He Freed a Lot of People

Nelson Mandela and Fidel Castro

Nelson Mandela was a great man. In fact I would say that he was a Gadol among the nations of the world. History will remember him as a hero who not only changed the horrible way the Apartheid State treated its black majority… but for the example he set in forgiving and reconciling with his former oppressors. 

I say this knowing full well about his antipathy for the State of Israel. Something I obviously very strongly disagreed with him about. But I also understand where he was coming from. He incorrectly saw an Apartheid type state in Israel. He saw an oppressed people in the Palestinains who live under Israeli occupation. In his mind that mirrored what happened in his own country during its Apartheid years – before he and then President  F.W. de Klerk joined forces to end Apartheid and form a unity government. Where all its citizens would be treated equally and given the power to vote.

The most remarkable thing about Mandela was in his ability to forgive his tormentors. And by example to convince his people to forgive the government for Apartheid. He was not always that forgiving. In fact he was pretty violent during his African National Congress (ANC) days. The ANC turned violent after a particularly harsh crackdown on a peaceful protest. People were killed. It was ANC violence that landed him in prison under a life sentence. He was released from prison 27 years later after an international boycott of South Africa – demanding the end of Apartheid and his release.

Mandela emerged from prison a changed man. His time in prison was spent reflecting on the problems of his country and how to best handle them. He knew that any real change would best come by dealing directly with the Apartehid government and any change would have to include an attitude of forgiveness and reconciliation. De Klerk too was a courageous man. He  presided over the end of Apartheid and the formation of a unity government which granted voting rights to all South African citizens. Mandela ran for Presdient and won – becoming the first black president of South Africa. This is a remarkable achievement  if one considers the extremely harsh treatment of its black citizens under Apartheid.

Lest anyone wonder how terrible Apartheid was, suffice it to say that conditions in the West Bank of Israel (Judea and Sumaria) are like Disneyland by comparison. I recall hearing descriptions of the kind of torture that blacks endured under Apartheid. I’m told that the reaction of black South Africans who experienced real Apartheid when they hear people comparing it to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians - is laughter!

But that doesn’t stop the Jimmy Carters of the world from making those comparisons. Shame on them all! While it is true that Palestinians live under difficult conditions because of the security measures Israel must take for its own survival… to say that this equals Apartheid is an insult to every black South African who lived under it! I do not believe for a minute that Nelson Mandela believed that the conditions on the West Bank are the same as they were in Apartheid South Africa.

This is the way I see Mandela.  It took a man of very high character and moral conviction to accomplish that kind of peaceful transition. To the best of my knowledge there were no reprisals taken by blacks against their former oppressors. I believe that can be directly attributed to the example set by Mandela. He set the tone for the new South Africa. He served one term and then retired from politics. But his influence is still felt.

Nelson Mandela was an inspiring figure. Those who say he was an anti Semite because of his negative attitude towards Israel truly do not understand this man. His relationship with the Jewish community of South Africa was very warm. His views about Palestinians were obviously colored by his experiences with Apartheid. He saw an oppressed people and an oppressor government.  He thus sided with the oppressed. He considered Yassir Arafat a comrade in arms – struggling for his Palestinian people that way he - Mandela - struggled for his.

But he always supported Israel’s existence. He probably believed that there would be the same kind of reconciliation there as in South Africa. I had once hoped that too.

Much as I wish that were true, Mandela was very wrong about that. The history of the Arab Israeli conflict has taught the Jewish State some very important lessons. They have learned that the theology of the Islam sees Israel as completely illegitimate. They have learned the hard way that Islamic fundamentalists advocate the destruction of Israel at all costs – including the cost of innocent lives among of their own people if necessary. They have learned that Islamic Fundamentalism is an overpowering force among Arabs.

They have learned that making peace with moderate Arabs (who in theory believe that Israel does not have a right to exist but are willing to make practical concessions to their existence for peace) are poor peace partners. Because Fundamentalism always seems to win over moderation and will overtake any peaceful government that would result under a peace treaty. Same as Gaza. So as things stand now making peace with moderates is not a realistic option in my view.

Nelson Mandela somehow did not see any of that. He thus felt that peace should be pursued without regard for the negative consequences. Not because he didn’t care about them. But because he didn’t believe they would happen. Unfortunately experience has taught Israel that he was very wrong.

But despite his errors of judgment about Israel, his greatness remains. The fact is that he had views that were problematic not only for Israel, but for the United States. For example he supported the Iranian Revolution and laid a wreath at the tomb of Ayatollah Khomeni! He also admired Fidel Castro. The United States is surely not all that thrilled about that.

But none of that factored into the admiration that virtually all leaders of the free world had. Including 3 of the four former living Presidents of the United States and the current one whoall traveled to South Africa to attend his funeral. Which brings me to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He decided not to attend. He cited the high cost of security during an austerity budget. I would not be surprised if Mandela’s negative views about Israel contributed to his reason for staying away. But he was wrong. He should have attended – even if he disagreed with him.

Nelson Mandela was a good man. The good he did for his people and his country… and the contributions he has made to the world by his example is rare among leaders. Israel should have been there to acknowledge that.

A Very Wise Jew

New York Times columnist David Brooks

I must admit that I was surprised. Noted New York Times columnist, David Brooks gave what I consider to be the quintessential message of Centrist Orthodoxy at a Chanukah convocation ceremony where he received an honorary doctorate. The video which appears on Gil’s blog Torah Thoughts (available for viewing below) is the address he gave upon receiving this degree. And it truly hits the nail on the head of what Centrism is all about.

What surprised me is that Mr. Brooks actually read and understood the message of one of Rav Soloveitchik’s most important works, The Lonely Man of Faith. And in my view he expressed the Rav’s thoughts rather well… and is a believer in them.

David Brooks is not an Orthodox Jew. I don’t know how observant Mr. Brooks is. But I do know he understands what being Jewish means in terms of the proper approach to God.This he takes from the Rav’s philosophy he so elegantly cited.

