Should women say Amen after the Shehechiyanu of Kiddush at the Seder? This is the famous question asked by Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank (Har Tzvi - OC 154 and Mikraei Kodesh Vol 2:35).
The Shulchan Aruch Paskins that women are obligated in the Arba Kosos… four cups of wine... and all the Mitzvos of that evening.
Because if the principle of B’Rov Am Hadras Melech… the glory of The King (God) is in the multitude of people, it is also a Mitzvah for one person to recite Kiddush for the many instead of each one making a separate Kiddsuh. And by listening to the Bracha with the intent one says Amen and fulfills the requirement for sanctifying the day. Afterwards the cup of wine which is the first of the four cups is drunk by all attending, both men and women.
But there is a problem in doing it this way for women. The problem is the Bracha of Shehechiyanu. Most women have already made that Bracha when they light the Yom Tov candles. As such they have already fulfilled that part of the Mitzva. So when the man makes Kiddush and says Bracha of Shehechiyanu and she says Amen, it becomes a Hefsek… an interruption in the Kiddush for her.
Rav Frank unequivocally says it is a Hefsek if she answers Amen. And since there is principle of HaShameya KeOnah, hearing alone even without answering Amen may be a Hefsek too.
Rav Frank adds that one cannot say that this Shehechiyanu covers all the other Mitzvos of the night (e.g. Matzah, Marror, the four cups of wine). Though the Avudraham tells us that it does cover those Mitzvos, there is in fact no Shehechiyanu mandated for them. Were there no Birchas Shehechiyanu being said for the day itself, we would not say it for the other Mitzvos of the night. So the Amen said to the Bracha of Shehechiyanu remains as a Hefsek between the Bracha on the wine, and the drinking of it.
Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe OC-Vol.4, 101:1) deals with this issue. He states that even though it apparently would be better for women not to make the Shehechiyanu during candle lighting so they could hear it during Kiddush say Amen and be Yotze then, he advises against it. He reasons that since it is already an established Minhag for her to make the Shehechianu at Hadlakos Neros, it would be wrong to force her to change it. But if she does not have the Minhag established than indeed the preferable way to do it would be to wait until Kiddushm and hear it then.
Rav Moshe further says that telling her not to answer Amen is not an option. Halacha prohibits one from causing others not to say Amen to a Bracha. Answering Amen even when not done to be Yotze the Bracha is A Chiuv Gadol …a major requirement. It is mentioned in Brachos (51B) and this is the Psak of the Rambam (Hilchos Brachos1:5) The Shulchan Aruch (215:2) the Taz, the Tur.
Rav Moshe makes the following argument. The person making Kiddush is obligated to make the Shehechiyanu. And as long as he has to make it, others are required to hear it and answer Amen. Since it isn’t a Hefsek to the person making Kiddush, it isn’t a Hefsek to those listening to it and saying Amen either.
The Shevet HaLevi, (Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner) disagrees with the rationale of Rav Frank. He holds that answering Amen is not a Hefsek if there are other Mitzvos specific to that day. So, both on Pesach and on Sukkos a woman answering Amen can rely that it is going on those Mitzvos. But he also does not accept Rav Moshe’s argument either. On Shavuos where there are no other Mitzvos with respect to that day, a woman should refrain from answering Amen to Kiddush if she made a Shehechiyanu at candle lighting.
Moadim U’Zmanim (Rav Moshe Sternbuch) points out that if one was Yotzei in a Shecheyanu, saying it again would be a Bracha Levatalah. So in theory, Amen should not be said either if one said a Shehechiyanu at candle lighting. But he adds that in this case there is a difference since when she made the Shehechiyanu it was not yet night. When night falls, only then do all the Mitzvos of that day apply. Thus she may say Amen at Kiddush and it is not considered a Hefsek.
