Day: November 4, 2023

Rabbi David J. Zucker  writes that when the Israelites left Egypt, the Torah states they were accompanied by an ʿerev rav (Exodus 12:38). This term has been interpreted in different ways throughout the two millennia of rabbinic interpretation of Torah, and modern academic scholars still debate its meaning.

When the Israelites left Egypt, Exodus 12:38 states: “An erev rav also went up with them.” The common understanding assumes that erev derives from the root meaning “to mix,” and refers to the nature of the group as being a mixture of tribes and peoples. The second word, rav, is an adjective meaning “great or many,” and thus the standard translation of the term erev rav is “a mixed multitude.”

Whether the erev rav was a mixed multitude or just one type or class of people, it is clear that they are non-Israelites. But why do they join the Israelites leaving Egypt?

One possibility is that they were a group of Egyptians and/or other ethnic groups who lived near  the Israelites and decided to leave with them. Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki 1040–1105) interprets them as local Egyptians and other foreigners who align themselves with the Israelites for religious reasons: Erev rav—A mix of tribes or nationalities who had converted to Judaism.’

And the 10th/11th century midrash, Exodus Rabbah (18:10) envisions a split among the Egyptians between those who joined the Israelites and those who felt the wrath of God.

God said: Anyone who loves my son [Israel] should come and celebrate his redemption. The good Egyptians came and participated in the Paschal offering with the Israelites, and left with them, as it says (Exodus 12:28), “and an erev rav went up with them.” All those who did not want Israel to be redeemed suffered the fate of the firstborn. 

In contrast to this interpretation, the former chief rabbi of the United Kingdom, Joseph Hertz (1872–1946), in his classic commentary The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, writes a “mass of non-Israelite strangers, including slaves and prisoners of war, who took advantage of the Egyptians panic to escape from Egypt.

Another  possibility is that the term reflects not just a group of people that joined the Israelites at the time of the exodus, but people who had become attached to the Israelites already, through intermarriage. The Bible envisions Israelites living among Egyptians for a dozen decades or even many generations, it is not hard to imagine their marrying locals, Egyptians or other foreigners like Arabs. 

Rabbi Yishmael was a descendant on his mother’s side of the rev rav mix of non-Israelites. He was an important early sage who laid the foundation for the legal midrash on the Book of Exodus, the Mekhilta.  Why was he named after Prophet Abraham’s first born son Prophet Ishmael? 

Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha, usually called just Rabbi Yishmael, was born about 90 CE into a wealthy priestly family in the Upper Galilee, and was likely named after his father’s grandfather, the high priest Yishmael ben Elisha, who served in the Jerusalem Temple in the mid first century, although no High Priest named Elisha is historically known. Rabbi Ishmael’s traditional tomb is located in the Druze village of Sajur in the Upper Galilee.

In the Talmud, the high priest Yishmael ben Elisha, describes how he once entered into the Jerusalem Temple’s Holy of Holies, where God asked him for a blessing, and he replied by asking God to always treat Israel mercifully. But why would a mid first century high priest be named after Abraham’s first born son Ishmael? 

The Yerushalmi Talmud (Berakhot 2:4) tells the story of an Arab man who tells Jews that when his ox bellows it is a sign that the Jerusalem Temple was destroyed; when it bellows a second time, it will signal the birth of  the messiah, whose name will be Menachem and who will be born in the  vicinity of Bethlehem. Why is an Arab chosen by God to proclaim the birth of the Jewish messiah?

Because Rabbi Ismael taught that the Arabs would someday help the Israelites rebuild the wall around the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.  Rabbi Ishmael said: The Sons of Ishmael will do fifteen things at the end of days…. “They will rebuild the breaks in the wall of the beyt hamikdash (the Al Aqsa Mosque about 500 feet south of the bayt al maqdis) and build a building on the ruins of the heiykal  (the central sanctuary of the Holy Temple). Sons of Ishmael refers to the Arabs in the Book of Genesis and also to Islamic traditions that Muslims see themselves as the progeny of  Prophet Ishmael. Considering the 600 year gap between the era of Rabbi Ishmael and the Islamic era of Prophet Muhammad, I find this passage astonishing. 

Could the return and rebuilding of the third Temple in Jerusalem actually have been started by Caliph Umar ibn Khatab on the Temple Mount (in 638 CE) by building a sanctuary for Muslim Arabs known as Masjid Al Aqsa or the bayt al maqdis?. I find the idea that bnei Yishmael ie Arab Muslims were the ones who actually started the process  of rebuilding the third Jewish Temple fascinating.

