March 6, 2012 | 2:29 pm

Jewish Education - Teaching Emotional Intelligence

Posted by Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz

Brain image with amygdala, part of the social brain, highlighted. Photo by Wikipedia/Woutergroen

For centuries there has been an ongoing debate as to where ethics are grounded as universal attributes in the human condition. The philosopher Immanuel Kant grounded ethics in reason, whereas David Hume looked toward emotions such as sympathy, empathy, and compassion. Today, neuroimaging may offer a new way to resolve this issue.

Brain scans reveal that when participants are engaged in moral reasoning, there is significant activation in areas crucial to emotional processing (a circuit running from the frontal lobes to the limbic system). This supports the argument of researcher Martin Hoffman that the roots of morality are located in empathy. Thus, people learn to follow certain moral principles when they can put themselves in another’s place. These findings also bolster the ideas of educational reformer John Dewey, who taught that lessons are best learned by students when taught not via abstract lessons, but through real life events where emotional literacy is acquired.

If we know that emotional development is a key part of moral development, then why is Jewish education so cognitive-based? We teach for text mastery, intellectual reasoning skills, and memorization (all of which are important), but too often leave aside the cultivation of empathy, understanding of shame, actualization of mercy, and control of anger.

Teaching prayer, Torah study, and ritual performance should all embrace a pedagogical approach that is sure to lead to cognitive and emotional development. But even more, it is through volunteerism that the necessary altruistic virtues are cultivated. More than just leaving our students and children in a two-hour chesed project to fulfil menial tasks, we must be sure that the right emotional experience is cultivated. Since most of our emotional lives exist beneath the surface of the conscious mind, we must engage in deliberate processing conversations to make sense of our feelings before, during, and after crucial activities. We must ensure that service-learning projects aren’t merely about task completion but also that they further the cultivation of compassion and empathy among other emotional virtues.

Rav Kook made the case for how intellect is deficient without emotion and the dangers of neglecting emotional cultivation: “Man cannot live with intellect alone, nor with emotion alone; intellect and emotion must forever be joined together. If he wishes to burst beyond his own level, he will lose his ability to feel, and his flaws and deficiencies will be myriad despite the strength of his intellect. And needless to say, if he sinks into unmitigated emotion, he will fall to the depths of foolishness, which leads to all weakness and sin. Only the quality of equilibrium, which balances intellect with emotion, can deliver him completely” (Scholem, Devarim be-Go, 326-327). Rav Kook emphatically stressed the importance of emotions in education.

As Ecclesiastes teaches, there is “a time to weep and a time to laugh. A time to wail and a time to dance” (3:2-8). To live fully, we must embrace it all. In A Theory of Emotions. Rabbi Soloveitchik made the case for the importance of the totality of emotional experience in religious life: “Judaism has insisted upon the integrity and wholeness of the table of emotions, leading like a spectrum from joy, sympathy, and humility (the conjunctive feelings) to anger, sadness and anguish (the disjunctive emotions). Absolutization of one feeling at the expense of others, or the granting of unconditioned centrality to certain emotions while denoting others to a peripheral status, may have damaging complications for the religious development of the personality.”

While all emotions must be tended to in moral development, the emotional choices we make are crucial. In a lecture on “Morals and Education,” Donald Winnicott shows how many religious systems of morality actually harm development. His primary example is the overemphasis on sin and shame over love and trust. Education of the emotions must not only be deliberate, but also carefully measured.

When we properly cultivate compassion, we promote good citizenship. When we give space to reflect upon anger, we teach self-control. When we start conversations about fear and shame, we foster humility and self-awareness. When we talk about personal suffering and loss, we inculcate empathy and care. When students are asked to cultivate moral imagination, the most complex emotions can be actualized.