He also points out that Avraham Ben HaRambam mentions that Yemenite Jews who do not eat bread and had no wine make a Shehakol but still recite the Nusach of Kiddush without Shem U’Malchus (without mentioning God’s name) so that they will not forget the laws of Kiddush. And this is not considered a Hefsek. This apparently means that the only real Hefsek of speech is just talking without any purpose. Amen or even the entire Nusach of Kiddush is not considered a Hefsek
So, it seems that for all of the above reasons, women who made a Shehechiyanu at candle lighting should still answer Amen at Kiddush.
Taken From Torah L'Daas
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Friday, March 30, 2007
One Might Have Thought…
The Gemarah tells us Shoalin V’Dorshin Shloshim Yom Kodam HaPesach… 30 days before Pesach, we should ask and expound upon the laws of Pesach.Immediately after dealing with the four sons, the Haggada tells us when we are required to fulfill the Mitzva of Sipur Yitzias Mitzrayim… the exodus story. Part of this requirement includes teaching it to one’s children. V’Higaddita L’Vincha.
The paragraph begins by saying Yachol MeRosh Chodesh… One might have thought we should have begun doing so at the beginning of the month of Nissan and then informs us “BaYom HaHu”…that no, we do it on the day of Pesach itself.
The question arises, “Why assume that we begin with Rosh Chodesh in the first place?” There is no indication that this day has any significance? If there is any assumption to be made let’s go back 30 days as is the case for studying Hilchos Pesach?
Rav Mordechai Gimpel Yaffe answers the question. In the Gemarah, Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel argues on the 30 day period and says that two weeks before Pesach, on Rosh Chodesh Nissan, we expound upon the laws of Pesach because Moshe stood on Rosh Chodesh Nissan and expounded.
The Mefarshim ask, Why didn’t he do it and not before that? The Mechaber answers. It depends. Mi SheNishal… If one asks about the laws of Pesach, we are required to do so 30 das before the Chag. But if no one asks, than we begin by simply expounding on the laws of Pesach two weeks before.
And this is why the Haggadah precedes this portion with that of the fours sons. The last son is the “SheEino Yodeia L’Shoel”. He is the one who does not know how to ask. At P’sach Lo. We simply just tell him.
Yachol MeRosh Chodesh. Since he does not know how to ask, his obligation does not begin until two weeks before on Rosh Chodesh. That being the case, one might also think think that V’Higaditta L’Vincha also begins two weeks before on Rosh Chodesh. Answers the Haggadah, “Bayom HaHu” on that day, the day of Pesach.
Taken From Torah L’Daas
A Woman’s Requirement to Recite the Haggadah
The Sefer HaChinuch lists as Mitzva number 21, the biblical requirement (Mitzvas Aseh) that women are required in Sipur Yetzias Mitzraim, the recitation of the Exodus story… the Haggadah
The Minchas Chinuch asks how that could be the case? Women are completely exempt by law in any of the positive biblical commandments that are time bound (Mitzvos Aseh SheHaZman Gramma). And reciting the exodus story on Passover is certainly a time bound positive commandment?
One cannot use the usual principle of Af Hen Hayu B’Oso HaNes...they too were involved in that miracle… to explain the requirement. True, women were involved in the miracle, but this is a principle of a rabbinic nature and applies only to Mitzvos D’Rabbanan…rabbinically mandated ones, such as lighting the Menorah on Chanukah. The sages required as part of that Takana, that women are to be included even in time bound positive rabbinic enactments if they were involved in the miracle. But this principle is not utilized in biblical commandments, even when women were involved in the miracle… such as the Passover exodus. They are thus exempt from doing those Mitzvos. So the question remains, why are women required to recite the Haggadah?
The answer can be found in another principle. The Torah obligates women in a positive biblical commandment when there is a negative commandment associated with it. Men and women are then equally required by Torah law to honor all negative commandments.
But what negative commandment is associated with the reciting the Haggadah?
It is based on the following: Kol SheYeshno B’Bal Tochel Chometz, Yesh Lo BeKum Ochel Matzos. The Lav…requirement to not eat Chametz, a negative commandment… is tied to eating Matzah, a positive one. A woman is, therefore, equally required to eat Matzah the same as is a man.
