Crossing a Theological Line

A couple of years ago, a group of Catholic Cardinals had asked Yeshiva University if they could come and observe Yeshiva students studying in their Beis HaMedrash. Apparently they had heard about the type of modern orthodoxy espoused by YU which combined a strong secular studies program along with a strong Torah studies program using the traditional Chavrusah type study sessions. They had heard how successful it was, both now and historically and wanted to see if the could learn anything from it. They believed they could possibly incorporate these methods into their own study programs by observing them and perhaps talking to a few students. YU agreed. The cardinals came. Their stay was brief and they were in the Beis HaMedrash for just a few minutes to observe.

After that event, Rabbi Chaim Keller, Rosh HaYeshiva of Telshe Chicago (and former student at YU) wrote a highly critical article in the Yated condemning the event and calling it a Chilul HaShem.

I was indignant. I wrote an article published in the Chicago Jewish News questioning Rabbi Keller’s conclusion and asking why he wasn’t being Dan Yeshiva University L’Kaf Zechus. Indeed I thought it was a Kiddush HaShem. By all accounts the event was a big success. The good will and positive press generated by it not only made The Torah and its people look good it improved an already good relationship between the Jewish people and the Catholic Church. Indeed Agudath Israel itself often filed legal briefs in federal appeals courts and even the Supreme Court (if I remember correctly) on matters of mutual concern in conjunction with Catholics and various Christian denominations. Why is a friendly response to a good faith request by the Catholic Church considered a Chilul HaShem? I still feel that way and my question to Rabbi Keller stands.

However, today’s Forward reports a similar event of far greater controversy which took place in New York. In stark contrast to Yeshiva University’s response to a request to observe its students, Yeshiva Chovivei Torah had initiated an actual learning session. They sent an invitation to the Catholic Church to send Cardinals to sit down and study in their Beis HaMedrash, B’Chavrusa with their own students . An entire morning was spent “learning” Gemarah.

To me this crosses the line. It is one thing to accede to a request in a gesture of good will to observe students. It is an entirely different matter to sit and learn with them. There are strict laws about how and when it is permitted to dialogue with non-Jews about matters of faith. Usually such situations are permitted only when forced upon us as was the case with the famous Vikuach (disputation) between the Ramban and Pablo Christiani. But here they were invited to do so. Chovevei Torah Rosh HaYeshiva, Rabbi Avi Weiss, defended his actions by saying that "This is not theological dialogue — this is a study session...” but as the article goes on to immediately say “...at several moments, as straight text study made way for free-flowing discussion, it seemed hard to draw a clear line dividing the two categories.”

Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik ZTL, the acknowledged and undisputed leader of Modern Orthodoxy had written an essay permitting interfaith dialogue, but not on matters of theology. It appears that Chovevei Torah crossed that line. From the article:

“(Chovevei student) Friedman told his Catholic study partner that the Hebrew word for "stand," can be understood as a synonym for "pray." The archbishop smiled, his knees nearly touching the student's. Nodding, he replied, "Jesus stood up early in the morning to pray."

You don’t need much imagination to realize where thid dialogue might lead. This event should not go unnoticed. I don’t know if it is an actually Chilul HaShem ...or whether it isn’t.. but it is certainly worth considering it as such.

I want to be clear. I am very much in favor of having good relations with the Catholic Church. I do believe they view us differently now since Vatican Two. Our attitude towards the Church ought to change from one of suspicion to one of warm and friendly relations which is a hallmark of the free and open pluralistic society that America is. I have indeed written two controversial articles on this subject, one on this blog and one in the Chicago Tribune praising Evangelical friendship as genuine and that we ought to embrace it, albeit with a watchful eye.

But it is one thing to be friends. It is an entirely different matter to debate theology with them, especially when the Catholic side is experienced elders... “Princes” of the Church and Jewish side is young rabbinical students with heads full of mush.

The Crisis in Jewish Education: Show Me the Money

Chicago has many wonderful educational institutions. Just about the entire spectrum of Yiddishkeit is represented by these many schools, whether high schools or elementary schools or Yeshivos, we have a school to fit any Hashkafa. There are, of course, many people who would love to change a few things about a particular school here or there, but for the most part we are diverse and able to serve Jewish Chicago’s educational needs. (There’s always room for improvement.) But as is the case in many cities there is one major problem and it is at crisis proportion. That problem is funding. For various legitimate and not so legitimate reasons, these schools are dangerously under funded. Schools are operating with budgets that are increasing annually and revenue that has not kept pace, and indeed, may even be decreasing per capita (i.e. student) in some cases.

I serve on the scholarship and tuition committee on one of these schools. It has been becoming increasingly clear that the parent body is being pushed to the limits of their abilities. Tuitions in some schools are as high as $10,000 per student (or perhaps even higher) and you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see that if you have a typical Jewish family of 4 or 5 kids that full tuitions far exceed a typical family’s ability to afford it. Scholarships are liberally given but still... every possible nickel is squeezed out of a typical parent’s pocketbook. Fundraising, such as banquets, concerts, or raffles, are maxed out and revenue from those events, even though they may raise in excess of a half million dollars per year in some schools, fall far short of an ever increasing budget.

The outlook for the future looks bleak as things seem to only be getting worse. Budgets are going to continue to go up. But community wealth in the aggregate seems to be stagnant and in some cases becoming less available.

What to do!

The answer is, I just don’t know. I don’t think anyone has a solution. It seems that we are at an impasse. On the one hand Mechnchim are being paid much better than they ever have been. In the past one could scarcely support oneself and one’s family on a Mechnech's salary. But teachers who are now paid the highest salaries in history (on the average) hardly qualify as decent wages for those entrusted with the education of our children. They deserve a lot more than they get. On the other hand there is really not enough money to pay for the salaries they get now! Most schools run on deficits. This in spite of maxing out every resource in fundraising and squeezing every parent for every dollar they can spare.

This is not the first time anyone has written about it and it won’t be the last. But one thing I know for sure is it cannot continue this way. Something is going to have to give.

Here are some of my thoughts.

I remember reading about a group of middle class parents in the New York area that were going to try a radical approach to solve the problem. If I recall correctly they decided to send their children to public school for one part of the day and give them private Limudei Kodesh lessons the other part of the day. It first glance I thought this to be a prescription for disaster. Wasn’t this what the situation was in the pre- day school era? And didn’t this situation have the disastrous results of losing almost every child to assimilation? This “afternoon school” system was a complete failure. Yet the current attempt by these NY parents is precisely a duplication of those circumstances. Or is it? I’m not so sure. Afternoon school consisted of a full day in public school and then when all their classmates were done with school for the day these poor Jewish kids had to start all over again in a Jewish school. Who wouldn’t hate such a schedule?

I do not think this new attempt duplicates the old and hated (by students) afternoon school system. The schedule would instead mimic the typical day school setting of half day Limudei Kodesh and half day Limudei Chol... only the Chol would be done in a public school setting. I don’t know that this will work for sure. There are serious problems that would have to be dealt with effectively and I’m not even sure it is possible. Just to pose one obvious example, the secular and moral climate that these children would be exposed to in a public school at very tender ages might not be the best way for them to get their secular Chinuch. And of course there are other problems as well such as control of the curriculum some of which might be objectionable to a Torah Hashkafa. And there is the simple technical problem of participating in public school part time and getting the full benefit of it. There are probably a lot more problems that I can’t even think of.

But I think the new program has some merit and should be seriously looked into. These problems although huge may be solvable.

Another possibility would be to hire Rabbeim who can teach Limudei Chol as well. In my view part of the budgetary problems is hiring good teachers at a living wage as a means of attracting them into Chinuch. But typically they only teach a little more than a half a day. This means that for the hours they teach they are paid quite well. I do not mean to imply that they don’t work outside of the classroom preparing etc. But this is true of every teacher including those who work full days. A way to reduce the budget would be to hire these Rabbeim to teach Limudei Chol too and pay them more than the get for a half day but less than hiring a separate secular studies teacher for the afternoon. It would also save benefits package costs which would theoretically be cut in half. And an even greater benefit would be having the Rebbe in place all day as a Mashpia and as a role model instead of secular teachers who are either not Jewish or not Frum.

This solution would entail an upheaval in the Yeshiva world where most Mechnchim are drawn from since they do not get the education required to be accredited secular studies teachers but with the current situation being what it is, an upheaval is required. It behooves our Rabbinic leadership to start encouraging it’s Bnei Torah to go to college and get credentialed as secular studies teachers if they want to go into Chinuch.

Another option might be to scatter the Limudei Kodesh classes throughout the day so as to enable Rabbeim to teach all day.

These are some suggestions I have thought about over the years and all of them should be examined seriously by those in charge of educational system of Orthodox Jewry. Otherwise something is going to give and it won’t be pretty.

Cutting off the Cancer.

Well it’s the “day after” and it’s time for some analysis. Elections were held yesterday in Israel and the results are in. Kadima won a majority of the seats but not as many as expected. Enough, however to carry out its goals. It is interesting to note, as does Rabbi Jonathan Rosenblum in Cross-Currents that in total 32 seats, or a little over one-quarter of the Knesset was won by those parties that support settler goals. This means that nearly ¾ of the people of Israel either voted against the settler goals of retaining all portions of Eretz Yisroel or at least considered other things more important. In my view this is a good thing. We need to do it. We need to “cut of the cancer” of Arab hatred by cutting off their population centers from ours.

I realize that there are Chilukei Deios. There are those (my Rebbe Rav Aaron, ZTL amongst them) who believe that this is the worst action we can take... that giving up land to Arabs is not only Assur but suicidal. I know the arguments well. But as I have stated many times in the past, I agree with Charedi leadership, and some of the more considered MO leadership like Rav Aaron Lichtenstein on this one. They hold that it is not Assur to give up land when Pikuach Nefesh is involved. This is my position.

