Three years ago on this day, in London and within 50 seconds of each other, there were bombings at three subway stations and an hour later, at 9:47am, there was a fourth one on a bus in Tavistock Square. Fifty two innocent people died that day while 700 were injured. Has Britain learned any lessons?

Last year there was a failed terrorist plot by Muslim doctors, also in Britain, has their government learned any lessons? Rather than putting restrictions on the preachings of extremist Imams, rather than kick them out of the country, they are allowed to freely continue preaching their hatred… all in the spirit of free speech and… multiculturalism. Freedom of Speech is one of the cardinal principles of a free society, it is in fact what keeps that society free. However, another - and at least - as important a principle also says that the right to move one’s fist stops where the other’s cheek starts. What does that mean? It means that when freedom of speech is abused by preaching violence against any other segment of society it must proscribed!

Read the rest of this post at: Freedom’s Cost

A fascinating article appeared over at the Telegraph about an Orthodox Jew Reva Mann. She was born in an orthodox home; her father was a rabbi. She was raised according to Orthodox Judaism’s strict rules, but rebelled. She lost her virginity when she was 15 years old, in the synagogue, after which she shouted “Hallelujah” from the bima (pulpit).” When she found a non-Jewish boyfriend, her father had had enough and kicked her out of his house. (more…)

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about a religious group in Turkey called the Dönme, after reading an article about them at Forward.com (Jewish news). Before reading that article, I had never heard of the Dönme, but after reading it, I was fascinated and wanted to find out more about them. Little over a week ago, a person who wishes to remain anonymous, sent me a lot of articles about them, hoping that they would help me understand the Dönme better. They most surely did, so here is my follow-up post (due to the length of my article, I have decided to publish in it two parts - part 2 about, among other things, their Lithurgy, Commandments, etc. and the endnotes - will be published tomorrow).

Because you all might not remember my first post on the Dönme, so here is a short introduction to who they are: they are the offspring of Jews who lived in the 17th century and were followers of rabbi Shabbatai Tzevi. Tzevi - and his followers - believed that he was the Jewish Messiah. The Ottoman rulers, however, were not very fond of the idea of having the Jewish Messiah among them and forced Tzevi to convert to Islam in 1666. Soon many of his followers followed suit and moved to Saloniki (then Ottoman, now Greek), where they lived for many generations.

Although they outwardly acted as all Muslims, they privately (or secretly better) “maintained a belief that Shabbatai Tzevi was the messiah, practiced kabbalistic rituals, and recited prayers in Hebrew and Judeo-Spanish.” [1] According to the descendents of the original Dönme living in Istanbul, “the Dönme in Salonika saw themselves as a community apart; fulfilling the commandments of Shabbatai Tzevi caused Dönme to only marry among themselves, avoid relations with Jews, maintain their separate identity guided by detailed genealogies, and bury their dead in distinct cemeteries.” [2] After the Turkey’s defeat in the first World War and the following (successful) Turkish Independence War, the Dönme moved from Salonika (which was, from then on, Greek) to Turkey.

In Turkey, the Dönme continued to adhere to their religion in private, while publicly pretending to be Muslims. On Friday’s they (sometimes) went to the mosque, on all the other days, however, they secretly practiced their own religious customs. In fact, they are so secretive about it no Sabbatean “will ever publicly admit to being one.” Quite amazing is that “the Sabbateans themselves learn their real identities only when they turn 18, when the secret is finally revealed to them by their parents. This tradition of zealously maintaining a double identity in Muslim society has been passed on for generations.” [3]

Although they are called Dönme by outsiders, they call themselves “Sabbateans,” because the term Dönme has a highly negative feeling: “the term implies a conversion that is not genuine” and “there is a stigma attached to to the term dönme, which, like the term kizilbas, tends to connote dissimulation and harbors allegations of heterodox practices often linked to incest.” Besides that, “the term dönme is also used in contemporary Turkish to refer to persons who have undergone a change in sexual idenity.” Needless to say, all of “this adds an additional layer of ambiguity to this already ambiguous term.”[4] This is why I will, from now on, call the dönme as they call themselves: Sabbateans.