Briefly stated the Rav talks about the two mentions in the Torah of the creation of man. He calls them Adam I and Adam II. Basing it on the context in which the Torah mentions them, The Rav expands on them in the following way.

Adam I is majestic man. He is the conqueror of the world. He goes out and ‘accomplishes’ for his material well being. Adam II is covenental man. He is concerned inwardly. He seeks the relationship with God. He is the man of faith - inward and therefore ultimately alone in that personal relationship with God . It is in the relationship with God that man develops his moral character. He is unconcerned with worldly pleasures and seeks only to do God’s will.  

Adam I on the other hand wants to seek control of his environment which includes seeing to it that his own physical well being is taken care of to the limit of his physical and mental abilities. The 2 Adams are therefore in constant struggle. And from that dialectic struggle, our person-hood develops. That dynamic struggle informs our values and actions.

Mr. Brooks compared what Yeshiva University does to the two Adams. Something that no other university does. Whereas the best universities do a good job educating man in his role of Adam I, they completely ignore educating man in his role of Adam II. Moral teachings are absent in the secular classroom. The result is a culture of a-morality. One which is difficult to navigate without the moral underpinnings of Adam II. Which is basically an unfettered love of God.

A-moral cultures have arisen in the past… when only Adam I is educated and Adam II is ignored. Taken to its natural extreme we can easily end up with the Germany of the 1930s and early 40s. Germany did a great job educating Adam I. And we know where that took them.

Western culture today is nowhere near that. But I think it is safe to say that we too live in an a-moral society. One need not look too far to see the wide acceptance of immoral images that surround us daily. They are all over, on billboards, magazines, TV, movies, and popular music. It has been that way for a long time. I recall the mantra of my generation during the late sixties, ‘If it feels good, do it!’ That is mostly all that mattered to many of my contemporaries back then. I don’t think that as a society, we have gotten any better today. If anything we have gotten worse.

YU is to its great credit counter-culture. It teaches man how to deal well with cultural surroundings and at the same time to revere God and his moral teachings.

My hat is off to David Brooks. He is a very wise man.

Is Charedi Daas Torah the Only Reality?

Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, ZTL

It pains me to say this. Unfortunately as time goes on I see that it is more and more the case. The vast majority of Charedim in Israel are clueless. And therefore soldiers of war in the fight against what they see to be the Godless world outside of Torah. They have no clue about what the reality of the outside world is. They live in a world of assumptions dictated to them by a very small group of rabbinic leaders that they view as virtually infallible.

Of course they will deny that these leaders are infallible and readily admit that they can – and have in the past - made mistakes. But that does not shake their devout devotion to every single word they say. So that the world they now live in – difficult as it may be – is the only option they see. It doesn’t matter how convincing an argument might be about reality. When a man who is perceived as a Gadol – let alone the Gadol HaDor – speaks, it may as well be God Himself speaking.

Any arguments to the contrary are seen as an insult to the Gadol, to God, and to His Torah. So, whether it is in matters of belief or matters of lifestyle whatever they say, goes.

This was once again made clear to me after viewing the video below. It is an interview with Machon Shilo head, Rabbi David Bar-Hayim. I don’t really know this man or his politics, but I believe he is right on the money on this issue.

The question was asked about how someone like Rabbi Yona Metzger could have attained the position of Chier Rabbi of the State of Israel. As most people by now know, Rabbi Metzger has been arrested for fraud and theft of millions of shekels.

The fact is that Rabbi Metzger’s less than honorable reputation was known long before he ran for that position. Ample examples of his shenanigans abound. One of which is clearly described in the video.

And yet he won the election because of the kind of loyatly Charedim have to Rav Elyashiv. Rav Elyashiv chose Metzger because he promised to do away with the Chief Rabbinate’s automatic endorsement of the Heter Mechira. (That permits farmers to continue farming their land during the Shemita year - the biblically mandated 7^th year sabbatical of Israeli land which is to remain fallow during that year). That rumors persisted about Rabbi Metzger’s character (as per Rabbi Bar-Hayim) was of no concern to Rav Elyashiv. Not that he had any respect for the Rabbinate. He abandoned that institution years ago – resigning as a Dayan (judge) on matters of principle.

His goal was to eliminate that long established legal loophole. He believed that this loophole was completely invalid and wanted to abolish it. Rabbi Metzger was only too happy to comply.

So the respected Dati Leumi candidate, Rav Yaakov Ariel who would have continued the Rabbinate approval of the Heter Mechira - lost. And the results now – ten years later - are a huge embarrassment to the Jewish people.

I am not questioning Rav Elyashiv’s Psak on the Heter Mechira. I am questioning the apparent lack of concern about all other considerations in the choice of a candidate… that his only concern was destroying the Heter Mechira.  There was no thought given to the consequences that may occur if such a man is placed in such a prominent position. Indeed the consequences were disastrous. And yet Rav Elyashiv’s words were considered Daas Torah – and tantamount to the word of God Himself! What is wrong with this picture?!

There are other issues that show how blinded Charedim insist on being to any reality other  than what their Gedolim say. We saw it with the ban on Rabbi Natan Slifkin’s books and the ban on Rabbi Nosson Kamenesky’s books. (Even though I believe that in both instances Rav Elyashiv was misled by Charedi community activists the results are the same. Rav Elyashiv spoke - and people listened!)

No where is this approach more damaging than in the area of sex abuse. One can see this very starkly by what happened to Rabbi S in Lakewood. The idea for example that self policing sex abuse and dealing with it ‘in-house’ has long ago lost any credibility. The damage done to innocent people with such policies in place has been demonstrated time and again.  

The reason rabbinic leaders in organizations like the Agudah Moetzes and Lakewood Yeshiva insist on going to rabbis before going to authorities when there are suspicions of abuse is to protect the accused. They know that an individual’s reputation can be damaged for life is he is falsely accused – even if he is exonerated. But thy refuse to recognize that it is rarely the case that children make false accusations.