But it wasn't always my position. I used to view the settler movement as heroes, idealists who were willing to put their money and their lives where there mouths were and settle all parts of Eretz Yisroel. It was their Hesder boys who fought the hardest in wars, always volunteering for the most dangerous assignments. How proud I was of these pioneer settlers who in my view exemplified how Klal Yisroel should act in Eretz Yisroel. Heroes all... who made a Kiddush HaShem with their every action. But that was then.

Prime Minister elect, Ehud Olmert was like that then, too. In fact he was to the right of not only me, but even Menachem Begin. He was one of the few Likud party members who voted against the Camp David Accords back in the seventies.

Omlert was a man raised on the philosophy of Zev Jabotinsky. His father was a Herut MK. Olmert has been a staunch member of the political right in Israel for a long time. He is a man of conviction. So much so that for decades, he was at odds with his entire family... his wife; his children... who were all politically to his far left. His wife used to vote against him in elections as did his children. Never-the-less he stood his ground for years because he believed in the ideals of the right. Establishing settlements, he thought, was the best way to secure his country. Giving up territory he believed was suicidal, would weaken Israel’s defensive positions, and give terrorists bases closer to large Israeli population’s centers to operate out of.

What changed? What changed is a huge dose of reality... the demographic time bomb. He has a choice to either continue holding on to large and growing population centers full of Palestinian Arabs who would vote us out of existence in a few short years. He also faces the reality of a united world against Israel’s holding on to these territories.

Even Israel’s closest and most important ally, the United States would never countenance an option of annexation of these large Arab Population centers without granting them democratic voting rights. The choice seems to be clear. Israel’s only real option is to cut them off and create Israel’s new border without Palestinians outside of it. This is why PM Elect Olmert changed his view. And this is why ¾ of the Israeli electorate voted either directly for his party or for those to the left of it. They support such a move. The United States supports it. And so I do.

The Other Moses

With all of the current discussion about critical scholarship and skeptical views on belief in God, I thought it might be interesting to take a look at founding father of Haskala, Moses Mendelssohn. He is perhaps one of the most enigmatic people in the History of the Jewish people. Did he personify "good" or "evil"? I think he is a victim of history and I don't believe we will ever really know the absolute truth. He is vilified by some and justified by others. His views could easily be seen as a precurser to the philosophy of Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch’s Torah Im Derech Eretz (TIDE). But the reality is that the Reform movement attributes its own beginnings to him.

Mendelssohn was born in the early 1700's and was educated in the traditional Jewish way. He was a strong advocate of the Enlightenment, himself acquiring a wide knowledge of math and philosophy and a strong command of the German language. He attributed his hunchback to the day and night study of Jewish Philosophy. The Rambam, he would claim, gave him his hump, but he loved him nevertheless.

He was greatly respected and admired by the German secular world, nevertheless he remained a staunchly, observant Jew. Because of the great respect he garnered in the non Jewish, Christian world he was constantly being asked to renounce Judaism. He not only did NOT do that but resolved to strengthen his own people.

His devotion to Halacha was absolute. He stated unequivocally the Torah was not subject to the whim of subtle reasoning and cannot therefore release us from the rigid obedience to Halacha. He did believe, however, that this fact did not prevent us from seeking self improvement which he defined as a sort of assimilation into general society while remaining 100% loyal to the Torah. I find this to be almost the mission statement of Torah Im Derech Eretz.

One of the biggest deficiencies he perceived was the inability of the Jewish people to speak the German language properly which delayed their assimilation and acceptance into society which that enabled. To improve that situation he wrote the "Biur" which was a translation of the Torah into perfect German. This, he hoped would serve as a "textbook" of the German language.

However, the Biur was roundly condemned by many of the Gedolei Hador of that time, like R. Yechezkal Landau (The Noda Beyehuda). There were even threats of Cherem for anyone who used the Biur, even though there was nothing heretical in it whatsoever. The grounds for the rejection was fear of rejection of the Torah through assimilation by learning to speak German too well (the very thing that Mendelssohn was trying to accomplish L'Shma). This may be the very first occurrence of the clash between two Hashkafos: RW and MO. It is interesting to note a parallel to bans in our own time.

However, Mendelssohn was probably just ahead of his time. The philosophy of "A Jew in the home and a man (Mentch) in the street" was taken by his followers to mean rejection of Halacha when it interfered with societal acceptance. Rav Hirsch’s TIDE has virtually the same message but by the time he established it, the Reform movement generated by Haskala was a clearly defined enemy and he was better equipped to deal with it. If I am not mistaken TIDE was designed to counteract Reform.

It was the fashion of the day to gather in the "salons" of prominent people and argue and debate various philosophies. Mendelssohn was a very popular "invitee" to such parlors and attracted lots of young Jewish intellectuals who became disciples. These disciples were ill prepared to handle his ideas about combining assimilation with loyalty to the Torah and because of his actions his disciples embraced the enlightenment and rejected the inviolability of the Shulchan Aruch. These people became the founding fathers of the Reform movement.

In the end, it's hard to say if Mendelssohn was a hero or villain. It is said that none of his descendants remained Jewish, all converting to Christianity. This was the case with his famous grandson, composer Felix Mendelssohn. To point to his descendants as apostates is not a legitimate criticsm because no one can be responsible for the actions of their later generations. It is also a fact that none of the descendants of the male line of R. Akiva Eiger are religious today, either.

There is no doubt that he was the impetus behind Abraham Geiger and Israel Jacobson, who are two of the founding fathers of the Reform movement. But neither should there be any doubt that his motivation and philosophy was the same or similar to that of R. Shimshon Raphael Hirsch. So once again, was Mendelssohn a villain responsible for the origin of the Reform movement or was he a Shimshon Raphael Hirsch who was just ahead of his time? Probably both.

How should history judge Mendelssohn? In my view...L’kaf Zechus.

In the Image of God

There is a lot of hate going around in the world that passes for righteousness. Man hating his fellow man ...thinking of him as less than human, worthy of death. Such is the case of Muslim-born Abdul Rahman, who faced execution in Afghanistan for converting to Christianity. Although no longer in danger, the calls for his execution are still being heard. There is no respect for his humanity by the leaders of this fastest growing religion in the world.

But lack of respect for fellow human beings is not limited to Muslims. How many times have I heard Orthodox Jews referring to non Jews as subhuman, whether they be Arabs or other minorities, or just Non-Jews in general. Subhuman! There was in fact a book written in Hebrew a few years ago that said precisely that and was given approbation by Rav Malkiel Kotler, Rosh HaYeshiva of Lakewood. When the book’s contents were exposed in the secular media, Rav Kotler quickly removed his Haskama and stated that he didn’t realize that the book had stated this, didn’t believe this way himself, and mistakenly gave approbation based on the character of the author, one of the brighter students in his school. Or so he thought. . He apologized. He then followed it up with the statement that the Torah view is that all of mankind is created B’Tzelem Elokim, in the image of God.

I’ve always understood Tzelem Elokim to mean being created in the image of God. Maimonides points out that God is pure Form whereas everything else is a combination of Matter and Form. It is difficult for us to grasp the concept of pure form, so this limits our ability to understand the Nature of God and therefore, how to define “image” of God. So the best we mere mortals can come up with is a finite definition of Tzelem Elokim. We must use finite terms to define a characteristic of the Infinite... a physical description of a metaphysical trait.

By way of understanding the unique way in which Man differs from animals, we can begin to understand God’s creation of Man - B’Tzelem Elokim. What differentiates man from animals is rational thought, the ability to distinguish and discern, deduce and learn, communicate and teach, ...and ultimately build up the world. There is another facet to Tzelem Elokim: the ability to learn the difference between right and wrong; good and evil. To an animal there is no such knowledge or understanding. In giving man the ability to recognize these differences, he is also given Bechirah Chafshis, freedom of choice between good and evil... and to know the difference. In this way Man can earn Divine acceptance by choosing good over evil, and thereby refine his Tzelem Elokim.

As I understand it, this is the essence of the Rav’s great essay, “The Lonely Man of Faith”. Man’s creative capacity (Adam I) comes into play. His mandate from God to control his environment which entails necessary social interaction, combined with the paradoxical Homo Religiosus (Adam II) whose faith, by definition, must ultimately be “alone”, disconnected and otherworldly directed to his personal inwardly convictions, becomes the paradigm for Man’s perfection through the fulfillment of God’s word.

Adam I, the socio-political Man’s goal of control and conquest is, by itself, selfish in nature and counters God’s will. Adam II, Homo Religiosus, by himself, is too otherworldly. He rejects the real world for the ethereal. It is the melding of Adam I with Adam II that creates the potential that every human being has for the ultimate perfection of our Tzelem Elokim, which we are given in unimproved form at birth.

The level of intellect is unimportant. It is not the level of intelligence that we have that makes us B’Tzelem Elokim, One can have Downs Syndrome, and still be B’Tzelem Elokim. It’s not the level of knowledge or deeds measured against someone else are that God judges, but the level of knowledge or deeds measured against one’s own potential.

This divine spark is part and parcel of all of mankind, Jew or non-Jew. It behooves us all to recognize this simple truth and treat all of our fellow human beings with the respect that a creation in the image of God deserves.

The Conservative Movement: Is The Theology Heresy?

An article in Cross-Currents has prompted me to ask a question about the Conservative Movement. As we look at it today, what exactly is the objection to it? I am not asking what the problems are. They are many and self evident as shown by statements made by Conservative Rabbi, Dr. Ismar Schorsch Chancellor emeritus of JTS. Who, after all, had a better perspective on these problems than he? My question is a theological one.

I have been in the forefront of referring to the Conservative movement as a heretical one. And I continue to do so. But that description requires more analysis and reflection. Here is how I view the current state of affairs.

There are two basic problems with the Conservative movement. One is in the area of what I would call creating law. The Conservative movement has redefined how Halacha is created and adopted a much more liberal method of doing so, using a kind of Eis Laasos reasoning. They have used questionable methods based on inappropriately applied Talmudic reasoning and changed established rabbinic law based on their own logic and reason rejecting centuries of established rules on how to Paskin.

