The Red Cross’s Jewish Problem


6 min read
15 min read
"As Jewish as a ham sandwich" — that's how Ben Shapiro described a Hannah Einbinder’s anti-Israel views. A Chabad rabbi pushed back hard. Who's right?
A fascinating debate broke out online last week over a question that sounds semantic but is actually profound. Though it wasn’t framed this way, to me, the question being debated was essentially: is there a difference between being a Jew and being Jewish?
It began when comedian Hannah Einbinder expressed views sharply critical of Israel (not for the first time). Ben Shapiro responded, “Hannah Einbinder is about as Jewish as a ham sandwich.” He added, “If you believe that these people represent Jews or Judaism, then you believe Madonna represents Catholics or Catholicism.”
When someone, whether a celebrity or grassroots activist, invokes the “as a Jew” card to lend credibility to an argument or position that he regards as anti-Jewish, Ben’s response on several occasions has essentially been: Don’t use your Jewish identity to validate an argument that is antithetical to Judaism or harmful to the Jewish people.
Don’t use your Jewish identity to validate an argument that is antithetical to Judaism or harmful to the Jewish people.
Rabbi Mordechai Lightstone of Chabad.org pushed back. “There are many ways to criticize bad arguments,” he wrote. “Saying people who are indeed Jewish are about as Jewish as a ham sandwich is simply not it.”
Shapiro responded: “Wrong. Using the mantle of Jewishness, something Einbinder and company demonstrate zero actual commitment to, in order to promote anti-Judaic insanity is fundamentally un-Jewish and ought to be called out as such.”
Then Rabbi Shais Taub joined the fray. “Torah is the final arbiter of all matters, including Jewish status,” he wrote. “You cannot revoke someone’s Jewishness even if you believe they are using that very status to advance ideas that are to the detriment of the Jewish people.” Rather than push such Jews away, he argued, we should devote ourselves to bringing our brothers and sisters back into the fold.
So who is right? When a Jew invokes “as a Jew” while advancing ideas we believe are deeply damaging to Judaism, Israel, or the Jewish people, do we say, “You’re about as Jewish as a ham sandwich”? Or is a Jew a Jew now and forever, and our responsibility is always to love them, embrace them, and try to bring them closer?
The answer may be both.
The Talmud in Sanhedrin famously describes the sin of Achan, who disobeyed God’s command not to take from the spoils of Jericho, with the words, “even though a Jew has sinned, he remains a Jew.” Even though Achan committed a transgression that harmed the Jewish people, his essential identity remained unchanged.
Once you are a Jew, you are a Jew forever, even if you’re a convert to Judaism. There is no reverse conversion.
As the Talmud teaches, “You are children of Hashem your God”, even if you act at times like terrible children, you remain God’s child.
This viewpoint supports the approach of Rabbis Lightstone and Taub. A Jew is a Jew, always a child of God.
But Ben Shapiro also makes a valid, different point. When it comes to Jewish identity, God decides who is a Jew. And a Jew is a Jew is a Jew. But if someone deliberately removes himself from the Jewish people and works against them, the Sages recognize that those choices can affect the privileges he or she enjoys and how we relate to him or her.
Maimonides describes one who separates himself from the Jewish community in startling language: even though he has committed no transgressions, but he separates himself from the Jewish people and doesn’t feel their pain or view their enemies as his enemies, then he conducts himself “as though he is not one of them.” That is itself a profound religious failure and it impacts his place in the community in this world and his very entrance to the next one.
We need to be careful here. Criticizing Israel or its government and leaders, or advocating for Palestinians does not make someone an enemy of the Jewish people. There is plenty about Israel and about the Jewish community that can legitimately be criticized. But there is a difference between criticizing policies and leveling blood libels against the Jewish state. There is a difference between advocating for another people and actively undermining the safety and security of your own, a clear distinction between disagreement and disassociation.
