Status Firearms Control Card

Minhag the cons? (I)

is a subject that fascinates not everyone, but certainly has its value if we are to understand some of the Jewish world today and especially the Sephardic Jewish world.

Everything starts with a realization: there is a kind of mismatch between the current practice of Sephardic Jews called "orthodox" and practice of devout Jews say when they were in North Africa.

I am not speaking here of some Jews who would rather be treated at the quiet beach with a sandwich on the last day of Passover a few hours before the end of the festival, but the Jewish question, implied by the Halacha and obligations.

Some examples:

- since when the Jews of the Maghreb are they wearing black suit and Borsalino?

- since when the Jews of North Africa they follow Halakha policy makers from Baghdad?

These two questions cover two issues that are very emblematic of the turmoil experienced by the Jews of North Africa after his disappearance geographical, mainly due to the mass exodus of Jews from Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco to a lesser extent, to other more welcoming countries such as France, Canada or Israel.

The first question (Borsalino and Sephardim) is approached by a researcher, Yaacov Loupo in a daring book: Metamorphosis ultra-Orthodox Jews in Morocco (ed. Harmattan).

It describes how the Lithuanian Jews, especially after the war, will "recruit" so massive pupils Moroccan instil in them a mode of study and even of life practiced before the war in Eastern Europe. How young Moroccans, "threatened" by the strategy of liberating the Alliance Israelite Universelle, have been recovered by militants of the study none.

What Loupo regret is two things. On the one hand they could not open the Western world as he wanted the IAU, which is a regret perhaps criticism in the light of sometimes overly assimilationist consequences caused by the Alliance and its rupture with the world of Torah.

But also secondly, the loss of "tradition" Sephardic generally, that is to say, how to live a Jewish life, that is what Jewish tradition calls the "minhag", the daily variation of the principles of the Torah.

And here the author fly, all one can also add another factor that the author does not mention: the Lubavitch activism.

That Chabad (Lubavitch) has helped thousands of Sephardic Jews to rediscover their Jewish identity is undeniable. But it has come at the cost of "conversion" in Hasidism sweeping away thousands of Sephardic traditions. We are talking about both "Folklore" (or the msoki Seoudat Ytro among Tunisian) than the pure halakha: the Lubavitcher Hasidim essentially follow the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Kitzour Gansfried, stating Halachot sometimes very divergent Sephardi makers classics.

This "transformation" is highly visible within the French Jewish community, but rather the target Lupo Yaakov Sephardic Israel, because of their learning in yeshivot Lithuanian Ashkenazi tradition, have in fact followed the same path : Recovering traditions of dress and adopting standards Ashkenazi halachic.

vision Kountras

Kountras The newspaper has a review of the book Loupo: http://kountras.magic.fr/index.php?publid=163&articleno=17

As usual, Kountras deploys a fairly specious argument and especially free from critical reflection on the Orthodox world a sociological perspective. It means as I heard with my own ears Rabbi Kahn, editor of the newspaper, denied that there is any sociological problem of battered women or marriage problems within Orthodox circles to get a idea of the ideological blinders that the newspaper has, despite the high quality background of certain items.

Why is it specious article?

- Because he equates "modernity" to the use of gas, electricity and refrigerator. Modernity is something else. That individual autonomy in seeking personal fulfillment is the ability to have access to secular works and / or criticism is the inclusion in educational settings "profane" allowing to learn a trade, etc. ... All this can be debated (is it good or bad for the continuity of Judaism), but Kountras do not speak ...

- Because he is trying to suggest that the approach of "Lithuanian" is simply a way to bring back these young Sephardic sources of their "real" tradition, given the numerous exchanges between masters Ashkenazi and Sephardic worlds. By this argument, Kountras subscribes to the theory that the Torah is absolute and that minhagim, the traditions of each community are just folklore friendly but superficial and superfluous.

This is even more damaging than some of the arguments of the article are quite acceptable: the initiators of this movement were in good faith, it was an important fight for the vitality of Judaism among these populations, especially against the assimilationist tendencies, and finally two evils choose the least ...

approach questionable

Moreover, the book is Loupo criticized in many respects. First on the form, the book is very lousy: misspellings, outdated layout, typography worthy of a handout of the 60 ...

On the merits, wrote a book Loupo dependent. What does an academic point of view the word "fundamentalist"?

Because that's the word he uses repeatedly to name the rabbis responsible for religious schools in Morocco. His dislike for these people is palpable in his book, which seriously harms the quality of the demonstration. Especially as their point of view does not appear otherwise than in the pre-supposed that Loupo gives them. No real defense, while their position, as I said earlier, is likely to be defended more than valid.

short, damage ultimately this book to be discussed with an a priori anticlerical opposite of what should be a real academic work.

That said, the question of the value of Minhag rest and also happens to be central to the second question: since when the Sephardim from North Africa they follow policy makers from Baghdad? "

This question is directly related to a phenomenon called Ovadia Yosef. And will be a future post dedicated to this master often controversial, but much more complex than it seems ... (it's called Teasing ;-))

Pending Happy Holidays Passover!

Gerbers Blueberry Buckle

May 68 and the Jews: the obvious?

Well, I succumb to the sirens and news of the commemoration of May 68. But since we're on the Jewish world, we must of course ask the question of the nature's ties with Jews in May 1968.


what is true: almost nobody talks about in the media when the agreement is quite strange, if not striking. A large contingent of charismatic leaders of that era were Jewish. Judge for yourself:


- Daniel Cohn-Bendit , of course, leader of the movement of 22 March and emblematic figure of this period. For the story, his mother was employed as bursar at the Maimonides School of Boulogne-Billancourt in the 50s. Students of this period still remember that little red devils roamed around the school.



