The original Taboo, a word-guessing game much like TV’s $25,000 Pyramid, except that each word to be guessed is accompanied by a list of four that cannot be given as hints, was introduced by Hasbro in 1989. Like many best-selling games, it has spawned several spin-offs, like Taboo for Kids and Christmas Taboo.

Jewish Taboo began to take shape when Seth Burstein and Ian Framson, friends and business partners (they founded Trade Show Internet) living in San Francisco, were playing Taboo one night in 2008. In the middle of the game, they realized they were giving each other clues that had some sort of Jewish connotation—and that they were communicating effectively. What better way to win at a classically cryptic game than to rely on religious-based clues equally cryptic to outsiders?

“Dude,” Burstein recalled his friend saying, “we should make a game called ‘Ta-Jew.’”

Burstein was on-board. He grew up in a game-playing family of four kids where Risk and Monopoly matches would rage for days. Video games, he explained, are no match for the deep pleasures of board games. The young tech entrepreneurs decided to go old-school.

They turned to the 25-year-old gaming company Jewish Educational Toys for assistance with a prototype. It turned out that Jewish Educational Toys had always wanted to develop a Jewish version of Taboo. The biggest challenges, company president Abe Blumberger said, had been securing a license from Hasbro and finding someone to write the clue cards. Fortuitously, Taboo’s original developer, Brian Hersch, contacted Jewish Education Toys around the same time to suggest the same thing. He agreed to pave the way with Hasbro, Burstein and Framson would provide the manpower, and the game was on its way.

It took three years, but eventually Burstein, now 29, and Framson, 28, reached their goal of creating 1,008 words—the same number as in a standard Taboo game—canonizing centuries of Jewish history and consciousness into small colorful cards. “Anything and everything I know about Judaism is in there,” Burstein told me. Grandmothers were consulted (“schmuck” was deemed inappropriate for mass distribution), the New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia was procured, and Burstein’s older brother, a Reform rabbi in New Jersey, was called upon for his expertise.

Blumberger and his team at Jewish Educational Toys worried that too many of the clues drew on secular knowledge. “Adam Sandler,” for example, got vetoed. Burstein and Framson, meanwhile, nixed items they felt were too religious. “You have to appeal to people who are culturally Jewish or religious Jewish, people who know culture and liturgy but not everything from the Torah or Bible or Talmud,” Rabbi Burstein, the New Jersey rabbi, explained. A compromise was to put different kinds of clues on each side of a card: The blue side gets an easier word (like “pastrami”) and the green side a harder one (“Orthodox Union”).

Taking the game for a test-play reveals an unsurprising Zionist streak, as you try to get your teammates to guess terms like “promised land,” “Diaspora,” and “aliyah.” “Birthright,” “JCC,” and “Hillel” (also, not unrelated, “dues”) appear, too. People whose names appear include usual suspects, like Spielberg, Wiesel, and Mel Brooks, along with younger-skewing ones like Marc Cuban and Matisyahu. Barbra Streisand shares a card with Dustin Hoffman, though the Rain Man actor is on the green side, for harder words.

And then there’s the card that seeks “gentile” or “goy.” You’re not allowed to use “Muslim,” “Christian,” or “other,” which seems like a recipe for ethnocentric disaster.

The second thing he did was tell the audience about “Eight Days of Hanukkah,” the song he recorded two years ago for Tablet Magazine. It’s a good story, one that begins in 1999, when Hatch—an avid songwriter—treated contributing editor (and future blogger) Jeffrey Goldberg to a private performance of his Christmas songs. Hatch recounted that Goldberg had asked him for a Hanukkah song, and said the whole thing had been forgotten as a joke until a decade later, when he was invited up to New York to record the song, which was set to music by Madeline Stone. The only problem was that Hatch seemed to have forgotten both Goldberg’s name and the name of the “blog” that made the whole dream into reality. But, never mind: Here we are! And so, one more time, is the video:

Eight Days of Hanukkah from Tablet Magazine on Vimeo.

Related: Eight Days of Hanukkah [Tablet Magazine]
Ambassador Michael Oren Explains That These Are Perilous Times [Right Turn]

But the very same outdated and irrational religious puritanism that drove the site’s existence also renders it, um, impotent. For example, the lead article, “What is Abstinence?” is so afraid to use terms like “oral sex” that it fails to answer its own question. “We will simply define abstinence as refraining from sexual activity,” the site declares, “but we’ll leave it up to each person to determine for his or herself what constitutes sexual activity.” Apparently, when you take the sex and the education out of sex education, you’re left with nothing at all.