Modern neuroscience teaches us that many moral decisions we make bypass the prefrontal cortex (the rational brain), creating instinctive patterns of behaviour. It is crucial that parents and teachers educate children holistically to produce an ethical personality. These are not mere thought experiments. The Greeks used drama to teach emotions, the Jews used real-life experience. We must expose our children to life, “the real world” of poverty, suffering, and struggle, and foster the necessary concomitant emotions of sympathy, empathy, compassion, and love. Through this we can actualize our full service in this world: “b’chol levavecha” to man and G-d.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Senior Jewish Educator at UCLA Hillel and a 5th year PhD candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available for pre-order on Amazon.

March 5, 2012 | 11:48 am

Are Taxes Fair, Good, or Jewish? A Defense of the Progressive Taxation

Posted by Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz

For several months, the whole nation has been intensely debating what constitutes a fair system of taxation. It is very peculiar that there are American Jews today who adhere to the Tea Party mantra that all government is bad, that taxes should always be reduced, and that a flat tax should be embraced. While Jewish law cannot be applied to the U.S. tax system to advocate for an individual policy, it is clear that Jewish values support taxation to achieve a just society. A flat (regressive) tax system will harm the middle and lower classes, so we are obliged to embrace a progressive system.

Jewish Law & Thought on Taxation

Jewish law is unequivocal about the obligation to obey the law and pay taxes (Bava Kama 113a, Nedarim 28a, Bava Batra 54b-55a and Gittin 10b). The principle of dina d’malchuta dina explicitly includes tax money (Bava Kamma 113a, Hilchot Malveh ve-Loveh 27:1), and tax evasion is prohibited by Jewish law (Hilchot Gezelah ve-Avedah 5:11). As tax evasion is also a felony according to secular law, and evokes harsh criticism from the public, Jewish law also describes it as a “chillul Hashem” (desecration of G-d’s Name). Additionally, one cannot pay cash for a service where it is known that the receiver will not pay taxes on it since the consumer is enabling the wrong. Finally, Jewish law is clear that it is legitimate and important for the government to collect funds for collective benefit as long as there is a transparent system in place, and the tax collecting individual is not dishonest or arbitrary (Bava Kamma 113b, Gezeilah V’Aveida 5:11). As Rav Moshe Feinstein explained, Americans live in a legitimate and just society that can be trusted (“medina shel chesed”). We benefit from the public goods supported by the collective to create the possibility for a good life for each individual. At the very least, we must pay what we are required to but ultimately we must do more and advocate for a just taxation system.

The Gemara explains that our public financial matters as Jews are the paradigmatic opportunities for creating a kiddush Hashem or chillul Hashem, a consecration or desecration of G-d’s name (Yoma 86a). While there is one flat tax (machatzit ha’shekel), this is not regressive, as some advocate today, and it is an anomaly in any case. This was an important statement that all citizens have a responsibility to build and support their government and that it is not only the responsibility of the wealthy. Yet the potential harm that would be caused by today’s proposals for a flat (more regressive) tax structure would be immense, and is not sanctioned in Jewish tradition. The other required contributions in Jewish law are proportionate to one’s wealth (terumot, maasrot, matanot aniyim, etc.). The rich take more responsibility in society so that we can create a more equitable society. This is the Jewish way.

Historically, the rabbis themselves have imposed taxes to sustain local infrastructure. Jewish law embraces different categories for local, city, and national taxes: hilchot shecheinim (rights of neighbors), ben ha’ir (obligations of the citizen), and din hamelech (rights of the king). There are different types of taxes and different levels of obligation based upon utility of public goods and personal wealth. For example, “Rav Nachman bar Rav Hisda levied a poll tax on the Rabbis… Rav Papa levied an impost for the digging of a new well on orphans… Rav Yehudah said: All must contribute to the building of doors in the town gates, even orphans” (Bava Batra 8a). All citizens have a responsibility to pay taxes but the level of responsibility varies.

