fbpx

September 7, 2016

The Female Rabbi exchange, part 1: On how women rabbis have changed Judaism

Rabbi Sally Priesand is America's first female rabbi ordained by a rabbinical seminary, and the second formally ordained female rabbi in Jewish history, after Regina Jonas. After her ground-breaking ordination she served first as assistant and then as associate rabbi at Stephen Wise Free Synagogue in New York City, and later led Monmouth Reform Temple in Tinton Falls, New Jersey from 1981 until her retirement in 2006. In addition to her rabbinic roles, Priesand has served on the board of each of the major institutions of Reform Judaism, including the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the Union for Reform Judaism and the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.

This exchange is in honour of a new anthology, The Sacred Calling: Four Decades of Women in the Rabbinate, of which Rabbi Priesand is a contributor.

***

Dear Rabbi Priesand,

The new anthology celebrates four decades of women rabbis. To mark this occasion, we'd like to ask you a big opening question: As the first ordained female Rabbi in America, how do you feel these four decades of female clergy have changed Judaism? How different is the Jewish religious landscape from how it was when you entered the rabbinate?

Yours,

Shmuel

***

Dear Shmuel,

Your question is quite comprehensive, which is why The Sacred Calling: Four Decades of Women in the Rabbinate is nearly eight hundred pages! Let me focus on a few points, and then encourage you and your followers to read the book for more information.

One of the major differences I see is in the definition of leadership itself. When I was growing up, rabbis were expected to be the ultimate authority, often maintaining complete control over the congregation and making whatever decisions needed to be made. Welcoming women into the rabbinate provided an opportunity to rethink previous models of leadership and make room for empowerment, networking and partnership. As shown by psychologist Carol Gilligan and others, women function best when creating relationships based on caring and concern. My twenty-five years as rabbi of Monmouth Reform Temple in Tinton Falls, NJ were enhanced by the ability to work together as partners in creating a temple family in which members were always there for each other.

Another area in which we see the influence of female rabbis is that of theology. I grew up with the image of God as King, omnipotent and clearly male. Today’s children understand that God embodies characteristics both masculine and feminine. For many years now, whenever new liturgy is created, its language is gender neutral. The mothers of Israel have found their way into the prayer book, and we have learned how to talk to God and with God rather than about God, to enjoy that intimacy that comes when addressing God as “You,” knowing that every person should have the freedom to imagine God in any way he or she finds meaningful and satisfying.

When I attended Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion fifty years ago, there were no women on the faculty. As the number of female students increased, we began to understand the importance of training new leaders, both men and women, to be more gender aware. Today, we are grateful that dozens of distinguished female scholars serve on the faculty of our seminaries, sharing valuable lessons and insights unique to women.

Ordaining women as rabbis has also led to the discovery of new role models. We have begun to hear the stories of those whose voices have been silenced for too long, the countless number of women who have contributed to our people’s history from biblical times on. For example, my life, and that of my female colleagues, has most certainly been enriched by knowing the story of the first woman rabbi, Regina Jonas, who studied for the rabbinate at the Berlin Academy for the Science of Judaism.

Unfortunately, the professor who was her mentor died the year before she was to be ordained, and the seminary refused to follow through with her ordination although she had completed all the requirements including a thesis entitled “Can Women Serve as Rabbis?” She was forced to wait until 1935 when she was ordained privately by Rabbi Max Dieneman, President of the Association of Liberal Rabbis in Berlin. At first, she was permitted to work only in schools, hospitals and homes for the elderly, but as rabbis began to emigrate or be deported, she was invited to preach and fulfill rabbinic duties at various synagogues, gaining a reputation for her pastoral work and preaching ability.

Eventually, Rabbi Jonas herself was deported to Terezin. As I think about her life, one of the things I admire most about her is that she chose the well-being of her people over her own self-interest. She could have escaped the horrors of the Holocaust, but chose instead to accompany her people to the concentration camps, to continue to minister to their needs and help them find meaning and purpose in the values of Jewish tradition. We cannot help but stand in awe of her courage.

Now that we have discovered her story, we want to ensure that she is given her rightful place in the chain of Jewish tradition that binds together all the generations of our people – past, present and future. We have asked synagogues of all denominations throughout the world to observe her yahrzeit from year to year. The actual date of her death is unknown, but with the help of the Holocaust Museum in Washington and Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, we determined that she was taken from Terezin, together with her mother, on October 12, 1944 – her name appears on the transport list – and arrived in Auschwitz on October 14, 1944 where it is assumed she was murdered that very day which happened to be Shabbat Bereishit; therefore, we have chosen Shabbat Bereishit as the date of her yahrzeit, and we hope that all Jews will join us in saying kaddish for her, thereby bringing to her memory the honor she so richly deserves. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to tell her story.

L’shalom,

Sally

The Female Rabbi exchange, part 1: On how women rabbis have changed Judaism Read More »

Poll: Israeli Jews favor Hillary, but say Trump is better for Israel ‘policy’

Most Israeli Jews would prefer Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump as the next president of the United States — even though more of them think Trump would be better for the “Israeli government’s policy.”

According to a poll released Wednesday, 43 percent of Israeli Jews prefer Clinton as president, compared to 34 percent who want Trump, when asked to choose between the two candidates. But 38 percent say Trump would be better for Israel, compared to 33 percent who say Clinton would be.

On both questions, a large number of people don’t pick a candidate.

The Israel Democracy Institute think tank and Tel Aviv University released its latest Peace Index monthly survey after polling 600 Israelis at the end of August. The margin of error is 4.1 percent.

Some respondents support Clinton, the former first lady and secretary of state, even though they don’t think the Democratic candidate “will be better from the standpoint of the Israeli government’s policy,” as the survey puts it. Thirteen percent of the Jews who say Trump, the Republican nominee, would be better for Israel want Clinton to be president. Only 2 percent of Jews who said Clinton would be better for Israel want Trump to be president.

“There seem to be people who support Clinton even though they think she will put more pressure on Israel or be less easy for Israel to deal with in terms of all the support we need from the United States,” Chanan Cohen, a researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute who helped lead the survey, told JTA.

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson and the Green Party’s Jill Stein were not included in the survey .