The Jerusalem Report (see note 3) had the rare opportunity to talk to a Sabbatean, who does not want to hide his identity. His name: Ilgaz Zorlu. Zorlu is the author of Yes, I Am a Salonikan, “which has been through six printings since its publication earlier this year and which has made its author persona non grata in the Sabbatean community.” Zorlu has had enough of all the secrecy and is “determined to break the silence, to put the issue on the public agenda, and to prove that the Sabbateans are actually crypto-Jews, that their Muslim appearances are nothing more than a sham.”

The reason that he wants to convince the Jewish authorities (so to speak) that the Sabbateans are Jews, is that he wants them to be accepted as such. He wants to be recognized as a Jew - one with strange customs (for Jews at least) - but a Jew nonetheless. Sadly for Zorlu, other Jews do not except the Sabbateans. They consider them to be neither Jews nor Muslims. Zorlu’s 25-year-old cousin and a student of business administration who wished to remain anonymous when he talked with The Jerusalem Report, “tried twice to pray in local Jewish synagogues, but was kicked out both times.” [5]

All in all, there are an estimated 15,000-20,000 Sabbateans living in Turkey today.

The community is divided into three subgroups, who have little interaction with each other: the Karakas, Kapanci and Yacobis. Each group has its own agon (rabbi) and synagogue. The synagogues are kept secret - usually just rooms in private apartments or basements - and constantly change location; no outsider has ever been allowed to see one, and not even all the Sabbateans know where they are.[6]

When I read the articles the anonymous person sent to me, I was struck by the identity problem the Sabbateans have. They consider themselves Jews, but are not accepted as such. They consider themselves Turks, but cannot publicly say that they are not Muslims (because they fear that doing will hurt their chances to prosper / succeed). The Sabbateans are “viewed as a community with a double identity. The term itself, “connotes a conintuously changing or unstable identity” used by some scholars as a metaphor.[7]

Sabbateans were always very secular (which is quite logical of course). They were educated in a non-religious way and, again logically, strongly supported the revolution by the Young Turks, who wanted to - slowly but surely - make Turkey more secular. When Atatürk became more powerful, and liberated Turkey from the occupying forces, they supported him and his very secular agenda as well.

Once the Turkish Republic was established, “two major events brought Sabbateanism into public view.”[8] These two events were the Karakaşlı Rüşdü affair and the Capital Levy affair in 1942-1944:

In January of 1924, Rüşdü Bey, who belonged to the most conservative group of Sabbateans in Turkey, made an appeal to the Turkish Parliament in which he critiqued Sabbateans for not being “true” Muslims/Turks. This unusual public statement, caused, it seems, by Rüşdü Bey’s excommunication due to his marriage to a person from outside the group, resulted in widespread public debate on Sabbatean identity. Reportedly, many documents were destroyed during this period by families fearing an official investigation, and the Karakaşlı Rüşdü affair seems to have strengthened the resolve of Sabbateans to assimilate.

After the Karakaşlı Rüşdü affair Sabbatean identity faded again from public view until the Capital Levy of 1942. During World War II, the Turkish government instituted a head tax, the declared goal of which was to tax who had made fortunes as a result of the war economy. The Capital Levy, which remained in force between 11 November 1942 and 15 March 1944, had another goal that was not officially stated: to make possible the transfer of capital from the non-Muslim communities of Jews, Aremenians and Greek Orthodox to the majority population of Muslim origin. The Capital Levy largely succeeded in replacing the non-Muslim bourgeoisie of the city of Istanbul with a bourgeoisie of Muslim origine.

Although they were officially Muslim, individuals of Sabbatean background were charged higher taxes than Muslims, and treated in the same manner as non-Muslims during the Capital Levy episode. Of the two individuals charged the highest amount of tax during this period, one was Jewish and the other of Sabbatean origin. The Capital Levy was experienced as a great shock by persons of Sabbatean background who identified with the Turkish Republic and Turkish national identity, and who had largely ruptured their ties to a Sabbatean idenitity. The Capital Levy episode did more than illustrate the exclusionary nature of Turkish national identity; it suggested that anyone can be considered as a potential outsider in a society where the basis of identity is essentially unstable. The deep-seated paranoia and the constant search for the “enemy within” which characterizes Turkish political culture is a product of the Turkey’s modernity project’s refusal to acknowledge the past.[9]

The Capital Levy episode had a severe impact on the Sabbatean community: fear (for) and the experience of discrimination, led many Sabbateans to deny their heritage and to encourage marriages with Turkish Muslims. “As a result, the Sabbatean community has largely ceased to be a separate community, while a wall of silence within the family has created a rift between parents and children.”[10]

