Is Golfer Corey Pavin Jewish?

It's complicated. Yes, professional golfer Corey Pavin was born a Jew. But no, he does not practice Judaism. In religious practice he is a Born Again Christian. We don't understand how he can be a "Born Again" Christian since he was born a Jew. He is fervent in his Christianity, one of the few golfers who in interviews used to openly thank Jesus for his success on the tour.

Whatever his beliefs are now, in the Champions Tour's Allianz Championship last weekend, he made one of the most remarkable short iron shots we ever saw, a talented chip from an impossible lie up against a tree root.



Pavin is right handed but he reversed his eight iron and chipped left handed to within 5 feet of the pin. He then went on to win the tournament in a playoff. Blogger Jonathan Wall said of the stroke, "it probably ranks right up there with some of the best, and most clutch, recovery shots in the history of the game."

Here is the video clip - see at around 2:00 into the clip.



If we ever hit a shot like that one we might say a blessing like, “Blessed [art thou, O Lord, our God, King of the Universe,] who is good and does good.”

Read More

What a Deal! Four Kindle Tractates for 99 cents - Soncino Babylonian Talmud Me'ilah Tamid Middoth and Kinnim

Step right up. What a Deal! Hot New Releases. Four Kindle Talmud Tractates for 99 cents.

Soncino Babylonian Talmud Me'ilah Tamid Middoth and Kinnim [Kindle Edition]

Kindle Product Description

ME'lLAH (Trespass): Treats of the laws of Sacrilege or making unlawful use of consecrated things, in accordance with Lev. 5:15-16. Six Chapters.

TAMID (the Continual Offering): Describes the Temple service, in connection with the daily morning and evening sacrifice, prescribed in Ex. 29:38-41, and Num. 28:2-8. Seven Chapters.

MIDDOTH (Dimensions): Contains the measurements and descriptions of the Temple, its courts, gates and halls and the Altar, and includes an account of the service of the priestly watches in the Temple. Five Chapters.

KINNIM (Bird nests): Gives the regulations for the offering of birds prescribed in expiation of certain offences and certain conditions of uncleanness (see Lev. 1:14; 5:7 and 12:8) and discusses the case in which birds belonging to different persons or to different offerings have become mixed up with one another. Three Chapters.

Wait! These books are outselling "God's Favorite Prayers"

Read More

Is Nicki Minaj Jewish?

No, pop singer Nicki Minaj is not a Jew. She is multiracial -- of African, Trinidadian and Indo-Asian descent (Times).

She has riled up the Church with her song performance at the Grammy Awards.

Catholic League takes aim at Minaj

A leading Catholic activist group is upset with Nicki Minaj for her exorcism-themed performance at the Grammy Awards, condemning the rapper for the "vulgar" sexual undertones during her set.

The Super Bass hitmaker staged a bizarre performance art show at music's big night as she debuted her new song Roman Holiday at Los Angeles' Staples Center, surrounded by dancing choir boys and a man dressed up as a priest.

The show depicted the exorcism of her alter-ego, Roman - but the elaborate set has not been well-received by Bill Donahue, the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.

In a post on the Catholic League's official website, Donahue brands Minaj a "fool" and describes his anger at one sexually suggestive part of the gig.

He writes, "Perhaps the most vulgar part was the sexual statement that showed a scantily clad female dancer stretching backwards while an altar boy knelt between her legs in prayer. Finally, Come All Ye Faithful was sung while a man posing as a bishop walked on stage; Minaj was shown levitating."

Donahue is blaming Grammy bosses for failing to put a stop to what he claims was a sacrilegious performance.

He adds, "None of this was by accident, and all of it was approved by The Recording Academy, which puts on the Grammys. Whether Minaj is possessed is surely an open question, but what is not in doubt is the irresponsibility of The Recording Academy. Never would they allow an artist to insult Judaism or Islam."

Bill Donohue, Please condemn "God's Favorite Prayers"

Read More

Secular Israelis attack Haredim with nude Gauguin and Botticelli posters

A new escalation in the current culture wars -- poster wars -- in Israel.