The Rashba, the great 13th-century Spanish Talmudist, taught that tax should not be collected from each person equally; rather, one’s responsibility in paying taxes is proportional to one’s wealth (Responsa Rashba, 3:381). Aaron Levine, discussing the position of the Rashba in Welfare Programs and Jewish Law, explains: “If we assume that the rationale behind [the Rashba’s] call for a wealth tax is the ability-to-pay principle, the use of a progressive income tax would serve as a good substitute equity guidepost for the charity levy in modern times.” We are all blessed with various levels of financial stability and our public responsibility is proportionate to our abilities.

Discussing the Rashba, Dr. Meir Tamari, Director of The Center for Business Ethics and Social Responsibility in Jerusalem, and author of With All Your Possessions, writes, “He points out that the poor are unable to contribute a pro rata share. This is the pattern that is repeated in many different countries and periods: a basic premise that justice demands is? That each one contribute according to his benefit (from the system supported through tax); considerations of righteousness, however, demanded that the rich contribute a greater proportion of the communal budget.” In theory, one should only pay for what they benefit from but Jewish law took a turn from individualism toward righteousness. Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg, the great 20th century Jewish legal authority, embraced a progressive tax model as necessary to meet the needs of society (Tzitz Eliezer, 2:22).

The Jewish tradition understands dual financial duties as it distinguishes between taxation and charity. According to Jewish law, one must give a minimum of 10% (Deuteronomy 14:22, Tosafot Taanit 9a) and a maximum of 20% of one’s income to charitable causes (Ketubot 50a), unless one could comfortably exceed this limit (Shulchan Aruch, YD 249:1). One might conclude that tax money paid to the government could be considered one’s charitable contributions, but Jewish law rejects this (Shulchan Aruch, YD 259:6). Rabbi Moshe Aleppo, in the early 20th century, ruled that tax payments due to “an obligation from the king” must not be conflated with one’s tzedakah (Divrei Moshe, YD 19). Further, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein wrote, “we never find that the law is that since the government takes money you are exempt from charity” (Iggrot Moshe, YD 1:143). Tax payments fulfill an enforced requirement to sustain a society reciprocally based on a collective commitment. Tzedakah, on the other hand, is an unenforced obligation to support those who have not been adequately assisted by the collective system. The two cannot be equated.

These obligations pertain both to a Jewish and non-Jewish government and its contributors. “The rabbis taught: we support the non-Jewish poor with the Jewish poor, visit their sick with the Jewish sick, and bury their dead with the Jewish dead out of the way of peace” (Gittin 61a). Rabbi Ovadia Yosef teaches that “even from our own charity we are obligated to support the non-Jews” (Yabia Omer, 7 O.C. 22). We cannot only contribute to our family, friends, and fellow Jew. Being a part of a nation-state requires that we support the larger system that sustains us. 

The Jewish voice must be a voice advocating for the needs of a more just society, since G-d designated us as to be a “mamlechet kohanim v’goy kadosh,” a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Shemot 19:6). We as a nation are to be advocates for the just and the good ensuring that “the good life” is accessible to all. How can we argue that taxes should be lower when we know that Americans, on average, donate only about 1% of their income to charity? Who will ensure that the education system is maintained and improved, that the elderly have care, that the sick are provided for, and that the country is defended? Some suggest that charity should replace government to take care of those in need, but private funds cannot possibly meet the needs of the 45 million Americans dependent on food stamps, the 15 million who are unemployed, or the 50 million who lack health insurance. It is simply not the Jewish way to naively hope that millionaires will all of a sudden become exceedingly charitable.

In addition to the problem that most citizens are not actualizing their charitable potential, many dodge their tax commitments as well. Dr. Tamari explains: “Contrariwise, it seems that it is possible to attribute the growth of an underground economy in the United States (which has the lowest tax rates in the Western world) to the ‘loopholes’ used by the wealthy to pay little if any tax.”  The Torah does not embrace some modern secular notions of liberty that claim our freedom is infringed by asking the wealthy to take more responsibility. Rather it is the opposite: taxes support the operating environment that enables individuals to earn their high salaries and live in freedom. It is incumbent upon us to reduce the disparity in net pay of American citizens, to lessen the economic divisions between different members of society and bridge the gap between the “haves” and “have nots.” The alternative is the perpetuation of social forces that block social mobility and this is antithetical to Jewish values.

