The Art of Asking Questions

 

“The art and science of asking questions is the source of all knowledge.” – Thomas Berger
“A Wise man’s question contains half the answer.” – Solomon Ibn Gabirol

Last night was the first night of Pesach when Jews commemorate and celebrate our ancestors’ "Exodus" from Egypt, and the liberation from slavery. The “Seder,” is the festive meal that opens this especially important Holy Day, recalling, reminding, and educating our younger generation about the significant chain of events which preceded that momentous outcome. It is chronicled in the “Haggadah,” the book we read during that occasion.

I remember my childhood “Seders.” Being a curious child, I wanted to know everything about it. I sought to learn why the Seder plate had certain foods on it or why the table was arranged the way it was. I also wanted to know why we eat "Matzah," "Charoset," and other kinds of food which are consumed only on this night and this Holy Day. I was curious about some of the terms and the logic behind some of the customs. I was eager to learn why this night was different than any other night. In short, I had many questions.

“What a great question,” I remember my father commenting on some of my queries. “And another good one,” he would remark on others as he was caressing me with his soft eyes. “Don’t ever stop asking,” he kept encouraging me, “we learn about our world and our life by asking questions.”

As I grew older and delved deeper into the content of the “Haggadah,” I realized that it was not my wisdom or dexterity that prompted me to ask all those “good questions” which made my father so proud of me. Rather, it was the ingenuity of those who, so prudently, crafted the art of asking questions - the essence, and the fabric of the “Haggadah.” The way they outlined the “Seder” (order in Hebrew), sparked my strong sense of curiosity, and led me to ask those questions.

A bird’s eye view of the “Haggadah” will reveal to us that it is laced with distinctive symbolic acts and food. It is not happenstance. They were deliberately created and aimed at raising curiosity, interest and stimulating inquisitiveness.

The directive to tell and retell the story of the “Exodus” is mentioned in the Torah. Moreover, it is provided in the form of a commandment weaving a hypothetical conversation between parent and child: “If your son asks you in time to come . . . you shall say to your son, ‘We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt, and G-d took us out of Egypt with a strong hand.’”  D’varim (Deuturonomy) 6:20-21. The wise rabbis understood that the telling over of the story of the “Exodus” is meant and should be in a question-and-answer format.

These sages, obviously, recognized that at the core of asking questions is the desire to know, learn and understand. Questions are the fuel of growth and the best way to gain deeper acumens. Asking questions is, in itself, a creative activity, perhaps the epitome of human creativity. The skill of asking questions is, according to Jerome Brunner, the ability to go “beyond given information.” It grants us the opportunity to examine issues from a different angle. The greatest inventors and scientists in human history, people such as Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein and many others asked fundamental questions which eventually led to their marvelous breakthroughs.  Philosophers and thinkers devote their whole lives to asking questions about the meaning of life, morality, truth, human behaviour and the divinity of G-d.

Realizing the significance and developmental benefits of asking questions and since the “Seder” is all about provoking questions, the sages have also instituted a few unique rituals to be performed at the Seder table for the mere purpose of arousing curiosity among children, teaching and triggering them to probe for answers. The very fact that we are doing something different, they discerned, will lend itself to an additional question, answer, and further growth.

What a great legacy and what a blessing it is to be part of it.
Happy and meaningful Pesach.

One Difference of Opinion that I Refuse to Dignify

 

“The test of faith is whether I can make room for difference.” – Chief Rabbi, Lord Jonathan Sacks, “The Dignity of Difference.”

There is not a single person who could attest to me being someone who lacks faith. In fact, I believe that I am one of the most optimistic people I know. I am willing to accept and embrace the other (sometimes too quickly!). I am open to listen to their constructive criticism and comments, acknowledge dignify them and respond graciously.

However, there are some red lines that I refuse to cross.

I realize that not everyone is a warrior who is ready to risk that which they consider important to them, be it their family, their job, or their own safety. I also understand that to ask anyone to sacrifice that which is dear to them at the expense of adhering to integrity and truth, is, perhaps, unfair.