Former Tablet Magazine intern Dvora Meyers’s take, which grounds the site (which is a few months’ old) in recent attempts to withhold federal funding for Planned Parenthood, is worth reading in full. In the meantime, maybe it is time for the OU to join the 21st century. Or maybe at least the 20th?

The First Abstinence Website for Jewish Teens [OU]
Sex Ed, Orthodox Union Style [Unorthodox Gymanastics]

In an email exchange, Diament expanded his opinion beyond 140 characters. Asked whether the television network The CW should have rearranged its shooting schedule so that Petrack would not be forced to violate the Sabbath, he cited legal protections that may or may not apply. “Federal and state law require employers to attempt to accommodate an employee’s religious needs,” he said, though he acknowledged that reality show contestants may not be considered employees, so “that might make this more of a ‘spirit of the law’ point.” It’s unclear what effort, if any, had been made to accommodate the Jewish calendar during the shoot. (One commenter who claimed a relationship with Petrack noted that she kept kosher throughout. If that’s true, then at least kosher food was provided.) Diament, admitting that he is unfamiliar with ANTM’s schedule, wondered “whether it requires every model to be available to shoot 24/7—or whether there are shifts that could be used to accommodate Ms. Petrack.” I agree, but that’s just because I don’t think modeling is essential enough to require the same kind of hours worked by, say, doctors.

As to whether modeling is even an appropriate pursuit for a Modern Orthodox woman (or whether it is proper for her to appear on a reality show), Diament, qualifying that he is not a religious authority and therefore could not offer a halachic opinion, conceded, “Fashion modeling obviously also presents issues with regard to Tzniut (modesty).” He felt it was an issue for the girl’s individual rabbi. I would think Petrack would be hard-pressed to find an Orthodox rabbinic authority who would say that posing in a barely there bikini with words scrawled all over her body does not violate the restrictions placed on women’s dress and outward appearance in halacha. (But I am also not a rabbi, or even a rabba!)

Finally, Diament observed that both Tyra and Esther missed opportunities to send messages to the viewing public. Banks, for example, has expressed the desire to democratize modeling through her show by inspiring tall and impossibly thin girls from all backgrounds to aspire to a career on the catwalk. “In that spirit alone, the producers should have tried to work out a scheduling accommodation for Ms. Petrack,” he said.

As for how he would’ve advised Esther to handle her interrogation in front of the judging panel, Diament addressed his remarks directly to the contestant. “Before you told Tyra Banks that you would ‘do it,’ that you would work/compete on Shabbat, you articulated before a national TV audience what Shabbat asks of an observant Jew. What a lesson and inspiration for Jews (and others) everywhere it would have been if in reply to Tyra you would have said: ‘I am committed to the Sabbath and to winning this competition and I want to do both.’ It’s not too late, I’d urge, to go back to Tyra and open that discussion again.”

While it certainly would’ve made for a compelling moment of television, I think it is a lot to ask of an 18-year-old. Also, it would’ve smacked of grandstanding if she had merely shown up to say “no” and make a point; and if that had been her plan, then she would’ve been depriving another young girl of the opportunity to appear on the program.

Besides, Esther is not the only one sacrificing something to be on the show. Two of the contestants have children at home, whom I’m sure they miss. Should they be permitted to bring them into the models’ house?

And forgive me for stating the obvious, but life is full of difficult choices. Having been raised observant, I understand Esther’s plight. There were gymnastics competitions I couldn’t enter due to Shabbat, and break-dancing battles I couldn’t attend because they were on Friday nights (that is, until I made an Esther-like pronouncement and decided to go anyway). Though I often hoped that it could be different, I never thought that everyone else’s schedules should be rearranged so that I could have my cake and eat it, too. No one was telling me I couldn’t be an observant Jew. I just learned at a younger age than most that I would sometimes be forced to choose between two mutually exclusive things that were of nearly equal import to me.

I am happy that Petrack didn’t demand that the halachic details of Orthodox Judaism be catered to. And who knows? Maybe she was able to observe much more than we are privy to see. Maybe her housemates turn the light switches on and off for her on Shabbat. And while I appreciate Diament’s position—insisting on the rights and expanding the options for Orthodox Jews and related organizations is literally his job—I don’t think anyone is being wronged in this instance. In the end, all you’ve got is one girl who had to struggle with an adult decision.

