• As Bush explained in 2005: “A pandemic is a lot like a forest fire: If caught early, it might be extinguished with limited damage; if allowed to smolder undetected, it can grow to an inferno that spreads quickly beyond our ability to control it.” Because of a decade of failures, we are now in the midst of that inferno, waiting for the fire to burn itself out. And there is no excuse for it.

                                                                                                        George Bush, 2005
Not long after WW II, the civil defense came up with guidance that was distributed to schoolchildren in the 1950s. This 1952 film provided a prescription about how students ought to react in the event of a nuclear explosion.  At the time, the Soviet Union was engaged in nuclear testing and the US was in the midst of the Korean War. The lyrics most of us recall went like this:
There was a turtle by the name of Bert
and Bert the turtle was very alert;
when danger threatened him he never got hurt
he knew just what to do ...
He'd duck! [gasp]
And cover!
Duck! [gasp]
And cover!
(male) He did what we all must learn to do
(male) You (female) And you (male) And you (deeper male) And you!
[bang, gasp] Duck, and cover!
 
When we look back at this old memory, I probably chuckle. We wonder, “Did we really think hiding under our desk would protect us from a nuclear explosion?” Our teachers and parents realized that doing something, however minimal might confer a degree of from a potential oncoming nuclear fireball that was likely to cause serious injury or death.
The 2013 Noble Prize biologist Mike Leavitt served as the Secretary of Health and Human Services during the Bush Administration. In 2004, he urged that Americans store canned tuna and powdered milk under their beds for when bird flu hits. But Americans did not take him very seriously, and the comedian Jay Leno ridiculed Leavitt, who quipped, ““What? … Powdered milk and tuna? How many would rather have the bird flu?”
Nobody thought of distributing facemasks, or rubber gloves. Like a young child, our nation with a sense of invulnerability; we never imagined we would ever need rubber gloves, disinfection, and facemasks. The so-called “experts” from the Centers of Disease Control suffered from the type of hubris that Aristotle characterized in his depiction of the tragic hero, who, despite his great or virtuous character was destined for downfall, suffering, or defeat: Oedipus, the classic tragic hero. But Leavitt wisely observed, “In advance of a pandemic, anything you say sounds alarmist,” Leavitt explained. “After a pandemic starts, everything you’ve done is inadequate”
Our political leaders would love to blame Trump for the lack of America’s preparedness for the coronavirus outbreak. The pandemic revealed how the wealthiest country in the world was asleep at the wheel. Politicians, who lack foresight and wisdom, defunded monies that might have made the difference in our country’s preparedness.
When we chronicle the list of pandemics, we witnessed over the last twenty years, we recall the warning signs, e.g.,

• the 2002 SARS outbreak;
• the 2003 resurgence of H5N1 avian flu;
• the 2009 H1N1 swine flu outbreak;
• the 2012 MERS outbreak;
• the 2014 Ebola outbreak.

Unfortunately, the experts of the scientific, medical, and political community failed to consider the consequences of their sightlessness.

• The story behind today’s ventilator shortage is even more infuriating. The New York Times reports that in 2008, the Bush administration launched a project to stockpile ventilators for a pandemic, and in 2009 the Obama administration contracted with a California company to provide 40,000 of them. But in 2014, the company withdrew from the contract without delivering a single ventilator. So the government started over with a new contractor. It took another five years for the Food and Drug Administration to sign off on a new ventilator design, and the government did not place an order for 10,000 ventilators until December 2019 — the month that the COVID-19 outbreak began. We lost more than a decade due to government incompetence.[1]

Despite the warnings, we didn’t take the danger seriously enough — and were caught unprepared for COVID-19. We should have learned some wisdom from the out cartoon, “Duck and Cover.” Let us hope that we go back to making preparedness against a potential biological threat, which will serve to keep our country better prepared for whatever the future may bring.
The belief in scientism and our unquestioning belief in the scientific experts have revealed to all, “The Emperor has no clothes.”