So, how is that tied to Sipur Yetzias Mitzraim? What is the basis for requiring women to recite the Exodus story on Passover? Is there a negative commandment associated with it? The answer is the following.
One of the reasons cited in the Gemarah for referring to Matzah as Lechem Oni, is that it is a “bread” upon which many things are “answered”. Reciting the Haggadah ties Matzah, the Lechem Oni, to the recitation of the Hagadah. It therefore becomes part of the Mitzvah of eating the Matzah itself, thus making it a biblical requirement for women too: Kol SheYeshno B’Bal Tochel Chometz, Yesh Lo BeKum Ochel Matzos.
Taken From Torah L’Daas
The Minchas Chinuch asks how that could be the case? Women are completely exempt by law in any of the positive biblical commandments that are time bound (Mitzvos Aseh SheHaZman Gramma). And reciting the exodus story on Passover is certainly a time bound positive commandment?
One cannot use the usual principle of Af Hen Hayu B’Oso HaNes...they too were involved in that miracle… to explain the requirement. True, women were involved in the miracle, but this is a principle of a rabbinic nature and applies only to Mitzvos D’Rabbanan…rabbinically mandated ones, such as lighting the Menorah on Chanukah. The sages required as part of that Takana, that women are to be included even in time bound positive rabbinic enactments if they were involved in the miracle. But this principle is not utilized in biblical commandments, even when women were involved in the miracle… such as the Passover exodus. They are thus exempt from doing those Mitzvos. So the question remains, why are women required to recite the Haggadah?
The answer can be found in another principle. The Torah obligates women in a positive biblical commandment when there is a negative commandment associated with it. Men and women are then equally required by Torah law to honor all negative commandments.
But what negative commandment is associated with the reciting the Haggadah?
It is based on the following: Kol SheYeshno B’Bal Tochel Chometz, Yesh Lo BeKum Ochel Matzos. The Lav…requirement to not eat Chametz, a negative commandment… is tied to eating Matzah, a positive one. A woman is, therefore, equally required to eat Matzah the same as is a man.
So, how is that tied to Sipur Yetzias Mitzraim? What is the basis for requiring women to recite the Exodus story on Passover? Is there a negative commandment associated with it? The answer is the following.
One of the reasons cited in the Gemarah for referring to Matzah as Lechem Oni, is that it is a “bread” upon which many things are “answered”. Reciting the Haggadah ties Matzah, the Lechem Oni, to the recitation of the Hagadah. It therefore becomes part of the Mitzvah of eating the Matzah itself, thus making it a biblical requirement for women too: Kol SheYeshno B’Bal Tochel Chometz, Yesh Lo BeKum Ochel Matzos.
Taken From Torah L’Daas
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Pesach, Matzah, Marror
In the next few days before Pesach I hope to write a few short Divrei Torah suitable for the Seder night. One can also see last year’s contribution. We start with this:The Gemarah in Pesachim (Mishna 116A,B) tells us the famous quote of Rabban Gamliel that we say the night of Pesah during “Magid" portion of the Seder: “Kol SheLo Amar Shloshah Devarim Elu B’Pasach, Lo Yatza Yedei Chovaso. Anyone who does not recite the following three things is not Yotze his obligation: Pesach, Matzo, UMaror.
The Maharsha tells us that we do this is to explain the reason of these Mitzvos as we do them.
The Tzelach asks the following question. Why do we add the word “Chovaso”, obligation? It would seem to be an extra word. In other places in Shas when the Gemarah talks about not being Yotzeh it ends with that word. It does not add the word “Chovaso” as does Rabban Gamliel here. For example: Hakoreah Es Shema VeLo Hishmia L’Aznov, Lo Yatza. Anyone who reads the Shema and his ears do not hear it is not “Yotze”. Not Lo “Yatza Yidei Chovoso”. What exactly is the intent of saying Yedei Chovaso?