It is in that light that we have to look at before mentioned Ilgaz Zorlu: he tried to re-open the debate, but - above all - he tried to appeal “to persons of Sabbatean heritage to acknowledge their ethnic / religious idenitity.” He - at least - succeeded in the former: his work, “combined with the exposure in the media, has turned into a media campaign to bring Sabbateanism into public view as an ethnic/religious identity.” Sadly, however “it has done so in a way that has unfortunately encouraged pre-existing stereotypes about the community to resurface, has played into the hands of anti-Semitic groups, and made it more difficult for individuals of Sabbatean heritage to publicly discuss their identity.”[11]

The Sabbateans also - reportedly - played an interesting role in Turkish politics. According to Sabbateans - “from whose intelligentsia came some of the most active leaders of the revolution” - “were caught up in the great cultural revolution”[12] under Atatürks rule. They supported, even embraced, Atatürk’s secular agenda. Quite some Turkish politicians have - the last century - been ‘accused’ of being Sabbatean. One of them is Ismail Cem [1940-2007], Turkey’s Foreign Minister in 1997 (in the 55th administration of Turkey). Cem, however, denied being Sabbatean and died in January of this year.

There are even conspiracy theories alive and well about the political power of the Sabbateans:

Cem has long denied such claims, but he is only the latest target of a conspiracy theory that dates to the founding of the Turkish Republic in 1923. At its heart, two issues: the legitimacy of a secular regime in this mainly Muslim country, and the question of what it means to be a Turk. “The Sabbateans have a monopoly over Turkish society,” claims Mehmet Sevket-Eygi, columnist for the Islamic newspaper, Milli Gazete. “The Turks themselves live like the subject population of British India.”[13]

In this regard too, Zorlu is often criticized for writing his book I am From Salonika. According to some, his book and his claims that certain important people were (and are) from Sabbatean heritage have fed already existing prejudices and created and worsened conspiracy theories:

According to Marc Baer, Turkish historian at Pittsburgh University, the most troubling thing about Zorlu’s work is that “his claims about his community echo anti-Jewish and anti-Sabbatean myths popular in Turkey.” Zorlu’s conviction that “Turkey’s founders were all of of Sabbatean origin” has spurred religious newspapers to run headlines reading “Ataturk studied in a Jewish school” and “100,000 Sabbateans in Turkey.” It is now “common knowledge” that a media mogul and politicians ranging from the wife of the Prime Minister, Bulent Ecevit, through the recently resigned economy minister, Kemal Dervis, to the ubiquitous Ismail Cem, are of Sabbatean origin. “Zorlu has sold his soul to the fundamentalists”, says Rifat Bali.[14]

As mentioned in the quote above, not only did Zorlu’s book feed anti-Semitism and anti-Sabbateanism already existing in Turkey, he also accused several important people of being Sabbateans: Bulent Ecevit’s wife was Rahşan Ecevit (Bulent Ecevit passed away in 2006, Rahşan is still alive). Whether that is true or not: no one can say. Some even believe that Mustafa Kemal Atatürk himself was Sabbatean (or his father to be more precise, about whom very little is known).[15]

Other famous - alleged - Sabbateans are: “Mohammed Djavid Bey, one of the leaders of the ‘Young Turk’ movement, who for a while was Prime Minister of Turkey,” “Nazhat Fayek (another former Prime Minister), Mustapha Aref (a former Minister of the Interior), and Musleh al-Din Adel, a Deputy Minister of Education,”[16] and, lastly, it is even said that Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the father of Turkey, was of Sabbatean heritage[17].

The reason for this last ‘accusation’ are:
- Atatürk was born and raised in Salonika
- His father - of whom little is known - behaved like a Sabbatean: “outwardly observing Muslim ceremonies while inwardly scoffing at them”[18]
- Itamar Ben-Avi wrote in one of his books that, in 1911, he had a conversation with Atatürk, who was then still known as Mustafa Kemal. During that conversation, Atatürk reported said: “I’m a descendant of Sabbetai Zevi - not indeed a Jew any more, but an ardent admirer of this prophet of yours. My opinion is that every Jew in this country would do well to join his camp.” Furthermore, Atatürk said that he had a little, secret prayer of his own. His most important prayer: “‘Shema Yisra’el, Adonai Elohenu, Adonai Ehad!’” For those who know: this is the most important Jewish prayer[19]

Holly,

Thank you for answering my second set of questions.