Nude images hung in religious J'lem neighborhood

Haredi residents of Kiryat Yovel neighborhood in Jerusalem shocked to discover that paintings of nude women are hung on local bulletin boards – during Shabbat
Kobi Nahshoni

The Secular-haredi tensions over the exclusion of women reached new heights in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Kiryat Yovel where there is a growing haredi community. Local bulletin boards were recently pasted with pictures of women posing almost entirely in the nude.

The pictures were put up suring the Sabbath and included a caption that read: "The glorification of women." The haredi residents were horrified by the "abominable signs" but could not remove them because it was the holy day and doing so would involve desecrating the Sabbath.

Many signs were hung on the walls and fences of building sites in the neighborhood some with pictures of The Birth of Venus by Italian painter Botticelli, others featured the painting Two Tahitian Women by Painter Paul Gauguin.

The ANASH news website reported that the haredi residents were furious over the secular provocation which they claim, joins a series of acts of harassment against them. The secular struggle campaign headquarters made it clear they were not behind the acts – but were less than critical of the acts themselves.

Rutie Vazana, a religious resident of Kiryat Yovel told Ynet: "We immediately understood that (the acts were carried out) by the handful of secular residents campaigning against the neighborhood's "haredization."

Vazana believes beyond all doubt that the people behind the signs had no artistic or commercial intentions, their goal was to challenge the haredi population. In her opinion "it is clear that this was an intentional anti-haredi act."

She noted that as soon as Shabbat was out her husband and others removed the posters.

Ronit Gilboa from the secular struggle campaign headquarters in Kiryat Yovel said that she saw the posters in the neighborhood but had no information about the sources responsible.

Unlike the haredi residents, Gilboa found a positive aspect to the signs and said: "It was a nice decoration for the neighborhood – Gauguin and Botticelli. I'm not dissimulating; they really are beautiful works of art and are preferable to the Pashkevillim (haredi posters).

"This may be intentional secular provocation , but that's what the haredi residents do in the neighborhood every day – with their attempts to take over, their calls of 'Shabbos' and 'sluts' and by turning quiet synagogues into noisy yeshivas that operate from 5 am to midnight. The haredim have not realized that Kiryat Yovel will not surrender."

Read More

Kindle your Daf Yomi Talmud Study for $.99 with the Soncino English Translation of Babylonian Talmud Tractate Temurah

The Soncino Babylonian Talmud tractate Temurah - Kindle Edition is $.99 at Amazon.

The daily study of the Talmud called Daf Yomi starts tractate Temurah on Friday, February 17.

[No Kindle yet? Pick one up at Staples or Target where the touch is $99 this week with a $20 or $10 rebate.]

Babylonian Talmud tractate TEMURAH (Substitution): Sets forth the rules governing the substitution of one offering for another in accordance with the law prescribed in Lev. XXVII, 10. Seven Chapters.

This edition of the classic Soncino English Talmud translation was reformatted by Reuven Brauner.

Brauner's new and excellent Reformatted Soncino Talmud (in PDF) is available free at http://www.halakhah.com/ where it has attracted a record number of hits and downloads.

Get your copy of the new Kindle volume today. Let's make the Talmud a big international best seller.

Updates!
Two more Kindle volumes are available! Kerithoth and Me'ilah

"God's Favorite Prayers" was published by Talmudic Books

Read More

From Talmudic Books: "Kosher Talmud: Babylonian Talmud Hullin" - live now and available for ordering

Another new Kindle Edition from Talmudic Books: "Kosher Talmud: Babylonian Talmud Hullin" - live for sale now and available for ordering at Amazon.

Description: To know what food is kosher, that is, fit to eat according to rabbinic Judaism, you must study the principles set forth in this volume, the Babylonian Talmud Tractate Hullin. This translation, adheres closely to the text so that the reader has a sense of the structure and balance of the original. Yet at the same time it conveys the flow of the legal arguments and debates, the dramatic unfolding of events in stories, and the sensitivities to words and language in the exegetical texts. Its aim is to facilitate a smooth conversation between readers and the text so that, without consulting the original Hebrew and Aramaic version, they can appreciate the substantive meaning and recognize some major aspects of the style of the Talmudic text.