In April, Jewish opinion on the subject was nearly reversed. The Peace Index that month found 40 percent thought Clinton would be better for Israel’s interest and 31 percent thought Trump would be.

Since the primary season, when Trump pledged to be a “neutral” broker of Israeli-Palestinian peace, he and the Republican Party have tried to boost their pro-Israel bona fides. On Monday, Republican Trump supporters opened their fifth campaign office in Israel, the first in the West Bank. They predict 85 percent of Americans living in Israel, who they say number 300,000, will vote for the developer and reality TV star.

Still, Trump does not have a plurality of Israeli Jewish support. Even on the political right, only 49 percent support him, with 23 percent preferring Clinton, according to the survey. The left (86 percent) and center (57 percent) have an “overwhelming preference” for Clinton, according to the Israel Democracy Institute.

“I expected the right-wing voters to support Trump in bigger numbers, but we can see less than half did,” said Cohen. “I know that in the United States, the right has concerns about Trump’s personality, and we can see this also on the Israel right.”

Among Israeli Arabs, who make up about 20 percent of Israel’s population, 58 percent prefer the Democratic nominee and 11 percent the Republican.

Donald Trump speaking at the Republican National Convention on July 21, 2016. Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images

The poll also probed other issues. Asked about Elor Azaria, the Israeli soldier who is standing trial in a military court for shooting dead a downed Palestinian terrorist in Hebron, most Jewish Israelis “justify” what he did (42 percent strongly and 23 percent moderately). Just a quarter of Israelis “do not justify” the shooting (14 percent strongly and 11 percent moderately).

Jewish Israelis are almost evenly divided on executing captured Palestinian terrorists. Forty-seven percent lean toward killing such a terrorist on the spot, “even if he has been captured and clearly does not pose a threat.” Forty-five percent say he should be handed over to legal authorities.

Support for killing terrorists is highest among right-wingers (62 percent), young people (69 percent ages 18-24) and observant Jews (63 percent of haredi Orthodox and 72 percent of religious or traditional Jews). In April, the Peace Index found that 67 percent of Israelis agreed with the Sephardi chief rabbi’s assertion weeks earlier, which he later took back, that it is a religious imperative to kill Palestinian terrorists.

“We phrased the question differently this time, so you can’t say support has gone down,” Cohen said. “It’s more or less the same I think. It is a really high amount actually to be supporting an illegal action that every soldier is taught is against the army’s rules.”

Though many Israelis disagree with the army’s prosecution of Azaria, the Israel Defense Forces remains by far the most trusted official body in the country. Eighty-seven percent of Israeli Jews put “a lot” or “quite a lot” of trust in the army. Forty-seven percent of Israeli Arabs feel the same way. But Arabs put the most trust in the Supreme Court (64 percent “a lot” or “quite a lot”) — even more than Jews (54 percent).

Amid the controversy over dozens of French towns banning Muslim women from wearing the burkini, a full-body swimsuit, 62 percent of Israelis are against regulating what people wear in public, “including in the case of traditional and conservative clothing,” the survey found. Just 26 percent support the French bans.

Support for freedom of attire is consistent across the Jewish political spectrum — left (73 percent), right (59 percent) and center (61 percent) — and among Arabs (71 percent).

In honor of the start of the school year on Sept. 1, the survey asked Israelis to grade the education system, and both Jews and Arabs gave it a failing grade. Jews gave the system a 5.5 and Arabs a 5.9 out of 10.

In another poll released Wednesday, a CNN/ORC survey of likely American voters showed Trump with a 45-43 percent advantage over Clinton.

Poll: Israeli Jews favor Hillary, but say Trump is better for Israel ‘policy’ Read More »

Kaepernick’s right to protest works both ways

To protest police violence against Blacks, San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has caused a national stir by refusing to stand during the playing of the national anthem prior to the start of his team’s games.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses Black people and people of color,” Kaepernick told NFL Media. “To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”

This is not the first time the 28-year-old has spoken out against police violence.

“This is what lynchings look like in 2016!” he wrote on Instagram in the wake of the police killing of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, La. “Another murder in the streets because the color of a man’s skin, at the hands of the people who they say will protect us.”

Speaking from the G20 Summit in China, President Barack Obama defended Kaepernick’s decision to sit during the national anthem, saying he was “exercising his constitutional right” to bring attention to “some real, legitimate issues that have to be talked about.”  

The president is correct — Kaepernick is following in a long American tradition of exercising our right to protest and criticize, even in a way that some may find offensive.

In that spirit, then, I’d like to also exercise my right to protest and criticize.

My criticism relates to the claim of “bodies in the street” caused by police violence. Kaepernick may want to look at Chicago, where, according to author Heather MacDonald in National Review Online, 2,870 people were shot this year through Aug. 30 — but only 17 of those shootings, or 0.6 percent of the total, were by the police.

According to the Chicago Tribune, this past Labor Day weekend was the deadliest of the three holiday weekends this summer, with 65 people shot, 13 of them fatally. The 90 homicides in August tied for the most the city had seen in a single month since June 1996. 

A major reason for this growing mayhem, MacDonald writes, is that cops have backed off of public-order enforcement, with pedestrian stops down 90 percent. Evidently, by focusing so much of our anger on the police and putting them on the defensive, we've ended up hurting those we are trying to help.

“It is the people who live in high-crime areas,” MacDonald says, “who petition the police for ‘corner clearing.’ The police are simply obeying their will. And when the police back off of such order-maintenance strategies under the accusation of racism, it is the law-abiding poor who pay the price.”

None of those complications made their way into Kaepernick’s one-sided protest against police violence. That is my primary criticism —instead of enriching the national debate, he has shriveled it. By overlooking inconvenient truths and focusing all his wrath on the police, instead of honoring a complex reality, he has distorted it.

Kaepernick had a unique opportunity to advance the national debate. His decision to sit during the national anthem was controversial and stunning. With the eyes of the nation on him, he could have stunned us even further by calling for greater cooperation between Black communities and local law enforcement to reduce the scourge of inner-city violence.

He could have unified the country by encouraging a search for solutions that wouldn’t alienate the very police force that protects the majority of Blacks in the inner cities.

But he didn’t do that. Instead, Kaepernick did something that was so 2016: An instant gesture to make an instant statement about a complicated problem.