But when they ask me, in return, to dignify their approach and their opinion and accept their stand, they use the occasion to reprove me, label me with their own made-up titles and mock me. And why? Because I refuse to let go of my belief and become their “yes” person.  

Let me be specific. Anyone who has known me, even for a short while, is aware of how staunchly I support Trump and fight obstinately against the injustice and evil that was committed against him. I am, especially, referring to the results of the latest U.S. elections.

I doubt that there are many who will disagree that these elections were rigged. And no, I am not suggesting that there is overwhelming proof that Trump received more votes that Biden. What I am saying, though, is that there is enough proof of irregularities that occurred which, in my view, deems revisiting the subject for the sake of transparency and respect to every single voter. Neither do I demand, nor do I think that everyone who supported and voted for President Trump in the past should continue to exercise loyalty to the person who has been good to many of us, Americans first, and to the rest of the world, as I do. Likewise, I would never expect anyone not to capitulate to political and social pressure and stand by the side of the man, who has been wronged by so many, during his hard times, as they did during his good days.

In that respect, yes, I do dignify their right to hold a different opinion. Freedom of choice and expression are central pillars of the U.S. Democratic Republic. 

My question, rather, my dilemma, though, has nothing to do with my loyalty to one candidate or another. It has everything to do with upholding and dignifying the ethical principles and moral compass upon which this country was founded.

In other words, the rigged election results, the fraudulent manners in which some were obtained and the certification of the electorate, despite the abundant evidence which was not even granted a court hearing, is, in my view, a slap and a spit in the face of the Constitution of “We the People.” This is what, I believe, every decent, law abiding American citizen should also have an issue with.

Instead, I witness nonchalance among some of my fellow Americans who, even upon being presented with evidence of the deceit and the lies employed to produce the fraudulent election results, merely shrug their shoulders, click their tongues, blindly accepted such antics, and move on with their lives as if everything is normal.

They are, of course, entitled to their stance which is light years away from mine. However, to expect me to dignify their difference on this matter is to ask me to embrace lies, fraud, evil and lawlessness. That, I will never do. That, I could never do.

Crossing that red line would go not only against my Jewish upbringing. It would also amount to a violation of the oath of allegiance “to support and defend the American Constitution,” an oath I proudly took when I became a naturalized citizen of this great country, the United States of America.

?משרד החינוך או המשרד להינדוס תודעה

 

אזהרה, הכתבה הבאה מכילה חומר אשר עלול לפגוע ברגשותיהם של אנשים. עימכם הסליחה.

שלא כדרכי בקודש, החלטתי לערוך את הכתבה הבאה בעיברית.

הפעם, קהל היעד שלי הוא בני עמנו הגרים בציון. כוונתי לאנשים כמוך, כמוני ואחרים. חלקם קשי יום, אחרים עסוקים במלחמת הקיום היומיומית שלהם מבלי דעת כיצד מערכת החינוך במדינתנו מעצבת, או נכון יותר, לדעתי, עלולה, חלילה, לעוות את מוחותיהם של ילדיהם, הלך מחשבתם וסולם ערכיהם.

מעשה שהיה, כך היה.

באחד הימים קבלתי הודעה מחברה בפייסבוק. ההודעה לא הרבתה במילים, אולם התמונה

:אשר צורפה אליה אמרה רבות. הרי היא לפניכם

: לכל אותם אשר אינם מכירים את דמותה של שושקה, הרי מידע נוסף אודותיה

  : https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%A9%D7%A7%D7%94

כמורה אשר לימדה בני נוער בגילאי חטיבת ביניים ותיכון, במדינת ישראל, טבעי שאתהה אודות מהות הפעילות הנ"ל בתיכון "גלילי," ומטרתה. בנוסף לכך,כאם וכאזרחית המשתתפת במימון תוכניות חינוכיות, הנני רשאית לדעת מדוע נבחרה דמות זו המכסה טפח ומגלה טפחיים, החושפת את חלקי גופה האינטימיים ביותר של אשה, לפעילות במוסד חינוכי ומדוע דווקא קהל  היעד המורכב מתלמידי תיכון הנמצאים בגיל ההתבגרות עם כל התופעות ההורמונליות המתלוות איליו