Poverty in America & Barriers to Social Mobility

In addition to ensuring that tax money is distributed wisely and fairly, we must be sure it is collected in the fairest manner. Flat taxes are regressive. For example, if everyone paid a flat rate of 30%, the teacher earning $50,000 per year would be left with $35,000, while the principal being paid $150,000 would be left with $105,000. They would both pay the same tax rate, but the teacher would have a heavier tax burden, and would be much less likely to be able to pay for housing, food, transportation, and other basic living expenses after taxes.

Even when we don’t have a technical obligation to give of our own, the tradition teaches us to embrace the path of compassion. The Rashbam explains “’And I will hear them because I am compassionate’: Even if, according to the law you have the object and you have no obligation to return it except to go beyond the letter of the law, one might think that I [God] will not hear his cry, but I will because I am compassionate and merciful” (Commentary on Exodus 22:26). At times, the value of being compassionate and creating the just society must outweigh the value of the right to private property ownership.

The prophets teach us that the paradigmatic wicked society is one that collective neglects its poor. “Behold, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: pride, fullness of bread, and careless ease was in her and in her daughters; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy” (Isaiah 16:49). Further, the rabbis teach that one who embraces private ownership at the expense of the poor living by a principle of “Mine is mine, and yours is yours” is like the paradigmatic evil Sodomite (Ethics of the Fathers, 5:10). A model of capitalism that allows for significant wealth accumulation but doesn’t also enforce levels of wealth redistribution is not a model Judaism can promote. Economic equality and care for the poor are Jewish values to be defended, and Jews should be on the front line advocating for ethical taxation.

The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer in America. From 1981 to 2010, the bottom 90%’s income share fell from 65 to 52 percent while the income of the top 10%’s rose from 35 to 48 percent. Further, the top 1% of earners now takes home more than 18% of national income – a startling increase from 1973, when the rich’s share of income was only 7.7%. The richest 5% are making 37% of consumer purchases. Since the late 1970s, the middle and lower classes have been progressively weakened and Robert B. Reich argues that the economy won’t recover until we revive the middle class.

The government must intervene to ensure that the “American dream” is still attainable for all and that social mobility is a reality. Social mobility is a sign not only of a just society but also of a dynamic economy indicating that one of the most important tenets of capitalism is being met: a meritocratic system where smart and bold people have a better chance of achieving success regardless of whether they start out rich or poor. But social mobility is on a rapid decline in the U.S. today. Since the 1980s, the very rich do very well while the typical American makes little-to-no gains. The average American is losing incentive to work harder. Only the rich can get rich while others find their social mobility blocked even if they do everything right as they are caught in a poverty trap. Even when poor individuals seek to upgrade their skills through years of work experience or by going back to school, they can’t keep themselves afloat while trying to advance.

So who is to blame? Charles Karelis, a philosophy professor at George Washington University, explains that we cannot blame the poor or the rich for today’s crisis of poverty in America. Rather, our traditional way of thinking of economics just doesn’t apply to the poor. When one is poor ones economic worldview is shaped by deprivation, and one sees the world around oneself not in terms of goods to be consumed but as problems to be alleviated. Karelis explains that when in poverty one no longer prioritizes addressing the need for goods since they are fully consumed by the need to address major problems such as survival. Economists considering the purchasing of goods and the health of the economic system too often neglect that the poor don’t fit into their models. If one can’t afford to pay their credit card bills, rent, day care, car insurance, or even for food even when working multiple jobs then there is a huge disincentive to work at all.