They also factor in damage to the reputation of the school when things are made public by virtue of reporting it directly to the police.  That’s why they prefer handling things from the inside.  

So even though the reality is that credible accusations of abuse are best handled by professionals and much damage has been done in those instances where they were handles ‘in-house’ - nothing will not change in the Charedi world because Daas Torah has spoken.

There are indications that things might be changing. Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein has a very interesting post in Cross Currents along these lines. Here is what he says:  

We fully live the charedi life style, but our hearts are sometimes not so enthusiastic about it, and our minds are increasingly alienated from it. We are victims of repeating memes with which we were bombarded, and then discovering that they are not true.

He then goes on to show that a commonly made claim by rabbinic leaders and politicians in Israel that the government is run by a bunch of evil men – is totally false.

What seems to be happening is that people like Rabbi Adlerstien who are among those making such discoveries - are beginning to speak up and tell the world about the emperor’s clothing. He is not the first one to do that. Just last week Rabbi Berl Wein did the same thing. As have other moderate Charedim in the past – like Rabbi Dovid Landesdman, and Valley Torah High School principal, Rabbi  Avrohom Stulberger in a very eloquent statement about how to handle sex abuse in this video.

I am happy to hear that there are many Charedim that have become disillusioned with some of their memes. They are the ones who will hopefully bring change. My only question is how many of them think this way? And how many still buy into the infallibility of rabbinic statements?  I suppose time will tell. But you probably know which side I’m rooting for.

A Shameful Tirade

The Rav - Rabbi Dr.  Joseph B. Soloveitchik

“I could not care less what’s going on in Agudah!” These are not my sentiments. They are the sentiments of the Rav - R’ Yoshe Ber Soloveitchik. I heard them uttered in Yiddish by him in a recorded address he gave to the rabbinic alumni of Yeshiva University in the mid 1970s. This does not mean that he disparaged the legitimate Gedolim that populated the Agudah Moetzes at that time. The names are well known. Among others they included Rav Moshe Feinstein, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky and, Rav Yitzchok Hutner. The Rav obviously respected them. His point was that he was unconcerned with what they had to say on many of the controversial issues the day. He had his own point of view.

If one reads the scathing attack by Rabbi Yitzchok Frankfurter against the RCA you would never know that. That’s because he uses words the Rav used in another context to say that the rabbis of this rabbinic fraternity have departed from the Hashkafos of their teacher.

What generated this tirade? A statement by a group of RCA rabbis (...or as more accurately described by them - All of us are members in good standing or identify with the Rabbinical Council of America). They had written a critical (although unofficial) response to newly installed Yeshiva Chovevei Torah (YCT) president, Rabbi Asher Lopatin.

Rabbi Lopatin was first severely criticize by the right for inviting leaders of the Reform and Conservative movements to speak at his installation. They compared his movement to the beginnings of the Conservative movement! Rabbi Lopatin -upset by that - retorted that he had not even been given a chance to be the ‘uniter’ of all factions of Orthodoxy he had hoped to be… and declared his movement (Open Orthodoxy) to be Orthodox… and ‘here to stay’.

Those RCA rabbis then responded critically themselves and in pertinent part said the following in its concluding paragraph: 

(I)f Open Orthodoxy’s leaders feel some distance developing between themselves and mainstream Orthodoxy, they should not be blaming others. They might consider how they themselves have plunged ahead, again and again, across the border that divides Orthodoxy from neo-Conservatism. Why are they surprised to find themselves on the wrong side of a dividing line? 

I said at the time that even though I generally agreed with their sentiments, I would not have signed that statement. I know Rabbi Lopatin. I would have given him some space and not pounced on him so quickly. Sometimes silence truly is golden.

Rabbi Frankfurter in an earlier editorial criticized this statement saying that it was not enough. And that it left the reader confused about Rabbi Lopatin, YCT, and Open Orthodoxy. He believes there should have been an unequivocal condemnation of all three – much the same way the Conservative Movement was condemned in the past.  According to Rabbi Frankfurter, the RCA rabbis should have consulted with the ‘leading Gedolei Yisroel’ to obtain their views and followed them instead of acting on their own.

To his credit, Marvin Schick (one of my heroes) responded in writing to this letter (published as part of Rabbi Frankfurters’s response). He called it ‘breathtaking in its mean spiritedness’!

In this week’s editorial, Rabbi Frankfurter went on a virtual tirade… considering it to be an obligation to his mentor, Rav Dovid Soloveitchk to ‘call a spade a spade’ and tell the world what he really thinks of the RCA.  His words here made his earlier editorial look like a compliment by comparison.

What was his criticism? There were two things he singled out. One was the RCA defense of Tzohar head, and former candidate for the Israeli Chief Rabbinate, Rabbi David Stav, from some truly harsh and in my view very unfair criticism by Rav Ovadia Yosef, ZTL.  The other ‘sin’ was that they invited Rabbi Dov Lipman to address their annual convention. The criticism against the RCA hosting Rabbi Lipman was especially harsh because he was a member of Yesh Atid whose platform includes endorsement of same sex marriage.

Rabbi Frankfurter considers their defense of Rabbi Stav to be an insult to Rav Yosef. And then he has the unmitigated gall to assign guilt to Rabbi Lipman as though he too supports same sex marriage and - by association - the RCA by virtue of their hosting him. He blasts Rabbi Lipman as being anti Torah citing an exaggerated response he once made about how few Charedim would be exempt from the draft if he had anything to say about it.

I find this to be grossly disingenuous and highly misleading. Doesn’t he realize that inviting someone to speak at a convention doesn’t mean they will agree with everything he says? Does he really think the RCA endorses same sex marriage? Does he think Rabbi Lipman does? I am absolutely certain that he knows they don’t!

Rav Dovid Soloveitchik

His only purpose here is to further the agenda driven by Israeli rabbinic leaders like his mentor, Rav Dovid Soloveitchik. An agenda in which - as Rabbi Berl Wein put it - we are being ill served, since those rabbinic leaders refuse to change the current ‘miserable status quo’. (Perhaps Rabbi Frankfurter considers Rabbi Wein to be in the same category as the RCA?)