To my question, “If there is no Heaven or Hell, No Eternal Reward or Punishment, why live a Godly life?” you answered:

Because we’re supposed to do so! It’s the right thing to do and the essence of being a Jew. Even a Jewish atheist can do it.

I find this to be quite a dogmatic answer. It reminds me of my mother answering my ‘why’ question with “because I told you so.” Let me put it like this, why are we supposed to do so? Why should one live a Godly life? God, I understand, wants us to live a good life, but why? What is the ‘big plan’ that we are working towards, or does such a big plan not exist according to Judaism?

When I asked, “Is Judaism materialistic rather than spiritual? Is it only about life on this earth?” you answered:

Judaism does not separate between material and spiritual as Christianity does. Everything (and especially the material) is spiritual. Judaism has prayers for going to sleep and waking up, for eating and excreting, even for seeing beautiful things in the world.

I find this aspect of Judaism to be fascinating. Indeed, like you point out in the paragraph below the one I quote, Christianity focuses more on death than Judaism does (although I would not say that we Christians are “obsessed” with death). In this regard, Judaism reminds me of Buddhims: seeing God in every day life, in the little things one does, and doing everything - even the seemingly insignificant things - very consciously. In how far do you agree with that comparison?

Lastly, to my question, “Why suffer so much” (if there is no afterlife you answered):

Expectation of an afterlife helps some Jews do justly and remain Jews I’m sure, but this expectation is not necessary for everyone. Yes, life is full of suffering but can also be full of joy.
We can believe that one day all will be good without expecting that we will exist individually at such a time. In most cases, those Jews who became Christians out of persecution continued to be persecuted by Christians. I doubt that very many Jews have ever become Christian out of belief - it was generally to get a job, go to university, or even stay alive. Islam, being more purely monotheistic, is more palatable to Jews than is Christianity. As for Fighting Back - we just DO! BTW, did you know that the Dalai Lama put that same question to a group of Jewish scholars?

Could one, then, in essence say that Judaism is more positive about life / about the world than Christianity? In essence, Christians (especially early Christians who were persecuted) considered life to be full of suffering, but they were able to persist because they believed that they would be rewarded after they died. In a way, that is positive of course (I’ll get my reward), but also negative (life sucks).

Lastly, yes, you sent me a couple of e-mails with booktips, but I will publish those at the end of our conversation (’if you want to know more,’ etc.).

A fascinating article in today’s Jerusalem Post (h/t Holly). The author of the article is Jacob Neusner who wrote a book called A Rabbi Talks with Jesus. Jacob explains:

In the Middle Ages rabbis were forced to engage with priests in disputations in the presence of kings and cardinals on which is the true religion, Judaism or Christianity. The outcome was predetermined. Christians won; they had the swords.

But in the post-WW II era, disputations gave way to the conviction that the two religions say the same thing and the differences between them are dismissed as trivial. Now a new kind of disputation has begun, in which the truth of the two religions is subject to debate. That marks a return to the old disputations, with their intense seriousness about religious truth and their willingness to ask tough questions and engage with the answers.

My book, A Rabbi Talks with Jesus, was one such contemporary exercise of disputation, and now, in 2007, the pope in his new book Jesus of Nazareth in detail has met the challenge point-by-point. Just imagine my amazement when I heard that a Christian reply is fully exposed in Pope Benedict XVI’s reply to A Rabbi Talks with Jesus in his Jesus of Nazareth Chapter Four, on the sermon on the Mount.

POPES INVOLVED in Judeo-Christian theological dialogue? In ancient and medieval times disputations concerning propositions of religious truth defined the purpose of dialogue between religions, particularly Judaism and Christianity. Judaism made its case vigorously, amassing rigorous arguments built upon the facts of Scripture common to both parties to the debate. Imaginary narratives, such as Judah Halevi’s Kuzari, constructed a dialogue among Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, a dialogue conducted by a king who sought the true religion for his kingdom. Judaism won the disputation before the king of the Khazars, at least in Judah Halevi’s formulation. But Christianity no less aggressively sought debate-partners, confident of the outcome of the confrontation. Such debates attested to the common faith of both parties in the integrity of reason and in the facticity of shared Scriptures.