And that brings us back to Ben Shapiro’s ham sandwich. Perhaps what the conversation is missing is distinguishing between the noun Jew and the adjective Jewish. Jew is an identity. A Jew you are forever. Even if you espouse ideas as non-kosher as a ham sandwich, you remain a Jew. Only God determines Jewish identity, and no tweet, political position, or personal rebellion can undo it.
But are your ideas Jewish? Are your actions Jewish? Are you behaving Jewishly? Are you a representative of the Jewish people? That is a different question. In that sense, Ben’s formulation can be understood differently, and to me is compelling. He was not, to me, saying that such a person is no longer a Jew. He was saying that invoking “as a Jew” does not magically make an argument Jewish. You can be a Jew while espousing profoundly un-Jewish ideas.
Indeed, when espousing un-Jewish and anti-Jewish ideas with the introduction “as a Jew,” it is particularly dangerous and damaging. Historically, apostate Jews often walked away and disavowed their Jewish identity. They sought to assimilate, integrate, and erase their status as Jews. Today, by contrast, some of the most vociferous voices leveling false accusations against Israel have abandoned the basic criteria for being viewed as part of the Jewish people, all while prominently waving the “as a Jew” card.
In that sense, perhaps the ham sandwich metaphor is particularly fitting. The Sages describe the pig as stretching out its split hooves, as if to announce, “Look, I am kosher,” while concealing the fact that it does not chew its cud and is therefore not kosher at all. The pig is a symbol not merely of what is forbidden, but of the hypocrisy of publicly displaying the credential that suggests legitimacy while behaving in a way that contradicts it.
There is something similarly troubling about invoking one’s Jewish identity not as a source of responsibility to the Jewish people, but as a credential to lend greater legitimacy to those who attack them. The repeated declaration “as a Jew” can become the outstretched hoof, holding up Jewish identity precisely while advancing ideas profoundly at odds with Jewish solidarity and responsibility.
We don't give up on another Jew, but being born a Jew does not make everything one says a Jewish position.
So yes, a Jew is a Jew. We don't give up on another Jew because God doesn't give up on another Jew. We should reach out, invite, educate, inspire, put on tefillin together, share a Shabbos table, and try to awaken the Jewish soul that remains present no matter how deeply buried.
But being born a Jew does not make everything one says a Jewish position. Invoking “as a Jew” does not give Torah credibility to an idea. Jewish identity is unconditional but living Jewishly is not. A Jew is never a treif piece of ham but an idea, even if said by a Jew, can be and sometimes it is necessary to point that out, protest and set the record straight.
You can never stop being a Jew. But you can certainly stop acting very Jewish. And perhaps this is a question we should ask ourselves as we approach Rosh Hashanah: God has already decided that we are His children. Nothing can change that. The question we have to answer is: How Jewishly are we choosing to live?

An engaging, thought provoking conversation. May I suggest Melanie Phillips' books, 'THE BUILDER"S STONE', or 'FIGHTING THE HATE'.
If you can't decide to leave Judaism and declare for yourself whether you are no longer a Jew, is that is the same as when someone who is Muslim decides to leave Islam...? Are you no longer a Catholic if you decide to leave Catholicism? Who decides?
What if someone uses the declaration as a weapon to harm Jews?
I don't know how this would work in Hebrew, but in English lots of words have more than one meaning and some have meetings that are almost opposite each other, like sanction.
Jewish has two meanings, one, being a Jew. And two, of or like or in the manner of a Jew. Ben was using the second meaning, and those who argued with him were using the first. I'm a little surprised they argued with him. Would they say that eating a ham sandwich is Jewish? Would they say that a person who constantly eats ham sandwiches is acting in a Jewish manner? Of course that doesn't stop someone from being a Jew. That's the legal status and doesn't change that behavior does.
What's a Converso? What's a converso who doesn't know it or is descended from a converso and doesn't know it?