As proof that the RCA has lost their way Rabbi Frankfurter publishes a 1975 lecture given by the Rav to his students before one of his Gemarah Shiurim. The Rav’s exorts his students not to allow the Zeitgeist to determine one’s direction of leadership. It was probably done in response the 1970’s stirrings of the modern day feminist movement which was just beginning to roar about that time. (Thank you Helen Reddy).

He explains that the Torah must always determine that. And therefore they must never cooperate with heterodox movements whose motivation is social justice rather than following the explicit dictates of the Torah and Chazal.

Rabbi Frankfurter’s mistake is that he thinks that the only people who can tell us what the Torah and Chazal dictates are his own ‘Chachmei HaMesorah’. But as Rav Soloveitchik pointed out, he could not care less about what Rabbi Frankfurter’s Chachmei HaMesorah say. The Rav had a different view of what the Torah want’s us to do on many issues and it was not the Agudah’s view nor was it that of his cousin, Rav Dovid Soloveitchik.

The Rav was the titular head of Religious Zionism in America. He was opposed to his cousin, Rav Dovid’s point of view. As was the Rav’s brother, R’ Ahron who famously said Hallel on Yom Ha’atzmaut.

R’ Dovid’s antipathy for the state of Israel rivals that of Neturei Karta. He has absolutely no use for the government and considers them anti Torah do this day. This - despite the fact that until a few years ago the government provided millions of dollars of support to Charedi yeshivas. I recall Mir Rosh HaYeshiva, Rav Nosson Tzvi Finkel, ZTL telling a group of Chicagoans a few years ago that until that time 50% of their budget was taken care of by the Israeli government.  

He claims that the Rav would have never supported what the RCA has done here. But the fact is he doesn’t know what the Rav would have done. That did not stop him from using the Rav’s words against the RCA.

This is so ironic in the face of some very positive articles he has featured in the past on YU Roshei Yeshiva like Rav Hershel Schachter. And on the Rav. And on Rav Ahron. And on former RCA president Rabbi Shmuel Goldin.

I cannot imagine a more divisive editorial that the one he has written here. I think he ought to publish a retraction and an apology. That is the only decent thing for him to do. He probably won’t. But I hope he proves me wrong.

Tribute to a Kollel

Rav Shneur Kolter during his years studying in Jerusalem

The Chicago Community Kollel is one of the greatest assets Chicago has. This Kollel  - led by two ‘overachievers’ Rabbis David Zucker and Moshe Francis - came into town back in 1980 to much concern over about how they would affect our limited financial resources. 

The fear was that a Kollel of young men with growing families would be a burden to an already over-taxed community of families struggling just meet the tuition obligations for their children. I recall that even Telshe was opposed to the idea claiming that Chicago didn’t need a new Kollel (and the increased financial burden they would bring with it) since they (Telshe) already had a Kollel open to anyone who wanted to take advantage of it.

But there was one individual who wanted to make it happen in spite of the resistance to it. Rabbi Morris Esformes was determined to bring them in. So determined was he that he promised to fund their payroll for the entire first year out of his own pocket. Which he did.

So with the help of this Kipa Seruga wearing philanthropist and the encouragement of Lakewood Rosh HaYeshiva Rav Shneur Kotler and one of my heroes Torah VoDaath Rosh HaYeshiva Rav Yaakov Kamentsky, ‘The Kollel’ was established. As a condition for financial support Rabbi Esformes insisted that only the cream of the crop in Lakewood be considered as an Avreich (Kollel member). And so it was.

The pioneering Avreichim of the first year (and many years after) are today a ‘whos who’ of principals, Mechnchim, Rabbonim, Menahalim, Roshei Yeshiva, and outreach. Many of them populate our day schools, high schools, Yeshivos, co-ed schools and girls schools as Rebbeim as do many of their wives. Some of them have also gone on to successful business careers and careers in the professions. I can quickly think of at least 3 who have become professionals, One an MD, another a PhD in psychology, and another who is a PsyD.

The Kollel revolutionized Chicago. They changed the way Judaism was practiced. Not by being preachy. Not by dictating standards. But by being warm and inclusive; open and honest; and exemplary role models of their Hashkafos.

From the moment they came to town, people started studying Torah like they never had before. The Kollel influence spread far and wide in this town as they drew Baalei Batim (house-holders) from  across the Hashkafic spectrum into their Beis HaMedrash. Whether it was with Chavrusos (study partners) or by attending Shiurim given by either of the 2 Roshei Kollel or by any one of the many popular Avreichim.

Early on a popular Daf Yomi Shiur was established at the request of the newly inspired Baalei Batim. It was given the first  7 and a half year cycle by Rabbi Francis. This phenomenon became so widespread that other Shuls started giving their own Daf Yomi.  The publication of the ‘ArtScroll Shas’ was added  into the mix and now the Daf Yomi has exploded. It can be found in just about every Shul and Beis Hamedrash.

The Kollel’s influence dfid not stop there. They inspired other Kollelim to open up and flourish as well. We now have at least 7 fully paid Kollelim in the greater Chicago area. One of them is the YU Kollel Torah MiTziyon. And there are even more partially funded ones.

There is so much more to say about the positive influence this Kollel has had in Chicago that I could probably write a book about it.

All this came at a price. The Kollel has influenced Chicago to the right. The Lakewood/Agudah Hashkafa has become pretty much mainstream now. So that things like mixed seating at weddings is a much rarer occurrence these days than it was before they came. Former Religious Zionists (Mizrachi) have become very active in Agudah. Mizrachi – once a powerhouse in Chicago- barely exists these days while Agudah is exploding in popularity. (Chicago used to be the Religious Zionist capital of America!)  While the Kollel is not entirely responsible for that, they certainly played a major role in influencing people in this direction.