A little later he writes:

If I heard what he said in the Sermon on the Mount, for good and substantive reasons I would not have become one of his disciples. That is difficult for people to imagine, since it is hard to think of words more deeply etched into our civilization and its deepest affirmations than the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount and other pronouncements of Jesus. But, then, it also is hard to imagine hearing those words for the first time, as something surprising and demanding, not as mere clich s of culture. That is precisely what I propose to do in my conversation with Jesus: listen and argue. To hear religious teachings as if for the first time and to respond to them in surprise and wonder - that is the reward of religious disputation in our own day.

I WROTE the book to shed some light on why, while Christians believe in Jesus Christ and the good news of his rule in the kingdom of Heaven, Jews believe in the Torah of Moses and form on earth and in their own flesh God’s kingdom of priests and the holy people. And that belief requires faithful Jews to enter a dissent from the teachings of Jesus, on the grounds that those teachings at important points contradict the Torah.

Read the entire article at the JP.

It sounds like a fascinating book. I always think that the major religions have a lot in common, but we also differ. To pretend otherwise, would be hypocritical. There is no good reason why reasonable people of different faiths cannot have a calm, intellectual discussion about their respective religion.

Lastly, Jacob writes:

WHEN MY publisher asked for suggestions of colleagues to be asked to recommend the book, I suggested Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Rabbi Sacks had long impressed me by his astute and well-crafted theological writings, the leading contemporary apologist for Judaism. I had admired Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings on the historical Jesus and had written to him to say so. He replied and we exchanged offprints and books. His willingness to confront the issues of truth, not just the politics of doctrine, struck me as courageous and constructive.

But now His Holiness has taken a step further and has answered my critique in a creative exercise of exegesis and theology. In his Jesus of Nazareth the Judeo-Christian disputation enters a new age. We are able to meet one another in a forthright exercise of reason and criticism. The challenges of Sinai bring us together for the renewal of a 2,000 year old tradition of religious debate in the service of God’s truth.

Someone once called me the most contentious person he had ever known. Now I have met my match. Pope Benedict XVI is another truth-seeker.

The Pope is a scholar, so it does not surprise me that he is interested in such a debate. He is able to defend his faith intellectually, not just emotionally. He wants to expand his knowledge and understanding of the Holy Word: a debate like this will help him to do so.

Two interesting books, I think that some of you, especially people like Christine Stanley, might appreciate reading these works as well.

Holly,

Thank you for answering my questions yesterday. You wrote:

I do good deeds in memory of my late father - that’s enough of an afterlife for me, although I can handle the the idea of becoming a part of the Mind of God (no self-awareness). I don’t believe in or expect an afterlife but would rather be buried in my current synagogue’s cemetery. I’d be in good company!

And:

some believe in reincarnation and others believe in resurrection but most believe that after death we live on in our good deeds and, if we have them, children.

An afterlife is not nearly as important in Judaism as it is in Christianity. The ancient Egyptians (from whom we fled in the Exodus) were obsessed with Death - we Jews are focused on Life.

Fascinating. I bet that not many people knew that Jews do not believe in an afterlife like Christians do.

For Christians, the afterlife is an important part of life, so to speak. We believe that when we die, we will be saved and we will live eternally. Jesus, of course, died so that we could have eternal life. This gives the Christian a reason to live, and to live good: if we live good, if we focus on God, if we live a Godly life, we will be rewarded in the hereafter.

You do not share this belief. I wonder, therefore, what the role of God is in your life? If there is no (or doesn’t have to be a) ‘heaven’, why live, why live a Godly life? Is, then, Judaism a very material religion? Is it all only about life on this earth? And why suffer so much?

I am happy to announce that TMV co-blogger Holly agreed to have a ‘bloggersation’ about religion. Holly is, as most of you will know, Jewish; I am, as most of you will know as well, very much interested in Judaism. Therefore, I thought, an interreligious conversation could be highly interesting. If not for any of you, then at least for me. So I asked Holly whether it would be alright if I asked her certain questions at my blog, and that she would answer those questions at TMV, then I would respond to her answer, etc., etc. As said, she agreed and this is the first post in this series.

