Mas'as Mordechai is a major beis midrash in my street, and I've recently started a chavrusa there in the mornings. For the convenience of the many people learning there, they have an automatic beverage vending machine, which produces a reasonable tasting vehicle for the morning caffeine kick, plus several other liquids said to taste of tea, coffee and other popular beverages.
On this machine is a sign attesting to the kashrus of all the drinks. Since some of the drinks contain chometz (chicory, I guess), they also felt the need to assure potential buyers that they need have no concern about the chometz having been in Jewish ownership over Pesach. The sign said something to the effect of:
כל המשקאות הינם ללא חשש חמץ שעבר עליו הפסח
(Loosely translated: All the drinks are above suspicion of being chometz that was owned by a Jew over Pesach)
But some learned joker has gone and strategically inserted two commas, so that the sign reads:
כל המשקאות הינם, ללא חשש, חמץ שעבר עליו הפסח
(Loosely translated: All the drinks are, without any doubt, chometz that was owned by a Jew over Pesach)
Touché!
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Groan - Netanyahu immediately disappoints...
Well, looks like my earlier posting of today was wrong; apparently Netanyahu was not finessing anything, nor was he asserting anything about the Arabs having to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Quoth he:
Ugh. For a few hours there I thought we were going to see a new style of leadership and advocacy... but it looks like Bibi is slotting straight back into the Kadima/Labor mode of apologetics, concessions and never holding the Palestinian leadership accountable for anything - lest Heaven Forfend! it should turn out that our supposed "peace partners" also want us dead, just as much as Hamas. They only differ on tactics.
Bibi, you let the side down badly. Again.
"Contrary to reports, I don't condition dialogue with the Palestinians on recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. Nevertheless, progress in the peace process does depend on the willingness to recognize Israel as a Jewish state."Blah blah blah. Granted, we won't make any progress, but we will still go on talking... and allowing ourselves to be pressurized into making unreciprocated concessions... and destroying Jewish towns and lives... while the Pals do nothing but incite against us in their official media and complain to the world that we're poisoning their wells, using the blood of their children to bake matzos... etc. etc.
Ugh. For a few hours there I thought we were going to see a new style of leadership and advocacy... but it looks like Bibi is slotting straight back into the Kadima/Labor mode of apologetics, concessions and never holding the Palestinian leadership accountable for anything - lest Heaven Forfend! it should turn out that our supposed "peace partners" also want us dead, just as much as Hamas. They only differ on tactics.
Bibi, you let the side down badly. Again.
What NOT to put on a T-shirt
Every now and then when I want a good laugh, I visit Engrish.com for some very funny attempts at English in the Far East.
Apparently this kind of pseudo-English is not confined to the Orient, though. I went to mincha at a local shul a few days ago, and was treated to a rather disturbing sight. One of the mispallelim was wearing a T-shirt with a slogan emlazoned, in large, bold white on black: "RAPER MEN".
After davening, I discreetly called him aside, and asked him if he understood much English. Nope. Clearly not. I explained to him in my best Hebrew what the slogan on his shirt meant. Oops. He won't be wearing that shirt again. (I decided not to photograph him for Engrish.com!)
What was it supposed to say? "Rapper men"? "Paper men"?
Moral of the story: don't wear garments with slogans in a language you don't understand!
Apparently this kind of pseudo-English is not confined to the Orient, though. I went to mincha at a local shul a few days ago, and was treated to a rather disturbing sight. One of the mispallelim was wearing a T-shirt with a slogan emlazoned, in large, bold white on black: "RAPER MEN".
After davening, I discreetly called him aside, and asked him if he understood much English. Nope. Clearly not. I explained to him in my best Hebrew what the slogan on his shirt meant. Oops. He won't be wearing that shirt again. (I decided not to photograph him for Engrish.com!)
What was it supposed to say? "Rapper men"? "Paper men"?
Moral of the story: don't wear garments with slogans in a language you don't understand!
All credit to Netanyahu
Bibi Netanyahu is not my favorite politician in the world, but I have to hand it to him, his demand for the PA to recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people as a precondition to restarting talks was a genius of a maneuver. The Arabs couldn't bring themselves to accept this, and have launched a pretty pathetic counter-offensive in the media to regain the upper hand.
What this really highlights is the stark difference in approach between Bibi and his opponents. Olmert, Livni et al were completely bent on ignoring the fact that no amount of concessions would ever get the Arabs to accept Israel as a Jewish state. Bibi, in one deft finesse, has exposed for everyone to see the fact that we have no partner for peace - for if they will not accept the fundamental premise that Israel is the state of the Jewish people as a starting point, then there is nothing to talk about. Even Obama can't paper over that - or can he?
So now Netanyahu can come out looking like the good guy: "We're willing to do anything we can for peace - but these guys are not in the game for peace."
Kol hakavod, Bibi! Now keep it up!
What this really highlights is the stark difference in approach between Bibi and his opponents. Olmert, Livni et al were completely bent on ignoring the fact that no amount of concessions would ever get the Arabs to accept Israel as a Jewish state. Bibi, in one deft finesse, has exposed for everyone to see the fact that we have no partner for peace - for if they will not accept the fundamental premise that Israel is the state of the Jewish people as a starting point, then there is nothing to talk about. Even Obama can't paper over that - or can he?
So now Netanyahu can come out looking like the good guy: "We're willing to do anything we can for peace - but these guys are not in the game for peace."
Kol hakavod, Bibi! Now keep it up!
Thursday, April 2, 2009
The origin of April Fools' Day
Having been "taken" by no fewer than two April Fools' jokes yesterday, I thought I'd mention this...
Back in my bochur days at the Yeshiva Gedola of Johannesburg, I once picked up a (Hebrew) book off the shelf that gave some insight into various odd minhagim. I was intrigued to find one section devoted to the custom of playing tricks on people on April 1. And here's what I found out.
The Christians founded their faith a lot on the Pagan idea of a virgin birth. They claim that their savior was born on 25 December. Which would mean that, given a normal pregnancy of 38 weeks, the baby would have been conceived on or around 1 April. (Go ahead and count - or else you can trust that I've done the math already.) So why pull pranks on people on that day? Well, it wasn't the Christians who started it... it was the Pagans who were, shall we say, a little skeptical of whether the baby's father was really the angel he claimed he was.
The book's author concluded that even though the fun is at the expense of the Christians (and they don't even realize it!), it's inappropriate for Jews to get involved in these practices.
I've been looking for another copy of this book, but I can't remember what it was called, or who wrote it! Anyone know?
Back in my bochur days at the Yeshiva Gedola of Johannesburg, I once picked up a (Hebrew) book off the shelf that gave some insight into various odd minhagim. I was intrigued to find one section devoted to the custom of playing tricks on people on April 1. And here's what I found out.
The Christians founded their faith a lot on the Pagan idea of a virgin birth. They claim that their savior was born on 25 December. Which would mean that, given a normal pregnancy of 38 weeks, the baby would have been conceived on or around 1 April. (Go ahead and count - or else you can trust that I've done the math already.) So why pull pranks on people on that day? Well, it wasn't the Christians who started it... it was the Pagans who were, shall we say, a little skeptical of whether the baby's father was really the angel he claimed he was.
The book's author concluded that even though the fun is at the expense of the Christians (and they don't even realize it!), it's inappropriate for Jews to get involved in these practices.
I've been looking for another copy of this book, but I can't remember what it was called, or who wrote it! Anyone know?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)