my existing AT&T dsl service to uverse. The AT&T shyster that called me told me that equipment upgrades leading to a fiber optic service necessitated turning off the dsl service in my neighborhood. As there are no other options for wired internet service in my neighborhood other than AT&T, I had the choice of switching to uverse or turning it off.
Guess what? No fiber optic upgrade in my neighborhood is planned for the foreseeable future, despite having an AT&T cell tower 100 yards from me that is served by fiber. The functional result of switching to uverse? Marginally better speed, but a real problem with modem reliability, requiring modem re-boots several times a week. AT&T's answer to modem reliability? Bring me another crummy wireless router that has the same problems occur within a week or two of installing it. The financial penalty of uverse? Once the "promotional" one year period is up, I'm paying a third more than I was before I switched.
I finally started complaining to the FCC via the link I provided above, and guess what? I got a call the following week from the "President Of AT&T" office (LOL!!) telling me they were intervening, and the problems would get resolved. Who do these people think they are fooling? It took two complaints over a couple of months, but they finally did something about the line loss issues. The modem problems? They continue. Hey AT&T! If you buy crap, you get crap. Pity you have to foist these crummy modems off on your customers, AND charge them a monthly rental fee of $7.
This is the second time I've been slammed by AT&T (the first was long distance service back in the 90s), so no, this leopard isn't going to change its spots. If there were other wired services available, I'd change in a heartbeat.
I heard that AT&T bought DirectTV a while back to increase their monopolistic position regarding communication services. I hope they choke on it. DirectTV is like cable. It is old school "take what we give you" tv subscription service, which is fading fast as a viable business.
So did anyone find out if you could buy, rather than rent, a modem??
I've had Uverse since October 2010 and I started having issues with the original modem some time over the last year or so. I kept asking AT&T if I could get a new modem, and they kept wanting to send a repair tech out to see what the problem was. They also said there'd be a $99 charge if the problem was inside my home. After I had made numerous calls telling them that I thought the problem might be with the modem -- because it was 5 years old after all -- and they continued to want to send someone out without even trying to replace the modem, I finally told them to just forget it that I would just cancel my service and hung up. A day or so later, an AT&T representative called me and said they would send me a new modem and advised me how to ship the old modem back to them at their expense.
I have also asked repeatedly about purchasing my own modem so that I wouldn't have to continue to pay $7 per month -- to no avail. It is ridiculous that customers don't have the option to bring their own modem for internet service. It's just one more way that one of the largest monopolies gets to milk consumers for something they probably buy from China for a few bucks.
I've read your response, which has been the same to multiple posts on here. I was just stating my opinion. It's sad that customers who want internet and are willing to pay for it each month are forced to pay rent on a piece of equipmnet month after month, year after year. We should have the option to buy the modem, which could not possibly cost what I paid over 5 years. If I continue to keep Uverse internet until I'm too old to care about the internet, I will have paid a small fortune for a piece of equipment that I could have purchased many times over.
I guess I should just be glad that I don't have my wireless plan through AT&T because their wireless plans, compared to 2 of the 4 largest wireless providers, are way too expensive.
AFAIK, very few TV/internet companies allow outright purchase of their equipment. Sure, you can buy a router and sometimes avoid small fees, but set-top boxes and modems are generally company-owned.
You're right that $7/mo can quickly add up, but the benefit there is that when the equipment fails, it can be returned for a newer model. If the total equipment cost is $500, at $7/mo, that will take years to pay off.
Any retentions office I've ever spoken to is happy to give discounts to long-term customers, including AT&T. I have one DVR and two additional STBs and don't pay any equipment fees other than some $4 internet access fee. Call them up and politely threaten to cancel and they'll magically come up with all sorts of deals. I think I'm saving about $50/mo for several years now. Occasionally, they'll even throw in some free HBO/Cinemax or a free upgrade in package.
Set top boxes are becoming obsolete as more online media options are becoming available. This proprietary hardware ISP's are forcing on their customers is ridicuoulus. If I have a compatible unlocked phone for a wireless carrier, I don't have to purchase a new phone when I buy their service. This is pretty silly. I just but service today (current have comcast business) and I'm pretty sure I'm going to cancel tomorrow. Bummer, beem wanting to try fiber out for a long time.
I have some of the same problems. I wouldn't say I was "forced" into switching to UVERSE, but talked into it because "eventually everyone will be forced to switch to it" and that it is so much better & faster than DSL. Got it installed April 2015. I think the kid they sent to install it had never done it. It took him 5 hours to install ! His supervisor came twice during the install & he assured me I had a good tech & I was "in good hands". After the install, I had new holes drilled into the outside of my house with no caulking in them and no effort was made to try to hide the cable against the house. The new box for the cable is in a different room than my computer, therefore meaning long cables leading from one room to the next. I've had trouble with it from the start. I've made many calls to AT&T. One tech supervisor that came out couldn't believe the poor installation, was taking pictures on his phone, and told me he was going to report it to AT&T & fix the problems for me. Then, he went on vacation and nothing was done. He didn't return my call. I was told that I was sold a faster internet service that wasn't even available in my area. When they cut down the speed, it did work better, but the service still goes in & out. Now that I have Uverse, the phone line now goes out as well as the internet. Doesn't make me too happy when I'm talking on the phone and the line goes dead. Every time, I call, AT&T, they want me to go downstairs and unplug the cable to reset it. When you call AT&T and actually get to the point where you can talk to a live person, you talk to someone who sounds like he's in India. They act like they don't want to come fix the problem & threaten that if they find the problem is inside your home you'll owe them a $80 service charge. I've had the techs out many times. Had the modem changed out, and who knows what else they did. Then there's the mandatory $7 monthly charge for the modem. In the past, AT&T seemed to want to please their customers if they had a complaint & they would connect you to a "retention specialist" if you suggested you were going to terminate your service. On my last call to them, the guy didn't care in the least & made no efforts to remedy the problems or offer a discount for crappy service. They don't care anymore, so I am making arrangements for cable installation with another company. I am expecting great service(unlike my nightmare AT&T service)! P.S. : One AT&T tech told me that he would advise that nobody switch their phone to Uverse because it is so unreliable. Tell your neighbors ! Goodbye AT&T !
Att has a reputation of being difficult to consumers. Consumers are bombarded with ads and no so cheap offers. The s saying in the industry is, Do you know why ATT dont claim to be cheapest? THEY ARN'T.
Go online go to the FCC website and file a complaint.
Sorry but we have lobbyed TELCO since 1976. The CSC has numerious filings with the Commision Related to Bellsouth ATT pole attachment fee bid rigging snd others.