Holly,

Quite a while ago I watched a movie about a man and a woman who were married, but were now divorced. The woman was Jewish, the man Christian. During the the custody battle for their daughter, the subject of religion came up, and the Jewish woman explained that Judaism does not believe in ‘an afterlife.’ I was unaware of this: I thought that both Judaism and Christianity believe in an afterlife.

Was I wrong? Do you personally believe in an afterlife or not and what do they teach about this in the synagogue?

What do you believe happens when we die?

UPDATE I
Holly responded.

David Greenberg sent me an e-mail earlier today, asking me whether I wanted to check out his website and to tell him what I think of it: the website is about Judaism, a subject I am greatly interested in. Of course, I headed over to his website immediately and found it to be fascinating. The website is called “Judaism Online“. It contains many, many highly interesting articles about Judaism, such as Why Don’t Jews Believe in Jesus, Judaism and Islam, Judaism and Buddhism, but also Life After Death, The Story of the Jewish People and Why Keep Kosher?

Be sure to read some of the articles on Judaism Online.

One problem: once you start reading, you don’t want to stop (which might be problematic if you’ve got exams coming up and several essays to write).

A fascinating episode in the history of Judaism:

Far away from the eyes of the Jewish mainstream, in modern-day Turkey there live hundreds, if not thousands, of crypto-Jews — and today, one of their most sacred shrines is in danger.

This is the hidden, fascinating tale of the doenmeh, descendants of the faithful followers of the 17th-century false messiah Sabbetai Tzvi, who converted to Islam in 1666. Tzvi’s own conversion came under duress: The Ottoman sultan demanded that he don the turban or die after nearly one-third of European Jewry had come to believe he was the messiah and had begun swarming into Turkey, expecting the long-awaited triumph of the Jews.

And then he converted to Islam.

That must have disappointed quite some followers. Luckily for him though, not everybody stopped believing in his divine nature:

Tzvi chose to convert, and most of his followers lost hope — but not all of them. Many saw the conversion as a heroic act of tikkun, or repair, and followed their messiah’s lead by outwardly becoming Muslims while secretly maintaining their messianic Jewish faith. They were called doenmeh, meaning “turncoats”— a pejorative term not unlike marrano (“pig.”) Among themselves, they were called ma’aminim, “believers.” Sabbateanism did not die out in 1666, or even 10 years later when Tzvi himself died. There were subsequent messiahs — largely forgotten men like Baruchiah Russo and Jacob Frank — and, as recent scholarship has shown, Sabbateanism greatly influenced the 18th-century emergence of Hasidism. And then there are the doenmeh, who live on until the present day, in secretive communities, at first primarily in Salonika and today almost entirely in present-day Turkey.

What about their situation now?

Over the years, most of the doenmeh assimilated into Islam; many more were annihilated during the Holocaust, and still more have, in modern-day Turkey, come to see their background as a curious but largely irrelevant heritage. But even those who did assimilate usually maintained some knowledge of their ancestry, and doenmeh were among the founders of the secular Turkish republic. Today, many doenmeh are among Turkey’s elite, though it is taboo to speak their names; since doenmeh are regarded as traitors by both Muslims and Jews, it is scandalous to accuse a person of being one of them, even if his or her identity is an open, unspoken secret. (Recently-deceased Turkish foreign minister Ismail Cem, for example, was “outed” by several Turkish newspapers, but he denied being a Sabbatean, and Iglaz Zorlu’s best-selling 1999 memoir, “Yes, I am a Salonikan,” stirred controversy throughout the country.) But the secret is open, like the doenmeh cemeteries outside of Istanbul, with their distinctively unadorned gravestones, and the mosques where doenmeh are known to pray.

Forward’s reporter was lucky enough to speak with a descendant of the doenmeh: Barry Kapandji (fake name). Barry’s father told him about his ancestry when he was nine years old. He has been fascinated by his heritage ever since. Today Barry is worried: the government wants to destroy “the house in Izmir (formerly Smyrna) in which Tzvi is believed to have lived.” Barry tried to organize resistence but there is one minor problem: most doenmeh keep their heritage a secret.

Kapandji: “This is a crime against culture, history and my heritage. The Jewish community elders do not want the house turned into a museum.… They would like Sabbetai’s name to be eradicated from history.”