לשם כך פניתי למנהלת הית הספר תיכון "גלילי" בכפר סבא, הגברת יעל מטלון. הנ"ל הפנתה אותי למחלקת החינוך בעירייה. מחלקת החינוך הפנתה אותי לדוברת העיריה, הגברת ליעד בראל גיל.

בתאריך  5.12.2020, פניתי לגברת בראל גיל:

שלום רב לך, גברת  בראל גיל,

שמי בת ציון סוסקינד-סאקס. אני מורה בישראל. כמו כן, הנני עיתונאית בסקטור האקדמי ובלוגרית ב

    ובעלת בלוג פרטי. Times of Israel ו-JPost

פנייתי אליך אינה אך ורק בהקשר לעיסוקי הנ"ל. פנייתי נובעת מתוך רצון להבין את הנימוקים העומדים מאחורי צעד שבו נקטה עיריית כפר סבא

 כפי שמצויין בעלון הפרסום המצ"ב, בתאריך 30.11.20, נערכה בבית ספר תיכון "גלילי" פעילות לתלמידי התיכון בו השתתף/ השתתפה שושקה

צר היה לי ללמוד שבחרתם דווקא בדמות זאת להשתתף באירוע המופיע תחת השם : "אמנות ואקטיביזם עם  שושקה

האם זו הדמות היחידה אשר עמדה לבחירתכם כאשר תכננתם אירוע זה?

האם זו, לדעתכם, הדמות הטובה ביותר לחיקוי עבור בני נוער במדינת ישראל

אשמח לדעת מה היו שיקוליכם בעת קבלת החלטה זו.

בברכת חג אורים שמח

בת ציון

:באותו יום הגיבה לי הגברת בראל גיל

,שלום בת ציון

מדובר בתוכנית של משרד החינוך בנושא אומנות מחאה. במקרה זה נבחרה דמות הפועלת נגד גזענות ושנאה.

כעירייה, איננו מתערבים בתכנים חינוכיים וסומכים על מערכת החינוך הנפלאה שלנו שיודעת להנגיש לתלמידים תכנים שונים ופלורליסטים, המרחיבים את הדעת ומעודדים חשיבה, חקר וידע.

אני מאחלת לך חג שמח ובריאות איתנה,

 תגובתה של דוברת העירייה, לא סיפקה אותי. האם חינוך כנגד גזענות ושנאה חייב להיעשות תוך כדי חשיפת חמוקיה ואבריה הפרטיים ביותר של אשה? האם פעילות שכזו מכבדת כל אשה באשר היא? כיצד אמורה מורה בישראל להרגיש כאשר הינה עומדת בפני תלמידים אשר אך זמן קצר לפני השיעור נחשפו לתחפושת המציגה את בת מינה במערומיה?

מאחר שהגברת בראל גיל תארה את מערכת החינוך כ"נפלאה," החלטתי להפנות את שאלתי לאותו אחד העומד בראשה, מר יואב גלנט.

שתי פניותי למשרדו של מר גלנט, האחת במסר ישיר, השניה במדור התלונות של משרד החינוך, לא נענו.

חברה יקרה הציעה להציג בפני את מר  אריאל בראון, חבר מפלגת הליכוד וסגן ראש מועצת כפר תבור בתקווה שהוא יוכל להעביר את פנייתי ישירות לשר גלנט.

למרות שהנני מכירה תודה למאמציו של מר בראון אשר לטענתו הראשונה השר היה בבידוד והשניה "השר עסוק בבחירות," לא הסכמתי לתשובה שקיבלתי.