The Tzelach answers that the Chov we are talking about here is the Chov of Shibud Mtzrayim. It is to explain to us how we fulfilled our obligation of being enslaved for 400 years by only being enslaved for only 210 years.
There is a Machlokes about how that obligation was fulfilled and among one of them, is the position that it was through the Avodah Kasha. Because of the extreme hardship of the labor of the 210 years, God counted it as four hundred years. That is, it was the equivalent of 400 years worth of labor. And this is why the order of saying it is done out of sequence.
Now since Matzah is is to remind us of the redemption, and Maror of the enslavement, the order of Matzah and Maror, should have been reversed to reflect the actual chronology of events. But the truth is that it was the Maror, the bitterness of the slavery that actually caused our redemption. And this is the intent of Raban Gamliel. It is to tell us that even though our time had not yet been completed and there were still left 190 of slavery to fulfill, we were never the less leaving Egypt. Our Chov, our obligation was indeed fulfilled... Yatza Yidei Chovaso... by the Avodah Kasha as symbolized by the Maror and that’s why we say it last after Matzah. In other words the Maror is the symbol of the completion of our oblgation, and the true redemption from slavery in Egypt.
Taken from Torah L’Daas
Daas Torah, Blogs, and the Israeli Courts
Well it seems that we have a new presence in the blog-o-sphere, Rabbi Avraham Ravitz. That’s right, the same Rabbi Ravitz that is a member of Degel HaTorah, the Lithuanian based faction of the Agudat Israel Party, the party of the Charedim that is supported by all the Gedolei HaTorah in Israel. I’m glad to see that Israeli Daas Torah now recognizes the value of blogs and contributing to the public discourse.
As to the substance of his post, it is an explanation of a bill he is introducing in the Kenesset, that would weaken the stranglehold of the courts upon Israeli society. This is an opinion shared by many. The fact is, as Rabbi Ravitz indicates, that no matter how judicially well qualified the justices in the Israeli Supreme court are, the way it is currently structured means that it represents only a narrow ideological slice of Israeli society. It thereby cannot fairly represent all of its constutueants. By allowing the political biases of the few, no matter how talented, it imposes its will on the many.
He offers this bill in the context of the process Israel is undergoing of trying to draw up a constitution. In my view, Israel would be wise to follow the American style of government of three equal branches of power. But the current system is a parliamentary one based on the British model. As I understand it the reason it is structered that way is because this is the system that was extant just prior to statehood under the British Mandate. It is just a continuation of it.
The powers of the various branches have not been accurately defined in Israel precisely because there is no constitution. I’m not sure how or why, but it seems the Supreme Court in Israel has usurped an inordinate amount of power. They in effect have taken over lawmaking by determining laws they don’t like as unconstitutional. This is quite a feat considering they have no constitution. Rabbi Ravitz’s bill would take away some of that power and restore it to the Kenesset. Here he states his proposal and its purpose:
"The purpose of the bill I submitted, titled “Judicial Criticism,” is to reinstate respect in our lives and to ensure that each democratic arm fulfills its task. If a situation arises in which the Judiciary believes the legislature has acted in a manner that harms our basic laws or a humane way of life, it will re-submit the law back to the Knesset for further review and a final stamp of approval. "
I think it is a reasonable proposal if it means that when a law is deemed unconstitutional, it can be resubmitted to the Kenesset to be re-written in a Constitutional way. But doesn’t the Kenesset have the abilty to do that anyway? What’s to stop it from rewriting the law in a way that will pass "constitutional" muster? Is it now forbidden to do so? I doubt that. If it is then then Israel has become a dictatorship of the courts. If not, why is this bill necessary? I guess this bill needs further explanation. But in theory, I agree that no branch of Governement should have more power than any other. It has worked out quite well that way in the US and there is no reason it wouldn’t work out well in Israel too.