[1] https://www.aei.org/op-eds/we-were-caught-unprepared-by-a-pandemic-9-11-the-failures-began-long-before-trump/

Many of us have grown up with the idea that myth is synonymous with a widely held but false belief or idea, e.g., "he wants to dispel the myth that sea kayaking is too risky or too strenuous." Plato discusses this idea of myth in the Republic. According to Plato, Socrates distinguishes between a true lie that leads to “ignorance of the Soul.” Myth, from this perspective, is a non-historical story that helps ignorant people come to understand the necessity of virtue.
 
As a case in point, Don commented on an old story about how King Christian X of Denmark donned the yellow star badges on behalf of the Danish Jews and the rest of the Danish community also wore the yellow star badges so the Nazis could not distinguish who was Jewish from those who weren’t. As Don mentioned in one of his articles:
 

• The story gained considerable currency with the publication of Exodus by the novelist Leon Uris, but the story was not a true one. In fact, through most of the German occupation, Denmark's government was permitted to run the country's internal affairs. Although the Germans suggested that anti-Jewish measures be enacted by the Danes—including a requirement that Jews wear the yellow stars—the Danes steadfastly refused. Therefore, Danish Jews never wore the yellow star and there was never any reason for Christian X to do so either.[1]

 
In the interest of clarity, here is the passage Don alluded to from Uris’ Exodus:
 

• The King has said that one Dane is exactly the same as the next Dane. He himself will wear the first Star of David and he expects that every loyal Dane will do the same." The next day in Copenhagen almost the entire population wore arm bands showing a Star of David. The following day the Germans rescinded the order.”[2]

 
 
With due respect to Don Harrison’s fine observation, I wish to approach this “mythical” account from an altogether different perspective. As I mentioned in the beginning of this article, myths—no matter how strange they may seem—often have elements that are grounded in historical fact.  According to the Danish historian, Bo Lidegaard a Danish historian in his book, “Countrymen: The untold story of how Denmark’s Jews escaped the Nazis, of the courage of their fellow Danes—and of the extraordinary role of the SS”
 
At the very beginning of the book, he shows a political Danish cartoon that appeared in one of the Göteborg Trade and Maritime Journal newspapers in April of 1940 depicting how King Christian rode through the streets of Copenhagen wearing the yellow star in defiance of Nazi demands that the Jews do so.
 
The cartoon shows, according to Lidegaard:
 

• “the Danish prime minister, Thorvald Stauning, in an overcoat, in thoughtful conversation with King Christian, easily recognizable by his riding boots and uniform. In the caption Stauning asks: “What shall we do, Your Majesty, if Scavenius says that our Jews also have to wear yellow stars?” The king replies: “Then we’ll probably all wear yellow stars”—an almost literal transcription of an interview King Christian had had with Acting Prime Minister Vilhelm Buhl four months earlier. The fact that the tenacious myth is rooted in a real conversation has only been revealed recently, as the handwritten diary notes made by the king were made accessible to historians. Even if King Christian was prepared to do so, he did not ride through the streets of Copenhagen wearing the yellow star; in fact, no one in Denmark was required to wear it.

 
What is remarkable however is the fact that the King was willing to do so in the event the Nazis tried to force their hand and will upon the Danish people. The question raised between these two men was of real concern—especially since the United States did not yet enter the war. The discussion of the plight of the Danish Jews was a sensitive one for everyone involved. But in the end, as Don also pointed out in his article, “Considering the inhuman treatment of the Jews not only in Germany but also in other countries under German occupation, one could not help but worry that one day this request would also be presented to us. If so, we would have to reject it outright following their protection under the Constitution.”
 