I feel for you fosterchildk. I was fortunate that I have been through 2 BICSI installation courses plus Army and USAF telecommunication courses and even a couple of (old) AT&T courses and was able to do most the install myself. I ran/connected CAT5E between my utility room and the AT&T NID. All the AT&T tech did inside was put the RG on a shelf I provided and ran (dangled) the RG VDSL patch cable to MY nearby RJ45 jack. Outside he replaced an old NID and connected it to my CAT5E cable which I had run to it and had used a bushing to keep moisture from getting behind the wall. Once connected I ran speed and quality tests using the DSLReports test APPs and told the tech that it was working fine. He was at my residence maybe 20 mins. I did 95% of the install myself to avoid the issues you had. I also use a 3rd party VOIP provider for my phone service which has been ~99.9% reliable.
FCC just fined Charter for not allowing customers to buy their own modems and their defense was that they weren't charging a fee and were still found to be in violation of federal law. Who wants to file against UVerse?
Today, August 7,2016 ATT charges $10.00 per month rental on Uverse Modem/router. They will NOT sell you one.
They are now charging $10.00 per month.


text:
Six Appeal: Diamond Atelier's super-sano BMW 'DA#6'
Diamond Atelier exploded out of nowhere two years ago with one of the cleanest airhead builds we've ever seen.
Their R80 took the 'sano' look to a new level, and made it onto the cover of Moto Heroes magazine—an extraordinary achievement for a first-time builder.
At the time, we wondered if Tom Konecny and Pablo Steigleder would fade away. So many builders pour all their ideas into one immaculate bike, and then find the well dry.
But the Munich-based duo have kept at it—and just keep getting better. Last year, their third build made it into our Top 10 Custom Motorcycles of 2015. Then a few months ago they turned a Suzuki DR650 into a rakish café racer, and jolted our servers yet again.
This is their sixth build, and they're back into the BMWs. Why?
"We took a break from airheads to see what else could be made into something special," says Konecny. "But we quickly felt the urge to build another 2-valve Boxer."
Konecny and Steigleder tore an early 90s R100R to pieces for the brutal-looking DA#3, and know the bike inside out. But this time they've given the 980cc Bavarian tourer a more classic vibe, returning to the simple lines of DA#1.
"It's a mash-up of other influences we've picked up along the way," says Konecny. "We've put a huge emphasis on balanced proportions, which look even better with the wide 17-inch rims laced onto bronze metal flake hubs."
The classic cafe racer lines that flow from front to back are clear and straight, without any distracting shapes. To get the effect, the gas tank and rear frame were lifted up to a higher level.
There's a levitating effect to the back frame, with no visible means of support. "BMWs have struts attached to a lower part of the main frame, to support the seat," says Konecny.
"But we wanted a super-clean look with a completely exposed rear wheel. So we created a new rear frame that attaches to the stock mounting points of the main frame. It's pretty much a plug-and-play piece, which bolts right in."
This part will also appear on Diamond Atelier's upcoming Mark II Series limited production bike. And most importantly, it's TÜV homologated—meaning that it's strong and safe, and a legal accessory in Germany.
The custom seat and tail unit is made from 0.8mm sheet aluminum. To keep the clean look, the lights and indicators have been moved to the number plate holder, and the cowling is enclosed from the underside. No matter where you look, it's tidy.
With the frame mods, there's little space under the gas tank to hide the electronics. "But we've always hated visible wiring, and especially exposed batteries," says Konecny.
"We were left with a space about the size of an A5 sheet of paper (six by eight inches) and 1.5 inches in height. So we had to think of some special solutions. In the end we made it work, and now everything is neatly hidden." How exactly? "That's a secret!"
Diamond Atelier bikes are obsessively detailed, and this one is no different. As with all builds from the Munich workshop, there's a 0.17 carat diamond set into the CNC-machined triple clamp—which also holds a Motogadget speedo.
There's a custom-made pop-up gas cap, and a titanium exhaust system remanufactured using a Spark exhaust as a template.
But it's what you can't see that impresses the most. There's no starter button: pressing the brake lever in a specific sequence triggers the starter. There's a built-in alarm system that requires no rider input.
And there are no messy cables going to the wheel for the speedometer—signals are now taken directly from the gearbox.
"We never want to do the same thing twice," says Konecny. "We try to come up with a new solution, a new technique or improvement over the last bike. Even if it's as small as one less cable."
The next step for Diamond Atelier is to produce OEM-quality parts using 3D scanners, CAD and CNC mills—TÜV homologated parts that will appear on the upcoming Mark II Series. Which is very good news for owners of older BMW airheads.
Most amazing of all, Konecny and Steigleder are still in their twenties. "Right now, we're working seven days a week and hardly ever sleep—but if people enjoy our work, it's worth it," they say.
We reckon it's definitely worth it—they're raising the bar for the custom scene, applying the kind of detailing and precision found at the top end of the custom car scene.
If you like what you see too, hit up the Diamond Atelier website and get on the wait list for the new Mark II.
Images by Lukas Magerl.
Filed Under Custom Motorcycles TAGGED BMW cafe racer, BMW motorcycles, BMW R100, Cafe racer, Diamond Atelier |
Jul 1, 2016 Chris Hunter
Town and Country: A Honda CB350 Built In The Catskills
A Magnificent V7: 46Works' Moto Guzzi custom


The purpose of this letter is to respond to your letter, that was received by this office on August 4, 1998. This is a private letter ruling pursuant to Kansas Administrative Regulation 92-19-59.
In your letter you stated that your company sells horse feed to various customers. You seek guidance as to which purchasers are exempt from Kansas retailers' sales tax and the proper exemption certificate to be issued by exempt purchasers. I have indicated the proper treatment for each purchaser listed in your letter.
I have enclosed the appropriate exemption certificate for your use. I have also enclosed an appendix that contains the relevant statutes and regulations.


Sand art and sand crafts are so pretty and a lot of fun for children The trouble is buying coloured sand is quite expensive and it often comes in small bottles that really go no where at all. Rather than inspiring children's creativity the limitation of the amount available and the range of colours and cost can actually end up leaving everyone feeling frustrated!
It's actually so easy and cheap to make your own coloured sand, you'll never want to buy it again! And of course you can choose exactly how much or how little coloured sand to make and the perfect colours for your particular sand craft project too!
It's so quick and easy to make Coloured Sand. My children thoroughly enjoyed making a wide range of colours in just minutes. They loved doing it so much they wanted to make a video to show you how it's done. You can see their "How To Make Coloured Sand" video below and there are written instructions too. It's the first time they've tried filming a tutorial and I think they've done a marvellous job. We hope you like it too.
Add 1 spoon of powder paint.
Seal your Ziplock bag and shake like crazy to thoroughly mix the sand and the powder paint. The children love doing this bit!
You'll see the sand has turned a fantastic colour. Now just leave your bag open or spread the sand out on a tray to dry for a few hours. When the sand is wet the colour may transfer to your hands.
Once it's dry it's ready for all your fun sand art and sand craft projects. Perhaps you'll sprinkle it for Rangoli patterns or stick it on to pictures for sand art?