We need to treat poverty as its own problem within economics and have specific solutions to address it systemically making everyone stronger. Too often economics remains on the theoretical level aimed at the achievement of “pareto-optimum.” A pareto-optimum is a situation where it is impossible to make one person better-off without making some other person worse-off. But today, we can find economic solutions that are win-win creating a stronger, safer, and more just society for all.

Several recent studies have shown the United States to be less mobile than comparable nations. Markus Jantti, an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42% of American men raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. Meanwhile, just 8% of American men at the bottom rose to the top fifth. How can America be understood as classless if 65% born in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths (Economic Mobility Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts)? Our country is not only less equal but also less mobile!

The late Harvard moral philosopher John Rawls argued for the redistribution of wealth as a moral imperative. Rawls explains, in “A Theory of Justice,” his thought experiment of the veil of ignorance “no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status; nor does he know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence and strength, and the like.” To ensure social mobility, Rawls argued for inheritance taxes on the basis that a completely unregulated transfer of wealth from parent to child would result in the entrenchment of wealth in some segments of society while others would be blocked from mobility. As wealth continues to amass in the family from generation to generation, the problem of wealth disparity increases.
The poverty is not as some have described as a lack of motivation. Rather the problem is that our system no longer enables one in poverty to climb out. And we can’t rely upon some naïve notion of charity that values free will and the cultivation of virtue through giving over the needs of the poor. Spoken nobly, this is one of the great philosophies only the rich can embrace. Virtue in the rich cannot take priority over the survival needs of the most poor in our midst. Enhancing social mobility is not only a moral imperative it is also an economic need. The Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) notes. “First, less mobile societies are more likely to waste or misallocate human skills and talents. Second, lack of equal opportunity may affect the motivation, effort and, ultimately, the productivity of citizens, with adverse effects on the overall efficiency and the growth potential of the economy.”

Creating more social mobility will not only allow for a more just state and a stronger economy but perhaps also for a happier society. While ethics, of course, are not determined solely by what makes people happy, it should be noted that a new study has shown that people are happier in countries with more progressive taxation, because they are more satisfied with basic government services, such as quality of health care and education. Among the world’s developed nations, the United States taxes its citizens at one of the lowest rates, as a percentage of GDP. According to Citizens for Tax Justice, the bottom 20% of income earners are paying around 21% of their income in taxes while the tax rate for the 400 richest Americans was only 18%.

The Jewish Mandate

Jewish law is opposed to the radical laissez faire economic policies that many advocate today.
The obligation to help the poor is of utmost importance in the Jewish tradition, and this is achieved most successfully in a sophisticated collective system of government and not-for-profit agencies. Taxes in the United States are collected on three levels—federal, state, and local—comprising taxes on property, income, sales, imports, estates, and gifts. These taxes ensure that we can achieve our collective goals to improve our education system, provide quality health care, defend our country, and protect our environment. A progressive tax structure ensures the proper distribution of money, helps to protect the poor in society, and ensures a more stable income stream for the government in times of recession. It is our responsibility to ensure that the most vulnerable in society are protected and that our nation is strong. Progressive taxation is a crucial part of the solution especially in a country that taxes as little as the American government does in comparison to other countries around the world.

Without a more fair tax system, who will ensure the old, sick, poor, and unfortunate are cared for? Jews must continue to take leadership in advocating for progressive taxation.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Senior Jewish Educator at UCLA Hillel and a 5th year PhD candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available for pre-order on Amazon.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 2, 2012 | 1:32 pm

JStreetPAC co-chair hosts Obama fundraiser

Posted by Jonah Lowenfeld

Victor A. Kovner, a New York-based lawyer and co-Chair of the JStreetPAC board, hosted a fundraiser for Obama last night. (Photo courtesy Davis Wright Tremaine.)

The first of four fundraisers last night in New York that netted President Obama more than $5 for his reelection campaign was held in the the Upper West Side home of Sarah and Victor Kovner.

Victor Kovner, a lawyer whose practice focuses on communications law, intellectual property and commercial litigation, is one of two co-chairs of JStreetPAC, the political action committee that endorses federal candidates in an effort to advance the “pro-Israel, pro-Peace” group’s agenda.