Sadly, Izmir’s Jewish community did not want to comment on it: what is known, is that “in traditional Jewish circles it is customary to add the epithet ‘Yemach shemo,’ ‘May his name be blotted out,’ to the names of Sabbetai Tzvi and other heretics.”

Dr. Cengiz Sisman, an expert on Sabbateanism who received his doctorate from Harvard University, strongly believes that the house in question is indeed the house where the Jewish heretic was born. If true, “it is an important relic of a key episode in Jewish history,” and its destruction would be a shame. Forward’s Jay Michaelson explains that the doenmeh continued to live in the same neighborhood for centuries: this makes it more likely that the story of the house is true.

Of course there are other reasons to preserve the house Tzvi once lived in: it’s not just part of the history of this Jewish sect, its also part of Jewish history in Turkey and of the history of Turkey. As dr. Sisman explained, it shows the country’s “multicultural heritage.”

Absolutely fascinating: the history of this sect, but also that they still secretly exist. If anyone out there knows more about them, please contact me (send me an e-mail). I would appreciate that greatly.

Truly a fascinating article, I encourage all of you to read it. A big hat tip to Holly for e-mailing me the article.

The Dutch newspaper Nederlands Dagblad reports that the grave of Herod has been found. Herod “The Great” was the ruler of Palestine when Jesus was born. According to the Bible, Herod was so afraid of Jesus, the new King of the Jews, that he ordered his officers to kill all male babies. Mary, Josef and Jesus fled, however, in time. Approximately one year after Jesus was born, Herodes died. The location of his grave was unknown, until now: Israeli archeologist Ehud Netzer found it.

The NY Times has an article up about it as well:

After a long quest in search of King Herod’s tomb, an archaeologist announced Tuesday that he had found what appear to be the ornate remnants of the Roman-era king’s burial site on the edge of the Judean Desert.

Ehud Netzer, a Hebrew University archaeologist, said he knew he had solved the puzzle of Herod’s grave when his team uncovered pieces of a large sarcophagus made of pink Jerusalem limestone and decorated with expertly carved floral motifs. They were found among the ruins of a mausoleum on the site traditionally thought to be the ancient king’s burial grounds.

“The location and unique nature of the findings, as well as the historical record, leave no doubt that this was Herod’s burial site,” Mr. Netzer told reporters…

Mr. Netzer had been excavating the site of Herodium, a palace complex about seven miles south of Jerusalem and situated in the occupied West Bank, since 1972, with the goal of unearthing the various buildings on the site and the tomb. But until an early morning discovery almost three weeks ago, the precise site of the tomb had eluded him.

An account by the first-century historian Flavius Josephus told of the king’s elaborate funeral procession to Herodium, but he did not mention exactly where the tomb was.

Herodium was one of Herod’s many architectural masterpieces in the Holy Land, and according to some, his finest work. For this man of great ego and architectural vision — responsible for the Second Temple in Jerusalem, the desert fortress of Masada, as well as building up the port city of Caesarea and other major projects — this was the place he had chosen to be buried and memorialized.

Experts quotes in Dutch newspapers agree with Netzer: there seems to be little doubt among experts that this was / is, indeed, Herod’s grave.

Quite an important discovery for Israelites, Jews, Christians and, of course, simply humanity.

To read more about Herod go here.

A good article at Arutz Sheva (Jewish Daily News) about Mitt Romney, the Mormon faith, the Republican primaries, and the role of religion in U.S. politics.

For Jewish leaders concerned about the growing mingling of sectarian religion and presidential politics, the surging campaign of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is taking some ominous turns.

The Republican Romney, facing polls indicating that only 29 of Americans believe the nation is ‘ready’ for a Mormon president, has been working frantically to reinforce his religious credentials with the conservative Christian leaders who could play a big role in deciding the outcome of key GOP primaries next year.

And those credentials aren’t entirely confined to his positions on the issues so-called ‘values’ voters care about the most.

In a recent conference call with voters in Iowa, he said “my faith includes a fundamental belief that we are all sons and daughters of a loving God,” and added that “I happen to believe that Jesus Christ is my personal savior and the son of God.”

Romney’s urgent quest to prove he is a ‘genuine’ Christian by publicly airing the kind of religious statements once considered personal reflects the growing emphasis on religion in major campaigns and the growing power of a handful of Evangelical leaders who have set themselves up as the religious judges of candidates.