In other words, he didn’t aim very high, giving us yet another dramatic and divisive statement that elicits more hype than hope. Maybe he forgot that the national anthem he has shunned ends not with a statement but a question:

“Oh say, does that star spangled banner yet wave o'er the land of the free and the home of the brave? “

What makes this country the home of the brave is not just the freedom to make loud statements, but the courage to tackle complex problems.


David Suissa is president of TRIBE Media Corp./Jewish Journal and can be reached at davids@jewishjournal.com.

Kaepernick’s right to protest works both ways Read More »

It’s Not Bubbe’s Chocolate Anymore: Chocolate Covered Jalapeños?

When her new chocolate company needed a name, Sara Meyer and her husband, Corey, decided to connect it to his maternal grandmother — Faigele/Faigy/Fay, meaning little bird in Yiddish — and her love of chocolate. Both are memorialized in the name they came up with: Little Bird. While Fay usually kept several boxes of random chocolate open at any given time in her home, Little Bird’s Curious Confections prefers its proprietary Belgian, sustainable chocolate and natural ingredients to produce its Fire Bites and Fire Barks, all with candied jalepeños.

Little Bird started about five years ago when Sara hungered for a project to supplement caring for her twins and her job as a technical operator at NY1 TV. So she started a recipe blog and learned about photographing food. One day she prepped one of her husband Corey’s favorite treats, chocolate-covered orange peels. Possessed by a Sorceror’s Apprentice citrus-peel binge, she found herself candying all available citrus: lemons, oranges, grapefruits. She was covering everything in reach in chocolate. When she ran out of rind, she tried candying the jalapeños. When the leftovers ended up at work and co-workers asked to place orders for the chocolate-covered jalapeños with sea salt, Sara realized that she had concocted a potential business. With time, Sara and Corey scaled up from their home kitchen to the factory they call The Nest.

Corey and Sara, who met through JDate over Ethiopian food, each grew up in observant, synagogue-affiliated families. As Sara says, “I think that my generation of Jewish-Americans grew up with the stories of our grandparents or great-grandparents coming over with the proverbial $10 in their pockets. We grew up learning about the immigrant experience — hearing about what parents/grandparents/great-grandparents had to do, how clever they were, or what trials they endured. We work hard, we work smart, we work with dedication, we work with the full support of our families. We (both personally and professionally) donate to local causes and shop locally, and believe strongly in hiring people with a desire to grow, regardless of their backgrounds.”

Sara and Corey would like their children to know what it means to work, to be part of the dreams of growing a business. Their five-year-old twins, Jack and Rebecca, and older daughter, Emily, visit the factory almost every day. Emily is learning about business development. Jack is hands on. Rebecca knows where the hair nets are. While they nibble the chocolate off of the jalapeños, Corey and Sara hope that their palates become more sophisticated with time.

You may satisfy your wish for the hot and sweet chocolate combo on line or in stores around the country.

Bubbe Faigy would be so proud.

Cross-posted.

Rabbi Prinz travels the world sharing stories about chocolate, cultures and convictions. More about Jews and chocolate, along with historical and contemporary recipes, may be found in On the Chocolate Trail: A Delicious Adventure Connecting Jews, Religions, History, Travel, Rituals and Recipes to the Magic of Cacao. Prinz also blogs at the Huffington Post and at onthechocolatetrail.org. She is currently working on a project related to women and chocolate.

It’s Not Bubbe’s Chocolate Anymore: Chocolate Covered Jalapeños? Read More »

New generation shifts Holocaust conversation in ‘Germans & Jews’

There is one line in the documentary film “Germans & Jews” that illustrates, better than statistics or scholarly studies, the difference between Hitler’s Reich and present-day Germany.

Given the Nazis’ racial ideology, the absolutely worst and most unforgivable insult one could level at an “Aryan” German was that he “looked” or “acted” like a Jew.

Discussing such a scenario, but set in the present, Susanne Suermondt, a German Catholic, observes in the film, “The biggest compliment you could give me is to say that I look Jewish.”

This praiseworthy change has another, perhaps more uncomfortable, side. Rebecca Gop, a Jewish journalist and mother in Berlin, tells of her soccer-playing teenager who represented Germany at the 2011 European Maccabi Games in Vienna.

He and his fellow Jewish teammates marched into the stadium behind the German flag, occasionally shouting a lusty “Deutschland, Deutschland.” Gop, perhaps like most Jews of previous generations, could only wince at the image.

The concept and production of “Germans & Jews” grew out of a conversation initiated by Tal Recanati, an American-born Jewish entrepreneur, and her longtime friend Janina Quint, a German gentile.

Both were interested in films and initially thought of doing a documentary about the present Jewish community in Germany. Eventually, though, they decided to focus on a more “dynamic” topic, the relationship between Germans and Jews among the second and third post-Holocaust generations.

Dividing the responsibilities, Quint became director and producer, and Recanati executive producer and producer.

The film’s primary location is a large dinner table in a Berlin home around which sit five German Jews, three non-Jewish Germans, one American Jew and one Israeli, all living or working in Berlin. Their back-and-forth discussions are augmented by a number of individual interviews.

The film’s creators and participants are impelled by different and often complex motivations and backgrounds. For instance, Quint said in an interview with the Journal that her maternal grandfather was an early member of the Nazi Party and was seriously wounded during World War II while fighting against American troops.

By contrast, her paternal grandfather was an early opponent of Hitler and in the mid-1930s left Germany for Spain to fight against the fascist insurgency of Generalissimo Francisco Franco.

Quint has lived in New York for many years with her Jewish husband. Their three children have been raised with a “dual heritage,” she said.

Some statistics about Jews in Germany are quite precise, while others fall within broad ranges. During the Weimar Republic, Quint said, the national 1925 census counted some 523,000 respondents who identified themselves as Jews (while likely omitting a considerable number of born Jews who converted to Christianity).

Surprisingly, more than 3,000 German Jews survived the Holocaust by living underground, passing as Aryans or being married to gentiles. There are no precise and authoritative figures on how many Jews live in Germany now, though Quint believes the number ranges from 200,000 to 250,000.