King Christian, his assistants, and the Danish people stood up for the constitutional rights of the Jewish Danes, and Hitler fortunately relented. But this is where Socrates’ concept of the “noble lie” came to play. For those unfamiliar with this concept, the noble lie presents to the public false propaganda for the sake of the public welfare.[3]  Lidegaard explains how the cartoon and myth of the King served an important political purpose;
 

• Buhl did not keep the king’s suggestion to himself, and four months later the conversation appeared as the text of a cartoon in a newspaper in neighboring Sweden, also neutral but not occupied by the Germans. The cartoon gave birth to the compelling image of King Christian riding the streets of occupied Copenhagen wearing the yellow star. The myth has never died, and new generations have taken it as a token of hope amid the dismal history of the Holocaust.

 

• The history from the Swedish cartoon traveled widely and it proved both compelling and useful. It served those in the United States and the United Kingdom who were working to improve the public image of an occupied Denmark criticized for its cowardly appeasement of Hitler’s Germany. In the United States the myth was spread by Danish-American and Jewish organizations, in the United Kingdom by the Political Warfare Executive as part of a targeted effort to drive a wedge between Denmark’s allegedly pro-German government and the resistance-willing people rallying behind their king.

 
Apparently, King Christian X did not mind this story getting disseminated. The cartoon and the story associated with it spread across the world, and it served to bolster the public image of Denmark and their willingness to protect the Jews as a matter of principle and conscience.[4] In the end, Plato and Socrates proved correct about the role of the “noble lie” in shaping a country’s political values.  and it illustrates how this conversation between King Christian X and PM Buhl took on a new life beyond what actually occurred.



[1] http://www.sandiegojewishworld.com/denmark/copenhagen/1994-01-28_myth_magic.htm
http://www.sandiegojewishworld.com/denmark/copenhagen/1994-02-04_jews-danes_400_years.htm
http://www.sandiegojewishworld.com/denmark/copenhagen/1994-01-28_why_danes_rescued.htm
http://www.sandiegojewishworld.com/denmark/copenhagen/1994-01-14_red_cap_girl.htm
[2] Leon Uris, Exodus (New York: Bantam Books, 1958), p. 72
[3] Plato, Republic  607a, comp. 611b-612a.
[4] Bo Lidegaard  and Robert Maass (Trans), Countrymen: The untold story of how Denmark’s Jews escaped the Nazis, of the courage of their fellow Danes—and of the extraordinary role of the SS” (New York: Alfred Knoph, 2013), pp. 8-9.
 

 When I was a young yeshiva student, I would get up every day and bathe in the hot mikveh (similar to a jacuzzi) around 5:00 in the morning. Then I would walk to the yeshiva hall and study the entire Mishnah while observing the sunrise. By my second year, I had completed the study of the Mishnah with its commentaries. This experience afforded me the opportunity to study the laws of animal sacrifices; most people might be surprised to see how the sacrificial cult influenced the origins of Jewish prayer—especially with respect to the role of intentionality, for one stray thought, could invalidate a sacrifice.  
 
But when I came to the section regarding ritual purity, the laws pertaining to the mikveh seemed fairly straightforward. But the laws regarding ritual contamination left me wondering about the characteristics of ritual contamination. I wondered: Did the rabbis think of ritual impurity as a spiritual or as a physical phenomenon?  This question bothered me for many years and decades. The rituals of handwashing originated from these Levitical laws and historically, handwashing helped prevent the spread of contagions. To this day, the pious Jew almost instinctively washes his/her hands several times in the course of the day.
 
In this week's Parsha Tazria and Metzorah, considerable space is dedicated to the theme of the problem of ritual uncleanness with respect to the ancient dreaded disease of leprosy—a disease that does not kill but disfigures the victim. The ancients practiced social-distancing because they did not know how to deal with a threatening disease that might spread upon close contact with others.
 