זו הבעיה, חברים, כל אחד "עסוק" במשהו בעת שילדינו נחשפים לפעילויות חינוכיות אשר אינני יודעת את משמעותן ומטרתן האמיתית. כמו כן, ברצוני לדעת אם ההורים אכן היו מודעים למהותן ואם הן היו לחלוטין מקובלות עליהם, על מורים ואזרחים מן השורה במדינת ישראל.

בהמשך למאמצי ודרישותי לקבל מענה, מסר לי מר בראון את שמו של מר שחר כץ העובד במשרד החינוך בהבטחה שהנ"ל יטפל בשאלתי.

שחר כץ הפנה אותי למר דביר אמסלם אשר העביר אלי את כתובת האי מייל שלו.  בתאריך   7.1.2021 שלחתי למר אמסלם אימייל ובו גוללתי בפניו את השתלשלות העיניינים.

באותו יום חזר אלי האחרון והפנה אותי למיכל "דוברת משרד החינוך" בהבטחה שאוכל לפנות אליה "לקבלת מענה."

כאשר יצרתי קשר עם מיכל, טענה הנ"ל כי אינה מכירה אדם בשם דביר אמסלם העובד במשרד החינוך וכי אינה יודעת במה מדובר. כמובן שמיד יצרתי קשר עם מר אמסלם והנ"ל הדגיש כי מיכל אכן אמורה לדעת לגבי הנושא וכי הוא שלח לה הודעה באי מייל "שתבדוק את האי-מייל שלה," הוסיף האחרון. למיותר לציין שהגברת מיכל לא חזרה אלי.

מאידך, מר אמסלם, וכאן עלי לציין את האיש לשבח, אכן עושה עבודתו נאמנה ועשה ככל שביכולתי לקדם את הטיפול בנושא, הגיב לי באותו יום. וזו לשון תגובתו:

כמובן, שלא היססתי ומיד פניתי "בצורה מסודרת" לדוברות.בתאריך ה-8.1.2021 קבלתי הודעה מבחורה בשם מיטל, העובדת במשרד החינוך. זו לשון ההודעה:

בשיחת טלפון עם מיטל, הבהרתי לה את מטרת החקירה וכי בכוונתי לערוך כתבה ולפרסמה באחד מהבלוגים שלי.

בתאריך ה-5.2.2021 פניתי שוב למיטל במטרה לברר אם יש בידה תשובה.

תגובתה:

:כאשר בקשתי לדעת מתי אוכל לצפות לתגובה, השיבה הנ"ל

חזרתי והדגשתי שאני בשיג ושיח (דרך מר בראון) עם משרד החינוך בנושא זה כבר מחודש דצמבר וכי זכותי לקבל תשובה. וזו הייתה תגובתה של מיטל

     הבהרתי לגברת שאין בכוונתי להמתין עוד זמן רב. כמו כן הוספתי שעל פי השתלשלות הארועים, אני מאוכזבת מאוד מאופן התנהלות משרד החינוך בנושא וכי כתבתי תביע זאת

בתאריך 24.2.2021 בעת ביקור בארה"ב לרגל הולדת נכדי הבכור, שלחתי הודעה נוספת למיטל. לצערי, וללא כוונה זדונית שכחתי את הפרשי השעות בין ארה"ב לישראל ושלחתי את ההודעה בשעות הקטנות של הלילה.
למחרת, פניתי למיטל לוודא שאכן קבלה את ההודעה. זו הייתה תגובתה:

הבהרתי שאני בחו"ל ושאכן שלחתי את ההודעה מאוחר אולם, הייתי מצפה שאכן תהיה תשובה לאחר זמן כה ממושך של טיפול בנושא(מתחילת חודש צדמבר). בקשתה של מיטל "שנמשיך רק באמצאות הדואר האלקטרוני, כמקובל" הפתיעה אותי מאחר שכל ההתקשרויות עימי ממשרד החינוך, כולל זו שלה, היו מלכתחילה באמצעות הוואטסאפ.