A classic example of this is the Heter given to driving to Shul on Shabbos. Their rationale was that since Jews were driving anyway, they might as well better drive to shul. They qualified the Heter as permitting driving only for Shul. But once the horse is out of the barn there is no point in closing the door. In fact there was recently some discussion amongst Conservative rabbinic leaders that the “driving to Shul” Heter was a mistake as people used it to drive anywhere they wanted.

Perhaps their intention was good but breaking away from traditional methods of Psak Halacha slid them down a slope of no return. This has culminated in one prominent Conservative rabbi, Neil Gilman, into facing reality and exhorting the movement to stop calling itself Halachic.

But this approach to Psak Halacha can perhaps be forgiven in the abstract if not in reality. Orthodox philosopher and theologian, Dr. Eliezer Berkovits has suggested a similar approach for Orthodoxy in his final publication “Lo BaShamyim He”. A much bigger problem is the Conservative Movement's acceptance of critical scholarship.

Critical scholarship is the acceptance of the archeological lack of evidence of the biblical narrative and literary analysis of the biblical text concluding the events in the bible never actually took place. Conservatives reconcile this with Emunah by saying that even though the bible never happened; its narrative was "divinely inspired", meaning that those who wrote it, did so through Ruach HaKodash. It was God, they say who inspired them to write the narrative as a method of teaching us how to live, through the example of the Avos and the laws of the Torah. This approach was universally looked at by Orthodoxy as heretical. To deny that the events of the bible took place was to deny basis of Judaism.

But recently something strange has happened. Many of the assumptions of the literalness of the Torah have been questioned within Orthodoxy itself. Modern Orthodox scholars who have tried to deal with, for example the archeological claim that there could not have been a major flood (Mabul) have suggested that the story was indeed allegorical. Of course they were roundly rebuffed by those who considered such claims to be against the Mesorah. Yet they all seemed to stop short of calling it outright heresy.

One does not have to question the Mabul to claim that the not all of the Torah narrative is to be understood as literal (R. Elyashiv and the ban on Rabbi Slifkin’s writings to that effect not withstanding). Because of scientific discoveries in the last couple of centuries many of even the right wing of Orthodoxy now accept that the first six days of creation are not to be taken literally.

If this is the case then how is it different from the claims of the Conservative Movement? They accepted critical scholarship and wrote off all the narrative. Many of the most respected Orthodox thinkers, such as Aryeh Kaplan, have accepted scientific study and have changed their own understandings of formerly literal interpretations into allegorical ones... or other non traditional explanations. The difference between us now seems to be the degree to which we allow allegorization.

So in the final analysis, the differences between Orthodoxy and Conservativism, at least in theory seems to eroding, on the one hand because of Dr. Berkovits’s claim and on the other the fact that we have allowed for some allegorizing which opens the door to more, as we’ve seen with the attempt within Orthodoxy to allegorize the Mabul.

So I ask in all sincerity: In theory, is there really a major difference anymore? Can we still say that the Conservative Movement is heretical because of their acceptance of critical scholarship?

Updated: 6/28/07 8:22 AM CDT

Chasidus

My renowned ancestor, Chasidic master, Rav Shimon Yaroslover is probably turning over in his grave because of what I am about to write. Rav Shimon, was a Talmid Muvhak of the famous Chozeh M’Lublin. But he did not come from a Chasidic background. His father, R. Yisroel Leib Elbaum, was an avowed Misnagid. He vehemently opposed Chasidus. He was so “turned off” from it that he avoided any contact with those who were trying to spread “the word” and when the Mezritcher Magid once came to his home, he snuck out the back door rather than talk to him in.

He was very upset that his son Rav Shimon had become a Chasid. When he was near death, he had made Rav Shimon promise that he would not say “V’Yatzmach Purkanei V’Karev Meshichei” in the mourner’s Kaddish, an innovation of Chasidus that was never incorporated in Minhag Ashkenaz. He agreed.

This story is brought down in Halacha with respect to a Shaila as to whether one is allowed to depart from a Minhag to honor a father’s deathbed wish. I bring it as an illustration to show just how opposed to the Torah world was to Chasidus. It wasn’t only the GRA. It was many Gedolim and Rabbanim who considered it a break from the Masoretic chain. Things have changed since that era. The advent of Haskala caused the two worlds come together in a common battle against the rush by many to embrace it and abandon observant Judaism. But there was never really reconciliation. There was never a real acceptance by the non-Chasidic Torah world of the tenets of Chasidus. It was sort of put on the back burner and tolerated for the sake of the greater good. Today, you will see a lot of public interaction between the two groups, most notably at Agudah events. But I do not believe the differences were ever resolved.

There is a famous Teshuva by R. Moshe Feinstein that if one reads carefully seems to bear this out. He was asked a Shaila by a young student about which Nusach to Daven, The Nusach of his father, Nusach Sefard, which is the Nusach of Chasidus, or the Nusach of the Yeshivos he learned and Daven’d in, Nusach Ashkenaz, the Nusach of non-Chasidus. He was answered that he should follow his father’s Nusach. But the Teshuva doesn’t end there. He discusses what to do if one does not know which Nusach to Daven and states very clearly that it should be Nusach Ashkenaz. This is because Nusach Ashkenaz is the correct Nusach as it is the one written by the Anshe K’nesses HaGedolah. It predates Nusach Sefard by many centuries. Nusach Sefard was an innovation created by the Ari based on his interpretation of Teffilot Edot Mizrach. He had written what he considered to be a superior form of Teffilah based on Kabbalah. This innovation was not incorporated in to Teffilah. And it is my understanding that even the Ari himself did not use that Nusach. It was only later adopted by Chasidic Masters who insisted on following many of the Ari’s Minhagim. They “bought into” his claim that this Kabalistic interpretation is superior to our Masoretic one, Nusach Ashkenaz. But... who gave them that right? Who gave them the right to change the Nusach HaTeffilah? This is just one point of contention. There are more.

What generated this post was an e-mail from some one who challenged my assertion that there are no Gedolim today who are of a caliber to be called leaders in Klal Yisroel. He asked me “What about Chasidic Rebbes?” Well aside from my Hashkafic problems with Chasidus, I also have sociological problems with it. Here for the most part, is what I wrote:

I never really considered them to be Gedolim because of the way they became Rebbes in the first place. They inherit the position. The entire enterprise is a big turn off to me. All the pomp and circumstance... the Tish... the huge wedding celebrations... the way the Rebbe is treated... like royalty. It all strikes me as one big “theater of the absurd”.

I saw a photo in the Jewish Press of some Rebbe's Sukkah a few months ago. It was huge and ornate. It looked more like a palace. Greatness does not stem from ornate palaces. Greatness does not stem from the trappings of royalty. Greatness in my mind comes from achieving greatness in Torah learning and knowing how to lead... combined with the Midah of Anavah, humility. It does not derive from the artificial grandeur that some Chasidic Rebbes seem to revel in.

There were of course great Chasidic Rebbes that were also Gedolim, like the Satmar Rebbe (Rav Yoel Teitlebaum) and some of the Gerrer Rebbes (the Sfas Emes being the greatest among them) and more that I can’t think of at the moment. I do not attribute their greatness to Chasidus but to them as individuals, who happened to be Rebbes as well. Currently I don't see anything but a bunch of Rebbes who automatically became such by inheriting their positions and parading around as royalty with entire entourages of people accompanying them where ever they go. They see people, give advice, and take money. This makes them Gedolim? I'm sorry I just don't buy it. The entire enterprise is just a big turn off to me.

In the case of Litvishe Gedolim they have to earn it. They have to achieve something on their own. They are not born into it. Rav Elyashiv did not inherit his position. Neither did Rav Moshe, or Rav S.Z. Auerbach before him, or Rav Schach... or the Chazan Ish... or the Chafetz Chaim. They earned it. I have far greater respect for them than I do for Chasidishe Rebbes who got lucky by being born into their positions.

Reflections on Smicha

There is a story told in the name of R. Chaim Shmulevitz who besides being the great Gadol that he was, also had a excellent sense of humor. R Chaim was standing in a corner of the Bais HaMedrash in Yeshivas Mir during Shmuess of some kind and one of the speakers was announced to come take his turn in front of the podium. After a few moments had lapsed without him coming forward, R. Chaim was overheard saying, “Ruft Ehm "HaRav HaGoan" Vell Ehr Bald Kumen Tzu Loifen.” (“Call him HaRav HaGoan, and he’ll quickly come running.”)

The conferring of real Smicha, of course was discontinued about 2000 years ago. Even though there was an attempt at revival during the time of Rabenu Yosef Caro, who actually received one of these Smichos, the practice was not universally accepted and had to be abandoned. Today’s Smicha is far less meaningful.

Unfortunately, in our day and age, titles are given out far too easily. When I was a student in the Yeshiva it was common practice for many of us to take afternoon Hebrew school teaching jobs. This opportunity usually coincided with our entry into the very high level Gemarah Shiur given by Rav Mordechai Rogov. The Yeshiva determined that in order for us to receive any respect from the afternoon school kids, we would have to call ourselves Rabbi even though we were far away from getting Smicha. It was also the practice at the yeshiva for those of us who had achieved entry into Rav Rogov’s Shiur, that we could be called Rav uManhig (Rabbi and leader). By making it to Rav Rogov’s Shiur we were all supposed to on a very high level of learning and were therefore entitled it. The truth though was that the level of learning was not uniform on the part of the students. In some cases there were some real ignoramuses who had year after year passed on from one Shiur to the next and over time and just by sticking out, they got into the Shiur. Rav Rogov paid no attention to those individuals and directed his Shiurim to the motivated students.