It's called suicidal empathy. She can trash Israel and the Jewish people all she wants, but one day, when she no longer serves a purpose, she will be thrown to the dogs.
Great Article.
As is often the case, thoughtful analysis showed that the disputants were talking past each other and ultimately arguing about different things.
Ultimately, the question is not "who is jewish" - the Torah defines that based on matrilineal descent. (Much to our shame, Bernie Madoff, Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein are Jewish.) The real practical question is who is worth engaging with versus casting out.
I'm with Shapiro on this one. If you take positions that undermine the safety of the Jewish people and legitimacy of the modern state of Israel (yes, with all its flaws), you are outside of the tent.
Her OPINIONS are as Jewish as a ham sandwich.
Wonderful!
FWIW, I don't totally follow where the Chabad rabbis mentioned in the article are coming from. On the one hand, I totally agree with what they're bringing (especially during Elul! I enjoy Ben Shapiro, but I don't find him to be overly sensitive to the calendar…). But on the other hand, Shapiro's comment seems a valid observation: When an ethnically Jewish person uses their identity as a political weapon in a polemic against fellow Jews, that is about as kosher as a ham sandwich. That is not a denial of either identity or chromosomes, but it is a denial of the validity of the argument (e.g the _ipse dixit_ fallacy mentioned by VMS in another comment).
Ben MEANT her actions, but SAID HER. Chabad correctly called Ben out on that because she is NOT as KOSHER as a HAM SANDWICH, she is 100% KOSHER, BUT her WORDS are NOT!
I have several friends (and know of many others) who are involved in the [Christian] "Messianic Movement". I'm very happy that they're exploring and learning (a little!) from [actual] Judaism, but one of the chief arguments they cite that the New Testament is a "Jewish" book, written (primarily) by Jews. Which may be factually true, but I ask them if that means that E=mc^2 is a Jewish equation or if they likewise consider The Communist Manifesto to be a Jewish book. I'm glad that they're learning (a little!) from Judaism, but these are the kinds of questions that also get them _thinking_.
Einbinder is and remains a Jew. But her statements and opinions are not Jewish.
She reminds me of the wicked son in the Haggadah. She separates herself from her people by her attitude. But she remains a Jew.
Absolutely,
I think that is the point here.If she was born a Jew, nothing she says or does changes that. Her ACTIONS and WORDS may be called out as unJewish as a ham sandwich...
A very good analogy. She is exactly like the wicked son.
How does one classify "Jews" who support the murder, rape and other crimes against Jews? They can mealy mouth that they don't support these crimes, but if you support the cause of the Fakestinians, how can you not support crimes against Jews? They are "Jews" according to halacha, but haven't they sacrificed not just their Judaism, but their humanity for their hatred?
רשעים
…is a frequent "classification" for Jews who commit evil acts.
Excellent analysis of a complex issue.
Shapiro’s snooty take on perspectives different than his own is blithering nonsense. I’m a flag waving American who believes our current government in Washington DC are a bunch of corrupt frauds and criminals. That doesn’t in any way diminish my American identity. Feeling the same about the Netanyahu government doesn’t make me as “Jewish as a ham sandwich.” Shame on Shapiro!
Supporting HAMAS and / or supporting a Genocidal "Palestinian State" is NOT the same as criticizing the Netanyahu Government. If you support HAMAS, if you "claim" that Netanyahu is "genocidal", if you claim that Israel should not have gone into Gaza after 07 October -- then while you might be [halachically] a Jew, your actions are clearly NOT "Jewish" at all and do -- indeed -- resemble the pig.
The Rambam is pretty clear. Ben and Chabad have valid points that I, and hopefully others, can learn from. My question to Hannah Einbinder is whether she has ever stood up for Israel and the Jewish people.
The Chabad rabbis (Rabbi Shais Taub and Rabbi Mordechai Lightstone are correct!