הודעתי לכל הגורמים אשר עימהם הייתי במגע שיש בכוונתי לפרסם את הכתבה בציון שמותיהם של כל המעורבים בנושא והשתלשלות הארועים אשר הביאו אותי לנקוט בצעד זה.

לצערי, עד לרגע זה לא קבלתי תשובה ממשרד החינוך וזאת לאחר שהבאתי את הנושא לתשומת ליבם של  אותם אשר אליהם הופניתי, בזה אחר זה, כאשר נאמר לי שהם אחראים והם אלה אשר יוכלו לספק לי מענה

!כמה עצוב

The Impeachment of Reason

 

Impeachment has become a household word, nowadays. We hear and read that the Legislative branch (yes, the very same one that was created as part of the “checks and balances”) of the U.S. government is planning to impeach former President, Donald J. Trump. We witness many discussions and debates, by various analysts, mostly media people and unfortunately, even some U.S. politicians who are clueless about their own U.S. Constitution, in general and on the Articles of Impeachment, in particular.

Since I am an American, some turn to me to ask my view on this issue, seeking some clarification.

I always suggest that we start by defining terms.

“Impeachment” according to the Cambridge Dictionary is “to make a formal statement saying that a public official is guilty of a serious offence in connection with their job, especially in the US:” This teaches us that impeachment can only apply to a person who holds an official public office.

Next, let us see what the U.S Constitution states regarding impeachment. A basic Google search has produced, among others, an article by the NYTimes. In it, the writer states in plain everyday language that: “The Constitution permits Congress to remove presidents before their term is up if enough lawmakers vote to say that they committed “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” I have no reason to doubt the NYTimes on the accuracy of this statement.

What we learn from these two sources then is that:

A. Only a person who is a public official, not a private citizen, can be impeached.

B. The process can be done only while they, in this case, presidents, are still in office.

C. The penalty for an impeached official, upon conviction, is their removal from office. 

As far as I am concerned this is clear, simple, and straightforward. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to be able to grasp the concept. All one needs is a healthy logic and sound reason.

At least that is what I thought until this afternoon.

A friend, a fellow Trump supporter, one who I hold in high esteem, called, and asked me to explain to her what the “impeachment” entailed. I shared her with the above information. She sounded confused.

I decided to simplify it for her by providing an example. “Let’s say,“ I started, “that a lawyer who had been working for a certain law firm for a number of years, decided to leave his job, move to another town and start a clothing business.” So far so good. “Now,” I resumed, “suppose that after he had left his firm, one of his colleagues who resented him, decided to get him fired. Can he do that? Can you fire someone from any place of work where he is no longer employed?” I asked.

“Of course not, “answered my friend without hesitation.

“Great,” I thought to myself. That should be easy. “Now,” I moved on, “let us pretend that the lawyer who left the office, moved to another town, and opened a clothing business, is President Trump…” A long silence on the other side of the telephone line prompted me to ask, “hello, are you still there?”
“Yes,” she responded hesitantly, “but the media keeps telling us that he is still going to be tried. Let us hope you are right, let us……”

“Wait a minute,” I interrupted her. “Do you believe that Donald J. Trump is still in office?” I probed her. “No, of course not,” she answered very confidently. “Biden is the President. The media shows him sitting in the White House signing executive orders……He is the sitting president.”

“Then,” I persisted, “in that case, since Donald J. Trump is not the President, he is now a private citizen like you and I, correct?”

“yes…..”

“Therefore, according to the U.S. Constitution, he cannot be impeached. Unless, of course, there are two presidents or there is something that you and I and many others do not know…..,” I added.

“No,  it is clear that Trump has conceded. He is no longer in the White House,” I heard her assuring answer. I decided to leave my disagreement with her regarding Trump's "conceding" to another occasion. One step at a time.

Just as I was about to heave a big sigh of relief, I heard her say, “But in the news….well,” she added realizing her predicament, “as I said, I hope you are right….”