- Alain Geismar , Secretary General of NIS sup, then an active member of the proletarian Left.


- Henry Weber, the socialist senator at the time that he founded with Alain Krivine movement Trotskyist Revolutionary Communist Youth. Since then, both have taken somewhat different paths ...


- Robert Linhardt , Chief UJCml (Union of Communist Youth Marxist-Leninist: they had those names at the time ... it was not yet marketing their strong)


- Benny Levy, head of the Proletarian Left, co-founder Liberation and private secretary to Jean-Paul Sartre, whose role has instead said in the 70



- and others: Andre Glucksmann, Bernard Kouchner, Alain Finkielkraut who has also taken his share, etc. etc ...


short. The question worth asking. Would there have been 1 May 1968 without the Jews? Or addressed differently: what was that Jews have rushed into this movement? Is there a report with 1917 where it is now established by historians that the proportion of Jews among Bolshevik revolutionaries is much greater than a hypothetical statistical normal?


During the Russian revolution, the Rabbi Moshe Shapira (Rosh Yeshiva of the future of Beer Yaakov Yeshiva in Israel, not to be confused with his namesake, the future master Benny Lévy Jerusalem) told that some days , centers of study of Vilna are completely empty. There were more students. These days, when Trotsky (Lev Davidovich Bronstein or) came to Vilna talk of revolution.



It's hard to imagine today the mad exultation which were "victims" (consensual) these young students. I speak both 1917 and 1968 in France. How can people be as bright as ENS may have to succumb to an ideology that has emerged as the last of mediocrity?

In fact, it is not very complicated to get an idea. Read the Communist Manifesto


is powerful. It has the breath. And when it combines with the famous sentence Raoul Vaneigem , One begins to regret that our generation has no other existential concern the latest innovation for iPhone ...: "We do not want a world where the certainty of not dying from hunger comes against the risk of dying of boredom "


So, the first track is emerging: the Jews have died because they are inherently culturally (which is the same thing some would say) revolutionary. They are not satisfied with a situation which is blocked or stagnant. That the notion of progress is explicitly included in the message Jew, whether through the notions of Tikun (repair the world), Hidouch (perpetual innovation in the interpretation of texts and the world) or even messianism (the Hebrew translation does not refer to truly traditional concept, if not that of Geula but means and Issuance can not be assimilated completely to the messianic hope).

they are loyal to a certain prophetic tradition consistently opposed the government in power: we remember the face of Samuel King Saul and King David Nathan in front or after Chamai against Herod.


The track is appealing. But it will not convince materialists (and there are many among the Marxists) who will wonder how these Jews nevertheless, treated mostly with a rather poor knowledge of their own tradition without being coordinated around a red thread on the wrist or a sack Steve's Packs Jerusalem could have put in so much music so massive a message carried by their ancestors.

The remark is relevant (and I welcome ;-). And early response, I found the book Linhardt Virginia, daughter of Robert Linhardt: The day my father was silent .
As she says herself, "Robert Linhardt is one of the most influential figures of May 68, but also one of the most marked ". For over twenty years, his father has not spoken. In the literal sense. Profoundly mentally reached, this state has always had an impact on education and development of Virginia Linhardt.
What she tries to analyze in this book, but adds a very nice little idea: she met many children from these figures May 68: the offspring of Alain Krivine, Alain Geismar, Henri Weber and even Benny Levy.

Do they have common points of all these revolutionary son? Apparently yes. They are not allergic to order, they are often less politicized or not at all compared to their ancestors. Those who had more than 10 years at that time were very poorly supported images of nudity, very common at the time.

And many were Jews. And that, at the corner of a passage, it addresses this issue we torments. Why so many Jews? What took them?

There are the classic responses: the Jews were traveling companions history of communism. The USSR was still taken Berlin, as stated above, the name was no stranger to Jewish and Soviet ideology initial could be understood as a secular message thoraïque transposition. It was therefore "normal" that Jews are involved in student movements and political factions of the extreme left. The answer

Virginia Linhardt is in these few words: it was not easy to be Jewish after the war . We were surviving. Without the ability to express themselves openly. It took longer to integrate people from the East. Do not rebel, certainly not. A muffled anguish that the worst again. No waves. It was not yet allowed to live, to make sense of potential and / or envy. And then comes May 1968. With its slogans liberating: it is finally possible for every Jew to take to the streets to vent, to exist and to end this painful situation Undead induced by the aftermath of the Holocaust.

What Linhardt Virginia does not mention, but the continuity is obvious is that 68 comes after 67 (thank you, thank you, you will thank me one day for this conceptual breakthrough unmatched since Hegel).

And 67 is the 6 Day War. This is the first time since the war and even since the Jews living in France as protesters marched by claiming publicly and strongly attached to their identity often passed over in silence the private faith. And if the Jews of 68 did not claimed as such, Alain Geismar in his recent book on 68 points they have always been very careful to promote the Palestinian cause while remaining extremely vigilant regarding the existence of Israel. The thing has become increasingly rare today ...

What has played in those years is the realization that the Jews after the Holocaust could even regain control of their destiny. Which then results in various ways: a traditional political engagement (Henri Weber), a loyalty to the extreme left (Alain Krivine) or a return to the original Jewish sap (Benny Levy).

But if only for that, the momentum of the heart, breath suggesting that the world could be changed and the lucidity of the existence, it should certainly not liquidate the legacy of 68. ;-) Well, not completely