According to a blog maintained by Legal Times staff, Obama spoke for 12 minutes and then took questions. The subjects covered included “the economic challenges facing the United States, as well discussion of Iran, Syria and the prospect of a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine.”

“There’s no contradiction between having a smart foreign policy, a foreign policy that is consistent with our values, but also being tough and looking out for America’s national security,” Obama told the attendees, according to an ABC News report.

The President is scheduled to speak to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference on Sunday morning.

More than 105 people attended the $5,000 per person fundraiser on Thursday night, which brought in more than $600,000 for the Obama campaign.

According to a biography on the J Street website, Victor Kovner is a partner at Davis, Wright, Tremaine, LLP, and has been a member of the board of Americans for Peace Now since 1991.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 2, 2012 | 12:42 pm

Make your own babka: a how-to video

Posted by Michel Schapira

The guide to making an excellent Babka with minimum effort. It is a Purim favorite and great for Mishloach Manot!

Dough

2 oz fresh yeast (or 6¾ tsp dry yeast)
½ cup warm water
6½ cup flour
½ cup sugar
12 oz margarine (3sticks)
½ cup warm orange juice
4 eggs
pinch salt

Filing

2 cup sugar
½ cup confectioners sugar
1 cup sifted cocoa
2 Tbsp coffee granules
1 Tbsp vanilla sugar

Topping

4 oz margarine (1stick)
½ cup sugar
1½ cup flour
1 Tbsp vanilla sugar

To assemble

oil for smearing
1 egg, beaten for egg wash

Directions

1. Dough: Dissolve the yeast in the water with a drop of the sugar. After it has completely dissolved, combine with the remaining ingredients in the mixer bowl. Mix well with a dough hook to obtain a smooth dough. Cover and allow to rise for 1 hour.


2. Filling: Mix all ingredients and mix well.


3. Topping: Mix by hand to form crumbs.


4. To assemble: Preheat oven to 350F


5. Grease 3 loaf pan. Divide dough into 3 parts. Work with one section at time.


6. Roll the dough to double the length of the pan (about the size of a cookie sheet) and smear with oil. Smear 1/3 of the chocolate filling over the dough. Roll up jelly roll style and pinch the ends closed. Fold the roll in half and twist 3 times. Transfer to loaf pan.


7. Brush with beaten egg. Sprinkle the streusel over the entire roll. Repeat with the remaining two parts of dough.


8. Bake for 1 hour.

Rate and review the babka recipe!
Visit CookKosher.com for more kosher recipes.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 1, 2012 | 4:31 pm

LA Principal Supports Former Students In Basketball Shabbat Standoff

Posted by Julie Gruenbaum Fax

The Shalhevet Firehawks beat the Beren Academy Stars in a yeshiva tournament in November. They may face off again in March. Photo by Ariela Feitelberg of the Boiling Point

With Houston’s Beren Academy Stars back in the playoffs, Rabbi Ari Segal, head of school at Shalhevet high school in Los Angeles, is breathing a sigh of relief, and kvelling a little.

Segal was head of school for seven years at The Robert M. Beren Academy, a K-12 Jewish day school, before he came to Shalhevet in September. Beren made international news this week when its basketball team nearly had to forfeit a spot in its league’s state semi-finals because the game was schedule on Shabbat.

Segal said he has been in close touch with former colleagues and students this week.

“I am beyond proud,” Segal said. “These kids are not only great basketball players – they are great young men as well. They are kind, funny, sweet and smart – and I am just happy the world is getting to see that.”

The Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools’ Class 2A (TAPPS) had denied two appeals from the school, but today, after three students filed a lawsuit, the league backed down and agreed to adjust the schedule so the students could play at 2 p.m. on Friday rather than at 6 p.m., after the start of Shabbat.