  In Levitical literature, uncleanness describes ritual uncleanness as a substance that can cling to a person or thing and may be transmitted to others in a variety of ways.  The Mishnah creates a hierarchy of ritual contamination. The “grandfather” of all uncleanness is the human corpse. Ritual uncleanness can be transmitted in a variety of ways. The Mishnah distinguishes between the primary source of impurity, commonly referred to as (אַב הַטֻּמְאָה), and from there it imparts uncleanness to the object that is infected. The latter is what is sometimes called, a “child of uncleanness” (וְלַד הַטֻּמְאָה).[1]
 
Examples of the former include anyone who has been in contact with the dead—either directly or indirectly, e.g., sharing space under the same roof with a corpse. An animal carcass, the blood of couches, beds, foods, and drinks; it includes being in touch with lepers, or human bones—each of which is considered as a primary transmitter of ritual uncleanness.[2] Thus, we have primary sources of ritual contamination, along with second, third, and fourth degrees of uncleanness. Men, hands, vessels, and clothes are infected only directly through contact with the dead, or with a leper.[3]
 
Secular or non-sacrificial meats and drinks (חֻלִּין,) are susceptible to second-degree infection. First-fruits, priestly tithes, are affected only to the third degree, and sacrifices to the fourth. The intensity of infection weakens a stage with each transmission. The ancient Greeks were no stranger to the concept of ritual pollution, a term they called μίασμα(miasma), believed to be a physical contagion that is airborne. This pollution especially occurs when there is a murder or any kind of heinous crime, thus leaving those responsible of taint pollution.   These laws probably make little sense to a modern Jew. If the most Orthodox Jew were to travel in a time machine to the time of the Second Temple, odds are s/he would feel completely out of place in a Jewish society that took the purity laws seriously.
 
 As with the Mishnaic laws of uncleanness, the parameters concerning how the COVID-19 virus can live in the air and on the surfaces.  One study from the John Hopkins School of Medicine found the virus is viable for up to 72 hours on plastics, 48 hours on stainless steel, 24 hours on cardboard, and 4 hours on copper. The virus has also detectable in the air for three hours. The virus is purported capable of lasting on plastic for 72 hours. According to the New England Journal of Medicine, COVID-19 can be detected in the air for 3 hours. Nevertheless, one is more likely to catch the infection through the air than to someone infecting them off of a surface. Cleaning the surfaces with disinfectant or soap is very effective because once the oily surface coat of the virus is disabled, there is no way the virus can infect a host cell.
 
Objects to be concerned about include tables, doorknobs, light switches, countertops, handles, desks, phones, keyboards, toilets, faucets, and sinks. Avoid touching high-contact surfaces in public. Handwashing with a strong disinfectant soap and water for at least 20 seconds upon returning home, or from public places such as a bank or grocery store. Social distancing requires there be a distance of six feet between people standing in a line.[i]
 
Although these laws have not played a dominant role in Jewish life for over 2000 years, the guidelines bear a striking resemblance to the precautions we now observe in stemming from this pandemic. Note that in the days of the Temple, rabbinic tradition imposed social distancing in preventing people who were ritually unclean from entering the Temple.
 
According to Maimonides, the laws governing ceremonial uncleanness are designed to help heighten the faith community’s respect when entering the Temple.  But today, these ancient rules of uncleanness take on an altogether new meaning in the age of the COVID-19 pandemic.


NOTES:

[1] Taharoth, 1, 5.
[2] Kelim, 1.
[3] Yadaim 3:1,



[i] https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/03/20/sars-cov-2-survive-on-surfaces/