Unfortunately, she is not the only one who views this unequivocal issue in such a bewildered manner. Many people that I consider intelligent and perceptive seem to have difficulty grasping such a very straightforward issue.

I fear that my friend, along with many others, have lost their ability to think independently. Their judgmental faculties have been assailed and are in danger of being removed from them. They, themselves, it seems, have become subject to an impeachment. In their case, it is the impeachment of reason  

Yisrael - The National Jewish Home or a home for Jews?

 Special thanks Moshe Schwartz who inspired the titular question of this article

Almost three quarters of a century after its birth, who would have imagined that the essence of the State of Yisrael would still be a focus of debate and mostly among Yisraelis?

The subject was brought to my attention a couple of weeks ago. One of my friends told me that her youngest son who is in high school was given an assignment on the issue. Students, she told me, were requested to deliberate on whether Yisrael’s National anthem, “Ha’Tikvah,” which includes expressions to the yearning of the “soul of a Jew” to Zion should be revisited. Following such pondering, the students were instructed to express an opinion on whether its lyrics which, do not mention non-Jews should be modified and include other minorities such as Druze, Muslim, Christians, and others who are Yisraeli citizens.

As a frame of reference, the teacher suggested a few sources. One of them was an article entitled “Lost in Translation – Hatikva in Arabic Too” was written by Gadi Benmark. In it, Benmark evokes that Yisrael follows the example of Canada. There, the anthem, “Oh Canada” was originally written in French, in the seventeenth century when Canada was “The New France.” The British, who arrived much later, explains Benmark, evidently felt that the French version excluded them and hence added an English language version, which is not a translation of the French one. “So now,” comments Benmark, “it is a national universal song that every Canadian, of every origin, can sing proudly.” In conclusion, Benmark suggests that Yisrael duplicates the Canadian experience so that every Yisraeli can sing the version that suits them.

With all due respect to Canada, not only do I consider such an analogy inappropriate, I also deem it an insult.

I am afraid that no matter how one addresses it, neither the French, nor the English possess the same bond to Canada, which is a few hundred years old, as the one that Jews have forged with the Land of Yisrael for over a few millennia. And I am not even touching upon the Biblical connection, as I much as I hold it true, simply because I believe that in today’s geo-political environment, religious arguments are irrelevant. The union between the People and the Land, in the case of the Jews, reflected itself for thousands of years not only in religious rituals and customs. It also paraded itself in Literature, Art, Archeology and documented historical accounts.

Canada, unlike Yisrael, was created in a unilateral move by the British in 1867. The British Parliament then passed the North America Act. Canada was introduced into the family of nations in an arbitrary step by a colonial power. Its purpose, its goal, its core, and its nature were left undefined.

The creation of the State of Yisrael was anything but an arbitrary move by one government. No act of one state, one parliament or a single colonial power decreed its  foundation or created it. Its idea, yes, but not its actual creation.

From the very first moment of the inception of the notion, starting with the Balfour Declaration, Yisrael (AKA Palestine, the artificial name given to it by the Romans in 135 C.E.) was defined as the place where a National Home for the Jewish People, not just a home for Jews, would be erected. The State of Yisrael was decreed as Jewish in its essence and by more than one source.

The Jewish character of Yisrael was further reinforced in the San Remo Accord of 1920 which was voted upon by the Supreme Council of Five that acted as an International Court of Law. It was an International Order, not just an Act of Parliament of one power.

And then, of course there was U.N resolution 181 of November 29, 1947. In it, the family of nations, voted to establish two states in Eretz Yisrael, one Arab, and one Jewish. The Jewish State was born following a democratic vote after a long painful labour period.

Ironically enough, more than the Jews defined the nature of their state, the Gentiles did.

As a Jewish state, the only Jewish state on the globe, might I add, Yisrael should adhere to the designated nature and substance decreed to it. It should keep the blue and white flag with the powerful symmetric Star of David at its center. It should maintain the emblem of the Menorah that adorned the Temple of Solomon and it should keep the words of Ha’Tikvah intact.