Germany’s largest concentration of Jews is in Berlin, now cited as the fastest-growing Jewish community in Europe, followed by such German cities as Hamburg, Frankfurt and Munich. Among their Jewish populations, some are descendants of German Jews who left after 1933, but the major increase is due to immigrants from the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries.

Also noticeable has been a considerable influx of Israelis, many of them artists, although their exact number is not known. Rough estimates put their number as between 10,000 and 40,000, although some cite much higher figures.

For the first two decades following the end of World War II in 1945, Germans were largely in a state of denial about their country’s war and Holocaust atrocities. Starting in the early 1960s, German attitudes shifted. Among the factors were the trial of Adolf Eichmann and, five years later, the sentencing by a German court of many of the men and women who ran the Auschwitz death camp.

Adding to the confluence of events were the release of powerful television and movie productions on the Holocaust, and rebellions against the old order throughout Germany and much of Europe, fueled by a new generation.

Young Germans started to question their parents and grandparents about their roles during the Nazi era and the war, and an anti-nationalist wave swept the country, to the point, in the words of one German, “If you were patriotic, you were considered a weirdo.”

Participating in the lively discussions was the recently deceased historian Fritz Stern, author of “Five Germanys I Have Known.” In a not uncommon German-Jewish scenario during the pre-Hitler era, Stern declared, “My grandparents converted, but the Nazis made me a Jew again.”

A renowned historian at New York’s Columbia University, he returned to Germany in 1950, and, at the time, was struck by the citizenry’s “capacity for self-pity, sense of darkness and state of shock.”

Some other illustrative observations in the film, made during discussions and interviews with various people, include the following:

“When my (Jewish) father returned to Germany right after the war, he was not accepted by either the Germans or Diaspora Jews.”

“In 1979, when I was a German boy of 13, I sat in front of the television set, without my father, for hours and hours watching the NBC series ‘Holocaust.’ I was appalled and asked my parents if this really happened.”

“Hitler tightened the vise on German Jews, a little step at a time. One day there was an edict that Jews could buy bread only between 4 and 5 in the afternoon. Then came another order that Jews could sit only on special benches, painted yellow, when visiting a park.”

“Like many young Israelis, I felt repulsed by Israeli politics. As a musician, I was drawn to life in Berlin and came here 20 years ago.”

 “It’s not sexy to be German,” says a young German. “If I say instead that I’m a European, it shows that I’m progressive.”

A Jewish tour guide: “Most Germans never meet a Jew … Jews will never be accepted as Germans.”

In the eyes of many Germans, the fighting and killing in 2014 in the Gaza Strip turned the image of Jews from victims into perpetrators, giving rise to some “unacceptable” anti-Semitism.

“As an Israeli, I feel much safer in Germany than anywhere else.”

And, as a final comment: “As a Jew, I have met quite a few philo-Semites in Germany. … They embrace us so tightly that you can’t breathe.”

Today, it is the rare German who is not reminded of the Holocaust on a daily basis. There are memorials throughout the country, constant articles in newspapers, and, in Berlin, the massive Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe and the “Topography of Terror” exhibits at the former Gestapo headquarters.

Across Germany and other European countries, there are some 56,000 stolpersteine (“stumbling blocks”) embedded into the walkways in front of homes, each inscribed with the names of Jews and other Nazi victims who once lived there, including birth and deportation dates, and the dates and locations of their murder in concentration camps.

The memory of the Holocaust remains so strong that, to this day, it influences aspects of German foreign policy. When German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently opened her country’s borders to 1 million refugees from Syria and other countries, the underlying message was that Germans are a good people now, as one German academician wrote. There is no way these refugees would be put on death trains and sent back. 

After finishing her film, Quint observed that Germans continue to feel a sense of responsibility for the Holocaust, an “event of biblical scale, whose meaning will never go away,” she said. But, she added, for the third post-Holocaust generation of Germans, the sense of personal responsibility is gone.

She doesn’t know whether the relationship between Germans and Jews ever will become completely “normal,” but the Jewish people need to realize that today’s Germany has shed the legacy of Hitler’s Reich, she said.

In an odd way, Quint added, Germans and Jews are now connected forever by the horror of the Holocaust.

“Germans & Jews” opens Sept. 9 at Laemmle’s Music Hall in Beverly Hills and Town Center in Encino.

New generation shifts Holocaust conversation in ‘Germans & Jews’ Read More »

Controversy at UCLA spurs student transfer, complaint, criticism

Has the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel at UCLA gotten so bad that pro-Israel students don’t feel safe studying there anymore?

Milan Chatterjee, a former UCLA Graduate Students Association (GSA) president and third-year law student, sent a letter on Aug. 24 to university Chancellor Gene Block indicating that he is “leaving UCLA due to [a] hostile and unsafe campus climate.”

In an Aug. 30 phone interview from New York, Chatterjee told the Journal he would begin classes the following day at New York University School of Law.

“It’s really unfortunate,” he said of his departure. “I love UCLA, I think it’s a great school and I have lot of friends there. It has just become so hostile and unsafe, I can’t stay there anymore.”

Chatterjee, 27, is Indian-American Hindu and was president of the GSA during the 2015-16 academic year, during which time he made distribution of GSA funds for a Nov. 5 UCLA Diversity Caucus event contingent on its sponsors not associating with the divest-from-Israel movement. 

The move brought protests from BDS supporters, including the UCLA chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP). That group advocated for the removal of Chatterjee from the presidency on the grounds that he violated a University of California policy that requires viewpoint neutrality in the distribution of campus funds. The GSA board of officers censured Chatterjee in April, and a June investigation by the UCLA Discrimination Prevention Office (DPO) concluded that Chatterjee’s stipulation violated the policy.

In a statement sent to the Journal by UCLA spokesman Ricardo Vazquez, the university expressed disappointment at Chatterjee’s decision to leave but stood by the findings of the DPO report.

“Although we regret learning that Milan Chatterjee has chosen to finish his legal education at a different institution, UCLA firmly stands by its thorough and impartial investigation, which found that Chatterjee violated the university’s viewpoint neutrality policy,” the Aug. 31 statement says.