Make Any Coloured Sand You Like!
As Biscuit said in the video you can make any colour of sand you like as long as you have that colour of powder paint. Don't forget you can mix the powder paints together too to give you a greater variety. We found mixing the powder paints together before adding them to the sand worked best.
You can have a great time using your coloured sand for all sorts of sand art and sand craft. Once the sand is dry it will keep stored in its sealed bag indefinitely.
When you're using your coloured sand don't worry if sand spills and the colours get mixed. We still keep all of this mixed sand to use in projects as we think it still looks really pretty.
Brilliant colours and so simple to make – I'd love to let our little one just add some coloured sand to her sandpit and let her just explore it – something for the summer I think!
Fabulous idea and a great video tutorial!
I've always noticed that adding colors attract more attention from the kids (specially the girls), and this post really helps me widen my option. Now I can make this as a mini project for my little girls after going to the beach on weekends. Thanks for the share.
Love the colours…what a great idea – mine would love this.
I had no idea it was this simple and the coloured sand looks so fun and tactile.
What a fun idea! I'm sure the kids will love this!
Oh I am liking this a lot! My girls could get the whole house full of sand i think!
Fab idea, and much easier than I would have imagined – they are naturals on camera too!
Thanks Louisa, they'll be delighted they came across clearly.
What a super idea. With Diwali not so far away, I will try and get the sand and colours so that I can do a rangoli pattern just outside my front door!!
Love the tutorial! What equipment did you use? The sound and picture quality is so clear.
Thanks it's done on my Canon DSLR.
Oh fantastic I may turn some orange for Halloween. Great video – and I think pink is a great choice of colour.
My little boy will be delighted to hear that Pinkoddy.


text:
Dr. Moon speaks at University of Bridgeport
by Aurora Lee-Bridgeport CT
The Family Federation for World Peace and Unification drew a host of local VIP's and an audience of nearly 1200 guests on April 2. Dr. Hak Ja Han Moon, the founder, gave the keynote address entitled "Blessed Marriage and Eternal Life" at 7:30pm in the Mertens Theater of the Arnold Bernhard Art and Humanities Center.
The Unification Campus Ministry invited Dr. Moon to come to UB as one of her 16 stops in America. According to Rev. Krys Hempowicz, the Connecticut director of FFWPU and Unification Campus Ministry, "Mrs. Moon is on her third world tour since 1994 promoting world peace through a blessing of marriage re-dedication to God."
The Moon family and organization have been the source of a lot of controversy in America over the past 24 years and around the world. Last year they officiated over a marriage rededication of over 40 million couples and this spring they will bless in marriage over 120 million couples around the globe. The main event will take place Saturday, June 13 in Madison Square Garden and be broadcast internationally via satellite to 12 other main cities and a number of different nations which will have smaller ceremonies.
At the end of her speech Dr. Moon greeted and thanked each of the local VIP's and gave them a gift of 15 books each entitled "Gathering for Reading and Learning." These texts are translated from Korean speeches of the Moons and their record of over 40 years of Unification Movement activities, persecution, endurance and rise to a new global religion in over 185 nations.
Among the local VIP's were President Richard Rubenstein, Dr. Betty Rubenstein, Bishop Skyers of the Apostolic Faith Church, Mr. Rodney Dennis, representing the ABCD community action agency, Prof. Thomas Juliusburger, director of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, Rev. De Kock of the Creative Word Power Ministry, Rev. Jacob David of the Episcopal Diocese of Newark, NJ, Dr. Zal Velvez, deputy mayor of West Orange, NJ, and Mr. Nicholas Pastor, former police chief of New Haven, CT.
Over 200 UB students, mostly Unificationist, attended the event. "We came out to support Mrs. Moon. She is a role model for young women who are committed to building families and establish themselves as professionals," commented a six-year Unificationist, Naoka Toda, who is a senior in mass communications at UB.
Amie Ceesay, a junior business major who is not affiliated with the FFWPU or the Unification Church, commented, "I was pretty impressed. I didn't find her speech controversial. She spoke about family and life values."


text:
Category: Responsa Literature
The Halakhic Controversy Regarding the Status of Turkey
Posted on November 22, 2018 November 22, 2018 by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel
The question of turkey's status as a permitted bird is a topic that comes up every Thanksgiving holiday season. Nevertheless, many Orthodox Jews I personally know will never eat turkey since there is no tradition permitting it.
Clearly, the Torah does not mention turkey at all since it is native to North America. Based on the criteria the Mishnah provides, the turkey does possess all the kosher signs one would expect of a kosher bird.[1] However, the absence of having a tradition going back many generations is one reason why some pious observant Jews will not eat turkey. This is in accordance with the view expressed in the Shulchan Aruch that ruled, "no bird should be eaten unless there is a mesorah (tradition) that it is a kosher species."[2]
The fact the Torah mentions only twenty-four species of birds implies that only those species are considered impure and unfit for consumption, but the majority of birds are considered permitted. It was only in the 16th century the custom arose not to eat any bird that did not have a tradition permitting it. Since turkeys had already been eaten by Jews prior to that time and therefore the rabbis did not consider it "unkosher."
Although the Torah did not state the specific tokens regarding fowl, the Sages ruled: "Any fowl which seizes is unclean. Any fowl which has an extra talon [the hallux] and a craw and the skin of the stomach of which [can] be stripped off are clean." R. Eleazar b. Sadoq says, "Any bird which parts its toes evenly two in front and two in the back is unclean" (Mishnah Hullin 3:6). It is significant the 4th century Amora named Amemar said, "The law is that every bird that has one characteristic [of cleanness] is clean, that is, if it does not seize prey." Rashi notes the meaning of Amemar's opinion is, so long as it does not seize prey and it has, in addition, one characteristic of cleanness it is clean. However, Tosafot (s.v. tuvu) takes the scholar literally; the fact that it does not seize prey is the only characteristic of cleanness that it need possess (BT Hullin 62a).
So how did turkey suddenly gain a kosher status?
Enquiring minds really want to know!
Some of the rabbis of the previous centuries identified the turkey as the הוֹדוּ תַּרְנְגוֹל "Indian chicken," and thought the bird originated in India. Jews were not the only ones who thought this way. The French referred to turkey as poulet d'Inde ("Chicken from India"), as did the Polish, Ukrainian and Russian countries. It was assumed that the rabbis in India permitted it. However, this was an assumption that could never be proven since it was based on a false assumption: Turkeys did not exist in India!
But as erroneous as this view was, subsequent rabbis realized that people had already accepted it as a kosher bird—especially since it had all the kosher characteristics mentioned in the Mishnah.[3] But here is the real reason why turkeys ought to be permitted—from a scientific perspective, is because turkeys belong to the family of Phasianidae.
