World War III

Much of the Western world is suffering from a dangerous lack of imagination, choosing to see the “conflict in Iran” as something less than a simmering Third World War.

To read why I feel that way, please click here.

Eikev – Does Heaven Play Favorites?

Well, does He or doesn’t He?

Hashem, that is. Does he show special favor to some or not?

That question is placed by Rabbi Ami or Rabbi Asi (Berachos 20b) in the mouths of angels, who asked the Creator about the description of Him (Devarim 10:17) in this week’s parsha: “Who favors no one and takes no bribe.”

But yet, the angels said, “You, nevertheless, show favor to Yisrael, as it is written: ‘Hashem will show favor to you and give you peace’” (Bamidbar 6:26).

Hashem’s reply: “How can I not show favor to Yisrael? I wrote for them in the Torah: ‘And you shall eat and be satisfied, and bless Hashem your G-d’ (Devarim 8:10) [meaning that only if one is satiated is there an obligation to recite birchas hamazon, the blessing after a meal], yet they recite it even if they have eaten a mere olive’s or egg’s volume!”

What a strange reply. Firstly, reciting a bracha when it isn’t required isn’t permitted – so by what right did the rabbis of the Talmud allow it for a sparse meal? And secondly, the response doesn’t answer the question! Isn’t Hashem still showing favoritism?

Unless… reciting birchas hamazon even on a small amount doesn’t represent any changing of the requirement itself for saying the bracha but is rather a new sort of fulfilment of that requirement – in other words, an embrace of being “satisfied” with less.

If we are “satisfied” with any small degree of Hashem’s blessing – if we recognize what a divine kindness even a minimal amount of sustenance is, and feel sincere gratitude for it – then our own declining to demand a more literal satisfaction, full stomachs, may be what allows Hashem to be “satisfied,” so to speak, with less from us.

In which case, His “showing favor” to Yisrael is not really that at all but rather something of a midda kineged midda, a quid pro quo – an act of perfect justice.

© 2026 Rabbi Avi Shafran

Vo’eschanan – Living Martyrdom

The Jewish credo, “the Shema,” declares Moshe’s directive to us to love Hashem “with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your resources” (Devarim 6:5).

And, famously, Chazal understand “all your soul” as meaning even if being faithful to Hashem means dying as a result (Berachos 54a).

That command has been honored over the millennia in countless acts of Jewish martyrdom at the hands of enemies who sought to force their victims to violate one of the precepts for which a Jew is to die rather than transgress, or in times when such evildoers sought to uproot Torah observance from Jewish people.

Martyrdom is the ultimate self-abnegation. It is, though, not the only expression of selflessness. 

Rabbi Yisrael Salanter noted that the directive to love Hashem with all our souls encompasses not only readiness to lose our entire souls (the ultimate negation of self) but any overlooking of self-interest in the service of the Divine. 

Every situation, in other words, whereby “negation” of one’s self serves a higher purpose.

It happens often that one is faced with a situation that violates one’s sense of self, or self-image.  It might be a slight, or an open insult; a usurping of a turn at something, or an unwarranted deprivation.

If such situations are not legally actionable (like if one has suffered a financial loss or damage due to another’s misdeed), it is commendable to recognize that it is only one’s “self” that has been put at stake, and that “dying” a little – overlooking the slight – is not only the proper path to take but, most valuably, an act of Kiddush Hashem, a mini-martyrdom.

© 2026 Rabbi Avi Shafran

DSA VS. USA

There’s no way to put a gloss on the ugliness of Darializa Avila Chevalier’s and Melat Kiros’ sentiments about the US and Israel. Even more disturbing is the reluctance of saner Democratic leaders to criticize the corrosive candidates.

To read more about the implications of the above, please click here.

Devarim – Timeless

Sefer Devarim begins with Moshe Rabbeinu’s recounting of the Jewish People’s history since the exodus from Egypt, through the years of desert-wandering.

And our communal reading of the beginning of the sefer coincides yearly with our own annual survey of the millennia since, our lookback at the myriad travails our forebears endured; parshas Devarim always precedes Tisha B’Av.

Abba Shaul (Shabbos, 133b) tells us to emulate certain name-descriptions of Hashem: “Just as He is compassionate and merciful, so too should you be compassionate and merciful.”

I’ve wondered about the fact that Hashem’s most “descriptive” name, the Tetragrammaton, implies “timelessness,” its letters signaling “Was, Is and Will Be.” In what way might we even think of emulating His temporal omnipresence?

Perhaps, though, in a way, we can.

Jews have history on their hearts. We are exquisitely sensitive to the past, not only the recent, but the long-ago.

On Tisha B’Av, we will fast and mourn the tolls taken by our people’s travails over time. We will sit low for much of the day, and read about the destruction of the Batei Mikdash, reciting poetic dirges about those Jewish catastrophes and many others, down through the Middle Ages to more proximate collective Jewish tragedies.

The fact, though, that most of the events we will mourn took place hundreds, even thousands, of years ago does not make them less timely. We live in the past no less than the present.

And so, perhaps, combined with our determination to live meaningfully in the here-and-now, and our relentless pining for the ultimate future – Tisha B’Av is pointedly followed by the “Seven of Consolation,” when the haftaros read in shul consist of Divine reassurances that there is an end-point to history — we parallel, if imperfectly, the Creator’s existence outside of time.

© 2026 Rabbi Avi Shafran

Deconfliction Fiction

An armed and violent criminal holds a gun to the head of a hapless hostage, demanding that a third party jump off a cliff.

An outlandish but apt metaphor for what’s happening on the Iran negotiation front these days.