With the legal assistance of Peter Weil, managing partner at the Century City law firm Glaser Weil, Chatterjee has filed a complaint with UCLA, pursuant to “Student Grievances Regarding Violations of Anti-Discrimination Laws or University Policies on Discrimination.” In the Aug. 10 complaint, he charges that the university discriminated against him “because I refused to support an anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist activity, organization and position while serving as President of the UCLA Graduate Student Association.” The grievance was addressed to Dianne Tanjuaquio, the hearing coordinator and student affairs officer in the UCLA office of the dean of students.

Chatterjee’s complaint asks for immediate withdrawal of the DPO report, acknowledgment by DPO that he acted in good faith and a promise that he won’t be subject to any disciplinary action. For his final year of law school, Chatterjee will study at NYU under the status of a “visiting student” but still earn his degree from UCLA, he said. 

In UCLA’s Aug. 31 statement, the university reiterated its support for Israel while also defending the right of students to express positions critical of Israel: “Though the university does not support divestment from Israel, and remains proud of its numerous academic and cultural relationships with Israeli institutions, supporters and opponents of divestment remain free to advocate for their position as long as their conduct does not violate university policies.”

Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO and national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said he was troubled by events leading to Chatterjee’s decision to depart UCLA.

“We have tremendous respect for the institution, and it’s troubling that the past president of the GSA felt like he had to leave the university because of what he felt was a hostile, unsafe campus created in part because of these outspoken anti-Israel activists,” Greenblatt said in a phone interview. “Regardless of his views on the [Israeli-Palestinian] conflict, where there are deep, difficult issues, this student’s decision to leave UCLA because of these attacks is incredibly problematic.”

The Chatterjee affair is only the latest iteration of the BDS movement against Israel causing problems at UCLA, according to Josh Saidoff, a UCLA graduate student who has supported Chatterjee in the pages of the Daily Bruin, the UCLA campus newspaper, and is the son of pro-Israel philanthropist Naty Saidoff.

“What we’ve seen at UCLA is an attempt by BDS activists to use legal intimidation and other forms of social stigmatization to silence those who oppose BDS, and you only need to look back as far as what happened to Lauren Rogers and Sunny Singh to see that they’ve used the judicial process within student government to try to silence and marginalize and exclude those people who do not advocate on behalf of BDS,” the 36-year-old grad student said in a phone interview, referring to two non-Jewish students who were the focus of opposition campaigns by SJP after accepting trips to Israel from pro-Israel organizations. “So I was surprised that the university allowed itself to become complicit in this process because I think it’s part of a very clear pattern of intimidation used by the BDS activists on our campus.”

Rabbi Aaron Lerner, executive director of Hillel at UCLA, said “major [UCLA] donors” have called him and wanted more information about what happened with Chatterjee in the wake of his departure, but he said that no donors he knows have threatened to pull their gifts.

“I think most UCLA donors love UCLA, have UCLA’s best interest at heart and are not trying to threaten UCLA. They’re trying to help UCLA, trying to be involved in conversations with the university, want to be in conversation with students and professionals to understand what the right steps are,” Lerner said in a phone interview.

Those troubled by Chatterjee’s departure include David Pollock, a Los Angeles-based financial advisor, and his wife, Lynn, who have more than 20 pieces of their art collection on loan to the UCLA Anderson School of Management. Pollock told the Journal that he has contacted UCLA Anderson School Dean Judy Olian about the possibility of taking the artwork back in light of what has occurred with Chatterjee. 

“I was perfectly happy to have it there until this thing got me going,” Pollock said.

In a Sept. 5 statement, pro-Israel organization StandWithUs joined many major Jewish organizations in applauding Chatterjee for standing by his principles. “We commend Mr. Chatterjee for standing up for his beliefs in the face of intimidation, and hope that the attacks he has faced from anti-Israel extremists are taken as a testament to his principles, rather than a stain on his reputation,” the statement says.

Chatterjee’s stipulation was expressed in an Oct. 16 email to Manpreet Dhillon Brar, a UCLA graduate student and diversity caucus representative who did not respond to the Journal’s interview requests. Chatterjee said in the email that the caucus’ event must have “zero connection with ‘Divest from Israel’ or any equivalent movement/organization.” He said that he later clarified that the
caucus could not be affiliated with any position on the Israeli-Palestinian issue.
wThus, the stipulation was viewpoint neutral, he said.

Whatever the case, the caucus accepted the stipulation — as well as the $2,000 grant from the GSA. The Nov. 5 town hall organized by the caucus went off without any incident.

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the school of law at UC Irvine, said in a Feb. 8 letter that stipulating that the caucus not associate with either side of the issue does not violate viewpoint neutrality. “I think it is clearly constitutional for the GSA to choose not to fund anything on this issue,” he said, “so long as it remains viewpoint neutral.” 

Jerry Kang, UCLA’s vice chancellor of equity, diversity and inclusion and the author of a July 19 blog post on the UCLA website titled “Viewpoint Neutrality,” said there are more sides to the story and that supporters of divestment felt threatened by the law student’s actions.

“People on the other side of the political issue, they also feel harassed, threatened and retaliated [against],” Kang said in a phone interview. 

Kang’s statements were echoed by Rahim Kurwa, 29, a doctoral candidate in the UCLA sociology department and a member of UCLA’s chapter of SJP, which has argued that Chatterjee’s actions amounted to stifling free speech on campus. 

SJP, which during the process received legal assistance from the American Civil Liberties Union, Palestine Legal and the Center for Constitutional Rights, posted the DPO report, which was confidential and omitted names, on its website. The Daily Bruin also linked to the report. Kang dismissed concerns expressed by some major Jewish organizations that the publication of the report violated Chatterjee’s privacy.

“This is obviously a matter of great public concern about a student-elected official using mandatory student fees, so it is a public record we had to release,” he said.

Despite how the whole affair may make things look to outsiders, Kurwa said in an email that pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel students get along better on campus than people think they do.

“For the most part, the day-to-day interactions between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israel groups on campus is much less dramatic and tense than it is portrayed by off-campus actors,” he said.

Still, Saidoff, who holds dual Israeli and American citizenship, said, “I can tell you that Milan has very good reason to not feel welcome here because he was targeted and scapegoated, because he was made into an object of derision and he has reason to not feel comfortable here.”