My ordination took place during the era of the Viet Nam war. Because of it and because of various other reasons, many students of, shall we say, not very high caliber, (to say the least) ...who would have otherwise left to go to secular universities... continued on past high school all the way through the intensive 3 year Smicha program instituted by Rav Aaron Soloveichik and, somehow, received an actual Yoreh Yoreh (Smicha, as we know it today)! Somehow they passed the Bechinos (tests). It is simply amazing to me to see the disparity between the two opposite ends of the Yoreh Yoreh spectrum: from major Talmidei Chachamim to complete ignoramuses who would break their teeth just reading Hebrew in some cases!

And then there are the Israeli “Smichos”! It is possible to go to Israel, and get a quickie Smicha, an actual Yoreh Yoreh, in just a few months! On the other hand a Rabbanut Smicha is one of the most difficult ones to get. But most Yeshiva students today don’t care to put in the time and effort to get it.

Yeshivas Chaim Berlin, if you learn there long enough, gives you Simcha without requiring any Yoreh Deiah at all and certainly no Bechinos are given. A very respected Rav here in Chicago has that kind of Smicha.

Contrast that with the Chafetz Chaim who did not get Smicha until very near the end of his life, long after he had written the Mishna Berurah.

The attitude by right wing Yeshiva students today is to completely reject Smicha. They look at it as a waste of time at best... time that could be better spent learning Gemarah. In some ways, I can’t blame them for this condescending attitude. There are too many Musmachim out there that can barely learn a word. Why would anyone then consider it an achievement to be counted amongst them? Besides, if they get jobs in Chinuch and call themselves “Rabbi” who is going to question it?

It is too bad that the conferring of Smicha today has degenerated to a level of such insignificance. What was once one the loftiest of goals by any Yeshiva student has now been reduced to almost ridicule. For many who worked diligently to receive Smicha and are truly deserving of it, it is a shame to have to be embarrassed by those amongst their ranks who have Smicha and in some cases, barely read Hebrew.

Why Do They Hate Us?

Arabs hate Jews. That is the reality. There may be some exceptions to this rule but it IS the rule. And it seems to have been that way for decades, perhaps going back to the earliest days of Zionist enterprise in Israel. With the upcoming elections in Israel and the prospect of giving up more land to the Palestinians if as predicted, Kadima wins the elections I thought I would present my own overview of what the source of that hatred is. I do not claim this to be the quintessential truth of the situation nor will I provide any documentation. It is my own thinking on the issue based on a lifetime of observations, impressions, and analysis. I freely admit it may be flawed.

So, Why do they hate us? When I was a young man learning at HTC in 1969, I remember a statement made by my Rebbe, Rav Aaron Soloveichik during one of his Shiurim. I believe it was during a Blatt Shiur of the Gemarah in Gittin 2B that talks about the borders of Eretz Israel and the Tosphos there discussing Kedushas Eretz Israel, Kivush Yachid/Kivush Rabbim... and what is Kedusha L’Shaytah and what is Kedusha L’Asid Lavoh. The statement was as follows:

"If not for the Torah, the Arabs would be right!"

Remember that Rav Aharon was one of the biggest Kanoim for holding on to all the land captured in the six day war. He was a strident supporter of this view and held that it was Assur to give any land ever re-captured by the Jewish people. He was anti-Oslo and he was one of the few Gedolei HaDor who actually said Hallel on Yom HaAtzmaut.

This statement: “If not for the Torah, the Arabs would be right” has stayed with me all these years. I think that understanding the underlying premise of the statement would go a long way to understanding why the Arabs do indeed hate us.

The question is, why would the Arabs be right, if not for the Torah? Does the world recognize this statement? Why did the UN partition Palestine into 2 states in 1948? Was it because of the Torah? I don’t think so. If not then according to my Rebbe, the UN should have denied Israel its existence and there should be no support for Israel at all, for as RAS has said, without the Torah... the Arabs are right. To put it another way, the Arabs have a moral superiority in their claims if not for God clearly titling the land of Israel to His people.

This is indeed the crux of the belief by an Arab about the Jewish presence in what he considers his land. To an Arab, the State of Israel is nothing more than an imperialist presence by foreign invaders much the same as the Afrikaner was viewed by the indigenous population of South Africa. This is indeed the correct view. If one honestly looks at the situation one cannot have any other view.

The enmity predates the establishment of the State. By May of 1948 the Arabs long ago considered Jews to be the enemy.

Let us turn back the clock to the turn of the century and the very advent of modern Zionism. Herzl created a movement as a result of what he considered irreversible anti-Semitism ingrained in society. It was made painfully clear to him during the Alfred Dreyfus trial which he covered as an assimilated Jewish Viennese reporter. This was followed by British Foreign Secretary Lord Balfour’s declaration viewing as favorable by His Majesty’s government, the right of return by all Jews to a homeland in Palestine.

If one goes back in time to pre-Zionist Palestine, one will likely not find any extraordinary anti-Jewish feelings on the part of the Arabs. The indigenous Palestinian Arabs at that time were nothing more than primitive nomadic Bedouins with virtually no concepts of nationhood. This was probably true about much of the Middle East. To the best of my knowledge there were no nation states like Jordan or Saudi Arabia, or Kuwait. These were Arabs... Muslims... with a primitive culture.

The Arabs of Palestine had no state then nor did they have any aspirations to Statehood. They were happy to live in their various environments or neighborhoods and were probably oblivious to the Yishuv HaYashan that the Talmidei HaGra and other religious non-Zionists were immigrating to. Everyone at that time, Jews and Arabs alike, lived in pretty primitive conditions. But they lived together, side by side without any anti-social attitudes toward each other. If anything, I would bet that the Arabs were at first very hospitable to Jews as that is the nature of their culture.

But... after the advent of political Zionism and the Balfour declaration, European Jews started making massive immigration to Palestine. A Jewish agency was formed and land was purchased and/or occupied on a massive scale. All of a sudden there was a large presence of foreigners, European Jews, who were involved in taking over... creating farms, and cities and the infrastructure of a modern nation. These new idealist immigrant Jews began the process of reclaiming Eretz Israel and in the process creating the new Zionist, modern secular State of Israel.

In the meantime Arabs were bewildered by all this new activity. Land was sold by wealthy Turkish landowners and other like-minded absentee owners, to the newly created Jewish Agency. Often land squatting Bedouin Arabs were in many cases evicted leaving them in a trail of dust.

What the Arabs then saw was a gradual usurpation of land they had lived on peacefully as Bedouins for many hundreds of years by a European imperialist Zionist entity which had absolutely no legitimacy in their eyes. They did not view the Abrahamic Covenant with any validity (any more than did the founding fathers of modern Zionism). The indigenous Arabs remained in relative poverty while these new immigrants were involved in bettering their lot, while building a new nation. The Arabs through no fault of their own due largely to their primitive status unwittingly and unwillingly became second class citizens even while their physical existence was improving. This improvement was in large part due to their improved economic circumstances as laborers in physically building the new Israeli nation. Their ignorant bliss was soon replaced with the cruel realization that a new power was usurping their land and dominating their people. This made them angry and resentful and culminated in a vengeful mob perpetrating the 1929 massacre in Chevron.

This anger has persisted to this very day and it seems to have grown exponentially. It is exacerbated by both religious and cultural ideals which are espoused on a daily basis by Muslim clerics and political leaders who use Palestinians as pawns.

It doesn’t matter that the Arab militants and terrorists of today were not alive at the advent of modern Zionism. The hate is passed on from generation to generation in increasing intensity. The hate is exploited by both the clerics and the secular despots. Suicide missions are looked upon as both a religious duty and/or a matter of Arabic honor. To the Arab mind, Jews are both the evil infidels and the colonialist occupier that has illegally occupied Arab Palestine.

The Arabs view greater Palestine as an historical and religious right that they are entitled to, but because of foreign meddling (mostly by the USA) they are denied from having. There are two mindsets and both... or either... can be present in the same person. The political mindset believes that they are being denied their dominant sphere of influence as Muslims and Arabs by the presence in the very heart of the region the Zionist entity known as the State of Israel. The religious mindset believes that Jews are infidel impediments to an ultimate pan-Arab Islamic society.

So there you have it. A century of enmity, combined with Israel’s need to protect itself which exacerbates the hatred. Will that hatred ever cease? I don’t know but maybe if Israel cuts off the population centers by ceding the land where those population centers are located we can see the light at the end of the tunnel. But then again maybe not. Maybe the point of no return has long passed.

The More Things Change...

Chardal has a must read post today. If only there were more Gedolim like Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank, a man of courage, conviction, and character who was not afraid to tell the truth and who actively tried to rectify injustices. Today the opposite is true. Injustice is ignored, or worse, tolerated in a never ending pursuit of Kavod. And what better way to get it than to be asked to sign a ban together with Rav Elyashiv! How can any self respecting Kavod seeker refuse to do that just because he doesn’t know what he’s signing?

Lies and Deception: The Making of a Ban

I am so sorry for Rav Nosson Kaminetsky’s trials and tribulations. How much rejection can one person take from people he respects the most? As most people by now know, Rav Kamintesky’s revised book “Making of a Gadol” has been banned. His first attempt, the original, was banned over a year ago by Rav Yoseph Sholom Elyashiv, a man that Rav Kaminetsky himself has called the Gadol Hador. And the way it happened can at best be described as done through deception and lies. This... from people who are considered great rabbinic figures by many in the Torah world. ...people who surround Rav Elyashiv and people he relies on as a source of information and upon which he bases many of his Halachic decisions.

About a year ago I heard the audio of a speech given by Rav Kaminetsky relating how his original book came to be banned. There was material in it that some claimed was harmful to the reputation of previous generations of Gedolim. While the charge is debatable, what is NOT debatable what happened next. The book which is written in English could not have been read by Rav Elyashiv. And Rav Elyashiv is not so easily approached. He has an army of “Askanim” people who surround him and protect him from the public. To gain access one must go through this “mafia” of Askanim, people who think they are not only protecting his interests but the interests of Klal Yisroel.