There is still a vibrant Modern Orthodox community in Chicago. But they have gone from being the majority to being a minority and are mostly located in the suburb of Skokie. (There is still one very large MO Shul in Chicago proper located just a couple of blocks from the Kollel. It housed 2 additional Minyanim: Agudah and Bnei Akiva. What is nice about Chicago is that this MO Shul is used by all Hashkafos when large gatherings are called for.)

But that is a small price to pay for the kind of ‘in-reach’ the Kollel has been so successful at. And even though my Hashkafos are different than those of the Kollel I am a fan of what they have accomplished and continue to accomplish.  My hat (Kipa Seruga?) is off to them.

What about the increased financial burden to the community? In my view – whatever the cost of the Kollel is, it is well worth it. Money well spent.

Another Moderate Charedi Speaks Out

Rabbi Berl Wein

A middle-aged person recently came to see me before embarking on a trip to the United States to raise money to pay for his crushing debts accumulated over the years that he has not worked. The irony is that he graduated university and is a qualified engineer and is easily employable. So when I asked him why he doesn’t go to work instead of undergoing the humiliation of canvassing door to door in the American winter for a month to receive charity, much of it given begrudgingly, I sighed deeply at his answer: “I have daughters to marry off and the husbands they want to marry will not accept daughters of someone who is working!”

This little anecdote by Rabbi Berel Wein says it all, doesn’t it? As does his entire article. In fact I could have written it exactly the way he did. His understanding of the reality in the world of the right is exactly the same as mine. And he identifies himself as a Charedi Jew of a Lithuanian origin!

His point being that of the comic strip character Pogo whose most famous line is, ‘We have met the enemy and he is us!’ Here is What Rabbi Wein says along these lines: 

Somehow we have forgotten that idleness, poverty and a persecution complex all are, in the long run, self-destructive conditions. These were the conditions that secularized much of Ashkenazic Jewry over the past three centuries. Eventually a system built on declining governmental welfare allotments and unending charity from others - a system decried by Maimonides and other great rabbinic sages and religious leaders throughout the ages – is a Ponzi scheme that inexorably will collapse of its own weight.

And we are ill served by religious political leaders and the handlers of old and revered great Torah scholars who, for purposes I have never really understood, oppose any change of the current miserable status quo. And, there is never any plan advanced to help rescue their adherents from the deepening abyss of poverty and personal despair.  

Oh how true this is. This is precisely what a courageous hero like MK Rabbi Dov Lipman is trying to change. And for his efforts he has been disparaged by just about anyone who sees the rabbinic leadership in Israel as unassailable in their approach to these problems. Even the two feuding Charedi sides on how to handle these issues in Israel agree that any change should be fought. The only difference between them is what the approach should be.

That the right wing American rabbinic leadership has only spoken up to endorse that position when many of them have educational values similar to those of Rabbi Lipman shows just how fearful they are of speaking their mind. They would rather endorse the values they themselves do not necessarily have and walk in lockstep with Israel’s rabbinic leadership.The explanation for this is that what’s good for American Charedim is not necessarily what’s good for Israeli Charedim

I'm sorry but with all due respect to those who say this... that is the biggest cop-out I can imagine when seen in the face of the crushing poverty Israeli Charedim face. 

Rabbinic leaders in Israel refuse to acknowledge that there is a valid remedy to their poverty problem: A clear statement that Kollel is not for everyone and that there needs to be preparation for the workplace starting in elementary school and continuing all the way through high school and beyond. At the very least, that means having a core curriculum. One that is similar to what most American rabbinic leaders support in America. The refusal to acknowledge this is the kind of thing that perpetuates the problem. 

My hope is that people like Rabbi Berl Wein will increasingly make their voices heard. He is not the only Charedi Jew who thinks like that. As his anecdote shows, Charedim would clearly be willing to work except that it will hurt their reputations and thus their children’s Shidduch opportunities!

Perhaps there is a glimmer of hope. During my last visit to Israel I had a discussion with some young people about the dire poverty situation for Charedim. I was told by one individual that many rabbinic leaders had come into their town to discuss ideas of how to do better financially. This included better budgeting of finances, various investment strategies, and the proper way to use free loan associations. But none of the solutions included getting a job. One very bright young Charedi student asked, ‘Why isn’t that an option?’ ‘What’s wrong with working?’ This fellow is at the top of his very Charedi class in high school. Needless to say his high school never heard of Limudei Chol. The question was left hanging.

I think it is high time for the rabbinic leaders in America to speak up for their brethren in Israel. The answer is not to ‘Adopt a Kollel’ which was touted at the recent Agudah convention.  That will not generate anywhere near enough money to alleviate the increasing poverty this community faces.Walking in lockstep with an educational formula that is ‘killing’ people in Israel does not do anyone any favors. As Rabbi Wein points out, we are ill served by rabbinic leaders who refuse to change the current miserable status quo. I could not agree more.

When Being Right is Wrong

Rabbi Binyamin Ginsberg - Photo credit: New York Daily News

Sometimes being right is not a reason to go ahead. I am frankly appalled by what I just viewed on CBS This Morning. 

The Supreme Court is going to decide a case brought by Rabbi Binyamin Ginsberg. They are going to determine whether he has a right to sue an airline to restore his frequent flyer mileage.

Rabbi Ginsberg was a frequent flyer on Northwest Airlines (since bought out by Delta). In his job as a consultant he has flies cross country about 75 times a year, thus accumulating those valuable frequent flyer miles. Which he of course uses. All well and good. I use frequent flyer miles all the time.

The problem for Rabbi Ginsberg is that the airline took away those miles because of the vast number of complaints registered by this man. 24 times in 8 months. That happened in 2008. He is suing to get them back.

I agree that he probably should. And I also agree that there are often legitimate things to complain about. But at the same time I can understand why the airline wanted to drop this guy. Unless he is the unluckiest guy in the world, I doubt that all of his complaints were of so serious a nature that they deserved to be made known to the airline. If his complaints were first made to the flight attendants while he was still on board, I can just imagine how he was perceived by both the flight attendants and the other passengers on board.