But, he added, “I feel OK here at UCLA.”

Controversy at UCLA spurs student transfer, complaint, criticism Read More »

The Pressure Is On

Did I up and go from that visit with Frank too hastily? Did I linger too long with Sarah? As I visit with a sick or bereaved person, I try not to wear out my welcome by taxing their attention, nor run the risk of cutting them off with a premature goodbye. If in the person’s mind I provide the reader’s digest version of a visit, they may think one of these: “She doesn’t care about me.” “She’s uncomfortable with what I am telling her or she disapproves of it.” “She is more concerned with tallying the number of clients she has seen today than anything else; it’s just a job to her.” If I overstay, they may think, “Doesn’t she realize how worn out I am?” “I need some privacy to sort out my thoughts.” Or of course, “I don’t really feel like seeing you for more than a moment; I was just being polite.” Ouch.

When members of a chevra kadisha (Jewish burial society) and other caregivers find themselves comforting the bereaved, we should keep in mind that it is a supercharged time: every sentence can bear extra weight, like those in the closing paragraphs of a novel. Thus we may more easily err on the side of offering “too much of a good thing” especially because we are so eager (overly eager?) to help. But we serve people better by getting at the heart of the matter as quickly as possible. Don’t squander the few moments allotted to us with niceties; people in crisis have a short attention span and short fuses and they are letting us in on their lives at a critical juncture. If a bereaved spouse looks like they are on the verge of tears, let those two cups runneth over by affirming what a sad and poignant moment they are in and then quietly be a partner to their grief. If a bereaved parent is angry, echo their distress by exclaiming what a rotten and unfair deal they got. If a brother or sister or cousin wants a hug and silent reflection while holding hands, don’t waste time with preliminary words. Match intensity with intensity. Enter the center.

[For a related article about length of visits, please see my post on offbeatcompassion, “I was stumped” at Rabbi and board certified Chaplain Karen B. Kaplan is author of Encountering the Edge: What People Told Me Before They Died (Pen-L Publishing, 2014) a series of true anecdotes capped with the deeper reasons she chose her vocation. For more details including reviews, you can go to the publisher’s page or to amazon.com. There is also an audio version of “>Offbeat Compassion.

 

  

 

GAMLIEL INSTITUTE COURSES

Please Tell Anyone Who May Be Interested!

          Fall 2016:

REGISTRATION IS NOW OPEN:

Gamliel Institute Course 5, Chevrah Kadisha Ritual, Practices, & Liturgy (RPL) will be offered over twelve weeks from September 6th, 2016 to November 22nd 2016 online.

There will be an orientation session on Monday September 5th for those unfamiliar with the online course platform used, all who have not taken a Gamliel Institute course recently, and those who have not used an online webinar/class presentation tool in past.

Class times will be all be 5-6:30 pm PDST/6-7:30 pm MDST/7-8:30 CDST/8-9:30 pm EDST. If you are in any other time zone, please determine the appropriate time, given local time and any Daylight Savings Time adjustments necessary.

Please note: the class meetings will be online, and will take place on Tuesdays of September 6, 13, 20, 27, November 15, and 22. The remainder of the twelve class meetings will be on Thursdays (due to the Jewish Holidays) of October 6, 13, 20, 27, November 3, and 10. 

The focus of this course is on Jewish practices and all ritual and liturgy (excluding Taharah & Shmirah, which are covered in Course 2). This deals specifically with liturgy, ritual, and practice towards and at the end of life, at the moment of death, in preparation for the funeral, during the funeral, the rituals of mourning, and rituals and practices of remembrance. 

SIGN UP NOW TO TAKE THIS COURSE!

There is no prerequisite for this course; you are welcome to take it with no prior knowledge or experience, though interest in the topic is important. Please register, note it on your calendar, and plan to attend the online sessions.

Note that there are registration discounts available for three or more persons from the same organization, and for clergy and students. There are also some scholarship funds available on a ‘need’ basis. Contact us (information below) with any questions.

You can “>jewish-funerals.org/gamreg. A full description of all of the courses is there as well. For more information, visit the “>Kavod v’Nichum website or on the

Please contact us for information or assistance. info@jewish-funerals.org or j.blair@jewish-funerals.org, or call 410-733-3700, or 925-272-8563.

 

          LOOKING FORWARD:

Gamliel Institute will be offering Course 1 in the Winter semester (starting December 5th, 2016), and course 4 in the Spring (starting March 6th, 2017). Look for information on each to be forthcoming, or visit the “>Kavod v'Nichum Gamliel Institute Registration site.  

  

DONATIONS:

Donations are always needed and most welcome. Donations support the work of Kavod v’Nichum and the Gamliel Institute, helping us provide scholarships to students, refurbish and update course materials, support programs such as Taste of Gamliel, provide and add to online resources, encourage and support communities in establishing, training, and improving their Chevrah Kadisha, and assist with many other programs and activities.

You can donate online at You can also become a member (Individual or Group) of Kavod v’Nichum to help support our work. Click  

MORE INFORMATION

If you would like to receive the Kavod v’Nichum newsletter by email, or be added to the Kavod v’Nichum Chevrah Kadisha & Jewish Cemetery email discussion list, please be in touch and let us know at info@jewish-funerals.org.

You can also be sent an email link to the Expired And Inspired blog each week by sending a message requesting to be added to the distribution list to j.blair@jewish-funerals.org.

Be sure to check out the Kavod V’Nichum website at “>Gamliel.Institute website.

 

RECEIVE NOTICES WHEN THIS BLOG IS UPDATED!

Sign up on our Facebook Group page: just search for and LIKE “>@chevra_kadisha.

To find a list of other blogs and resources we think you, our reader, may find to be of interest, click on “About” on the right side of the page.There is a link at the end of that section to read more about us.

Past blog entries can be searched online at the L.A. Jewish Journal. Point your browser to  

SUBMISSIONS WELCOME

If you have an idea for an entry you would like to submit to this blog, please be in touch. Email J.blair@jewish-funerals.org. We are always interested in original materials that would be of interest to our readers, relating to the broad topics surrounding the continuum of Jewish preparation, planning, rituals, rites, customs, practices, activities, and celebrations approaching the end of life, at the time of death, during the funeral, in the grief and mourning process, and in comforting those dying and those mourning, as well as the actions and work of those who address those needs, including those serving as Bikkur Cholim, Caring Committees, the Chevrah Kadisha, Shomrim, funeral providers, funeral homes and mortuaries, and operators and maintainers of cemeteries.