The 13th century mystical commentary on the Torah, the Zohar (2.191a), argues that the term ‘mixed multitude’ cannot refer to a general mass of peoples who joined the Israelites; but instead refers to a specific group of Egyptian magicians who worked from midday to afternoon “which is called ‘the great evening’ (erev ravrava).” These magicians had a change of heart “once they saw the miracles and wonders that Moses performed in Egypt, they repented and joined Moses.”

And this is proven by the Qur’an’s description (20:85-98) of the Egyptian magician Al-Samiri who built the golden calf: 85. He [God} said, “We tested your people in your absence, and the Samarian misled them.” 86. So Moses returned to his people, angry and disappointed and said, “O my people, did your Lord not promise you a good promise? Was the time too long for you? Or did you want wrath from your Lord to descend upon you, so you broke your promise to me?”

87. They said, “We did not break our promise to you by our choice, but we were made to carry loads of the people’s ornaments, and we cast them in. That was what the Samarian suggested.”
88. So he [A[-Samiri] produced for them a calf—a mere body which [mooed and] lowed. And they said, “This is your god, and the god of Moses, but he has forgotten.”
89. Did they not see that it cannot return a word to them, and has no power to harm them or benefit them? 90. Aaron had said to them before, “O my people, you are being tested by this. And your Lord is the Merciful, so follow me, and obey my command.”
91. They said, “We will not give up our devotion to it, until Moses returns to us.”
92. He [Moses] said, “O Aaron, what prevented you, when you saw them going astray.
93. From following me? Did you disobey my command?”
94. He [Aaron] said, “Son of my mother, do not seize me by my beard or my head. I feared you would say, `You have caused division among the Children of Israel, and did not regard my word.'”
95. He [Moses] said, “What do you have to say, O Samarian?”
96. He [Samiri] said, “I saw what they did not see, so I grasped a handful from the Messenger’s traces, and I flung it away. Thus my soul prompted me.”
97. He [Moses] said, “Begone! Your lot in this life is to say, ‘No contact.’ And you have an appointment that you will not miss. Now look at your god that you remained devoted to—we will burn it up, and then blow it away into the sea, as powder.”
98. Surely your god is[should be] God, the One besides whom there is no other god. He comprehends everything in knowledge.

One of the wonderful benefits of studying both the Torah and the Qur’an together is the new knowledge and insights that can be gained. Thanks to the Qur’an, Jews can learn that when our ancestors fled from Egypt, they were joined by a mixed group that included Arab descendants of Prophet Ishmael, as well as Egyptian magicians led by the Samarian Al-Samiri.  

There are people who fear this learning from other sacred scriptures because they believe it leads to doubting your own revelation. They believe that religion is a zero sum game. I believe that the study of both the Qur’an and the Hebrew Bible brings new knowledge and insights for both Jews and Muslims because the two Sacred Scriptures come from the same one God. 

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak looks as much a deep fake projection as a thin, superficial representation of reality.  His robotic, risible awkwardness makes a previous occupant of his office, Theresa May, look soppily human in comparison.  But at the AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park, the nervous system of code breaking during the Second World War dominated by such troubled geniuses as Alan Turing, delegates had gathered to chat about the implications of Artificial Intelligence.  

The guest list was characterised by a hot shot list of Big Tech and political panjandrums, part of an attempt by the UK to, as TechCrunch put it, “stake out a territory for itself on the AI map – both as a place to build AI businesses, but also as an authority in the overall field.”  They included Google, Meta, Microsoft and Salesforce, but excluded Apple and Amazon.  OpenAI and the perennially unpredictable Elon Musk, with his X AI, was present.

The guest list in terms of country representatives was also curious: no Nordic presence; no Russia (but Ukraine – naturally).  Brazil, holding up the Latin American front; a few others doing the same for the Global South.  US President Joe Biden was not present, but had sent his Vice President, Kamala Harris, as emissary.  The administration had, only a few days prior, issued the first Executive Order on AI, boastfully claiming to establish “new standards for AI safety and security” while protecting privacy, advancing equity and civil rights, all alongside promoting the consumer and worker welfare, innovation and competition.  Doubters will be busy.