When there was an announcement about a possible ban, Rav Kaminetsky asked for a meeting with Rav Elyashiv to see whether it could be avoided somehow. To make a long story short, before the appointed date of the meeting, Rav Elyashiv was lied to by his people and told that Rav Kaminetsky refused to meet with him. Rav Elyashiv then banned the book without ever meeting with him. This all happened while Rav Kaminetsky was out of the country dealing with a health issue. He was informed after the fact. Meanwhile his name was dragged through the mud to the point of people questioning whether they should be M’Shadech with him(consider opportunities to marry into his family)!

Upon his return he wanted to meet with Rav Elyashiv anyway to find out why the book was banned without the promised meeting. He got the meeting. When asked why he wasn’t given the meeting he was promised, Rav Elyashiv related that his people told him that he (Rav Kaminetsky) refused to come to the meeting. A complete fabrication. A boldfaced lie! ...by people whom Rav Elyashiv trusts. Rav Elyashiv apologized to Rav Kaminetsky but he said it was too late and he wasn’t pulling the ban. He then said something to the effect of, “I was lied to and told that you refused to come!” “How should I have known that you were still coming?” Do you think I have Ruach HaKodesh?

Poor man. Thrown to the dogs by a bunch of “murderers”! People who think little about unfounded character assassination and revel at the thought of doing it! These are the kinds of people Rav Elyashiv seems to be surrounding himself with. These are the people he trusts. And these are the same people who “killed” Rabbi Slifkin as well. It was a double header that year. It must have really made them feel good.

So now we have it again. Rav Kaminetsky’s book has been banned again. And people wonder why I think we have no leadership today. Sure, Rav Elyashiv is a Gadol. But as a man in his nineties he is too easily manipulated by others. His Gadlus is not providing true leadership. Yet all other rabbinic figures jump on any chance they get to sign on to a ban that has Rav Elyashiv’s name on it even when they don’t know what they are signing!

It’s time to call a spade, spade. Not just by me but by everyone. We have no Gedolim today.

I'm so Mad!

Making of a Gadol - revised edition has been banned. This really upsets me.
What is the world coming to?

I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's worth; banks are going bust; shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter; punks are running wild in the street, and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it.

We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat. And we sit watching our TVs while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be!
We all know things are bad -- worse than bad -- they're crazy.


It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out any more. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we're living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, "Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials, and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone."
Well, I'm not going to leave you alone. vI want you to get mad!

I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot. I don't want you to write to your Congressman, because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street.

All I know is that first, you've got to get mad. You've gotta say, "I'm a human being! My life has value!"

So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell, "I'm as mad as hell,and I'm not going to take this anymore!!"

English

A while back I lamented the fact that secular studies are so poorly thought of in the Charedi world, especially in Israel. Even more so is the English language. Charedim do not consider it to have any value at all for their male Talmidim. It is not taught at any level in any school for any age. I thought it might be worthwhile to present my own views of why the English language is so important.

It is my contention that the English language will one day become the universal language of the earth. At first glance, this may seem a little outrageous and self centered but please consider the following:

At the present time English is the most spoken language on earth. It is the first language of the most powerful and influential country in the world, the United States. It is also the first language of England, Canada, Australia, Ireland, South Africa, New Zealand, and a bunch of other countries that I can't think of at the moment. It is the second language of every other major country in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. It is the language of computers. It is the language of flight: all air controllers and all pilots must communicate in English. India has made English its official language not long ago. It is the language of international commerce. Japan in fact requires all international businessmen go through extensive training in the English language.

I believe there are several reasons for this. First of all the English language has evolved into what I believe to be one of the most expressive languages on the face of the earth. Just think of how many different words there are to describe the same basic thing, yet there are subtle nuances of difference between each word which, when used, will color a statement accordingly. As far as I know no other language has as many words to describe the same thing. (Admittedly my own knowledge of all other languages is very poor, but this is what I have been told by those who are knowledgeable on the subject)

The English language has evolved from a common ancestral language with German. The British Empire went on to absorb other languages as they conquered other countries. Most notably, when the French speaking Normans conquered the English speaking Saxons, the English language incorporated an enormous additional vocabulary from the Normans and if you research the etymology of many of the words of the English language you will find roots in the French.

English has always been very liberal in adopting foreign words as it still is today. Just look at how many Yiddish words have been incorporated. (e.g. bagel, chutzpa, nosh )

The British Empire then continued to spread the English language every time they conquered anything. India is a good case in point. India was not an English speaking country. After England occupied India and introduced English to the culture it took hold to such an extent that, even after England left, English stayed and became the official language. The Philippines (U.S. influenced) is another example of this type of phenomenon.

Another reason the English language is so widespread is the entertainment industry. American culture is, by far, the most emulated and desired of all foreign cultures. This is because our culture is promoted and distributed worldwide, in movies, television and other forms of entertainment. They are produced in English and even if they have subtitles or are dubbed into foreign languages, all who see this entertainment, know that it is English that was originally spoken and in the case of subtitles, they actually hear the English spoken. English is a part of the American culture and the world wants to emulate everything that is culturally American, whether they admit it or not. Even with the advent of Islamism in recent years and the hatred of everything American, you will often see an American company logo on a tee-shirt or sweatshirt worn by an Islamist militant in a television news report. Any attempts by foreigners to put down American culture are belied by such facts. It’s just... there. American culture is pervasive in the world and its language is English

Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch thought that German was going to be the universal language. But he was wrong! No matter how many countries were speaking German in his day, it was nowhere near to the numbers we have today with English. In Rav Hirsch's day there were no mass telecommunications. Not until the mid 1950's did we begin down that path and today there is instant telecommunications which facilitate the rapid spread of the English language today.

The feeble attempt by countries (most notably France and Quebec) to preserve and promote their language is doomed to ultimately fail. They cannot stem the massive tide of acceptance of the English language. Can you imagine a country legislating laws barring the use of English words to describe universally accepted words to describe things like a telephone? Yet, that is exactly what France has done they didn’t like having to use an English word so they made one up. I wonder how successful that has been. It shows you how desperate they are to keep the French language pure. Of course they can't succeed. In all languages English words are becoming more and more popular and accepted into the language, thus diluting their own language while bolstering English. You will never see the U. S. doing anything like that because, on the contrary, we love to adopt
new words and do it all the time.

English will most certainly replace Yiddish as the universal language of Jews, if it hasn't already. The language of learning torah for the majority Yeshivaleit is English. (Actually it is a corruption of English some have called “Yeshivish”, but that’s a subject of another discussion.) The vestiges Yiddish are slowly disappearing as the great European Gedolim, Rabbanim, and educators pass. It's true that there is a noble attempt by Chasidim, and to a lesser extent the right wing yeshivas, to maintain the Yiddish language (although I'm not sure why), but I don’t think they will succeed. Yiddish will go the way of Ladino I believe. Learning Torah in Hebrew is the only rival to learning in English and I think English is winning

Why the Skeptics Are Wrong

For those people looking for answers to question of faith encountered in the pursuit of truth there is a wonderful essay written by Godol Hador entitled Why the skeptics are wrong dealing with these and other issues. I highly recommend it. Even though I can’t say that I agree with every word, it is definitely a worthwhile read that will benefit anyone who has encountered these questions and haven’t resolved them. I would also personally like to thank Godol for his kind words about me here

I Was Wrong - Revised

I was wrong and want to apologize to my readers. My post on the Orthodox Atheist was well intentioned but has turned into a forum for promoting K’fira. I feared that it might but hoped that it wouldn’t. I was wrong. My bad. I cannot allow this particular post to continue. Not because I think that Mis-nagid has a wining argument but because there is no way for way either side to prove anything and allowing him to keep throwing doubts at people is counter-productive to my goals of seeking Emes. He is very bright and very knowledgeable and a skillful debater. That doesn’t make him right. But it does make him dangerous. So after I post this, I will delete that post. And shortly thereafter I will delete this one.* I apologize to all for having to put up with it. My intentions were good but the road paved was not. But... I leave the door open to anyone who wishes to comment on any of my posts in the future, including Mis-nagid.

* Although I said I was going to delete this one too, I may not. My only reason for doing so is that it may continue being an outlet for Kfira, which as I said is not the intent of this blog. If it does not turn into that, I will not delete it.

Supplicating God in a Time of Crisis

Yet again there is a crisis for a religious family in Chicago. A young woman was rushed home from a seminary in Israel to undergo surgery for a malignant brain Tumor. I pray for her complete recovery. There is a Minhag (custom) in Klal Yisroel to recite Tehilim during a time of crisis. This was again the case here. Various Tehilim groups were called and recital of Tehilim was done.

I have never understood this practice and have yet to see a satisfying answer as to what benefit there is to it. Why is saying verses in Hebrew written by David HaMelech 3000 years ago that have little to do with our situation now of any benefit? The fact happens to be that the vast majority of those reciting Tehilim do not understand the meaning of the words they are reciting. If they have Kavanah, (and I assume most people do) their thoughts are either on the pressing issues of our time or on a particular Choleh or Cholim that the Tehhilim is being said for. The portions of Tehilim that are often recited have little if any relationship to the situation nor is the meaning of each Tehilim really understood by most of those reciting it.

So when there is a call, even in times of crisis to public prayer and the "prayer" is verses from the Psalms that are not understood by those saying them and in any case not exact in expressing what we are asking God for, I do not jump up and salute. Instead I soberly reflect on whether there is any efficacy of the entire public Tehillim enterprise. This does not mean that I do not ever participate. I have done so many times, but when I do, I do so with a grain of salt... a huge doubt resides in my mind as to whether we are really doing anything at all.

One explanation I have been given from a Sefardic Rav here in Chicago, Rabbi Daniel Raccah is that the purpose of saying Tehhilim B'Eis Tzrah (in times of crisis) is to demonstrate our Dveikus to God. In effect we want demonstrate to Him by saying David HaMelech's Tehillim that we are close to Him and hope that when David HaMelech asked that God accept his Tehillim that He indeed did so.