 

 

The Pressure Is On Read More »

Miriam’s House opens doors for struggling women and their children

Rhonda Evans was 40 years old and addicted to drugs when she decided she needed help. She had three sons — two living with her parents and one with her — and she had been living in a motel, cobbling together money to pay for her habits. 

What turned her life around was a place called Miriam’s House, a nonprofit sober home for mothers. From 2007 to 2009, Evans lived at the house and got her life back on track, eventually getting to the point where she went to school to learn substance abuse counseling. 

“It was a passion of mine. After I lived [at the house], I wanted to give back,” said Evans, who is now the home’s program director. 

The West Los Angeles house opened its doors in 2007 and focuses on women recovering from drug and alcohol addiction. It has 15 rooms and is currently hosting seven women with little to no income. Residents might just be regaining contact with their children, getting a degree and going to work. 

It sits on a large property and has communal spaces for children to play in and women to gather. There also is a back garden where residents can sit outside and have time alone.  

Miriam’s House is part of the Promises Foundation, started by Lisa Rogg, a holistic medicine expert, licensed acupuncturist and lifelong resident of Los Angeles, along with her husband Richard, who founded Promises Treatment Centers.

“When you are a homeless mother or a mother living below the poverty line, it’s difficult to find help for addiction,” Lisa Rogg said. “Often you are faced with the choice of giving up custody of your child or receiving the support you need. As a mother, it was my mission to help these women keep their families together.”

The home, which is funded by private donors, has a success rate of more than 90 percent for reuniting mothers with their children, according to executive director Brenda Valiente.

“The women are so inspired by their children to become better people,” Rogg said. “When you have that threat of losing a child to the system, you really don’t want to go through that.”

If a woman wants to be admitted to Miriam’s House, she has to be at least 30 days sober and willing to follow the designated schedule, along with Alcoholic Anonymous’ 12 steps of recovery. She can bring along one or two children under the age of 10, who live with her in her room. During the time that she’s there, which can range from a few weeks to a year, her children can attend the public elementary school a few blocks away.  

The staff at Miriam’s House aims to get the women back on track and contributing to society. They make sure the residents are set up with housing after they leave, are able to work at a job or get a degree, and know how to plan for their future. 

“We try to impact their lives,” Valiente said. “We not only believe that they can be self-sufficient, but we give them the tools to make sure they are.” 

Miriam’s House hosts AA and Narcotics Anonymous meetings, offers parenting classes, provides child care, shows the women how to meditate and do yoga, and asks them to prepare and attend nightly dinners. The house also holds celebrations for various holidays, including a Chanukah dinner and candle-lighting in partnership with the Reconstructionist synagogue in Pacific Palisades, Kehillat Israel, which Rogg attends. (Residents do not need to be Jewish, and not many are.)

 Not every woman succeeds during her first stay at the house — about 1 in 15 relapses — but in those cases the woman is welcome to try again. 

“We’ve had women relapse,” Rogg said. “But they show a lot of strength and determination and are then very successful.” 

Valiente said that since the women aren’t forced to be there, they must resolve for themselves to do their best. “The women admitted have shown and agreed to certain standards they will fulfill for being in the program. They have to show that they’re committed to being in recovery.”

Evans said places like Miriam’s House are essential because there are too few organizations for mothers in recovery. “There aren’t a handful of places like this where women with children can get sober and the skills they need to be on their own.”

Like Evans, many of the mothers go on to earn their degrees in social work and become drug and alcohol counselors, Valiente said. They find jobs through outlets like Jewish Vocational Service Los Angeles and the nonprofit Chrysalis. Some residents receive scholarships from the Promises Foundation to fund their education. In terms of housing, the women may go on to live in Section 8 buildings, transitional homes, or apply for help from St. Joseph Center, a nonprofit that helps the needy find housing and treatment for mental illness, as well as receive education and training for jobs 

After women graduate from the program, they are always welcome to reach out for support from their counselors. The house hosts alumni events, like a Mother’s Day gathering, to stay connected to their network of mothers.

“What we’ve learned is the women who stay connected and engaged tend to stay sober,” said Valiente. “They feel like they want to do good in the community and pay it forward.”

By assisting mothers on the road to recovery and allowing them to stay with their children, Rogg said, Miriam’s House is able to make a real impact on their sobriety. 

“I think that being able to keep the family together and not have kids go into the foster care system is probably one of the best preventative measures for stopping the cycle of addiction.” 

Miriam’s House opens doors for struggling women and their children Read More »

Making Judaism radiate with color

Hillel Smith believes art has the power to transform Judaism, and he hopes his latest creation — a 25-foot-tall mural in Pico-Robertson featuring text from ha-Motzi — can prove it. 

“I mostly connect to the sense of tradition and heritage,” he said. “I think that comes through in the work I do and utilization of brachot (blessings). I’m updating it. I’m starting with this very firm foundation and building from there.”

The Los Angeles-based artist recently completed a new mural on the back wall facing the parking lot of Bibi’s Bakery and Café, on Pico Boulevard between Crest Drive and Livonia Avenue. The vibrant piece depicts Hebrew text accompanied by some wheat sheafs that also are symbolic representations of challah.

Smith, 31, said he chose to paint the Hebrew letters because he’s always “coming up with a new way to test the boundaries of visual Judaica and contemporary Jewish design. I’m trying to make something that’s bright, bold and engaging, and has, at its core, real Jewish content.” 

American Jewish University’s Institute for Jewish Creativity commissioned Smith’s mural through its WORD: Artist Grant, the Bruce Geller Memorial prize, that grants $500 to $2,000 to L.A. artists producing works inspired by Jewish text. Smith received $1,500.

The Bibi’s piece, finished Sept. 2, isn’t Smith’s first Jewish mural in Southern California. In 2013, he made a spray-painted mural on a handball court at Camp Ramah in California, located in Ojai. In Hebrew, it says, “U-k’ne lecha haver,” which means “acquire for yourself a friend,” and it contains an image of an outstretched hand. 