China was invited to the event with the reluctance one affords an influential but undesirable guest.  Accordingly, its delegates were given what could only be regarded as a confined berth.  In that sense, the summit, as with virtually all tribal gatherings, had to find some menacing figure in the grand narrative of human striving.  Humankind is important, but so are select, targeted prejudices.  As UK Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden stated with strained hospitality, “There are some sessions where we have like-minded countries working together, so it might not be appropriate for China to join.” 

Sunak left it to the Minister for Technology, Michelle Donelan, to release the Bletchley Declaration, a document which claims to scrape and pull together some common ground about how the risks of AI are to be dealt with.  Further meetings are also planned as part of an effort to make this gig regular: Korea will host in six months; France six months afterwards.  But the British PM was adamant that hammering out a regulatory framework of rules and regulations at this point was premature: “Before you start mandating things and legislating for things… you need to know exactly what you’re legislating for.”  Musk must have been overjoyed.

The declaration opens with the view that AI “presents enormous global opportunities: it has the potential to transform and enhance human wellbeing, and prosperity.”  With that rosy tinted view firmly in place, the statement goes on to state the goal: “To realise this, we affirm that, for the good of all, AI should be designed, developed, deployed, and used, in manner that is safe, in such a way as to be human-centric, trustworthy and responsible.”  

Concerns are floated, including the potential abuse arising from the platforms centred on language systems being developed by Google, Meta and OpenAI.  “Particular safety risks arise at the ‘frontier’ of AI, understood as being those highly capable general-purpose AI models, including foundation models, that could perform a wide variety of tasks – as well as relevant specific narrow AI that could exhibit capabilities that cause harm – which match or exceed the capabilities present in today’s most advanced models.”

Recognition had to also be had regarding “the potential impact of AI systems in existing fora and other relevant initiatives, and the recognition that the protection of human rights, transparency and explainability, fairness, accountability, regulation, safety, appropriate human oversight, ethics, bias mitigation, privacy and data protection needs to be addressed.”

For the sake of form, the statement is partly streaked by concern for the “potential intentional misuse or unintended issues of control relating to alignment with human intent.”  There was also “potential for serious, even catastrophic, harm, either deliberate or unintentional, stemming from the most significant capabilities of these AI models.”

The declaration goes on to chirp about the virtues of civil society, though its creators and participants have done nothing to assure them that their role was that relevant.  In a letter sent to Sunak, signed by over 100 UK and international organisations, human rights groups, trade union confederations, civil society organisations, and experts, the signatories protested about the fact that “the Summit is a closed door event, overly focused on speculation about the remote ‘existential risks’ of ‘frontier’ AI systems – systems built by the very same corporations who now seek to change the rules.” 

It was revealing, given the theme of the conference, that “the communities and workers most affected by AI have been marginalised by the Summit.”  To also talk about AI in futuristic terms misrepresented the pressing, current realities of technological threat.  “For any millions of people in the UK and across the world, the risks and harms of AI are not distant – they are felt in the here and now.”  

Individuals could have their jobs terminated by algorithm.  Loan applicants could be disqualified on the basis of postcode or identity. Authoritarian regimes were using biometric surveillance while governments resorted to “discredited predictive policing.”  And the big tech sector had “smothered” innovation, squeezing out small businesses and artists.

From within the summit itself, limiting China’s limited contribution may have revealing consequences.  A number of Chinese academics attending the summit had signed on to a statement showing even greater concern for the “existential risk” posed by AI than either the Bletchley statement or President Biden’s executive order on AI.  According to the Financial Times, the group, which is distinguished by such figures as the computer scientist Andrew Yao, are calling for the establishment of “an international regulatory body, the mandatory registration and auditing of advanced AI systems, the inclusion of instant ‘shutdown’ procedures and for developers to spend 30 per cent of their research budget on AI safety.” 

Humankind has shown itself to be able, on rare occasions, to band together in creating international frameworks to combat a threat.  Unfortunately, such structures – the United Nations being one notable example – can prove brittle and subject to manipulation.  How the approach to AI maintains an “ethnic of use” alongside the political and economic prerogatives of governments and Big Tech is a question that will continue to trouble critics well-nourished by scepticism.  Rules will no doubt be drafted, but by whom? 

Mr. President,

More than 20 years ago, Rachel Corrie, a 23-year-old  American peace activist, was killed in Rafah by an American-made, Israeli-owned Caterpillar bulldozer. Her crime: she protested a demolition campaign by the occupying Israeli government that destroyed over a thousand in the Gaza Strip. 