The free Kindle book sample (Click on: Send sample now) is quite large because the book itself is over 570 pages in print format.

Here is what one scholarly reviewer said at length in praise of the book:

From Ioudaios Review. Reviewed by: Sigrid Peterson, Department of Religious Studies, University of Pennsylvania.

“All may slaughter,” has to be one of the more memorable three-word opening lines ever invented – right up there with “Call me Ishmael.”  While the latter is the opening to Melville’s Moby Dick, the former is less readily identifiable. In fact, the words “All may slaughter” open and form the reiterated recall to the ground theme of Tzvee Zahavy’s modern English translation of Hullin, one of the Tractates of the Babylonian Talmud. On beginning Moby Dick, I am sure I would feel conscientious and obligated and virtuous and bored. Similarly, that was my expectation in opening Hullin on preparing to review it. That expectation has been dispelled by this accessible and fascinating portrayal of the world of the rabbis.

…The critical question in evaluating this work, and Z.’s contribution, is the quality of the translation. I am happy to report that it is an excellent translation. Z. has managed the difficult task of keeping to a literal rendition of the Aramaic and Mishnaic Hebrew of the original, while making excellent sense as one reads the English version alone. Often, translations of rabbinic literature represent paraphrases, and pass along the traditional meaning of a passage. This approach is extremely frustrating to one who is learning the language from an academic point of view, because words and phrases do not always mean, in the translated literature, what they seem to mean lexically. One often has the sense of being tricked.

Zahavy’s translation does not perpetuate this world of special meanings that lack any correspondence with the words of the text. Nevertheless, he translates with full knowledge of those meanings, as a one-time Yeshiva University student under the late R. Soloveitchik, the celebrated posek (decider of difficult questions of Jewish law). Now, however, from his academic vantage point as a professor in the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Studies at the University of Minnesota, Z. has provided the reader with clear English equivalents of the Mishnaic Hebrew and Aramaic of the original, as well as the parenthetical comments that are necessary to translate the laconicities of the original that contribute so much to that sense that understanding the language is never enough.

For example, the Mishnaic Hebrew phrase BO MISTAKEL does have the extended meaning “here is the proof,” and the Soncino edition of the Babylonian Talmud provides that translation. Z., however, translates “Come and take note.” This literal meaning becomes amply clear in the context; it is hard to see why the phrase needed to be given a special meaning over and above the literal translation.

The overall excellence of Z.’s translation gains from such features of Neusner’s approach as the bracketed explanatory concepts which take the place of Soncino’s footnotes. Z. uses these conventions with extraordinary economy and respect for the text and the reader. Z. has mastered the Neusner approach, and as a result the text speaks clearly for itself and the world it portrays.

Zahavy’s choices of American English equivalents are generally excellent; perhaps I was at first taken aback by his use of ‘heretics’ to translate MINIM, the word the Rabbis often used to designate Christians. After some consideration, I found that I agreed with Z.’s choice. The discussion distinguishes between Jewish and Gentile heretics with respect to the validity of their acts of ordinary slaughter (p. 72). I would have found two words, apostate and gentile, understandable in the English, yet I agree with a translation technique that finds the same equivalent for all cases, however odd the concept of Gentile heretic sounds at first.

What is it about Hullin that dispelled my initial sense of obligation, virtue, and boredom? Why do such excellent work as Z.’s, to translate an ordinary collection of rabbinic discussions of minutiae? The answer lies in the content of Hullin. Come and take note.

Hullin means “ordinary slaughter.” It is not until one is well into the discussion that the relationship of the book to its origins in Deut 12:21 is explored. Upon entering the land, all worship was to be in a central location, which meant that sacrificing animals for worship and food could only occur at that place. Until that point in the story, only priests could slaughter; however, priests could be found in a number of local sanctuaries. Now that the cult was to be centralized, there were no local priests to slaughter the meat, offering a portion for sacrifice, keeping a share, and returning most of the meat to the devotee upon some occasion for feasting. Now the rule would become “All may slaughter,” so that outside the designated central place people could still eat meat. The Deut 12:21 passage is cited as follows in this edition…:

R. Yemar said, “The verse says, ‘[If the place which the Lord your God will choose to put his name there is too far from you], then you may kill (ZBHT), any of your herd or your flock, which the Lord your God has given you...]’