If D'Veikus is all we are doing in the saying of Tehillim why not do it in a way that would be more understandable to those participating. Why not for example mandate a public Shiur in Mussar or Mishna or Talmud or Parsha ar better yet on relevant Halachos and Hashkfos dealing with the crisis at hand... or the Halachos of prayer with respect to praying for the sick? ... or anything else that would demonstrate such D'veikus and in this way those attending would be able to understand and prayer would have more Kavanah. Saying Tehillim doesn't do that. It is more like "crying incoherently". Wouldn't a Shiur in Hilchos Teshuva or Mesilas Yeshorim or Meseches Avos be a better method of showing our Deveikus? Wouldn't it be better to develop our Midos L'Shem Dveikus BaShem, than to say words of Tehilim that are not understood?

The very concept of D'Veikus is rejected Rabbi Y. B. Soloveitchik’s Halakhic Man. As he has said, it is homo religiousus, not Halakhic man who attempts to ascend God. Halakhic Man asks God... to descend to man. Transcendence becomes embodied in man's deeds that are shaped by the lawful physical order of of which man is a part. An individual does not become holy through mysterious adhesion to the absolute nor through mysterious union with the infinite, nor through a boundless, all embracing ecstasy, but, rather through his whole biological life, through animal actions and through actualizing Halacha in the empirical world.

Halachic man cannot achieve D'veikus (cleaving to God) through the recital of Tehilim. The Medrash on Tehillim (1:8) states that David requested that God should account one who recite Tehillim as one who studies Hilchos Metzorah and Ohalim. This clearly implies that David HaMelech believed the study of these laws is of more value than the recital of Tehillim and prayed that they be given value at that level. And there is no indication [in the Medrash] that God granted him his request!

This is so because the primary purpose of study is NOT to study for purposes of D'Veikus, but to comprehend, through the Torah, the Halachos, to understand them in detail so as to be able to perform them properly.

Bottom line: Although I would never try to stop it, I am not a Chasid of the public recital of Tehilim. I question its efficacy, and wonder how this custom developed and why there is not a better, more direct method of supplicating God.

The Shulchan Aruch: Are We Bound to It?

There is an article by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein in Cross-Currents that raises some interesting questions: Can Halacha follow opinions other than the ones established in the Shulchan Aruch? Is there solace in finding ancient voices of agreement that are not accepted? Is Jewish thought a huge intellectual smorgasbord, at which one dines to his or her pleasure?

He bases his questions by comparing two statements, one by the Conservative provost of the University of Judaism, Rabbi Elliot Dorff and the other by Rabbi Dov Linzer, Rosh HaYeshiva of the left-wing Orthodox Chovevai Torah Rabbinical School. In a nutshell Rabbi Dorff advocates the classical Conservative approach of adapting the Torah to fit the times and Rabbi Linzer advocates finding Talmudic sources to fit the times... as he puts it, “finding within the Talmud voices that articulate those same values”. It seems that Rabbi Adlerstein in essence wonders what the real difference is, and how far can Orthodoxy go before it turns into Conservatism... at least in practice

I agree that the two approaches are similar. But there is a distinction to be made that is critical. But I also think that even with that distinction made, Rabbi Linzer’s position is problematic.

The Conservative approach is driven entirely by societal determinations of right and wrong. Their approach to Halacha is that it is “dynamic”... which they define as changing or adapting to fit the times. If the times redefine social mores then Halacha needs to follow and be re-defined by it.

Rabbi Dov Linzer, while agreeing that modern sensibilities should determine the direction we take is not advocating adapting the Torah to fit the times. He seems to be saying instead that we should be finding Halachic precedent in searching for ways to incorporate modern sensibilities. The famous statement by Orthodox Feminist Blu Greneberg in her quest for feminist equality in Orthodox Judaism comes to mind: (paraphrasing...) If there is a rabbinic will there is a Halachic way. Although somewhat radical in that it seems to prioritize Zeitgeist as the determinant of Halacha, it recognizes that Zeitgeist alone cannot change it. It, therefore, remains an Orthodox viewpoint since it maintains fealty to Torah and Rabbinic law.

The problem (if I understand Rabbi Linzer’s position) is whether we are allowed to modify law that has been encoded in the Shulchan Aruch by choosing opposing rabbinic opinions that predate it... so as to make it more relevant to our time. I do not believe there are any Poskim who would allow it and would consider it a grave violation of Halacha and Torah Hashkafa to change the Psak of the Shulchan Aruch. However, there is one Orthodox Jewish thinker who indeed advocated doing so

Dr. Eliezer Berkovitz addresses this very issue in his book “Lo BaShamyim He” wherin he goes even further. In essence he says that while it was needed for its time (an Eis Laasos) the Shulcahn Aruch is really the antithesis of what it is supposed to be: Torah She Bal Peh. Torah She Bal Peh was never meant to be written down and was never meant to be static. He claims that now that we have a Jewish State we can revert to the original intent of Torah SheBal Peh and dispense with the Shulchan Aruch by convening a Sanhedrin. In this way we can create a new body of rabbinic law more applicable to the times.

This would be quite a radical departure for Orthodoxy and I don’t believe that even Rabbi Linzer would agree to it. But it is interesting that a major thinker, a Musmach of pre- WWII Europe, an Orthodox Jewish philosopher, and disciple of the Rabbi Yechiel Weinberg author of the Sridei Eish would advocate such a radical position as the true Derech HaShem.

Unintended Consequences

Unintended consequences. That is the situation here on my blog. My last post defending a fellow blogger has turned into a heated battle between people of various levels of belief and non-belief. That was not my intention at all. I am allowing it to continue, although to be honest I am getting a bit uncomfortable about it. I admit that it worries me that someone may access the comments section and extract the wrong message. There are some individuals commenting there seem to be promoting an agnostic agenda.... an agenda that is eager to convince others of their own conclusions about truth. It is my hope that even they who seem so attached to such a high level of doubt are still open minded enough to listen to arguments being made by rational people of belief. The fact that they are still around after many such arguments in other blogs makes me think that their assertions about their beliefs ...or lack of them... are not irreversible. (I don't believe that anyone commenting is an actual atheist even if he says he is.)

The purpose of this post is a disclaimer. I want to be clear. I do not in any way endorse any of the comments on matters of faith. Even though I may agree with some commentators more than others, I am not making any endorsements. Nor should my allowing the discussion to conmtinue be seen as an endorsement.

I hope that something positive will develop instead... that the discussion will lead people of faith to re-examine their own thoughts and sharpen their positions. I also hope that people of doubt will do the same while opening up their hearts and minds to the possibility that that their agnostic positions are not so absolute and inviolable. Truth can be gleaned from both sides of the aisle just as Rav Meir gleaned truth form Acher.

There are very few issues that are clear cut. If Emunah was that easy, everyone would be Orthodox. Emunah is a difficult thing to achieve and for those of us who are Maminim we need to continue working on ourselves to maintain it. I am a person of faith and work at it constantly. The commentators on this last post are all over the place in that respect. It is my hope that through discussions like these, as irreverent and even shocking as some of the comments may be... that Emes and Emunah will prevail.

In Defense of the Godol Hador

The most intriguing blogger I have encountered is the fellow using the pseudonym Godol Hador. As an Orthodox blogger he is most certainly the most controversial. He has been accused of being a Kofer by many a commentator and others have encouraged me to drop the link to his blog from my own. I won't. And I seriously doubt that he is a Kofer. I believe him to be a seeker of truth who is intellectually honest. The best indicator of that was his lengthy post on Emunah entitled, “The Science of Judaism”. But his openness and commitment to allowing all opinions to be expressed, even those of admitted Kofrim make him seem anti Orthodox. He has in fact always been able to argue both sides of an argument quite adeptly. The anonymity provided by this medium has enabled him to really speak his mind... to sort of “think out loud”.

One of the biggest complaints I have heard about him is that he bashes Gedolim. This may be true but I believe that the reason he does this is not because of any inherent hatred or rebellion. He does it because he is bothered by what he and many others see as a usurpation of authority by people who say they speak in the name of a man whom the Charedi world considers the Gadol Hador, Rav Elyashiv. And because R. Elyashiv seems to continue to allow it it makes him doubt his Gadlus.

I want to make clear that I believe that Rav Elyshiv is a Gadol. That was never an issue for me. I am just describing what I believe to be Mr. Hador's attitude and his understandible reasons for it. I was not around the blogosphere when GH started but I surmise from his sub heading that the reason for starting this blog in the first place was due to his outrage at what was happening in this area...hence the choice of his pseudonym.

I don’t know who is behind the mask. I’m sure GH will have a good laugh at this and doubt that he will “correct the record” as that would risk exposing who he is. But here is what I surmise. Based on my readings, I believe him to be married, in his early thirties with a Charedi background at least in which Yeshivos he attended. He says he learned in R. Dovid’s Brisk for a while. This tells me that his level of learning is relatively high and has many Blatt of Gemarah under his belt. Combining this with his living in the Upper West Side of New York and his description of the kind of Charedim who live there tells me that he was a member of that community. As he describes it: “for the most part have slipped out of Chareidi life, though they make fake it when they go home. Often, they end up being shidduched off to other Chareidi rebels and they go live in Flatbush like everybody else...” I wouldn’t say that this is exactly who he is but I would say it is somewhat parallel to his life experience.

His intelligence is obvious. His knowledge of Torah and the Charedi world seems quite extensive based on the content of his many posts. And because of the anonymity, he is uninhibited in his writings... cathartically so..., whether in the actual text of a post or in responses to those who attack him, he usually very biting. He also uses ridicule when he thinks it is appropriate. In many ways he expresses what many Frum Jews think... or at least what an initial reaction might be to a views that seem outrageous... but no one will ever say because of the repercussions to ourselves our families our children, parents etc. This is not to say that I agree with him on everything he says. I don’t. But I think I understand where he is coming from. And I think I understand his personality somewhat. I would be willing to bet that he is quite a gentleman in his real life. He provides a forum for people with major issues about Torah Judaism, including himself, to vent. I also believe that he is very likely a much respected member of his community too, whether amongst peers or community leaders. I am sure there are people, very close friends and/or family who know who Mr. Hador really is. I am equally certain that he sometimes regrets it when he goes too far. But I am certain in the final analysis that he is L’Shma as well.