In a letter sent to her family from Gaza, Corrie described the Palestinian suffering she had witnessed. “No amount of reading, attendance at conferences, documentary viewing and word-of-mouth could have prepared me for the reality of the situation here,” she wrote. “You just can’t imagine it unless you see it.”

In another letter she wrote, “I’m witnessing this chronic, insidious genocide and I’m really scared, and questioning my fundamental belief in the goodness of human nature.”

Poor Corrie, she did not realize that she herself would soon be a martyr – marked for extermination by the apartheid, colonial-settler statecraft. As expected, the ensuing internal Israeli military investigation cleared the bulldozer driver of any fault, and the ruling judge decided that Israel could not be held liable because the bulldozer was engaged in a “combat operation.” 

The next twenty years have witnessed not only the demolition of tens of thousands of homes, but also major genocidal crimes against the Palestinian people over and over again (what is termed ‘mowing the grass’ operation by the apartheid regime), by the same murderous and barbaric statecraft that has no respect for human lives. Thanks to the moral bankruptcy of the West, in general, and the US and the UK, in particular, Israel behaves like a rogue state that is above the international law. 

The latest genocidal orgy in the Occupied Palestine, esp. in Gaza, has once again shown the utter savagery and evil side of the Netanyahu government and the western complicity for such horrific crimes against humanity. In Israeli calculus, every Palestinian is a terrorist who does not deserve living alive. And the sad story is, it is our hard-earned US dollars that are paying the bills for those arms and ammunitions used by the IDF to commit war crimes. 

The death toll of the Palestinian civilians inside Gaza in less than a month has already surpassed those who died in Ukraine in its 18-month-long war with Russia. They are pulverized, shattered, and blown into pieces. By the way, a stark 70% of the victims are women and children. As of Friday, November 3, 2023, some 40,000 residential units have been destroyed by the IDF. Even the churches, mosques, schools, colleges, universities, utility centers, hospitals, clinics, ambulances and refugee shelters and camps are not off-limits. Nor are the UN-run offices, schools, and hospitals safe from Israel’s barbarism. As a result, more than 70 UN employees (highest ever in a conflict zone) have been killed by the IDF. There is not a single place, including the southern Gaza and Rafah border that is safe from Israel’s brutal attack from land, sea, and air. 

Rather than stopping the funding for Israel, your administration has bolstered its coffer. Do the Palestinian lives matter to you? How much blood must the Palestinians shed before you stop rewarding a murderous regime? 

What Netanyahu’s government is doing is pure evil. Israel cannot abuse the international laws regarding the ‘right of self-defense’ against people in occupied territories. Only a delusional mind can afford to see ‘no evil’ and ignore such obvious heinous crimes of our ‘reliable ally’ in the Middle East! It is high time to change the course and say enough is enough. Do not let the tail wag the dog.

The entire world is crying out for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. It is the USA, excuse my bluntness, which is behaving like a bully that is allowing the mass slaughter of the Palestinians to continue with no end in sight. They are seeing firsthand your administration’s regrettable double-standards vis-à-vis the Ukraine Crisis, which is contributing to a serious erosion of public trust in you. You cannot preach about human rights, dignity and democracy around the globe while giving a carte blanche to an apartheid regime that treats Palestinians as children of a lesser god. Apartheid system is the worst crime known to humankind. Please, do not reward it. 

Whether you like it or not, Mr. President, your naked approval of Israeli war crimes inside Gaza has made you a partner-in-crime of genocide. You have lost credibility not only in the Global South and within the broader UN, but also within the progressives and swing voters here inside America. Please, visit any major university campus to see how most young Americans feel about Israel’s genocidal crimes against the Palestinians. Listen to the voices of the protesters who have been rallying in all the major US cities. Do not be surprised to find that many of the vocal critics of your pro-Israeli policies are Jewish Americans. AIPAC does not speak on their behalf anymore. Please, consider talking to Jewish American academics like Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky to get an objective and more balanced perspective on the Palestinian question. 

I am not surprised that Secretary Blinken’s latest trip to Israel has failed. Thanks to the ‘Amen Corner’ in the Capitol Hill, and decades of pampering plus protective shielding offered by our US government in the UN, the ‘little’ rascal Israel has graduated to becoming an obscenely arrogant, purely evil, savage, monster that has the now the audacity to say ‘no’ to your plea for a ‘humanitarian pause’, let alone a ceasefire that is badly needed now in Gaza. 