The "as a Jew" is an ipse dixit (because I said so) argument that has no basis in the rules of logic and is by no means evidentiary in nature. Unfortunately, the general public is prone to accepting conclusions based on false logic.
So, remove the "as a Jew" preface from Hannah Einbinder's statements, and analyze them on their own merits; they will fail! Analyze the facts and data on which she bases her opinions, analyze her methodology in arriving at her opinions, analyze her qualifications for making such opinions ["as a Jew" doesn't cut it], and analyze whether she received any compensation or benefit for those opinions. With respect to Gaza genocide, she is merely parroting hearsay Hamas propaganda.
I am tired of listening to people who believe that they, and only they, can decide who is a Jew and who is not. The beauty of Judaism lies in the fact that we can criticize, argue and come to different conclussions whothout someone who thinks that he is a better Jew deciding that you are not a Jew or not jewish enough. Nobody today has a direct pipeline to HaShem.
Chabad's philosophy is: "A Jew is a Jew is a Jew!"
I have seen secular Jews that know nothing about Judaism except that they are Jewish, become more religious by taking small steps. First they slowly become kosher, they attend services on Shabbos, they become more shomer Shabbos, they attend classes on various Jewish topics, they get involved studying the weekly parsha, etc. These things are done in parallel or serially. The more they explore, the more they want to further explore. And yes, there is a small contingent that are the "JINOs" (Jews in Name Only), but fortunately those are in the minority.
Your comment is totally off the point: the issue here is not about the possibility of non-religious Jews gradually becoming more observant; rather it's about self-hating Jews hypocritically (though not erroneously) identifying themselves as Jews in order to falsely incriminate their spiritual brethren!
The person in question (or others like her) may even have the most illustrious Jewish ancestors; however, she's a disgrace to her people — not because she disagrees with the Jewish state's politics but because she isn't honest enough to admit that she falls for the vicious enemy's propaganda without even attempting to learn the truth for herself.
As the rabbi pointed out, Shapiro's remark is quite apt!
I am a Holocaust survivor and lived during the fascist and later the communist regime. During these times I witnessed jews acting willfully against us. After many present examples I can not forgive despite I am a follower of the tike
The Nazis sure proved this to be true
kapos were thrown into the ovens the same like all other Jews .. identity sticks for sure, appeasing the non Jew
“ as a Jew “ never works
einbinder should take a lesson on identity
In a similar vein, what does the Talmud mean when it says that every Jew is filled with Mitzvos like a pomegranate? Do we have credit for doing mitzvos even without intention? Or not?
Is this connected to
כל ישראל יש להם חלק
לעולם הבא
?
We have a similar situation in Michigan. Our AG is using the "as a Jew" argument to encourage Jews to fling themselves on the sword "for the greater good" (and she is spouting nonsense about "the world" etc. - she doesn't mean the greater good for Jews). She completely misrepresents the story of Esther, deliberately or ignorantly, disregarding the fact that Esther was willing to sacrifice herself for her own people, not for the Persians or the world in general). Here is my take: there are Jews who may be halachically Jewish but know nothing and feel nothing - they don't believe in the G-d of the Jews. These are the people who want (and want the rest of us) to go along to get along. We all know how that works out.
Re: The greater good argument. Sigh. That Michigan AG is really benighted imo.
Re: Rabbi Goldberg's article. Although I was brought up in a very Secular Jewish home and still have A LOT to learn, I have always known that there are certain practices we do not engage in by virtue of the fact that I am Jewish.
If you want to go down a rabbit hole, attempt to analyze the "Trolley Problem" and its variants using Halachic principles. You will quickly see that the "greater good argument" is Halacicly and morally corrupt! The Wikipedia article on the Trolley Problem is a very good place to start.
Indeed! The greater good argument is nothing more than a tool to tell us that we must behave like good little girls and boys and not ask any questions.
I enjoyed how you analyzed the arguments of both sides in a serious and sophisticated manner. Thank you.