Has Rabbi Ginsberg never heard of the concept of Vatranus? Sometimes you just have to let things go. You don’t have to complain about every little thing and make a nuisance of yourself. It isn’t always about you. There are other people on board. It does not make a good impression on other passengers when you constantly complain – even if you’re right. Especially if you are wearing a big black Kipa!

And what was his point in complaining? Did he expect some sort of concessions from the airline? Like vouchers for more trips or upgrades in his seating?

And now his case made it all the way up to the Supreme Court… which made the national news.

I understand that he does not want to lose all those miles. I am sympathetic to that. But he should have thought of that when he filing all those complaints. He says that he the complaints weren’t minor. That they were serious ones like being made to wait on the Tarmac for hours. No one likes that. But it happens. And I agree that it is wrong on the part of the airlines to keep the passengers ‘prisoner’ on broad for hours. It has happened to me more than once.

Which is the point. He wasn’t petitioning to change those rules. He was just complaining that he had to go through that. He wasn’t the first and he wasn't alone. There were other passengers on broad. How many of them registered official complaints?  

And what was he looking for when he complained? Compensation of some sort? …like more mileage points? ...or vouchers? ...or just good old American cash? Is that worth making Orthodox Rabbis look like malcontents? Not in my book. For his part Rabbi Ginsberg says that it's not about the money. It's about common courtesy. Well, when someone says it not about the money - it's about the money.

Like I said. Sometimes being right does not call for action. Just because he should not have lost those points and has a right to sue the company that took them away from him (if he indeed does have that right – which is what the Supreme Court is deciding upon) that doesn’t mean he has to exercise it. If you represent Torah, which – like it or not - is what wearing a Kipa is does to you, you have to behave in a manner which will gain you respect. Not in a manner that will make you look like a money hungry malcontent.

Rabbi Meiselman, Science, Torah, and Chazal

Rabbi Moshe Meiselman

How saddened I am to see an individual who I once so admired fall so far from the Hashkafa in which he was raised. I’m sure that Rabbi Moshe Meiselman would vehemently disagree with my observation. I have in fact heard him quoted as saying that his Hashkafos have not departed from those of his uncle Rav Yoshe Ber Soloveitchik – the Rav.

He claims that the Rav has always been misunderstood or misinterpreted. But to anyone who knew the Rav’s Hashkfos it is clear that he has indeed deprated from them. His views are more like those of the Rav’s uncle Rav Yitzchok Zev Soloveitchik. And there is not a scintilla of doubt to me that their views were radically different on variety of important issues.

One must see Rabbi Meisleman’s new book, Torah Chazal andScience in this light. One of the points he tries to make is that Chazal’s statements in the Gemarah on matters of science are as accurate as are their statements on Halacha or ethics. Now I have no problem with those who hold this view. But I do have a problem with Rabbi Meiselman’s rejecting as Apikursus (heresy – for lack of a better word) the belief that Chazal’s statements about science are not always accurate. I am one of those who believes that.  And I am not alone in this belief. It is also rather well known that many Rishonim and Achronim had this view.

Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik

My reason for this is as follows. Some of the statements made by Chazal were so clearly mistaken by what is known to us today, that one would have to give up all rationality and have simple blind faith that somehow they knew science in spite of some of the fantastic claims they made about the physical universe. My view (and the view of those like me) is that Chazal’s knowledge of science was limited to the knowledge available to mankind at the time.

They were all brilliant men - experts in Torah and the Mada of their time (Unlike many of our current rabbinic leaders.)  Their knowledge in Torah was handed down to them and they accurately transmitted it to the generations via the Mishna and the Talmud. But their expertise in science was limited in large part due to the lack of technology available to them at the time. Statements of scientific fact were based on what they could perceive and understand without the benefits of modern technology. I find it very difficult to believe (as does Rabbi Meiselman) that the science that Chazal redacted into the Gemarah was received from Sinai.

There are numerous scientific misstatement of facts in the Gemarah. Here is one rather stark example  from a Gemarah in Pesachim (94b). It tells us that Chazal believed that sun follows an unusual path during a 24 hour period. It starts in the morning on the Eastern horizon and continues towards the West. After sunset when it goes below the horizon it slips over a dome that covers the sky and travels in the opposite direction eastward until just before it is seen on the Eastern horizon. It then slips out below that dome and begins anew its daily trek westward.

There is no possible way to interpret that as accurate science. We of course all know that the sun does not revolve around the earth at all. But that the earth revolves around the sun. We also know there is no dome. We again also know that the sun does not change direction. The earth rotates so that the sun appears from our perspective to be rising in the East and setting in the West. It then continues to rotate in the same direction until it reaches the point where the sun is again perceived as rising  in the East. We know this because science has progressed over the millennia via technology available to us that was not available to Chazal.

Rabbi Meiselman’s explanation of this Gemarah is basically that it cannot be taken literally. I always find that to be a cop out when given as an answer in every single instance where there is a contradiction between science and the Gemarah. This is not the only Gemarah that contradicts scientific fact. It can’t be the case that clear and unambiguous statements by Chazal about science that contradict reality are always metaphoric.

None of this is new. This discussion took place many years ago when Rabbi Natan Slifkin’s books were banned for saying much the same thing. And at the time his books were labeled Apikursus by Rav Elyashiv whom many believed to have been the Gadol HaDor at the time. That created a firestorm of controversy.

I am not going to rehash all that now. But I do want to address a claim made by those who say that Rabbi Meiselman is uniquely qualified to write about this subject and therefore has the definitive final word on the subject. They say that because they feel he is both a Talmud Chacham and a PhD in mathematics from MIT.

I do not agree with that at all. Knowledge in mathematics does not make you more qualified to discuss matters not pertaining to math any more than it makes a physician qualified to talk about matters not pertaining to medicine.  And yet this is how many people will receive his book.