“It’s not just that religion is an important factor for voters; we’re seeing the creation of a de facto religious test for high office,” said Rabbi James Rudin, senior religious adviser for the American Jewish Committee and author of “The Baptizing of America: the Religious Right’s Plans for the Rest of Us.”

I agree and it is a very worrisome development. To be sure, religion has always played an important role in America / American politics, one might remember John F. Kennedy’s ‘Catholic problem’, but these days it - indeed - appears that the Religious Right or value voters have created a “de facto religious test for high office”.

Not all those who call themselves ‘Evangelical’ are good people, or good leaders, nor all those who are not Evangelical bad people, or bad leaders. Whether someone will be a good or a bad president is dependent on many things, but religion is not one of them.

Yoram Ettinger wrote a very interesting article for Arutz Sheva:

Passover has been a global inspiration for the concept of liberty.

The Exodus from Egypt inspired the Puritans, the Pilgrims and the American Founding Fathers. They considered themselves “the modern day Israelites,” King George III “the modern-day Pharaoh,” the Atlantic “the modern-day Red Sea,” and America “the modern-day Promised Land.” Jefferson, Adams and Franklin considered a proposal for the great seal featuring the parting of the sea with the inscription: “Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to G-d.”

The term “federalism” - based on foedus, the Latin word for “The Covenant” - was coined by the Founding Fathers, who considered themselves “the Modern-Day People of the Covenant.” John Locke, Roger Williams, Thomas Paine and Simon Howard considered the Laws of Moses and the structure of the 12 Tribes - sustaining semi-independence, governed by Moses, Aharon, Joshua and the 70-person legislature - a model for the American political system in general, and for “Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness” in particular.

Moses has become a role model of leadership and national liberation, greatly impacting US democracy, hence his marble replica at the House Chamber on Capitol Hill and at the US Supreme Court (where he is portrayed holding the Ten Commandments). Moses’ concept of Jubilee - which stipulated the return of land to its original owners and the freeing of slaves - constitutes another pivot of liberty. It inspired the anti-slavery movement, including Harriet Beecher Stowe (Uncle Tom’s Cabin) and it has been inscribed on the Liberty Bell, “Proclaim liberty throughout the land to all the inhabitants thereof.” (Leviticus, 25:10) According to Henry George, a top 19th-century economist - who opposed taxation except for that on land, and who was a student of the Torah and the author of Moses, The Law Giver - the Jubilee was Moses’ way of combating monopoly.

Read the whole thing.

On a related note, a while ago I wrote this post for The Moderate Voice about Puritans, Pilgrims, and American exceptionalism.. Quite some Americans found it to be an interesting read, if you haven’t read it yet, please consider doing so now.

h/t Watching America.

David Schraub wrote quite an interesting post about the Jewish religious fest of Passover. He was in doubt this year about whether or not he, a religious Jew, should celebrate this for Jews so important fest. Why?

Well, wonders David, weren’t the ten plagues a bit excessive? And what about the tenth plague? Doesn’t it constitute genocide?

The New York Times has an article up about the Exodus: the flight from the Jews out of Egypt to the promised land. Archeologists say that there is no evidence that the story is true, that, indeed, the Jews fled from Egypt through the desert, etc.

Archeologist Dr. Zahi Hawass even went so far as to call the story of the Exodus “a myth”. He added (about those who do believe that the Exodus happened): “If they get upset, I don’t care. This is my career as an archaeologist. I should tell them the truth. If the people are upset, that is not my problem.”

Which is of course quite correct. He is into science, not into upholding Jewish and Christian beliefs.

Fellow co-blogger at The Moderate Voice Holly forwarded me a great press telegram from the American Jewish Commitee. I’ve decided to publish the article, written by A. James Rudin - the American Jewish Committee’s senior interreligious adviser, and author of the recently published book “The Baptizing of America: The Religious Right’s Plans for the Rest of Us” - in its entirety.

“Well, there you go again.”

With those words hurled at Jimmy Carter during a presidential debate, Ronald Reagan probably won the White House in 1980. With a single stinging barb, Reagan defined Carter’s views and policies as worn-out and wrong-headed, out of step with the majority of the American public.

Reagan’s withering comment can also be applied to the 13 U.S. Christian leaders who visited Iran for eight days in February. The highlight was a 2 1/2-hour meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Alas, there they go again.
(more…)