I know of no one who has suggested that the intention of Hullin is to encourage vegetarianism. That may well be the effect, however, of reading through easily understandable discussions of the validity of slaughter if the knife is examined afterwards and found to be notched or nicked when the cut was made in a sawing fashion, back and forth. It is a bloody book.

It is in the midst of such discussions, however, following the details of what renders meat TEREFAH, “torn” or fatally damaged in some way that would render the meat carrion, that one learns the fascinating and relevant bit of rabbinic lore that it is not a capital crime to kill someone who is terminally ill, or TEREFAH.

“All may slaughter,” means women as well as men may slaughter; does it mean Samaritans, gentiles, apostates? The Mishna has already qualified the permission somewhat, in saying that the deaf-mute and the idiot and the minor may not slaughter, on the practical grounds of being unlikely to do it properly. However, if supervised, they too may slaughter. The discussions range widely and show some of the best of rabbinic thought, without omitting to display the pickiness of the issues. Yet the first word, “all,” characterizes the attempt at rabbinic inclusiveness.

The portrayal in Hullin of the rabbinic world grappling with the implications of the word “all” is fascinating. A similar discussion of the extent of meaning implied by permitting “all” to do something is found at the beginning of the first volume of b. ‘Arak., 2A-2B. There the Mishna begins “All [persons] are fit to evaluate,” in the Soncino translation, or “All may pledge the Valuation [of others],” in Neusner’s translation… The discussion is confusing, however, and neither translation explains the meaning of what it is the Mishna has permitted “all” to do. Also, the discussion in b. ‘Arak. wanders around, sometimes including women and minors, sometimes excluding one or the other, in a consideration of various other occasions where “all” are permitted to do something. In contrast, “All may slaughter” is a straightforward statement that requires a minimum of social explanation for today’s reader. The discussion that ensues is straightforward enough—by rabbinic standards, that is.

While the initial discussion in Hullin deals with the standard group of deaf-mutes, minors, and imbeciles, who comprise those who are excepted from mishnaic permission to slaughter, women are unequivocally admitted under the wings of the inclusive “all.” Nor does Hullin show a rabbinic discussion that is completely non-sexist, and therefore an inaccurate representation of the rabbinic world. Hullin provides insight into a world that is not hermetically sealed off from reality; that tends to prefer academic points to the close study of animal anatomy; that occasionally takes the world of women for granted; and that has a great deal of investment in determining the ethical way in which humans should proceed – in the specific case of ordinary slaughter of our food, and in the general case of the abstract consideration of “all” and its exclusions.

The discussion in Hullin is simple, clear, and precise. One does not need extensive explanation of rabbinic concepts to understand and follow the discussion. I have begun to imagine using this edition of Hullin as the text for a beginning course in Rabbinic Judaism, and find myself enthusiastic about the prospects. Hullin would also work well as a text for those fascinating courses that are often listed and seldom taught, where some students are reading the original language, and some are reading an English translation.

A Seminar on Christian Origins might look at Hullin in this edition to gain a preliminary understanding of a rabbinic view of Christianity. Since there is also material defining sacred and profane time, as well as grappling with the effects of idolatry and apostasy on the food supply, one might wish to use selections from Hullin in any number of approaches to the academic study of religion(s)…

# 1 Talmudic Books best seller: "God's Favorite Prayers"

Read More

WSJ: A rabbi, a priest and a minister walk into an op-ed

The rabbi at the posh KJ synagogue on 85th street has poked his ultra-conservative head into a political fray. Here is the quintessence of how to overstate an opinion, bathing it in the waters of our finding fathers, anointing it with the oils of patriotism. Ahem. Way out of line.