Earlier: ‘ANTM’ Contestant To Forego Observance

• Prime Minister Netanyahu rejected the U.S.-proposed, President Abbas-approved three-month construction freeze extension. But he also displayed a Palestinian flag at his residence when Abbas was over. [Laura Rozen]

• Priceless: From September 19 through October 4, “observant Jewish traveler” get special U.S. government leeway to carry “four plants—a palm branch, myrtle twigs, willow twigs, and a citron—in airports and through security checkpoints.” [TSA]

• Tablet Magazine columnist Etgar Keret has a new story just-translated. [n+1]

• The Democratic Party’s new logo looks the Orthodox Union’s! [Brand New]

• Are you the “BEAUTIFUL YOUNG SOUL (JEW)”? [Craigslist Missed Connections]

Grover want to know: Why do people need Day of Rest?

There’s only one catch: Each institution must use $1 million of its grant money on joint teacher-training endeavors with the other two schools.

If that sounds like an obvious request, you probably don’t remember the interdenominational Jewish politics of the recent past. During the 1980s and 1990s, the three major synagogue movements were widely perceived as being at loggerheads. Movement leaders and observers seem to agree that, in the past decade or so, tensions between the denominations have eased—led in part by a warming of the relationships between the heads of HUC, JTS, and YU, all central institutions within their movements.

But the relative ease with which this arrangement was made may less reflect a burst of newfound harmony among disparate monoliths as much as a loss of power experienced by each. During the period in which relations have improved, major Jewish community donors have eschewed giving to the denominations at all, often contributing instead to robust nondenominational organizations like Birthright and Hillel that target often-unaffiliated youth—and where such “megadonors” also have more control. What the Jim Joseph Foundation may have done is found a creative way to harness the decreased power of the denominations—by combining it.

“They’ve all been hit, but one of the ways to recover your health is to cooperate, save a few bucks, and ideally augment your quality,” said Charles Edelsberg, the Jim Joseph Foundation’s executive director. Edelsberg maintained that his organization is basically neutral on the issue of interdenominational collaboration: The point of the mandate, he said, was to reduce “unnecessary duplication of effort” that would waste the foundation’s dollars; more cooperation between the universities “would be great if it happened, but it’s not something we’re going to measure” when evaluating the success of the grant program, he added.

But the mere existence of the grant-sharing stipulations suggests that the foundation may have an agenda vis-à-vis the movements. “The Jim Joseph grant reflects a general belief among major donors that the denominational differences need to be overcome,” said Steven M. Cohen, a professor of sociology at HUC.

But for those with a strong commitment to the denominations remaining distinct—either for ideological or, for those employed by one of the synagogue movements, professional reasons—harmony between the movements is not necessarily a good thing. That’s especially true for the right-wing of the modern Orthodox movement—which is probably why, of the three university leaders, YU president Richard Joel has been the most direct about having to hold his nose while accepting an offer he couldn’t refuse. Far from celebrating the spirit of the new partnership, Joel took pains to minimize its significance in an interview with Tablet Magazine. “There’s no joint programming involved in any of this,” he said. “There are profound philosophic and doctrinal differences between Orthodoxy and liberal Judaism and this doesn’t represent any change in those differences.” Moreover, he added, “I don’t believe that people from different orientations in Judaism speaking together makes any kind of statement legitimizing or delegitimizing each other.”

Joel himself came out of one of the most successful nondenominational Jewish organizations, the campus movement Hillel, which he presided over for 14 years. But even if he personally understands the wisdom of that model, much of his YU constituency would likely recoil at the idea of working in significant ways with other denominations. “It’s very important that Richard Joel not appear to be moving toward a liberal position that’s untenable for them,” said Adam Ferziger, a historian at Bar-Ilan University in Israel who studies Jewish denominationalism. “It’s a very tough tightrope.”

Ellenson and Eisen, with their more liberal—and, maybe more to the point, more apathetic—memberships, are at greater ease talking up the collaboration. Ellenson went so far as to disavow what he called the “financial carrot” completely in an interview with Tablet Magazine, instead describing the collaboration as “a genuine reflection of a strong religious and ideological commitment to the value of k’lal Yisrael.” Eisen, fittingly occupying a tenuous middle ground, sounded resigned to if not wildly enthusiastic about the new facts on the ground. “I think we’re in a moment where keeping Jews, especially young Jews, involved, is more important than keeping us involved in particular denominations,” he said. “So, all of us recognize this and see why cooperation is necessary because of this mood.”