From the perspective of taxonomy, the Phasianidae includes a wide variety of birds that include pheasants, partridges, quail, chickens, pea-fowl, the wild turkey, and jungle-fowl. The red jungle-fowl (Gallus gallus), is actually primary progenitor of the domestic chicken. Even if Moses' time did not specifically know about turkey, they were certainly familiar with quail and chicken, turkey, pheasants, peacocks—are only a few examples of birds that are part of the Phasianidae genus.
And for those Jews who worry about turkey, it is strange that nobody—not even in rabbinical times ever wondered as to why chicken was permitted. Chickens did not exist in Mosaic times! But once again, even if the rabbis did not know about the Phasianidae genus, they were most certainly familiar with quail and pheasant. Chickens are kissing cousins of these two birds.
Although pheasant does not appear in the Tanakh, rabbinic tradition[4] identified it with the שְׂלָו (selav) the Israelites had eaten mentioned in Exodus 16:13. The appearance of pheasant and quail are very similar.
The Romans enjoyed eating pheasant. According to one midrashic text, Emperor Hadrian was surprised to discover that pheasants existed in Judea in great supply.[5] The Tosefta mentions pheasants were bread together with peacocks, which is another member of the Phasianidae genus.[6] The Midrash mentions the pheasant as among those rare delicacies, the taste of which the manna could acquire should a person yearn for it.[7]
Historically, the chicken actually makes its first appearance in Israelite art in seals dating back from the late 8th century B.C.E. Poultry and eggs probably did not become common before the 5th-6th-century B.C.E. Some scholars think King Solomon might have served chicken to his royal guests, for the word (barb-rîm = fattened fowl) may be related to the Arabic birbir, meaning, young chickens. As a man of means, King Solomon certainly would have been able to import this delicacy.
The earliest drawing of a chicken is that of a rooster on a seal found at Tell en-Nasbeh, some 8 miles north of Jerusalem, which dates back to about 600 B.C.E. The ancient Israelite diet might have consisted of beef, lamb, roebuck, gazelle, wild goat, and deer, quails, turtledoves, pigeons, partridges, geese, (possibly swans) and ducks—but no chickens! In Mosaic times, the chicken was completely unknown. Let us further add, that there is no Hebrew word for chicken, even the name, which later came to describe it, (tarnegol) is really a Sumerian loanword that Biblical Hebrew later adopted during the Persian period. It was at that time, the Jews began to eat chickens and eggs (2 Esd. 1:30).
Here is another piece of kashrut trivia most of you might be surprised to know. In rabbinical times, the Sages ate peacock as a delicacy. The Talmud records an interesting discussion pertaining to R. Yose the Galilean, who ate chicken with milk. On one occasion: Levi visited the house of Joseph the fowler. They served him the head of a peacock cooked in milk. Levi would not eat it. When he came before Rabbi, he said to him, "How come you didn't excommunicate them?" He said to him, "It was the locale of R. Judah b. Beterah, and I thought, maybe he expounded for them the rule in accord with the position of R. Yose the Galilean."[8]
Like the pheasant, chicken, and turkey, the peacock is also a member of the Phasianidae mishpacha!
[1] "Although the Torah did not state the specific tokens regarding fowl, the Sages ruled: "Any fowl which seizes is unclean. Any fowl which has an extra talon [the hallux] and a craw, and the skin of the stomach of which [can] be stripped off is clean." R. Eleazar b. Sadoq says, "Any bird which parts its toes evenly two in front and two in back is unclean" (Mishnah Hullin 3:6). It is significant the 4th century Amora named Amemar said, "The law is that every bird that has one characteristic [of cleanness] is clean, that is, if it does not seize prey." Rashi notes the meaning of Amemar's opinion is, so long as it does not seize prey and it has in addition one characteristic of cleanness it is clean. However, Tosafot (s.v. tuvu) takes the scholar literally; the fact that it does not seize prey is the only characteristic of cleanness that it need possess (BT Hullin 62a).
[2] Ari Z. Zivotofsky, "Is Turkey Kosher?" The Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society , 35(Spring, 1998):79-110.
[3] See the Responsa Meishiv Davar YD:22 by R. Naftali Tzvi Berlin, a.k.a., Netziv.
[4] BT Yoma 75b mentions a tradition associated with R. Hanan b. Abba said: "There are four kinds of slaw [quails]: thrush, partridge, pheasant and quail proper." Comp. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on Exodus 16:13. Cf. BT Kiddushin 31a.
[5] Ecclesiastes Rabbah 2:8.
[6] Tosefta Kilayim 1:7. The Tosefta considered the crossbreeding of these birds as violating the laws of Kilayim (forbidden mixtures), despite the fact that these birds belong to the same scientific genus. However, The Talmud mentions a rule known as the "hybridization principle." This principle states that kosher species cannot mate with non-kosher species; hence, the fact that a suspect species can interbreed with a known kosher species confirms the kosher status of the unknown species (BT Bechorot 7a). This is a question I will address at another time.
[7] Num. Rabbah 7:4. מי שהיה מתאוה תרנגול או פסיון וכ׳ "whoever desired to eat chicken or pheasant, found the taste of it in the manna."
[8] BT Shabbat 130a.
Posted in Askarabbi, Bible, Responsa Literature, Talmud, Zohar, and Midrash
Rabbi Yosef's Surprising View on Plagiarizing
The Jerusalem Post featured an unusual article about the Chief Rabbi of Holon Rabbi Avraham Yosef, the son of the late Sefardic-Haredi leader, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. His son sits on the Israel Chief Rabbinate's council and commands considerable influence in Orthodox politics in Israel and abroad.
In one of his Moreshet Orthodox website, somebody asked him the following question:
My friend needs to submit university work; she took the work from someone else and asked me to change the wording so that the work will not look like the same. Is it permissible for me to help my friend to re-word the work?" a woman asked.
Rabbi Yosef said that it is permissible to plagiarize and cheat. "[It is] permitted. And it is [fulfilling the] commandment of bestowing kindness, especially if she has a good command of the material," Yosef ruled.[1]
There are several halachic problems with R. Yosef's advice. The primary problem I wish to point out is the issue of ge'nei'vat da'at, which in Hebrew means, "stealing one's mind," which can easily apply to all forms of misrepresentation, taking credit for someone's work. Anytime a person deliberately tries to create a mistaken assumption in the minds of others, this is considered a major breach of Jewish ethics and law. Arguably,ge'nei'vat da'at goes far beyond just lying. It is also a clear violation against bearing false witness—a law that is considered one of the most important of the Ten Commandments.