The mullahs are unarguably armed and violent, having murdered tens of thousands of their own citizens – aside from, through their various gangland proxies, untold numbers of Americans, Israelis and others. They are holding the U.S. hostage, with the threat of shutting down the Strait of Hormuz again (concretized by recent attacks on vessels), unless Israel – no party to the current negotiations – withdraws from southern Lebanon.

The world needs a reset here, a zooming-out to provide some perspective.

The facts: Hezbollah is a terror organization, pledged, like its patron Iran, to the destruction of Israel (and eventual Shia dominion of the world). Lebanon is barely a country and unable (despite its recent ballyhooed agreement with Israel) to control Hezbollah, which operates (read: launches missiles and drones) with impunity from its territory. Israel, to protect its citizens from their would-be murderers, has created a security zone in southern Lebanon. Iran is demanding that she withdraw and make herself vulnerable to the killers.

And, recent icing on the rancid Iranian cake came last week in the form of a media outlet linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that contended that  Iran has “no choice” but to develop a nuclear bomb.

Maybe you can make this stuff up, but only as the plot of an absurdist novel.

And now, enter the “Deconfliction Cell,” a mechanism designed to “ensure compliance with the cessation of military operations in Lebanon” outlined in the “memorandum of understanding” signed by President Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.

Mediators Qatar and Pakistan (longtime coddlers of Islamurderers) announced the plan, to be overseen by themselves, the Lebanese government and the U.S.

Neither Israel nor Hezbollah, the actual combatants in southern Lebanon, were mentioned in the announcement.

According to an informed source, the plan would “monitor and document Israeli cease-fire violations and establish a clear and rapid timetable for a full Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon.” The Lebanese army, no match for Hezbollah forces, “would assume responsibility for areas vacated by Israeli forces.”

Dream on, says Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. “IDF troops in southern Lebanon,” he averred, “will have full freedom of operation to engage any direct or emerging threat to them or to the residents of northern Israel. The IDF has no restrictions in this regard.”

Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter, waxing diplomatic, said that Israelis “support President Trump’s [original] vision of ensuring that Iran no longer has nuclear capabilities, ballistic missiles or the ability to funnel money to its proxies to threaten its neighbors and maintain its regional hegemony.” But, he added, “the concept of ‘deconfliction’ is misplaced.”

The current ceasefire, he noted, was conditional on Hezbollah withdrawing to the north. “Is this agreement still binding?” he asked. Good question. Hezbollah hasn’t accepted it.

Mr. Leiter also took the opportunity to ask about how the U.S. intends to assure that the billions of dollars that Iran is granted access to in the MOA (through unfrozen assets and a “reconstruction fund”) “do not find their way to Hezbollah.”

Another good question. In 2025 alone, Iran moved $1 billion to Hezbollah, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. If currently sanctioned money is released, the terror group could recover, its weapons intact and its internal position in Lebanon only further strengthened by the very diplomacy meant to constrain it.

But Vice President Vance strives to reassure us. “Sometimes,” he told reporters, if Israel is attacked by Hezbollah, “we could have a better and more peaceful situation if Israel responds in the context of a conversation that is ongoing between Hezbollah, Lebanon, Israel and other partners in the region.”

Respond to deadly missiles and drones with… conversation!

Mr. Vance has admitted experimenting with drugs in his youth, which ended only after threats from his grandmother. Has he relapsed? Unfortunately, his bubby is no longer alive to set him straight.

President Trump has said that he was “not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves with Lebanon” and now downplays Israel’s reaction to a plan that ostensibly binds her but in which she had no say at all. “They have a lot of respect for me,” he said, “and they do as I say.”

Mr. Vance has also warned that Trump is “the only head of state in the entire world sympathetic to Israel.”

Maybe the president and vice president’s words are mere posturing, an attempt to gain credibility with the mullahs, in the hope of getting them to truly commit to limit their ambitions. They need to realize, though, that to Iran, “negotiations” are just a stalling opportunity, a speed bump on the road to a nuclear weapon.

© 2026 Ami Magazine

Matos – Being There

At first read, the tribes of Gad, Reuvein and half of Menashe seem to be making an entirely unreasonable request of Moshe: Let us remain on the east side of the Jordan River, where grazing is widely available for our large flocks of sheep, while the rest of the tribes cross the river and fight the idolaters in Cna’an for possession of the Holy Land.

But two factors need to be taken into account. Firstly, from the moment that the waters of Egypt turned to blood, through the ensuing nine plagues, through the splitting of the Red Sea and the moving well of water and the monn – not to mention the revelation at Sinai – the first years of the Jewish people’s history were rife with miracles.

So Hashem would be the One delivering Cna’an’s inhabitants into the hands of Klal Yisrael. There was no need for the sheep-laden tribes to be involved in the conquest of the land. It could have been accomplished with only Yehoshua marching in by himself.

And secondly, it was divinely preordained that the land east of the Jordan was intended for Gad, Reuvein and part of Menashe. That is clear from what eventually happened in the end; and there are deep mystical reasons brought in various sources for that fact. So why shouldn’t those tribes just stay there?

The questions seem strong but their answer is right in the text, in Moshe’s response: “Shall your brothers go out to battle while you settle here? Why do you dishearten the Jewish people?” Bamidbar 32; 6-7).

The petitioning tribes indeed belonged where they were, and the military campaign indeed needed them not a whit. But their remaining behind would dishearten their fellow Jews. Simply by the lack of their presence alongside them.

All of us readily recognize the powerfully positive value of an encouraging word or act (and, sadly, the destructive power of discouraging ones).

But there is something else that provides people encouragement and strength, and whose absence can deprive them of the same: being there with them.

One doesn’t have to say anything or do anything. But physically being at the side of someone who is facing adversity or tragedy provides them comfort, encouragement and strength. It is a gift of the most wondrous sort.

© 2026 Rabbi Avi Shafran