Seudas Purim

OK. The gauntlet has been thrown. I have been challenged. In his new blog Rabbi Notharry relates a story about my denigrating certain aspects of Charedism. I cannot let this stand. Nor can I let it even sit! All Hashkafos are good but NONE have yet been able to do what Centrists have done in this area. I responded there but for the sake of truth justice and the American way, I will restate here, the quintessence of Centrist glory in this area. I realize that some people may consider it a trivial matter but that doesn’t matter. Nothing is trivial when it comes to Kavod HaTorah. Besides, this is about one of the main staples of life... food. One can certainly not live without it and it is currently the Matzo of choice for Sefardim although Ashkenazim hold it is considered Chametz Nuksheh (see Rabbeinu Bachye and the Rama). And on the Mada side, according to most nutritionists this is one of the five basic food groups necessary for existence, right up there with hot dogs and barbecue potato chips.

This makes it all the more important to straighten out the facts and present the truth (not necessarily in that order). In fact I believe it is a matter of Pikuach Nefesh. And it could lead to a Chilul HaShem if it isn’t corrected. So for the sake of Torah, Mada, and my dog, Toto, (which means Toto, in English), I will here now repost here my response to the charge and show why the Centrist way is the best way. To quote from R. Notharry :

True Centrist Pizza is a living role model for how pizza should be made.

Truer words were never spoken. I have been to many fine Pizza establishments. Unfortunately none of them compare to my own home made super secret Centrist recipe.

I wasn’t always such a Pizza expert. But necessity is the mother of invention and I just HAD to learn because in all of my journeys throughout Boro Park, I never found anything but Charedi Pizzas. No Deep dish... No (fake) Pepperoni Pizza, no MO-Lite Pizza.... and certainly no Centrist Pizza. What’s a growing 59 year old to do? All I could find was this really Greasy Charedi stuff. It is a Charedi conspiracy. It’s probably because they have all the great Mechanchim!

So I decided to learn how to make really good Centrist Pizza from my good friend Rav Aharon Lichtenstein. He told me the secret recipe. Because we Centrists are not insular I will share it with my fellow blogger, R. Notharry... and his devoted readers:

OK. Here's my Pizza recipe.

Ingredients:
1 pkg. Maccabee Pizza Bagels.
1 microwave oven.

Directions:
Open pkg.
Remove 1 pizza bagel
Stick in microwave.
Set for 1.5 minutes and press "start"

Take out and enjoy.

The Yeshivishe Look: Yesterday and Today

In many sources on the subject I have found that the manner of dress of Yeshiva Bachurim in pre holocaust Europe was that of mainstream society. The look was one of being clean cut for that era. Most recently this was illustrated on the website of Dr. Yitzchak Levine with photos of Gedolim when they were Yeshiva Bachurim or even older. He stated in an e-mail correspondence that, in Slabodka or the Mir in Europe, they would not have been allowed to look the way Yeshiva Bachurim of today look.

I, also, have in my possession a film of pre holocaust Ponovezh with a very young looking Rav Kahaneman and many of his Beis HaMedrash Bachurim. All were nattily dressed in stylish clothes of the era. Tzitzis tucked away, clean shaven, no Peyos and were wearing light colored hats. I have spoken to various Charedi individuals who are knowledgeable on the subject and I was told this look was purposeful on the part of the Roshei Yeshiva. Bachurim were in fact forbidden to look frumpy. They were also forbidden to emulate the “look” of a Gadol or Rosh Yeshiva as this was considered Yuhara (which means showing off your Frumkeit in a self serving non L’Shma manner).

Fast forward to today. The look is uniform and nowhere near stylish. It is unique and often sloppy. There are exceptions. Some Charedi Yeshiva Bachurim do look quite sharp and dress as stylishly as they can within the parameters of the Yeshivhse dress code. But it is more of an exception than a rule. In most cases, the young men... many of whom are big Talmidei Chachamim look a bit disheveled and in some cases, like they sleep in their clothes.

The mind boggling question is... what happened? Why have things gotten this way? Why were the Roshei Yeshiva so Makpid that their Bachurim look more modern? Why were they more sensitive to what the parents and other Jews think of their Bachurim? Why was this important for them and not for our current Roshei Yeshiva? It is as though the Musser is in the exact opposite direction. Today’s RY are more concerned that their Bachurim look as different from the rest of society as possible. Today's Roshei Yeshiva want their Bachurim to have their own distinctive look... to be Porush from society as much as possible with seemingly utter disregard what the rest of Jewish society or even a parent thinks. They seem to care little about what impression a Bachur makes on the rest of the world... as long as he conforms to the "look”.

It is as though there are two totally different Hashkafos at work. The Torah world of the past which, ironically, is so glorified by the current "Right" was in fact polar opposite on this issue. The Roshei Yeshiva of yesteryear literally forbade the current Yeshivishe look of Peyos, beards, and white shirts and dark clothing, and black hats. THEY FORBADE IT! Today the exact opposite is happening. The more "modern" a Bachur looks the more he is looked down upon and encouraged to conform. No serious RW Yeshiva Bachur would be caught dead wearing a stripped or colored shirt. The attitude is so pervasive that women in seminaries are indoctrinated to be suspicious of such Bachurim who do not wear “the uniform” for Shiduchim.

Maybe the reason is Niskatnu HaDoros. Compared to the previous generations of rabbinic leadership, they need greater influence and control... and the Chitzonius of dress codes helps establish a more insular society wherein they can exert that control.

Another One Bites the Dust

On his blog On The Main Line Mr. MacDowell posts a letter from a Charedi student from Yeshivas Chaim Berlin who laments the fact that there are so few legitimate Torah based resources that deal with contradictions between Torah and science. Not that there haven’t been any published, but that the vast majority of them do not deal with all the questions raised by science, or that they use “bad” science to refute the rational arguments and conclusions made of the constant flow of scientific data that increasingly reinforces those questions . The legitimacy of these conclusions are held by virtually all of the scientific world community, whether atheist or Torah observant.

The writer whose intellectual honesty does not allow stifiling of his questions says that it would not affect his level of Mitzvah observance but in effect admits to a crisis of faith which in large part were answered by Rabbi Slifkin’s books.

So what’s his problem? His problem is THE problem which is at the core of the ban on Rabbi Slifkin’s books. His Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Aaron Schechter, has condemned the author several times... most recently in his appearance in Teaneck. I am convinced that Rabbi Schechter’s condemnation is rooted in the original ban on the books by R. Elyashiv. It is highly likely that his perception is that Rabbi Slifkin acted in a manner that was inappropriate to R. Elyashiv. I do not know how Rabbi Schechter got his information, but I doubt that it was first hand or that his sources were unbiased. I doubt that he heard Rabbi Slifkin’s side of the story. Rabbi Schechter joined in the assumption that the prevailing attitude in the Charedi community about Rabbi Slifkin’s impudence is true because of the universality of the condemnation by Israeli rabbinical figures and American rabbinical figures such as Rabbi Aharon Feldman who contacted R. Elyashiv personally and thereby reached his own anti-Slifkin concusion. I cannot say that this for a certainty but it is my strong suspicion.

But the damage is done. R. Elyashiv has spoken. And it seems like virtually all rabbinic leaders seem to have fallen in line with his view to the extent that they can call Rabbi Slifkin’s writings Apikursus or Rabbi Slifkin a “near” Apikores or worse.

But this letter writer demonstrates exactly why this is such a huge problem in the Torah world. The questions this letter writer has will not simply disappear. As a thinking community the Torah world cannot ignore these questions forever. Forcing oneself to remain ignorant of them will only go so far... and will only prevent the most indoctrinated among us to ignore them. We cannot permanently adopt the policy of “Fun A Kasha Shtarbt Min Nisht” (...no one will die from having a question unanswered) forever. As the questions get stronger, that attitude will disappear. And the danger of large numbers of Torah Jewry turning to apostasy becomes more of a reality. The true believers that remain will be those who increasingly withdraw from reality by indoctrination, lack of intellectual honesty, or fear of losing their Olam HaBah. That last motivation is a real strong one but is it enough to force the intellect to deny the question once it is raised into conciousness? Will a doubt that emerges through the incidental encounter of a piece of scientific data that contradicts a belief ever really leave consciousness? Can an individual’s blind faith overcome his rationally based doubt?

This is the danger that the current Charedi approach to Torah poses. We are witness to it through this letter and as the letter writer states he is not alone amongst students of Chaim Berlin. Other Charedi Talmidim there have these issues as well.

My suspicion is that this is just the tip of the iceberg. How many more Talmidim are there in the finest of Charedi Yeshivos that have had these doubts themselves but are afraid to make them public? I’ll bet there are a lot. And if the blogosphere is any indication I think there are a lot more than anyone could ever imagine. The anonymity of the blogosphere enables Charedim to express their doubts without having to reveal themselves to the public scrutiny of a very unforgiving Charedi community hierarchy and/or peer group.

Without books such as those Rabbi Slifkin wrote the danger of losing our best and brightest is real. I think the Agudah realizes this and that’s one reason they published Professor Levi’s words about respecting differing points of view in Torah Judaism. But I do not think it goes far enough. It was too vague and did not address the issues head on. If Charedi leadership wants to lead Torah Jewry and not lose its best an brightest, it needs to go the extra mile in the spirit of Elu v’Elu and clearly state that books like Rabbi Slifkin’s are completely acceptable Torah viewpoints right along with the more fundamentalist ones. If that happens, we can go back to the time where scientific discoveries no longer cause the crises of faith this Chaim Berliner and many others currently have.