But, some observers note, these leaders also have a stake in not letting collaboration go too far: As they become more and more ideologically indistinguishable from each other, they run the greater risk of losing their separate identities. The Conservative movement in particular, poised shakily between the other two movements, has been accused from within its own ranks of melding with its Reform counterparts—a fear that has sometimes been stoked by collaborative efforts between JTS and HUC. Earlier this year, for instance, the downsizing of JTS’s cantorial school led some students and faculty to wonder whether their program and HUC’s—which already share some courses—were going to merge. But it seems unlikely that either school—especially JTS, which is reportedly millions of dollars in debt—could have afforded to refuse $11 million even if it had wanted to.

It’s no coincidence that the collaboration between the universities will be directed at the level of their education Masters programs—first because the Jim Joseph Foundation’s focus on young adults is typical of megadonor-sponsored Jewish initiatives, but also because of what the education programs lack: the kind of inextricable relationship to theology and halacha that the universities’ rabbinic and cantorial programs do have.

According to Edelsberg, the schools have talked about using some of their shared grant money to create joint training in experiential education, but even that prospect has not gotten past the discussion stage. And optimists hoping for a slide from pedagogical collaboration on educational matters to collaboration on rabbinical ones should keep their hopes in check. While JTS and HUC offer some joint seminars for rabbinical students, Joel put the kibosh on such prospects involving YU.

“It’s counterintuitive to a contemporary liberal aesthetic,” he said. “But I’m trained as a lawyer. Some things are simply not negotiable.”

Settlers Allegedly Vandalize and Set Fire To West Bank Mosque [Jpost]
Clashes Break Out After Mosque Arson [Ynet]

From the Floor and the Heart, Senators Make an Issue Personal [NYT]
Jewish Groups Split on Gay Marriage Vote [JTA]
Marriage Equality Bill Voted Down in New York State Senate [SF Examiner]

Previously: Orthodox Communities Set Against N.Y., N.J. Gay Marriage

Orthodox Voters – Change Again [OU.org]

Correction, November 10: This post originally credited the blog item posted by the Institute for Public Affairs to the organization’s director, Nathan Diament. It has been updated to reflect that the item was published unsigned.

Jeremy Ben-Ami, executive director of J Street, wrote on the lobby’s blog that “[i]t was made clear to the President and his team the strong support that exists among American Jews and the broader public for a strong push to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, for a two-state solution, and for a regional and comprehensive approach to the peace process.” The left-leaning M.J. Rosenberg at TPM Café added: “When one of the main rightwingers told Obama that he should keep his differences with the Israelis private, Obama said that had not worked in the past and he’ll go the public route.” And Lynn Sweet at The Chicago Sun-Times reports: “According to a source familiar with what occurred at the 45-minute meeting who briefed me, Obama said that he was pushing Arab and Palestinian leaders too, but the press was focused on finding divisions between the U.S. and Israel.”

Even those who disagree with Obama’s stance on settlements had warm things to say about the powwow. The Jerusalem Post quotes Abe Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League: “He understood why we are anxious. He understood and said they have to find ways to [emphasize] the requirements they have made of the Palestinians.” And Nathan Diament of the Orthodox Union, who was also present for the meeting, told the paper “the president acknowledged there’s certainly a perception problem that the U.S. is pressing Israel and not the other side.” Ben Smith at Politico quotes Ira Forman, the executive director of the National Jewish Democratic Council as commenting that Obama “said we have been very specific with the Arab world on incitement, violence, commitments on accepting the reality of Israel and conveying that to their street as well.”

According to The New York Times’s Caucus blog, however, the only real critic at the meeting was Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, who briefly argued with the president. Hoenlein said that diplomatic progress in the Middle East only happens when there is “no light” between the U.S. and Israel, to which Obama countered that “no light” was the situation under George W. Bush and yet nothing got done.

Obama Talks of Progress on Israeli Settlements [Reuters]

The Court’s argument is strikingly similar to ones used by the Orthodox Union, America’s leading kosher certifying agency, in recent debates over whether animal cruelty or mistreatment of workers played a role in the kosher status of meat produced by the Agriprocessors slaughterhouse in Postville, Iowa. The O.U., like the Israeli court, took a narrow view of kosher certification, arguing that kosher status has to do with food and food only.

I’d be curious to know, though, what the O.U. thinks of the (secular) Israeli court’s recent ruling. If they’re at all in agreement with Israel’s rabbis, the answer is not much.

Court Declares Jew for Jesus ‘Kosher’ [Jerusalem Post]