Segal said the decision not to play on Shabbat was non-negotiable, but what has truly made him proud is the student’s balanced response. For example, team member Albert Katz, 16, said:

“It just teaches that you can’t always get what you want. We are Jews, and we don’t do anything on the seventh day and that’s how it is. There are bigger things in life than basketball,” Katz told the Houston Chronicle.

“They understand that, as Modern Orthodox Jews, we want to have our cake and eat it too. But sometimes that is not possible and sometimes values are mutually exclusive – and they have demonstrated that they have internalized the message that, at the end of the day, their Jewish identity is primary and they sometimes need to make sacrifices to stay true to themselves and the values of their families,” Segal said.

TAPPS had insisted that Beren entered the league knowing the schedule could not be altered. TAPPS does not schedule games on Sunday, an irony not lost on Houston Mayor Annise D. Parker, who came to the support of the Beren team, along with former Houston Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy.

“It is also my understanding that TAPPS teams are not allowed to play any sports on Sundays,” Parker told the Houston Chronicle, “which I presume is out of respect for the Christian Sabbath.”

Segal believes the media attention has taught the kids the impact they can have by sticking to their principles.

“I think the national outpouring of support – from people of all faiths – has crystallized for the students that every action they take as outwardly observant Jews has the potential to bring tremendous honor and pride to the Jewish people.”

In fact, the episode prompted Segal to present to Shalhevet students and parents an issue he had been thinking about for some time. Currently, Shalhevet encourages but does not mandate that boys wear kippot during games. Segal would like to see that rule changed.

“Look at the pride of the boys on the Beren team for their Judaism. This isn’t just about not playing on Shabbat in this one tournament. It is about a culture of placing Judaism first in a Modern Orthodox school – and a large part of that is the kippot the boys wear to play,” Segal wrote in a letter asking for student and parent feedback. 

“We teach our children that Judaism is something to be proud of. It is something to wear on our sleeves. It is something to wear on our heads and demonstrate that not only can we be great ball players, we can do it while not giving up an inch of our religious identity,” he wrote.

The Beren Stars and the Shalhevet Firehawks will be among dozens of teams that face off in the Yeshiva University Sarachek National Basketball Tournament in New York at the end of March.

The Firehawks and Stars faced each other last November at a yeshiva tournament hosted by the Beren Academy. Shalhevet lost to Beren in the first round, 76-62, but came back to beat them in the final game, 42-36.

Segal says he’ll be rooting for Shalhevet at the next tournament without caveats, but retains pride in the Stars, who went 23-5 this season.

“Their success is the confluence of really hard work, great teamwork and an unusually high concentration of athleticism for a school with less than 70 high schoolers,” Segal said. “These guys have been playing together for years and they have been working hard on the fundamentals – that pays off in the end when you pair that with a blazingly fast point guard, a multi-talented 6-6 swingman and a whole bunch of other very talented players who know their role, understand it and stick to it.”

And he admits this week has left him a little bit nostalgic for his Texas days.

“I will be honest – while I am beyond thrilled that our family moved out to L.A. and Shalhevet, I am a bit wistful that I left right before this all happened. It is a dream come true for any school community and I guess I am living a bit vicariously through the phone calls and text messages,” he said.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 1, 2012 | 3:07 pm

TONIGHT: Meet the filmmakers and directors from Ma’ale Film School

Posted by JewishJournal

"Barriers"

Israel is among the top ten countries in Academy Award nominations for Best Foreign Film.  One reason for that achievement might just be Ma’ale Film School in Jerusalem.  Two time Academy Award nominee Joseph Cedar (“Footnote,” “Beaufort”) teaches there and is a big proponent of the school’s bringing spiritual and religious dimensions to filmmaking.

Tonight, March 1, you can meet the filmmakers and directors of Ma’ale at a special screening at 7 pm at the Museum of Tolerance.  The evening will begin with a screening of three powerful short films, including “Barriers,” which won the Best Short Film at the Jerusalem Film Festival.  Here’s what our reviewer Laura Donney had to say about Barriers.