Mayor Bill de Blasio has a penchant for making controversial comments. As a politician who always tries to win the loyalty of his constituency, it is quite possible he may have dug a hole for himself that he cannot climb out of. The Mayor said:
If your congregation continues to meet, you could be done for good. If you go to your synagogue, if you go to your church and attempt to hold services, after having been told so often not to, our enforcement agents will have no choice, but to shut down those services,” “I don’t say that with any joy. It’s the last thing I would like to do, because I understand how important people’s faiths are to them, and we need our faith in this time of crisis. But we do not need gatherings that will endanger people.[1]
One would have gotten the distinct impression that churches and synagogues were not cooperating with the need for social-distancing. Yet, this has not been the case. Across the religious divide, synagogues and churches both committed to closing their services in the interest of halting the pandemic. De Blasio’s use of threats has made everyone more nervous than before—and in do so has exacerbated tensions in an anxious community.
The Mayor came across as a bully. But given the stressful state of our nation, today, it would be easy for us to overlook his remark; Blasio probably spoke off-the-cuff. Still, he really needs to clarify what exactly he meant and that under no circumstances would he seek to “permanently” close down places of worship. It would be prudent for him to stress the rules apply to everybody and that he has no animus toward any place of worship.
I found the Mayor’s response provocative for other reasons. Yes, we understand that the Mayor want all places of worship to observe the social-distancing so we might have a better chance at containing the pandemic.  The fact he included only synagogues and churches came across as being somewhat discriminatory. What about mosques? What about Ashrams, or other religious communities? This year, the month of Ramadan will begin on Thursday, April 23 and it will last to Saturday, May 23. Will they also subject to this new decree?
Time will tell.
Making threats sound more like religious discrimination.  What legal authority does a government have to permanently shut down worship services?  We know the answer: none. The Constitution makes it questionable whether one can shut down private property that is being held for a religious service—even in the face of a health crisis. By coming out strongly against the synagogues and churches, he inadvertently sparked a national debate over the separation of Church and State and the fundamental First Amendment, which guarantees Americans the right to free exercise of worship.
As Kristen Waggoner observed in her op ed article in the New York Daily News:

• The Constitution requires officials to exercise great caution when they attempt to regulate or restrict these freedoms. Our laws ensure that governments only limit religious free exercise for a “compelling interest” of the “highest order,” and even then, only if they do it with the “least restrictive means.” That means, even if the government is taking strong action for an exceptionally important reason, it cannot restrict more religious exercise than necessary to achieve its compelling goal.[2]

Should this case come before the Supreme Court, it will be a landmark case for future generations. I suspect, but I could be wrong, the judges will probably rule that governments can never target or explicitly target religious entities. Concerning the First Amendment, Oliver Wendel Holmes (1841-1935) has famously been quoted saying, “Shouting fire in a crowded theater" is not protected free speech.[3] That is to say, the most stringent protection of free speech does not protect a man who falsely shouts out fire in a theater, while causing a panic. Just as free speech has its limitations, one could argue this principle applies to the gathering of people at a worship center during the time of a pandemic poses a similar danger to all those present.
It would be interesting to see how such a case might unfold.
Oddly, certain medieval attitudes might have some practical use today. The medievalists did whatever they could to isolate plague victims as a public safety precaution. Not only were those infected by the plague quarantined, but so were their contacts, e.g., family members and friends—anyone who got in contact with them. In fact, the medievalists employed “medical police” to enforce the quarantine regulations and restrictions on movement. As you might expect, the authorities who enacted these rules received considerable criticism. But in the end, this proved to be successful way of constricting the spread of contagion.[4]
One last note:
The Mayor should have urged churches, synagogues, mosques, ashrams, or any place of worship to follow the government guidance against group gatherings; had he urged them to utilize zoom or Facebook Live, and YouTube, I think his point would have been no less persuasive. Using this new medium of communication has been very well received so far at the synagogue. I think we will continue using it long after the pandemic is over.



[1] https://politicodailynews.com/de-blasio-threatens-to-permanently-shutter-churches-that-continue-to-hold-worship-services-2/
[2] https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-sorry-cant-close-churches-20200331-itiui23k5fbivcrzeavsfb5a4a-story.html
[3] This phrase is a paraphrasing of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes came from the cause celeb, United States Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States in 1919, which held that the defendant's speech in opposition to the draft during World War I was not protected free speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution
[4] Ellen L. Idler, Religion as a Social Determinant of Public Health (New York: Oxford University, 2014), p.ge 410