It is surprising that some medieval scholars thought this is only a rabbinical prohibition, but the verses pertaining to all forms of theft are well-known. In fact, the Tanakh even mentions the crime of plagiarism "See, therefore, I am against the prophets, says the Lord, who steal my words from one another" (Jer. 23:30). More seriously, Rabbi Yosef is misleading others to sin, which is arguably Judaism's most cardinal sins and violates just about every biblical law pertaining to fraud and deception. [2]
Then again, there is a famous rabbinical dictum: R. Eleazar further said in the name of R. Hanina: Whoever reports a saying in the name of its originator brings redemption to the world, as it says, And Esther told the king in the name of Mordecai (Esther 2:22). [3]
The literal meaning of ge'nei'vat da'at in Hebrew is theft of one's mind, thoughts, wisdom, or knowledge, i.e., fooling someone and thereby causing him or her to have a mistaken assumption, belief, and/or impression. Thus, the term is used in Jewish law to indicate deception, cheating, creating a false impression, and acquiring undeserved goodwill. Ge'nei'vat da'at goes beyond lying. Deliberately creating false impressions about one's behavior is also subsumed in this prohibition—whether in words or in deeds. The Tosefta reads:
There are seven kinds of thieves.
(1) The first among them is the one who steals the minds of people.
(2) He who urges his friend to come as his guest, but in his heart does not really wish to invite him.
(3) One who excessively offers gifts to his friend, knowing that the latter will not accept them;
(4) One who opens up barrels for another, that were sold to a shopkeeper;
(5) Anyone who falsifies measures.
(6) One who secretly pads scales . . .
(7) Anyone who deceives people is called a thief, as it is written: "And Absalom stole the hearts of the men of Israel" (2 Samuel, 15:6).[4]
As a case in point, the sages believed that there are seven types of thieves and, of these, the most serious offenders is someone who "steals the minds" of people.
The Talmud discusses the principle of ge'nei'vat da'at and cites the 3rd century scholar named Shmuel, who taught: It is forbidden to steal the mind of anyone, even idolaters." [5] The Talmud observes that Shmuel never expressly stated such a law, but it was deduced from an incident in which his attendant duped a heathen ferryman. Scholars were not sure what exactly happened, but here is how the discussion went: One view asserts that Shmuel once told his attendant to give the ferryman a chicken and the latter thought he was getting a kosher chicken but was actually given one that was unkosher. Another opinion is that the ferryman thought he was receiving undiluted wine but was instead given diluted wine.[6]
The "Lemon Laws" of our country certainly have strong antecedents in biblical and rabbinical laws that demand personal integrity and moral excellence.
After the death of his father, the Israeli rabbinate considered him as a possible successor for his the Sephardic position of Chief Rabbi. However, when the police began Examining alleged issues involving a breach of trust, and other sundry ethical violations, they forced him to withdraw his candidacy. "Yosef was a candidate for Sefardi chief rabbi but his candidacy ended when police began investigating him for alleged breach of public trust and an illegal conflict of interest. Yosef allegedly coerced store and restaurant owners to get kosher supervision from a private kosher supervision company started by his late father and run by one of Yosef's brothers" (JPost). [7]
So what can we deduce from all of this?
Shakespeare perhaps said it best:
"The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul producing holy witness
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart.
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!"
William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, I, iii, 93);
When one examines the religious politics and chicanery in Israel today, we could also add, "The devil can cite Talmud, Halacha, Midrash, Hassidut and Kabbalah as well."
When one considers the amount of fraud that is publicized on the Web involving kickbacks, racketeering, and other numerous criminal offenses, the Rabbi Yosef embarrasses his community as well as every non-Orthodox Jewish community. If we wish to become a light unto the nations of the world, then we had better start becoming a light to ourselves first.
[1] http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-News/Rabbi-rules-copying-work-in-university-is-permitted-in-Jewish-law-346738
[2] Regarding theft:
Exod. 21:16. 22:1-5, 7-13. Le 6:1-7. 19:11, 13, 35-37. 25:17. Deut 5:19. 19:14. 23:24, 25. 24:7. 25:13-16. 27:17. Josh 7:24, 25. Job 20:19-22. 24:2. Ps 37:21. 50:18. 62:10. Pro. 1:13-15. 3:27. 6:30, 31. 11:1. 16:11. 20:10, 23. 22:22, 28. 23:10. 28:24. 29:24. 30:8, 9. Isa 1:23. 61:8. Jer 5:26-29. 7:8-11. 22:13. Ezek 33:15. 45:10. Hos. 4:2. 12:7. Amos 3:10. 5:11, 12. 8:4-6. Mic. 6:10, 11. 7:3. Zach. 5:3, 4. Mal. 3:5,
Regarding Fraud and Dishonesty, see Lev. 19:11; Lev. 19:35–36; Lev. 25:14; Deut. 19:14; Deut. 25:13–16; Deut. 27:17; Job 24:2; Ps. 37:21; Prov. 11:1; Prov. 11:26; Prov. 16:11; Prov. 20:14, 17, 23; Prov. 22:28; Prov. 23:10–11; Hos. 12:7–8, 14; Amos 8:5–6; Mic. 6:10–13; Hab. 2:6.
Regarding the sins involving hypocrisy: Job 17:1, 3–9; Ps. 5:9; Ps. 26:4; Ps. 50:16–23; Isa. 29:13; Isa. 32:5–8; Isa. 48:1; Isa. 58:1–2; Ezek. 33:31–32.
Lying and Falsity: Exod. 20:16; Job 15:35; Job 21:34; Job 24:25; Job 31:33; Ps. 5:6; Ps. 31:18; Ps. 50:19; Ps. 52:2–4; Ps. 55:20–21; Ps. 62:4; Ps. 63:11; Ps. 116:11; Ps. 119:69; Ps. 120:3–4; Prov. 2:12–15; Prov. 6:16–17, 19; Prov. 10:18; Prov. 12:22; Prov. 17:4; Prov. 19:22; Prov. 21:6; Prov. 26:23–26; Isa. 59:2–3; Jer. 5:2; Jer. 7:8; Jer. 9:3–6; Hos. 4:1–2; Hos. 11:12; Zech. 8:16–17.
Causing others to sin: Num. 25:1–2; Neh. 6:13; Prov. 1:10–16; Prov. 4:14–15, 25–27; Prov. 16:29; Prov. 28:10; Isa. 33:15–16.
[3] BT Megilah 15a, Mishnah Avot 6:6
[4] Tosefta Bava Kama 7:8; it is shocking that some medieval scholars think that the prohibition against ge'nei'vat da'at is not Biblical but rabbinical (Semak, 262). Such rationalizations only create scandal in the Jewish community and it also reenforces the impression that all Jews are dishonest in business.
[5.] BT Chullin 94a-b.
[6] Tosefta Bava Kama 7:3.
Posted in Bible, biblical history, biblical theology, ethics, good and evil, Halacha, Responsa Literature, Stories for the Searching Heart, Talmud, Zohar, and Midrash, The Future of Judaism, Theology and Philosophy
The Castration Complex and the Halachic Mind
At one of my classes, some student asked a pretty interesting question: In Orthodox Judaism, can a woman perform brit milah (ritual circumcision)?