If someone feels that certain lines in Yisrael’s Jewish National Anthem are hard for them to digest, I suggest they refrain from singing it. Losing our national identity at the cost of accommodating others is not an option, I am afraid. Turning Yisrael from the Jewish National Home to merely a home for Jews is a risk we cannot afford to take. That is one of the most important lessons that our Jewish history curriculum has taught us.

We cannot and should not allow ourselves to fail that course.

Am Yisraek Chai 

The Weakest Link

 

We are all part of a chain in one way or another. Some are a link in a family line, others are the connectors in the history of an ethnic group, a nation, a social, cultural or any other assembly.

That link is not always staring at us or is clearly visible. Sometimes, we need to search for it, join scattered dots, cross- check facts or dig deep to discover it. In some instances, we may be lucky enough and discover that tiny clue which will lead us to the component that we are in search of. In others, unfortunately, we may find that the weakest link is not only weak, but also nonexistent.

In 2002, I embarked on the quest for one.

It happened when my daughter and I attended a summer school programme in Yiddish studies at the University of Vilnius, Yiddish Institute.

Over one weekend, we went to visit both my parents’ hometowns.  My mother’s, Smorgon, was first on the list. Since I had visited the place two years earlier, I was rather familiar with its layout which, incidentally, unlike that of my father’s and others that I visited, changed considerably since the time my mother had lived there.  

My mother’s house was no longer there. The large and menacing grey Pravoslav Church that had once stood there and which my mother could see through her bedroom window, was demolished once the Soviets entered town. The only remnant of the days gone by was the habitual market day which took place on Wednesdays.

Just as I had in my first visit, two years earlier, I tried, again, to find some information about my family’s history, a shred of evidence, a weak link that could reconnect me to that place.

Our tour guide, Regina, a Yiddish speaker herself, was immensely helpful. She was able to find one man who was seventeen years old when WWII broke out. Surely, I thought to myself, he would have heard of the Kozlowsky family (fictitious name, for obvious reasons). My grandfather owned a big, successful wholesale business. He was the richest man in town and their big spacious home was located near the city square.

The old man we met (in the photo below) who was eighty years old at the time, was blind and could not remember much. I tried to help revive his memory and mentioned the name of my grandfather’s competitor, Bernstein (likewise, a fictitious name) but to no avail. Nothing!

I felt empty. I had brought my daughter all the way for nothing, no proof, whatsoever, of a world, part of her world, that once was. The missing link was nowhere to be found.

Our next stop was my father’s hometown. A poor place with a few scattered houses where time stood still. No slight chance of finding the long searched for missing link, there, it was obvious.

“Is there another place you wish to visit before we head back to Vilna?” Regina asked me, noticing my great disappointment.

“Oshmiany,” I responded automatically.

Both my daughter and Regina looked surprised. “Why?” probed Regina, “did you have any family there?”

“No,” I said, “But my parents used to mention that name more than once. I am curious to see it.”
“Interesting,” observed Regina, “I happen to know a Jewish family there, the only Jewish family left there.”

Like my father’s hometown, not much seemed to have changed in that small community since the war ended, according to Bluma De Leon.

Bluma, a woman in her eighties, lived with her daughter, her son in law and two granddaughters in a small house, surrounded by farms, in an area sprinkled with what seemed to have been semi built houses, and many ruined ones.

Somehow, she managed to survive the war and moved to Oshmiany after it ended.

“I was born in Kreve,” she started her story, in Yiddish, of course, “where my father owned a small retail store.”

“Kreve?” I asked, “it was not far from Smorgon, was it not?” I knew the name since my grandmother used to tell me stories, in Yiddish, about life in those little shtetles. I could see them in my mind’s eye. I could draw a map and place each and everyone of them on their approximate locations.

“Yes, I knew Smorgon. I used to go there with my father,” she answered without hesitation. A glimmer of hope was ignited in me. A sliver of light was shinning towards me from afar.