Tinokos SheNishbu... of Another Kind

The Yated Ne’eman published a correspondence by a Charedi English teacher in the US critical of the current negative attitude by Charedi parents towards secular education. This... in and of itself was a pleasant surprise since the Yated has had no love lost for secular education in the past and has always been very clear about this. But then my “hot” button was pressed because of the following story and comment (in part) I read on an e-mail list to which I belong sent by someone from the city of Ramat Bet Shemesh in Israel:

“About 2 months ago, we had the 10 year old son of a neighbor (ok, the son was also a neighbor...) staying with us for several days while his parents were in America. We were playing a game of Risk, and I was trying to teach him the names of the countries (despite being a native English speaker, he does not really read English well, if at all, having grown up since age 5 or so in Israel). He was attacking from Kamchatka ... After pointing out Kamchatka, I told him that no matter what he does in life, no matter how much (or how little he learns), I think he'll find that the only people in life who know where Kamchatka is are Risk players”

“... He responded by (politely) informing me that "I don't need to know that stupid [sic] stuff. I'm going to be a Rebbe when I grow up." To be fair, someone who plans to grow up in Israel (even though his family refuses to become citizens due to concerns about having to serve in the Army) may not need the same level of secular education as a student in the States, but, having clarified with the father, this is a (virtually) verbatim quote from the Rebbe. Perhaps I'm just placing my own (American) bias on things-- but I'd find it hard to respect anyone (Rebbe or not) who can disparage the idea of knowing the name (!) of a country as too stupid to bother caring about.”

OK... “I’ve been there and done that”. I don’t really like to just repeat myself. I’ve stated my views about the state of Charedi education in Israel... many times... in many places and in many ways. But whenever I hear a story like this it really upsets me and I can’t help but respond... especially in an American enclave like Ramat Bet Shemesh which is so heavily populated by Americans, my own son included.

How many 10 year old children in the majority camp ...which is the Charedi one... know how to read English, even if their parents are Americans? English is far too important to ignore if one is going to try and earn a living in an increasingly globalized economy. More and more good jobs will require it. The negative attitude about secular studies combined with the type of indoctrination that teaches that becoming a Rebbe (...not a Chasidic Rebbe, but a Mechanech) is the ultimate goal of a Torah Jew ...is so pervasive, it seems, that it defies logic!

The Rebbeim in these schools often become role models for these young and impressionable children. Young boys who can recite great numbers of Mishnayos by heart barely know how to recite the English alphabet.

Instead of learning something important like how to read English there is an emphasis on Narshkeitin. For example, I was told of one Rebbe in a Ramat Bet Shemesh non-Chasidic Cheder who went to Uman for Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur. UMAN!

In another case, an elementary school Rebbe is a heavy smoker (which he at least does outside the classroom as per the schools requirements... but it is known to the students). Are these the kinds of people that Charedim want as role models for a young non-Chasidic child? What is this school, thinking? I asked my son about the Uman thing and he said it upset him too but what could he do... This is the Charedi system! There is nothing anyone can do about it.

Is that true? Are Charedim stuck with a system that so poorly educates American children, indoctrinates them so counter-productively, and has Rebbeim that are such bad role models for them?

This can’t end well. Things have to change.

Professor Leo Levi, Gedolim, and Elu VeElu

There is an article in the current Jewish Observer by the renowned Talmid Chacham, scientist, and author, Professor Leo Levi, that speaks about the current climate of intolerance within the Charedi world. The fact that it appears in a publication like the Jewish Observer is quite amazing and is almost a complete departure for them.

First, let me put all the rumors and innuendo to rest. Nowhere in the article is R. Elyashiv named, nor is any direct... or even indirect criticism of him even implied. Yet there are certain phrases being said about this article which make it seem that R. Elyashiv is indeed being bashed. Phrases like one which I saw at another blog: “accusing the Gedolim in Eretz Yisroel - which includes Rav Yosef Sholom Elyashiv, the leading Chareidi Halachic authority - of arrogance, sinas chinam.” This is not at all what the article says.

What it does say is that there were, and still are posters being put up on billboards in Israel in the name of these Gedolim that sling mud at individuals that were not authorized by any of them. The individuals putting up those posters are the ones being slammed by Professor Levi, not R. Elyashiv or others of that caliber. It is the individuals who put up these posters without the permission of Gedolim they think they are speaking for who are Professor Levi’s targets.

Unfortunately those posters go up uncontested. This is the arrogance and what is causing Sinas Chinam. But one can still not over-look what the Jewish Observer did. In publishing an article like this, it distances itself from the stridency of those who are in essence the ones who are truly responsible for the bans on books of both Rabbi Slifkin and Rabbi Kaminetsky.

This is a good thing. But it fails to answer many of the issues brought up by the initial controversy of especially Rabbi Slifkin’s books. It also does not specifically deal with the many rabbinic leaders, both here and in Israel who publicly jumped on the band wagon condemning in the strongest possible term, the books, the author, or both. These leaders include some of the most famous names in the Torah world, people like, Rabbis Moshe Sternbuch and Aharon Feldman, and later Rabbis Yaakov Perlow and Shmuel Kamintesky, and most recently in Teaneck, Rabbi Aaron Schecther.

Nor does it answer the one question that really gnaws at me: Why has not R. Elyashiv stopped these evil people? Why hasn’t he banned them... with a billboard poster of his own? Why is this type of Sinas Chinam allowed to continue? R. Elayshiv has no problem making his views known on virtually any subject he chooses. Are we to conclude that indeed he is at fault here for not publicly condemning these people who speak in his name without authorization? Or should we conclude that he actually approves of what the posters are saying? The Sinas Chinam that is generated by these posters is beyond harmful to Klal Yisroel.

I applaud Professor Levi for writing these words and I applaud the Agudah for allowing that there IS an Elu veElu on these issues.

This counters those who have risen to defend the position that “The Gadol HaDor has spoken ...and we can, therefore no longer believe the kinds of views espoused by someone like Rabbi Slifkin”. The aforementioned Rabbis who are so stridently against such views some of whom hold them to be K’fira or near K’fira are still just one view, one that we need not agree with. There are other legitimate views and they should be respected.

The one thing that would end this conversation for good would be an acknowledgement from R. Elyashiv that indeed there is an Elu veElu on the issues discussed in Rabbi Slifkin’s books. But, that would mean rescinding the ban. He issued it a long time ago. He must know the controversy that has been stirred up. I doubt that he will change his mind. That leads me to think that he does believe that alternate views are K’fira and that there is no Elu veElu on this issue.

I think we can conclude that the Agudah Moetzes through its mouthpiece, the Jewish Observer disagrees with Rav Elyashiv. Yet... Rabbi Perlow and Rabbi Schechter have declared their strong agreement with R. Elyashiv on these matters and they are members of the Moetzes. What gives?

The Apprentice

Well, Orthodoxy is on display again in the world media. Or, is it? The current season of NBC’s “The Apprentice” features two Orthodox Jewish contestants, Yeshiva University graduate Dan Brody and HAFTR graduate, Lee Bienstock. Both are observant, knowledgeable Jews and Mr. Brody actually spent one year learning in Israel. First of all credit must be given to Donald Trump and the producers of the show for their willingness to accommodate the Orthodox requirements of these two gentlemen. Previous editions of The Apprentice were all taped on Shabbos as Mr. Trump’s busy schedule gave him little other available time to do the show. This season, they have gone out of their way and avoided any of the taping on Shabbos.

I have watched the first two episodes of the show and have mixed feelings. On the one had I am extremely gratified that Orthodox Jews are so favorably featured. Both gentlemen are quite attractive and normal looking. This is usually not the case when Orthodox Jews are depicted by Hollywood in dramas or comedies. Orthodox Jews are at best depicted as quirky and at worst as quite odd or even primitive. Not so here. These gentlemen are as cool and collected as any of the other contestants, if not more so.

So what’s my problem? Well, I have none really. Except for the classic K’nardly. What’s a K’nardly? Well... you K’nardly tell they are Jewish, let alone Orthodox. In fact you wouldn’t know it at all if not for the media attention paid to it. Both Mr. Brody and Mr. Bienstock have decided not to wear Kipot. They did not want that to become a media sideshow or the primary focus. They wanted to be on par with the rest of the contestants and be judged on their merits. I can understand that and I’m not even sure it’s such a bad idea.

But I wonder what it would have been like if they had worn their Yarmulkes. Would the producers of the show have edited it to make them look just a wee bit weird? Or is it the Yarmulke itself that makes you look weird? Or, ...is the opposite true? Would their all American good looks plus Yarmulke made an even bigger Kiddush HaShem, and in the process blaze a new trail in the normalization of a Yarmulke wearer? The truth is I don’t know. It will be interesting to watch and see how the show unfolds and whether their Orthodoxy comes into play at all... and if it does, whether it will be a Kiddush HaShem or a Chilul HaShem. It might have been even more interesting to see them wearing their Yarmulkes, but then I begin to wonder about the “weirdness” factor. If the editors saw it was weird and cut the tapes to emphasize that, it could kill any potential Kiddush HaShem.

So I am neutral about this at the moment. I like the fact that they are so... normal. But I don’t like the fact that if no one had told me, I wouldn’t even know they were Jewish. I guess we’ll have to wait until the end of the season to see how it plays out.

One more thing. It might be interesting to note the difference between how the Right Wing and the Modern Orthodox communities might see this event. The views I expressed above can be considered a Modern Orthodox viewpoint. The Right would probably look at it quite differently. They might say that participating with Non-Jews in an environment that may be less than Tznius... in a medium they have Assur'd does not do anything for Kavod HaTorah and instead debases it. In no way should these two gentlemen be looked at as role models for the Torah world as there is nothing "Toradic" about them. If they asked a Shaila to a Charedi Rav about whether it is Mutar to be involved in such a show, I am pretty sure they would have gotten a big fat “No”. To the Right, it probably amounts to a Chilul HaShem no matter how we slice it.