A Talmudic Discussion
There is a controversy in the Talmud regarding this very issue between Daru bar Papa who cites in the name of Rav, and Rabbi Yochanan, who differs with Rav. Here is the substance of the argument. Daru b. Papa held that only someone who is obligated to observe the precept of circumcision can act as mohel (the one who performs the circumcision) for others, whereas R. Yochanan felt that a woman can act as a mohelet as indicated in the story of Tziporah (see Exod. 4:24‑26 for details). [1]
In practical terms, R. Yosef Caro, the Halacha follows R. Yochanan and a woman may act as mohelet [2] but Maimonides adds one stipulation: this only applies in the event that a male Mohel is not available, however, she is certainly permitted to do so as a religious duty.[3] However, Rema cites authorities who differ on this matter, and discourages a woman from doing acting in this capacity. In fact, the same passage in the halacha states there is no legal obligation on the part of the mother to even circumcise her child, for the duty falls upon the father.
To the best of my knowledge, there is not a single Haredi or Hasidic scholar living today who would literally endorse such a scandalous halachic position. Were such an opinion like this considered halachically normative, many young Jewish men would choose never to get circumcised.
By the way, some rabbinic commentaries assert that Tziporah merely started the act of circumcision on her son, but it was really Moses who completed it.
Adding a Psychological Perspective
From a psychological perspective, the reluctance to utilize a female mohelet may have something to do with Freud's theory of the "castration complex." Freud theorized that castration anxiety is based on a deep‑seated fear or anxiety in boys and men said to originate during the genital stage of sexual development; Freud asserts that a boy, when seeing a girl's genitalia, falsely presumes that the girl had her penis removed probably as punishment for some misbehavior. The young boy then becomes anxious lest the same happen to him.[4]
It is worth noting that in some cultures, notably 19th century Europe, it was not unheard of for parents to threaten their children with castration, or to otherwise threaten their genitals, a phenomenon Freud documents several times.
Freud's Castration Complex in Patriarchal Religious Societies
Freud's controversial theory may also help clarify why some Halachic authorities are reluctant to go along with a female mohelet. Freud's controversial theory may even help explain why male dominated societies like the Muslim and Haredi fundamentalists fear women's liberation.
The fear that the patriarchal conceptions of masculinity being broken, may explain in part why there exists such an animus directed toward women in these closed societies. Basically, male dominated cultures are fearful of appearing "impotent," and will do almost anything to promote the image of strength and virility–the trademark of mullahs and Haredi Gedolim ("Giants" ) alike (obviously, another example of Freudian wish-fulfillment, or the Nietzschean "will to power").
The unraveling of the patriarchal order frightens men, perhaps on a very primordial level. Some scholars suggest that the ascendancy of the patriarchal religions of antiquity was because of their unconscious fear of the goddess religions. Whether this theory is correct or not, remains to be seen. However, it does fit a Freudian castration theory quite well. Continue reading "The Castration Complex and the Halachic Mind" →
Posted in Bible, biblical history, biblical theology, Contrarian wisdom, good and evil, Hassidic Theology, Heart-Centered Judaism, Holocaust Related Issues, Jewish Law & Technology, Jewish symbolism, Responsa Literature
Who Says an Orthodox Woman Can't Serve as a Rabbi? (Part 2)
Let me apologize if the following material seems obtusely worded. Some rabbis have a serious problem expressing coherent thoughts that appeal to common sense. Clearly, some of our ancestors were lacking in this department. The Talmudic style of reasoning called, "pilpul" ("peppered" didactic reasoning) can appeal to the inner sophist we all have. At times, I like to refer to this style of argumentation as, "rabbinicspeak," and to understand or argue with it, you have to almost think like a mental contortionist.
Continuing with our last thought, how could Deborah in the Bible (Judg. 4:4) serve as a judge, according to the Talmudic and medieval rabbis? The 13th century of scholars known as the Tosfot, try to make sense of the problem posed. To their credit, Tosfot offers at least adds fluidity to much of its interpretation; they are a lot like the girl with the curl, when they are good . . . you know the rest of the story. The same may be said of the Tosfot interpretations.
Ba'ale Tosfot discuss the problem from a variety of perspectives:
A. One answer proposed suggests that that Deborah was a judge because her community accepted her. Tosfot also admits that a woman is considered to be an equal in every matter of jurisprudence, except when it comes to serving as a witness. [1]
B. The Jerusalem Talmud rules that a woman is not allowed to act as a judge [2]; the case of Deborah is the exception–and certainly not the norm. Deborah was chosen by virtue of the Shekhinah resting upon her.[3]
C. Alternatively, one may accept a woman to serve as a judge, just like two litigants may accept a relative to serve as a judge–provided each party agrees. [4]
D. Some scholars say that Deborah could only "teach," but she could not render legal decisions–only men could do that.[5] Continue reading "Who Says an Orthodox Woman Can't Serve as a Rabbi? (Part 2)" →
Posted in American Jewish Issues, Bible, biblical history, Contrarian wisdom, Current Events, Halacha, Israel, Jewish Law & Technology, Judaism and Feminism, Responsa Literature, The Future of Judaism
This past week, the Jewish Star updated its article about the maverick Modern Orthodox named Rabbi Avi Weiss, who recently backed down from a confrontation with the RCA (Rabbinical Council of America) over his decision to offer ordination to a Sara Hurwitz, as an Orthodox rabbi.
Frankly, I am not surprised at all by the series of events that ensued. Surprisingly, Agudath Israel spokesman Rabbi Avi Shafran admitted that the issue whether women may become rabbis or not is not a matter of "Torah law," or not; in his opinion, it is morally wrong. Shafran remarked, "[If] Weiss had the backing of a world-class posek (halachic decisor) he would have a claim that he's not departing [from the mesorah], but he does not have any such backings on the recognized Orthodox spectrum, chareidi or central. He's changing the face of mesorah without anyone of stature behind him."
I am curious: Where does the Torah speak about rabbis in the first place, since "rabbis" did not exist in biblical times?
But wait, it gets more interesting than just that.
Rabbi Shafran further argues that the ordination of a woman ran counter to the concept of tzniut, (modesty). It includes the idea that women are demeaned, not honoured, when they are placed in the public eye," said Rabbi Shafran, "and that a position like the one suggested here is violative of that concept."