 At the Orthodox synagogue Westwood Kehilla on Santa Monica Boulevard, he created a mural last year called “Simchat Torah,” which means “the joy of Torah.” It depicts men, women and children dancing around with both a Sephardic and Ashkenazi Torah. 

And last year, Smith worked with Tel Aviv-based artist Itamar Paloge on a mural for the Silverlake Independent Jewish Community Center. It is of a giant orange-and-blue Hebrew letter alef. Asylum Arts and the NextGen Engagement Initiative of The Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles funded the project.

Smith grew up in Pico-Robertson, attending Gindi Maimonides Academy and Shalhevet High School, along with B’nai David-Judea Congregation. When he was a child, he said he noticed that there wasn’t much diversity in the Jewish art he saw. 

“One thing that’s always bothered me is that a lot of Jewish art is just of Hassidim on bicycles and really lovely watercolors of Jerusalem,” he said. “That’s kind of it. It blew my mind when I discovered the Jewish artists from earlier in the 20th century. They were at the forefront of their own artistic movements and made work in Hebrew.” 

After graduating from Shalhevet, Smith studied art at the University of Pennsylvania. He became interested in Hebrew typography and creating colorful illustrations, paintings and installations. 

Over the years, his work has taken him to Jerusalem — home to two of his murals — as well as Venice, Italy, where he had the opportunity to make three images for the new, illustrated Venice Haggadah. The book is to be released in 2017. 

Smith also has a blog (hillelsmith.tumblr.com) featuring something called “Parsha Posters,” which visually explores learnings from the weekly Torah portions. They are concert-style posters that feature “the crux of the story and a typographic illustration based off it,” he said. For example, for Parashat Re’eh, he made interpretive illustrations of the beasts Jews are allowed to eat, which include an ox, sheep, goat and antelope. The poster is called, “What’s for dinner.”

In all of Smith’s work, he uses vivid colors that jump off the page — or wall. 

Making Judaism radiate with color Read More »

Meant2Be: ‘Committed’

This year marks 21 years that I’ve been married to my husband, Robbie. As long as I can remember, we’ve played this little game that whenever we meet someone who’s been married for 20-plus years, we ask: “What’s your secret?” My husband and I have gotten dozens of answers over the past 21 years.

Some of the funnier answers have been:

“He makes me laugh.”

“She’s hot, I’m not.”

“Her mother lives in Baltimore.”

There have been dozens of answers, but there’s one answer that has left me uneasy. One that has made me actually frown every time I hear it. When I hear it, I feel a wave of nausea bubble over from my kidneys — like a ball and chain is dragging me into an oblivion of “aaah, you poor thing” rhetoric. 

That answer is: “Commitment”

Commitment?

I know you are surprised. I am in a monogamous relationship, which I deeply value. So I do respect commitment. But I can’t deal with the secret of marriage being commitment. There’s a difference.

When someone tells me the secret to his or her 42-year marriage is commitment, I think, “Really? You are bound to each other because you are committed?” It sounds like a psyche sentence or a prison punishment. Or the theme song to that discount store with tons of toilet paper named Smart & Final that many people associate with marriage.

I’d like to believe we stick with a spouse because of love, and the byproduct of that love is commitment, not the other way around. If the answer to the secret of being married for 20-plus years is that you are merely committed to staying there, then I’m going to assume you’re just too lazy to get divorced. But that’s just me.

I guess when I think of “commitment,” I think of these words: responsibility, obligation, duty, tie, liability, task, engagement, arrangement. Those words are the least kind, loving, romantic, hot, sexy, sweet words. They are the sort of words that you’d use for things such as doing taxes, organizing your pantry or getting a colonoscopy. These words speak of a different sort of union. And I’m not really interested in having that sort of love.

A puppy. A puppy needs that sort of love. Have you ever been told you need to shell out $500 to learn how to hand-feed your Chihuahua because she has acid reflux and you might get doggy vomit all over your hands? Now there’s an obligatory commitment, if I’ve ever heard one.

I’m not saying when you’re married you don’t have to do gross stuff. I’m just saying, that’s not the secret to a happy marriage. So, no, I don’t want my marriage to be like owning a dog.

You know what also needs commitment? Plants. Plants need someone to show up every day and do the same task, Every. Single. Day. Water, plant food and repeat. Sure, there’s that exciting time of the month when you move the plant a quarter of an inch to be in the light. Yes, that sounds super hot. Let’s face it, owning a plant takes commitment, but it’s also monotonous, boring and predictable. Nope, I don’t want my marriage to be like watering a plant either. I don’t think that’s the secret to a happy marriage.

So I guess that if someone asked me the secret to my 20-plus-year marriage, I’d say: “The pursuit to grasp romantic love.”

I say the pursuit, because it is a constant quest, one that sometimes comes very easily, and other times comes with more exertion. I never signed up for a committed marriage — not that I want him flying off and having an affair with some cowgirl named CiCi — but I definitely need more than his willingness to feel obligated to stay with me and for me to feel the responsibility to never leave. I think the secret to our great marriage is that our commitment to each other is the side-effect, not the conductor to our love. Our goal is always to strive to fall in love; I think that’s our secret. We work on falling in love every day. And when I don’t feel as if I’m falling, then I flip out, have a temper tantrum and wear a tight dress until we get back on track to start falling all over again.

So that’s my secret to 21 happy years. We fall. Every. Single. Day. And it’s never monotonous, boring or predictable. I’m not saying we have always gotten it right, or that we have not sunk into those “committed” days, but, thank God, we have never been happy with that mediocrity. We have continued to strive for awesome, and I think that’s our secret to staying together for 21 years.

So, no. Commitment is not the secret to our marriage. Thank the good Lord — if it were, I’d need to start calling Robbie “Fern” and buy him a blue pot to sleep in.


Chava Tombosky is an executive producer and a director at Deer-Vision Motion Pictures, a recording artist and an ongoing writer for The Huffington Post and for her personal blog, “Thelma & Louise.” 

Do you have a story about dating, marriage, singlehood or any important relationship in your life? Email us at meant2be@jewishjournal.com.

Meant2Be: ‘Committed’ Read More »