It is so upsetting to me that a man I once admired as an exemplar of Torah U’mada - now considers people like me to be an Apikores. How can he in the same breath say that having the identical belief to Avraham Ben HaRambam makes me an Apikores and yet does not make Avraham Ben HaRambam an Apikores?! There is no rationally acceptable explanation to that.

Aside from labeling those of us who believed Chazal erred in matters of science as Apikursim - there was another controversy in Rabbi Slfkin’s books that did that:  saying that the universe is more than 5774 years old. I’m not sure what Rabbi Meiselman believes on that score. But my guess is that he agrees with it since that is what his newly adopted Charedi Hashkafa tells him he must believe. I would be happy to be corrected if this is not the case.

This is where is expertise in science pales in comparison to another Talmud Chacham who knew science. His name was Aryeh Kaplan. Aryeh Kaplan was a physicist of renown. He believed that the universe is 15 billion years old. And he demonstrated that through Chazal, Rishonim and Achronim.

So when it comes to people that are uniquely qualified to deal with matters of Torah and science. I will cast my lot with Aryeh Kaplan ahead of Rabbi Meiselman every single time.

It’s Only Murder - Big Deal!

Rabbi Nuchem Rosenberg - Photo credit: Vice.com

Update
It has come to my attention that many people see this post as some sort of endorsement of Nuchem Rosenberg. This is inaccurate and I apologize for not making this clearer. Rabbi Rosenberg is not the most relaible source on matters of sex abuse. I want to emphasize that the claim that 50% of children in the Chasidic community are sexually abused is grossly exaggerated. 

We cannot possibly know the numbers since communities like Satmar generally do not cooperate in surveys - especially surveys like these. If I remember correctly, experts believe that the percentage of sex abuse in these communities is the same as that of the general population. 

My purpose for citing his words in a recently published article was to 'get your attention' and make the point that the spiritual and emotional 'murder' of so many children in these communities takes a back seat to issues like making sure stockings worn by their women have seams in them. Again, I apologize for any misunderstanding.

The Gemarah in Yoma, 23a-b (yesterday’s Daf Yomi) has some very unflattering commentary about the state of the Jewish community during the first or second Temple Era (It is not clear from the text which era the Gemarah is talking about – but if I had to guess, I’d say it was the first.) Briefly, we are told the story of how a Kohen was chosen to have the honor of performing the Terumas HaDeshen (the symbolic first shoveling of the ashes from the alter prior to the offering of the daily sacrifices). They used a lottery type system.

But that was a rabbinic enactment after a couple of violent incidents occurred. Before that they used to allow the Kohanim (priests) to race up the ramp of the alter. The first Kohen to reach the top of the alter, received the honor. Eventually the competition got so fierce that a when one Kohen saw another one running ahead of him, he took out a dagger and stabbed him to death.

The Gemarah goes on to relate that the father of the slain Kohen ran over to his son while yet alive but writhing in pain. He declared, that the dagger was not Tameh (spiritually impure by virtue of coming into contact with a dead body). The dagger was removed while his son was yet alive.

The Gemarah then comments that murder was apparently so common in their day, that people were more concerned about whether a murder weapon was Tameh than they were about murder!

My friends, little appears to have changed. It is rather well established that sexual abuse is tantamount to mental and spiritual murder. It very often ruins the life of the victim. Depressions is very common and often results in suicide. The OTD (abandoning traditional religious observance) rate of abuse victims is very high. I don’t know what the numbers are, but it would not surprise me if the majority of abuse victims go OTD.

Even those who somehow overcome the abuse, adjust to life, and remain observant, have a lifelong issues to deal with. How common is this ‘murder’ in the Orthodox world? I don’t know. Accurate statistics are probably impossible to come by. The more right wing a community is the less like they are to talk to a statistician trying to collect data.

But if it is anything like what is described in an article in an internet publication called Vice.com. The numbers are beyond belief.

What kind of numbers? How does 50% of all Chasidic children strike you? That is the number of children estimated by Rabbi Nuchem Rosenberg that are sexually abused or molested in Brooklyn's Chasidic community. The following is his description of his initiation into the world of sex abuse in the religious world: 

On a visit to Jerusalem in 2005, Rabbi Rosenberg entered into a mikvah in one of the holiest neighborhoods in the city, Mea She’arim. “I opened a door that entered into a schvitz,” he told me. “Vapors everywhere, I can barely see. My eyes adjust, and I see an old man, my age, long white beard, a holy-looking man, sitting in the vapors. On his lap, facing away from him, is a boy, maybe seven years old. And the old man is having anal sex with this boy.”

Rabbi Rosenberg paused, gathered himself, and went on: “This boy was speared on the man like an animal, like a pig, and the boy was saying nothing. But on his face—fear. The old man [looked at me] without any fear, as if this was common practice. He didn’t stop. I was so angry, I confronted him. He removed the boy from his penis, and I took the boy aside. I told this man, ‘It’s a sin before God, a mishkovzucher (male to male anal sex). What are you doing to this boy’s soul? You’re destroying this boy!’ He had a sponge on a stick to clean his back, and he hit me across the face with it. ‘How dare you interrupt me!’ he said. I had heard of these things for a long time, but now I had seen.” 

According to Rabbi Rosenberg, the perpetrator of this particular incident sits on the modesty council passing judgment on ‘serious’ violations of Tznius. Like a man walking in the street with a married woman that is not his wife.

Rabbi Rosenberg has been ‘thanked’ for his efforts by being condemned and completely ostracized from his Satmar community.

Other victims’ advocates were interviewed for this article and they do not paint a pretty picture either. One of them believes that the estimates of 50% are low. God have mercy!

I realize that ‘defenders of the faith’ will all come out of the woodwork now and condemn this article as pure fiction and anti Charedi propaganda. That people like Nuchem Roseberg have zero credibility. And that these advocates cannot be trusted as they all have an agenda. They are at best exaggerating and at worst lying in order to further that agenda.  (In my view their agenda of eliminating sexual abuse is a good one to further, but I digress).