Mr. President, do you recall, what late Secretary James Baker III, had said in June 1990 in comments directed to the Israeli government? “The phone number (for the White House switchboard) is 202-456-1414. When you’re serious about this, call us,” Baker said. If the new government, led by Yitzhak Shamir, which included some of Israel’s most hawkish politicians, were to put unacceptable conditions for Palestinian participation in the talks, “there won’t be any dialogue, there won’t be any peace,” Baker said bluntly. The United States could not get the talks going unless Israel showed willingness. 

Mr. President, Tony Blinken is no Jim Baker. Please, find a Jim Baker in your administration to demand an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. If diplomacy will not do the tricks, cut down all the supports that Israel now enjoys. Israel has been an ill-conceived investment anyway that has made the USA isolated in our globe. Do not waste the veto power in the UNSC to justify and sanitize Israeli war crimes. 

It is said that an uncouth hog needs whipping and not carrots! Such tough measures will help revive your credibility and spare you from being called to the Hague. Otherwise, even if you manage to dodge such a verdict in the ICC, please, be assured that history will judge you very harshly as one who financed mass murder and aided genocidal crimes of the apartheid state of Israel. And you can say, Sayonara to the next election. 

In London, television footage showed large crowds holding sit-down protests blocking parts of the city center, before marching to Trafalgar Square. 

Protesters held “Freedom for Palestine” placards and chanted “cease-fire now” and “in our thousands, in our millions, we are all Palestinians.” 

Police said they had made 11 arrests. One person was arrested for displaying a placard that could incite hate, contrary to terrorism legislation. 

Britain has supported Israel’s right to defend itself after Hamas killed 1,400 people and took more than 240 hostages in an Oct. 7 assault in southern Israel. Britain, along with United States and others in the West, has designated Hamas a terrorist organization.

Echoing Washington’s stance, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s government has stopped short of calling for a cease-fire, and instead advocated humanitarian pauses to allow aid into Gaza. 

In Washington 

Thousands of protesters marched down the streets of Washington waving Palestinian flags, some chanting “Biden, Biden you cannot hide, you signed up for genocide,” before congregating at Freedom Plaza, steps away from the White House. 

Speakers denounced President Joe Biden’s support of Israel, declaring “you have blood on your hands.” Some vowed not to support Biden’s bid for a second term in the White House next year as well as campaigns by other Democrats seeking office, calling them “two-faced” liberals who were “not a refuge from right wingers.”  

Others lashed out at civil rights leaders for not condemning the killing of women and children by Israeli bombings.  

Gaza health officials said Saturday that more than 9,488 Palestinians have been killed so far in the Israeli assault. 

In Paris

In central Paris, thousands marched to call for a cease-fire with placards reading “Stop the cycle of violence” and “To do nothing, to say nothing is to be complicit.” 

It was one of the first, big gatherings in support of Palestinians to be legally allowed in Paris since the Hamas attack on October 7. 

French authorities had banned some previous pro-Palestinian gatherings over concerns about public disorder. 

France will host an international humanitarian conference on Gaza on Thursday as it looks to coordinate aid for the enclave. 

“We came here today to show the people of France’s solidarity with the Palestinian people and our support for peace, for a peace solution with two states, an Israeli state and a Palestinian state,” said Antoine Guerreiro, a 30 year old civil servant. 

Wahid Barek, a 66-year-old retiree, lamented the deaths of both Israeli and Palestinian civilians. 

“I deplore civilian deaths on both sides. Civilians have nothing to do with these actions. It really is shameful,” he said. 

In Berlin, elsewhere

In Berlin, demonstrators waved Palestinian flags, demanding a cease-fire. One woman marched with her arm in the air, her hand covered in fake blood.  

Hundreds of protesters gathered in Istanbul and Ankara, a day before a visit to Turkey by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken for talks on Gaza. 

Turkey, which has sharply criticized Israel and Western countries as the humanitarian crisis has intensified in Gaza, supports a two-state solution and hosts members of Hamas. Ankara does not consider Hamas a terrorist organization, unlike the United States, the European Union, and some Gulf states. 

In Istanbul’s Sarachane park, protesters held banners saying “Blinken, the accomplice of the massacre, go away from Turkey,” with a picture of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Blinken together with a red “X” mark on it. 

“Children are dying, babies are dying there, being bombed,” said 45-year-old teacher Gulsum Alpay. 

Footage from Ankara showed protesters gathered near the U.S. Embassy, chanting slogans and holding posters which read: “Israel bombs hospitals, Biden pays for it.”