Rabbi Steven Pruzansky of Teaneck, NJ, expresses a similar position in his blog: "There are two greater objections: the utter disregard of norms of tzniut, with which ModOs generally struggle, and the corruption of the methodology of psak that transmits the Mesora and Jewish cultural norms and societal values. The only way to consider in this context the compelling Jewish value of "the glory of the King's daughter is within" (kal kevuda bat melech penima- Tehillim 45:14) is essentially to discount it and say it has no relevance in the modern Western world. Thus, this ideal of Jewish femininity – the disinclination to seek a public spiritual role, cited by Chazal hundreds of times – is simply written out of the Torah system. And why ? …" Continue reading "Who Says an Orthodox Woman Can't Serve as a Rabbi? (Part 1)" →
Posted in Bible, Contrarian wisdom, Current Events, ethics, Halacha, Israel, Jewish Law & Technology, Jewish sexual ethics, Judaism and Feminism, Responsa Literature, The Future of Judaism Tagged Contrarian wisdom, Current Events, Halacha, Israel, Jewish Law & Technology, Jewish sexual ethics, Judaism and Feminism, Private: Who says a woman can't serve as a rabbi? Posted by admin in Bible, religious ethics, Responsa Literature, The Future of Judaism
A Halachic Reductio ad absurdum
Posted on March 8, 2010 by Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel
One of my favorite concepts in logic is the reductio ad absurdum (Latin: "reduction to the absurd") argument, which is a logical method of argument that proves the falsity of a premise by following its implications to a logical but absurd conclusion.
"Fortifying the Walls of Conversion" ?
Today, at a conference dedicated to "fortifying walls of conversion," the Israeli Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger expressed moral support for Rabbi Sherman, who annulled thousands of conversions carried out by Rabbi Chaim Druckman, who has been the past acting director of the National Conversion Authority in Israel.
In the past couple of years or more, Haredi politicians in Israel have on a number of occasions tried to oust the rabbi, most notably under the corrupt leadership of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert , but Rav Druckman refused to go and there was nothing his critics could do to force him to leave. Even after his departure from the directorship, Haredi politicians and rabbis are still trying to overturn all of his conversions, which may affect the status of about 15,000 converts in Israel.
Explaining Why Revoking Conversions is Wrongheaded
The concept of revoking a conversion is a recent innovation in rabbinic law. As we have posted in other places, the Shulchan Aruch (Code of Jewish Law) does not sanction revocation of conversions at all. Should a convert return to his former gentile roots, the halacha still considers him as a "sinful Israelite." [1]
Simply stated, revoking conversions is risky business and can cause unspeakable harm to countless innocents who are indirectly or directly triangulated in the rabbinic web the Haredi rabbis have woven.
Reductio ad absurdum in Action
Say, for example, a woman converts from Catholicism and becomes a pious Haredi Jewess at the tender age of 20; she then raises a Haredi family and has 20 children of her own–all who live pious Haredi lives. Now each of those 20 children of the second generation have 20 children of their own, and they too, remain pious and God fearing Haredim.
As time passes, each person of the the third generation of 20 children produces 20 children–all who remain within the Haredi community. Continue reading "A Halachic Reductio ad absurdum" →
Posted in American Jewish Issues, Contrarian wisdom, Conversion, Current Events, ethics, good and evil, Halacha, Israel, Jewish customs, Jewish History, Responsa Literature, The Future of Judaism
A Short History of the Sabbatical Year in Late Antiquity
Sometimes even the most obvious biblical passages can be perplexing. One interesting verse is a case in point:
"Therefore, do not say, 'What shall we eat in the seventh year, if we do not then sow or reap our crop?' I will bestow such blessings on you in the sixth year that there will then be crop enough for three years. When you sow in the eighth year, you will continue to eat from the old crop; and even into the ninth year, when the crop comes in, you will still have the old to eat from" (Lev. 25:20-22).
It is difficult to determine how seriously the ancient Jews observed the שמיטה "Sabbatical Year" (literally "release"). The fact that people attempted to keep it at all, given the hard economic realities, is remarkable. The inhabitants of Jerusalem in the 5th cent. B.C.E. swore to let the ground remain fallow during the seventh year (Neh. 10:31). During the Maccabean revolution, the Syrian army led by general Lysias, took over the fortress of Beth-zur because food was in short supply during the sabbatical year when the attack was made. Its people "evacuated the city, because they had no provisions there to withstand a siege, since it was a sabbatical year for the land" (1 Maccabees 6:49, cf. vv. 53-54).
Josephus records that both Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar remitted Israel's taxes during the Sabbatical years.[1] Tactius also attests to the Jewish observance of the Sabbatical year but attributed the custom to "indolence."[2]
Given the animosity between Judea and Rome, the Romans demanded that the Jewish remnant of Judea continue paying the crop tax. No exceptions were made whatsoever for the struggling Jewish population of the land.
In the aftermath of the failed Bar Kochba revolution, the rabbis modified the law regarding the Sabbatical year during the Roman period to allow for food to be grown in order so that the people should survive, and be able to pay its taxes to a hostile Roman government.
What makes this an intriguing passage is the fact that the Sabbatical year continued to be observed even in a post-exilic era and most Halachic authorities ruled that the Sabbatical year was still a rabbinic obligation. The only reason the Sages exempted the farmers was because the imminent danger they faced should they have disobeyed. Other authorities insisted that it was biblically required, while others still maintained it was a nothing more than a pious custom.[3] Continue reading "A Short History of the Sabbatical Year in Late Antiquity" →
Posted in Bible, biblical history, biblical theology, Halacha, Israel, Jewish customs, Jewish History, judaism, Responsa Literature, Talmud, Zohar, and Midrash, Word Focus
From The Age of "Seducing By Scents" to "The Emergence of Ortho-Feminism"
I have often felt that misogyny has been one of the oldest sins since Adam and Eve. The woman's liberation movement has some remarkable antecedents in American history. It is remarkable how much the 20th century fight for gender rights have completely overturned thousands of years of male hegemony. It is no wonder why traditional religious societies across the globe fear it–change is necessary as it is inevitable.
Seducing By Scents
I came across an interesting article from House and Garden Magazine that illustrates just how much we have changed as a society over the last 300 years. It reads, "Legislation proposed in England in the 1700s: All women of whatever age, rank, profession, or degree, whether virgin, maid or widow, that shall impose upon, seduce and betray into matrimony any of His Majesty's subjects, by scents, paints, cosmetic washes, artificial teeth, false hair, Spanish wool, iron stays, hoops, high‑heeled shoes or bolstered hips shall incur the penalty of the law now in force against witchcraft and the like misdemeanors and that marriage, upon conviction, shall stand null and void." —- Act of Parliament, 1670
Incidentally, one of our readers (see comments) points out that this story was originally a joke that appeared in the magazine. That is an interesting thought, but who really knows for sure?