“You have been to Smorgon as a child?” I asked with my mouth wide open and sparkling eyes. “What did you go there for?” I persisted as if clinging to the edge of a lifeline.

“My father used to buy supplies such as flour and sugar from Bernstein.”

“Wrong name, wrong link,” a tiny voice whispered to me as I sank deeper into the armchair in which I was seated. And just when I was ready to give up, I suddenly heard Bluma’s voice as if in a dream, “herring, however, the best herring, he bought from Kozlowsky."

I jumped in my seat. “Did you say, ‘Kozlowsky?’” I heard myself saying.

“Yes, because he was famous for his herring. It was the best there was.” As the tears began gushing down my face, I stood up, walked to Bluma, hugged her and in a strained voice said, "I am his granddaughter. You are the evidence I have been looking for, the living proof, the confirmation that the chain has never been broken. Thank you,"

“But I am just a weak eighty years old woman,” she added, as she was wiping her tears.

“Even the weakest link can, sometimes, become the strongest one.” I whispered to her as we stood there holding each other for a long while.

A Miracle called "The Jewish People"

 

“Every day, many a miracle happens to the sons of Israel. Were it not for G-d’s miracles, we should -Heaven forbid! – have perished long ago” – Yonatan Eibschutz

“There are two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.” – Albert Einstein

Our long and eventful Jewish history is without doubt a testimonial to the first quote. Channukah, but one example, is always reminiscent of G-d’s marvels, past and present. Our entire Jewish existence, I believe, is a unique phenomenon. Each Jew, irrelevant of whether they regard themselves as such or not, is a miracle.

Some Jews, unfortunately, fail to see their lives as such. They are the ones Einstein is referring to in the former part of his quote. Others, like myself, live our lives as Jews “as though everything is a miracle,” as though each and every one of us is a wonder on their own.

Before anyone jumps at me and accuses me of arrogance or practicing some form of  “Jewish elitism,” let me explain.

As many of my readers know, both my parents were Shoah survivors. To have come out of the abyss, from the netherworld, to have survived its infernal fires, to have been reborn, gather the shambles of one’s life and build a bigger better temple, raise a family and rebuild trust in a vile world is miraculous. That, coupled with resuming to live one’s life as though “everything is a miracle,” eventually turns one into a miracle.

The fabric of our Jewish history is woven with many such astounding stories. “Miracle” is our Jewish middle name.

Much to my dismay, though, some fellow Jews continue to regard our existence as the first part of Einstein’s words suggest. “We were always meant to be a small nation,” told me a Jewish acquaintance once when I bemoaned that we are losing too many Jews to assimilation. According to her, there is nothing miraculous about our two thousand years of enduring, persecution, pogroms, discrimination and forced conversion. These were, if I follow her logic, merely some milestones to ensure that we fulfilled our destiny to remain a small nation. What a slap in the face of our Jewish heritage such a view is. In her perspective, so it seems, we are just like everyone else, just a nation among the nations with no unusual history, no unique set of beliefs and no Torah. She is, of course, entitled to hold that belief.

I, however, refuse to prescribe to that kind of a notion. I believe in miracles.

I consider my parents’ survival and the survival of many of our Jewish brothers and sisters through hard and dangerous times, a miracle. Moreover, to have been born to a miracle, by default, makes one a miracle. I am a daughter of two miracles. Hence, my birth, my gift of Life is, itself, a miracle.

Furthermore, I hold the view that a miracle should never be wasted. To preserve one’s life as a miracle, one needs to recreate miracles, spend their time on this earth, strive relentlessly and act constantly in a way that would keep the miracle going.

In the words of our wise Talmud, “Hope for a miracle but don’t depend on one.” (Megillah 7b)

In other words, miracles do not just happen. One should never depend on them.

In my words, one should keep the faith, never give up and create a fertile ground for miracles to transpire. That, too, as our few millennia old Jewish history, has proven, is attainable .

May this Channukah season be full of miracles and every blessing to all