Golan Rise’s short film “Barriers” is all too real, and that is probably a good thing. Stationed at an Israeli check point, along with three Israeli soldiers and a line of commuting workers, we too are straddling the border that those in the Middle East waver in between every day—and it is not easy. The scene seems ritual, and if we had to sum up the plot with one driving question it might be as simple as “who gets to cross over today?” But this is the Middle East, and simple doesn’t always exist.

Rise directs his short snapshot of the tension filled region in a way both unforgiving and necessary: our hearts beat faster, our blood pressure rises, and we scan our eyes rapidly looking for answers in the chaos—and it’s only 8:00 am.

But unlike the soldiers and civilians in the film—who are all portrayed authentically enough that I wondered briefly if this was a documentary—we don’t have return to the scene again; we can watch the credits roll and feign fiction.

What we can’t do, and perhaps this is the film’s biggest achievement, is believe any longer that we are without choice. But more than that, we understand the force behind another person’s decision, and the power with which their choice can change our lives forever, as well as our own choices extending far beyond ourselves— and no barrier can change that.

Following the screenings, Jewish Journal Publisher and Editor-in-Chief Rob Eshman will lead a discussion with the director of the Ma’ale Film School and the director, producer and star of Barriers. 

For more information, click here.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 1, 2012 | 2:49 pm

UCLA Homeless Aid Group Has White House Hopes

Posted by Julie Gruenbaum Fax

Rachel Sumekh, UCLA Hillel's vice president of social justice, leads Swipes for the Homeless at UCLA.

A UCLA student group that supports the homeless is one of 15 finalists in the White House’s Campus Champions of Change Challenge. The group was chosen from hundreds of applicants, and online voters will choose the top five.

Rachel Sumekh, president of Swipes for the Homeless and social justice vice president for UCLA Hillel, says momentum is building to get clicks before voting closes March 3.

Five winning applicants will be invited to the White House for a culminating event as part of President Barack Obama’s Winning the Future initiative. The student groups will have the opportunity to work with mtvU, an MTV channel for U.S. college campuses, to produce a short film that will air on MTV and mtvU.

UCLA Swipes for the Homeless was founded by Jewish student Bryan Pezeshki, now a senior. In 2009, he and a bunch of friends redeemed unused vouchers on their prepaid meal plan to purchase sandwiches, which they delivered to people living on the streets of Westwood, near campus.

They cashed in about 300 swipes that semester, then decided to organize and urge other students to donate swipes off their meal cards. Unused meal vouchers don’t roll over at the end of the quarter, so in the past students would either purchase nonperishables such as drinks and chips or lose the money.

Last quarter, UCLA students donated 7,400 swipes at redeeming stations set up at the dorms at the end of the quarter. Now, in addition to some prepared food, UCLA Dining Services provides palettes of packaged food, which the students deliver to homeless shelters, to food banks and to people on the streets.

Some of the food also stays on campus, stocking a discreet, unstaffed food closet where any student can pick up free food. Around 50 students a day make use of the closet, said Sumekh, who is also active in keeping the food closet running.

Pezeshki, a senior in neuroscience who is applying to medical school, is now working on taking the concept national. He established Swipes for the Homeless as an independent non-profit, and 10 other universities are running the program. 

Sumekh says a large number of the Swipes volunteers are also active in UCLA Hillel. Under the leadership of its director of Jewish life, Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz, UCLA Hillel has incorporated more social justice work into its activities through its Repair the World Street Team, which helps students take on leadership roles in the area of social justice.

Sumekh, a Street Team intern, participated in a spring break program that took her to on-the-ground efforts to aid the needy, and she visits schools in disadvantaged areas to talk to students about college.

Sumekh is graduating this year with a degree in history and minor in complex human systems, and will do a year of service next year.

To vote in the Campus Champions for Change Challenge, click here.

0 Comments — Leave your comment