The Humble Beginnings of Women's Liberation
Now move the clock ahead about 100 years later . . . Abagail Adams penned one of the most famous letters of her era, demanding that the new Declaration of Independence respect the rights of its female citizens, which she unabashedly says:
"I long to hear that you have declared an independency. And, by the way, in the new code of laws, which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies, and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power in the hands of the husbands. Remember all men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation. That your sex are naturally tyrannical is a truth so thoroughly established as to admit of no dispute; but such of you as wish to be happy, willingly give tip the harsh title of master for the more tender and endearing one of friend. Why, then, not put it out of the power of the vicious and the lawless to use us with cruelty and indignity with impunity?" [1]
—-Abigail (Smith) Adams (1744-1818), Letter to John Adams, [March 31, 1776]
John Adam's Fear of "Petticoat Despotism"
Her husband John Adams replied:
I cannot but laugh…We have been told that our struggle has loosened the bands of government everywhere; that children and apprentices were disobedient; that schools and colleges were grown turbulent; that Indians slighted their guardians and Negroes grew insolent to their masters. But your letter was the first intimation that another tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented. This is rather too coarse a compliment, but you are so saucy, I won't blot it out. Depend on it, we know better than to repeal our masculine systems. Although they are in full force, you know they are little more than theory. We dare not exert our power in its full latitude. We are obliged to go fair and softly, and in practice you know we are the subjects. We have only the name of masters, and rather than give up this, which would completely subject us to the despotism of the petticoat, I hope General Washington and all our brave heroes would fight. [2]
Back to the Future: The early 2oth Century Debate Concerning Women's Suffrage
It is remarkable that the world has changed so much over the last 250 years. Some of you might be surprised to know that back in the 1915 many Orthodox rabbis opposed the right for women to vote. Woman's suffrage proved to be a very divisive issue among American Orthodox Jews. Some rabbis felt that a women's place is in the home. The rabbis feared that society will become corrupt should women invade the institutions of political power.
Chief Sephardic Rabbi Ben Tzion Uziel pointed out that there was nothing in the Torah to forbid women voting. However, other rabbis argued, it's against tradition—a woman's place is in her home. Let the men worry about the politics!
Rabbi Uziel replied that in the olden days, men used to live in tents, in the desert, should we all go back to living in the wilderness just like our ancestors did? Ah, but the rabbis replied. If we give women equal rights to vote, they will want more freedom tomorrow, and who knows where that will lead to?
And That was Only the Beginning . . .
In a way, those early 20th century Orthodox rabbis were right.
An interesting debate has been developing in the Orthodox Jewish community. And that is the issue of Women's "Prayer Groups." Some have taken offense to women having "Minyanim" because only men can have Minyans.
Outraged by the growth of Ortho-feminism, a Queens-Long Island council of Modern Orthodox rabbis, the event symbolized a larger, possibly dangerous trend – the growing acceptance of women's prayer groups.
Its action this month to ban groups such as the one in Hillcrest that hosted the bat mitzvah has shocked hundreds of observant women worldwide and a number of Orthodox leaders, elicited at least two letters urging reconsideration, and caused one leader of the rabbinical council to resign. Continue reading "From The Age of "Seducing By Scents" to "The Emergence of Ortho-Feminism"" →
Posted in American Jewish Issues, Bible, biblical history, biblical theology, Contrarian wisdom, Current Events, ethics, good and evil, Halacha, Heart-Centered Judaism, Israel, Jewish customs, Jewish Folklore, Jewish Law & Technology, Jewish Prayer and Meditation, Jewish symbolism, judaism, Judaism and Feminism, Responsa Literature, Talmud, Zohar, and Midrash, The Future of Judaism Tagged Abagail Adams as a champion of women's rights, From The Age of "Seducing By Scents" to "The Emergence of Ortho-Feminism", Ortho-feminism
When Haredim go drag
Whenever I celebrated Purim in Me'ah Sharim, the Haredi epicenter of Jerusalem, I always marveled at the costumes the Haaredim used to wear. Every year, the Haredim participate in cross-dressing. Haredim in drag. What a sight to behold. Haredim and Hasidim literally let their hair down.
Any good Christian bible reader knows that cross-dressing is forbidden in the Torah. Men are forbidden to dress as women, since the proscription reads, "neither shall a man put on a woman's garment, neither may a man wear a woman's garment " (Deut. 22:5).
The law aims to maintain gender distinctions, while preventing potentially licentious behavior. Cross-dressing during Purim is nothing new in Halachic literature; pious Jews have been cross-dressing on this holiday for several centuries.
In the 16th century, somebody asked Rabbi Moshe Iserseles (a.k.a., "Rema"), whether cross-dressing on Purim was permitted or not. Rema cites two opinions, one says, "Yea!" while the other says, "Nay!" (and the cross-dresser says, "Hurray!"). Rema rules that it is permitted to follow the more lenient opinion. [1] Continue reading "When Haredim go drag" →
Posted in American Jewish Issues, Bible, biblical history, biblical theology, Contrarian wisdom, Current Events, Halacha, Hassidic Theology, Heart-Centered Judaism, Holidays, Humor, Israel, Jewish and Jungian ideas, Jewish History, Jewish sexual ethics, Jewish symbolism, Judaism and Feminism, Responsa Literature, The Future of Judaism, Theology and Philosophy Tagged When Haredim go drag
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein and the Rescue of Ethiopian Jewry (Part 2)
Shmarya Rosenberg posted a correspondence he had with Rabbi Moshe Feinstein on the plight of Ethiopian Jewry. It is a valuable historical document–one that will most likely be studied by future generations. Here is the record of his correspondence with Rav Moshe Feinstein.
Recently, I found Rabbi Moshe Feinstein's 1984 teshuva-letter on Ethiopian Jews stuck between two file folders. (You can click the thumbnail image for a larger, more readable image or download a PDF.[1]) This letter was written in response to a question I asked through Rabbi Moshe Tendler, Rav Moshe's son-in-law. He referred the question to his son, Mordechai, who then served as Rav Moshe's secretary-assistant. What follows is a (rough) translation:
With the Help of HaShem
26 Sivan 5744
To the honored, my beloved grandson ha rav ha-gaon moreinu ha-rav Rabbi Mordechai Tendler, shlit'a, with blessings of peace and blessing and all good:
With my best regards,
Here as per your request, I reaffirm what you wrote in my name several years ago regarding the "Falashas," that it is known what is written in the Responsa of the Radba"z, section seven, §9, that it is understood he considers them to be Jews; however for practical application of the law it is difficult to rely on this, for it is not clear if the Radba"z knew well the reality regarding them, nor is it clear whether up until our time their status has [remained the same and] not changed. But in regard to practical application of the law they are not mamzerim or the like, for the Radba"z mentions there that many many doubts apply to them. Review my responsa where I detail at length the qualifications of the rabbinical prohibitions regarding the legal status of 'an illegitimate child of unknown fatherhood' and 'a child found in the street whose parents are (both) unknown'. Continue reading "Rabbi Moshe Feinstein and the Rescue of Ethiopian Jewry (Part 2)" →
Posted in Contrarian wisdom, Conversion, Current Events, ethics, good and evil, Halacha, Heart-Centered Judaism, Jewish History, Jewish Law & Technology, judaism, Responsa Literature, The Future of Judaism, Theology and Philosophy Tagged A Tale of Two Different Rabbinical Responses on the Rescue of Ethiopian Jewry, One outstanding Haredi rabbi, Rav Moshe Feinstein as a voice of conscience