United We Stand for Religious Freedom
ObamaCare's contraception mandate stands the First Amendment on its head.
By DONALD WUERL, CHARLES COLSON AND MEIR Y. SOLOVEICHIK

Stories involving a Catholic, a Protestant and a Jew typically end
with a punch line. We wish that were the case here, but what brings us
together is no laughing matter: the threat now posed by government
policy to that basic human freedom, religious liberty.

Last month the federal Department of Health and Human Services
announced that the Affordable Care Act requires employers to pay for
insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilizations and
contraception. What made the announcement especially troubling is that
HHS specifically declined to exempt religious institutions that serve
those outside their own faiths, such as hospitals and schools.

Coverage of this story has almost invariably been framed as a conflict
between the federal government and the Catholic bishops. Zeroing in on
the word "contraception," many commentators have taken delight in
pointing to surveys about the use of contraceptives among Catholics,
the message being that any infringement of religious freedom involves
an idiosyncratic position that doesn't affect that many people.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The Catholic Church's
teaching on contraception (not to mention abortion and surgical
sterilization) has been clear, consistent and public. HHS Secretary
Kathleen Sebelius's decision would force Catholic institutions either
to violate the moral teachings of the Catholic Church or abandon the
health-care, education and social services they provide the needy.
This is intolerable.

And while most evangelicals take a more permissive view of
contraception, they share with Catholics the moral conviction that the
taking of human life in utero, whether surgically or by abortifacient
drugs, violates the basic human right to life. Evangelical nonprofits
such as Prison Fellowship would therefore also have to choose between
violating their consciences or paying fines that would ultimately
destroy their ability to help the people they are committed to
helping.

Even worse than the financial impact is the breach of faith
represented by Ms. Sebelius's decision. Her notion of an "appropriate
balance" between religious freedom and "increasing access" to
"important preventive services" stands the First Amendment on its
head.

In 1790, George Washington exchanged letters with Moses Seixas, the
warden of the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, R.I. Seixas praised the
newly formed United States for "affording to All liberty of
conscience, and immunities of citizenship." People who knew all too
well what it meant to be deprived of the "invaluable rights of free
Citizens" held religious liberty and freedom of conscience most dear.

In reply, Washington wrote that U.S. citizens had a "right to applaud
themselves" for setting an example of "an enlarged and liberal policy"
that enshrined freedom of conscience. He added that the ability of
members of one faith to seek the benefit of all Americans is the
foundation of America's civic strength.

We see evidence of that strength all around us: If a working mother's
child needs to visit the emergency room, there's a good chance the
hospital is a Catholic one. If an ex-offender needs help readjusting
to life outside of prison, there's a good chance help will come from a
Christian ministry like Prison Fellowship.

Yet instead of encouraging the different faith communities to continue
their vital work for the good of all, the Obama administration is
forcing them to make a choice: serving God and their neighbors
according to the dictates of their respective faiths—or bending the
knee to the dictates of the state.

For Jews, George Washington's letter has always been cherished. It
embodies the promise extended by America not only to them, but to all
citizens. That is why many in the Jewish community are alarmed to see
the very religious freedom Washington praised centuries ago endangered
by Washington's successor. "May the children of the stock of Abraham
who dwell in this land," Washington wrote, "continue to merit and
enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants."

At this critical moment, Americans of every faith, as guardians of
their own freedom, must, in the words of the First Amendment,
"petition the government for the redress of grievances." That's why
over the past two years more than 500,000 people have signed the
"Manhattan Declaration" in defense of religious liberty. They believe,
as do we, that under no circumstances should people of faith violate
their consciences and discard their most cherished religious beliefs
in order to comply with a gravely unjust law.

That's something that this Catholic, this Protestant and this Jew are
in perfect agreement about.

Cardinal Wuerl is the archbishop of Washington, D.C. Mr. Colson is the
founder of Prison Fellowship and the Colson Center for Christian
Worldview. Rabbi Soloveichik is director of the Straus Center for
Torah and Western Thought at Yeshiva University and associate rabbi at
Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun in Manhattan.

Hat tip to Abe, thanks.

Read More