It should be noted that Modern Orthodoxy does not get off the hook either by those interviewed as they blasted the slow response to Baruch Lanner. But that is beside the point.

Which is that it seems that issues of Tznius - like a man walking with in the street with a woman that is not his wife - is of far greater concern to the rabbinic leaders then the ‘murder’ of their own innocent children. As it is to their followers who are indoctrinated let their rabbis do their thinking for them.

What are the real numbers of abuse in these communities? Like I said, I don’t know. But my best guess based on everything I've read is that they are huge. Far greater than anyone ever believed or expected. Unfortunately we will probably never know the real extent of it.

Is it 50%? 30%? 20%? Or perhaps it is only a mere 10%. In Williamsburg alone that equals 4500 children! A lot of children being murdered by people who enjoy continued respect in these communities even after accusations are made and proven in court. As is the case with convicted serial child rapist, Nechemya Weberman.  All while the victims are kicked to the curb. After all who cares about them?! They all went OTD anyway! We have to worry about the Frum people of our community and make sure that they have the highest level of Tznius possible.

When will these communities wake up? My guess is… never! The question is, what do we do about it?

Are They Really That Pure?

Lev Tahor founder,Moshe Helbrans - Photo credit: Canadian Television

Sainte Agathe. I have fond memories of that little hamlet in the Canada’s Laurentian Mountains on the outskirts of Montreal. I spent a lovely summer vacation there in 1968 with my parents my older brothers and their families. But one thing was missing for me on that trip. The sect that currently resides there, Lev Tahor.

First let me state unequivocally that Lev Tahor (Heart  of Purity), which was founded by Moshe Helbrans is so extreme that their behavior exceeds even the most extreme elements of Judaism. I think I can safely say that even Neturei Karta, leta alone Satmar, Toldos Aharon, or Eida HaCharedis would probably condemn them.

A sampling of their troubling behavior can be seen in an IsraelHayom article from about a year ago: 

According to witnesses, cult members — who number around 250 people, 100 of whom are children — are coerced through the use of extreme violence, mind-control and various methods of manipulation. 

Israel Hayom has heard the unwavering testimony of people who have fled the cult, viewed documents witnesses have provided and heard recordings of vicious beatings of children. There were also documented incidents of weddings involving 14-year-old children and forced marriages and divorces of cult members. 

Helbrans has been known to encourage obedience to his demands through methods such as extreme ostracism, excommunication, monetary penalties, food deprivation and the confiscation of holy books. He has also, on occasion, forcefully separated parents and children in what he considered to be defiant families.

The cult leader conducts "psychiatric evaluations" of members on his own and orders his patients to take medication he himself prescribes. Former cult members say the rabbi has total control over his followers, including how they spend their days, what they eat and when they sleep.

The community is said to abide by unusual customs based on traditions of various Hasidic sects, including an extreme dress code which has young girls from the age of three and above donning a head covering similar to the Muslim hijab. 

Lev Tahor is in the news again. This sect has finally raised the ire of Canadian authorities and a judge has ordered the removal of 14 children from the parents. They were placed in foster care while their youth protection officials investigate allegations of extreme neglect or worse..

I think it’s pretty safe to say that all Jewish denominations and all Orthodox Hashkafos are on the same page here. This sect is vile. Period. I would even go so far as to say that those who joined this sect are mentally unstable and are in serious need some of psychotherapy and/or medication.

But aside from the obvious, there are couple of things that need to be said here. One cannot overlook the fact the basis for this sick behavior is in the loyalty in the extreme of the normative values of Chasidic sects like Satmar, Neturei Karta, and Toldos Aharon. In fact founder Moshe Helbrans says that his sect is modeled on Satmar Chasidus. (I’m sure that Satmar is ‘thrilled’ to know that.)

Rav Aharon Teitelbaum, Satmar Rebbe (Kiryas Joel)

It isn’t really too hard to see this group is the reductio ad absurdum of Satmar. The neglect and abuse by Lev Tahor of their children is another matter which is probably unrelated to the sect they claim to model themselves on. But their look, manner of dress and extremes of Tznius is another matter. One can see by the above photo that Helbrans has the look of a Satmar Chasidic Rebbe. In fact he almost looks like one of the Satmar Rebbes.

Now it is true that one does not judge a book by its cover. But the fact that he chose that look and claims to be an extention of Satmar is not insignificant. His antipathy for the State of Israel is identical to that of Satmar.  And their mode of dress for men is that of Satmar.

But what crosses the line of even the extremes of Satmar is how their women dress. They essentially wear Burkas. While even the Eida Charedis condemns that look, it really is not all that far off from the normative look of women one typically finds in their neighborhood, Meah Shearim. They do not wear the Burkas. But their manner of dress is to make sure that their feminine features are completely hidden. They are fully cover – neck to toe in very loosely fitting clothing. Their hair is fully – usually some sort of turban. The face is the only part of their body that is exposed.

The newest custom is for women to wear a shawl so as to add an additional layer of covering to their female form. If one pays such extreme attention to covering up the female form, it is not too much of a stretch to go the extra step of wearing a Burka… one that even covers the face! This facet of Lev Tahor’s abberative behavior is based on the extremes of Tznius that is extant in the more normative Chasidic sects.

I don’t think I can emphasize enough how ruinous extremes like this are to Judaism. When rabbinic leaders over-emphasize Tznius and blame every ill in the world on it, and continually exhort their flock to upgrade their levels of Tznius, is it an wonder that extremists sects like Lev Tahor have gone off the deep end? They attract followers that have been inundated with these messages. And if hey are the slightest bit obsessive compulsive, it is not that hard to see why they would be attracted to this group.

Which is why they ought to be severely condemned by every religious leader in Klal Yisroel- especially by the right of which this group claims to be a part. And those condemnations ought to be at least as strong as their condemnations of Open Orthodoxy. Because whatever condemnation they give to them (which in my opinion goes way too far) goes double for this group. And then they ought to stop haranguing their flock about Tznius and start blaming the ills facing Judaism on things other than that.