As to the substance of his post, it is an explanation of a bill he is introducing in the Kenesset, that would weaken the stranglehold of the courts upon Israeli society. This is an opinion shared by many. The fact is, as Rabbi Ravitz indicates, that no matter how judicially well qualified the justices in the Israeli Supreme court are, the way it is currently structured means that it represents only a narrow ideological slice of Israeli society. It thereby cannot fairly represent all of its constutueants. By allowing the political biases of the few, no matter how talented, it imposes its will on the many.
He offers this bill in the context of the process Israel is undergoing of trying to draw up a constitution. In my view, Israel would be wise to follow the American style of government of three equal branches of power. But the current system is a parliamentary one based on the British model. As I understand it the reason it is structered that way is because this is the system that was extant just prior to statehood under the British Mandate. It is just a continuation of it.
The powers of the various branches have not been accurately defined in Israel precisely because there is no constitution. I’m not sure how or why, but it seems the Supreme Court in Israel has usurped an inordinate amount of power. They in effect have taken over lawmaking by determining laws they don’t like as unconstitutional. This is quite a feat considering they have no constitution. Rabbi Ravitz’s bill would take away some of that power and restore it to the Kenesset. Here he states his proposal and its purpose:
"The purpose of the bill I submitted, titled “Judicial Criticism,” is to reinstate respect in our lives and to ensure that each democratic arm fulfills its task. If a situation arises in which the Judiciary believes the legislature has acted in a manner that harms our basic laws or a humane way of life, it will re-submit the law back to the Knesset for further review and a final stamp of approval. "
I think it is a reasonable proposal if it means that when a law is deemed unconstitutional, it can be resubmitted to the Kenesset to be re-written in a Constitutional way. But doesn’t the Kenesset have the abilty to do that anyway? What’s to stop it from rewriting the law in a way that will pass "constitutional" muster? Is it now forbidden to do so? I doubt that. If it is then then Israel has become a dictatorship of the courts. If not, why is this bill necessary? I guess this bill needs further explanation. But in theory, I agree that no branch of Governement should have more power than any other. It has worked out quite well that way in the US and there is no reason it wouldn’t work out well in Israel too.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Lakewood Hashkafos
This news coming out of Lakewood once again illustrates one of the many problems of the Charedi world of which Lakewood Yeshiva is it's flagship institution. It isn’t so much what they are doing in this one particular case. It is the mindset that causes this kind of “solution” to begin with that is the problem. This is the kind of thinking that our finest B’nei Torah are being subjected to. And this indoctrination will take root and be transmitted to later generations along with… who knows what else and treated as Halacha L’Moshe MiSinai: Immutable Siniatic law.
The potential for perpetuating this kind of thinking to masses of Torah Jews is very great. Lakewood, one should remember, is the premier Yeshiva in the Western hemisphere. It is the only Yeshiva any card carrying Ben Torah in Amercia worth his salt would even consider. If a young Ben Torah wants to get married, the “Lakewood” credential is the starting place for finding a good Shidach.
Lakewood’s administration knows this and that’s why they implemented their “freezer” policy: the six month period waiting period where their students aren’t allowed to date anyone except for daughters of the Lakewood Klei Kodesh. They probably see themselves as the true vangaurd for the Torah world. The protectors of the faith. The final word in the Torah world. That is how most of their students and supporters see them as well.
So enrollment is swelled to the max. It is by far the largest Yeshiva as well as the most prestgious. And to its credit, a lot of serious Torah learning takes place there. If there is a secular counterpart in terms of education and prestige, it would be Harvard. And that’s what makes this kind of thinking so dangerous. Add to that the almost abject fear of questioning DaasTorah (defined here as any edict coming out of Lakewood’s rabbinic administration) and you have a prescription for the kind of foolishness and danger to the fabric of Klal Yisroel that this news represents.
What should be the proper response to this kind of nonsense be? I am at a loss for words. But I do have a reaction to this by a Charedi Rav who sent me a link (above) to the post from a blog called “Lakewood Kollel Wife”, which is what generated today’s post.
The fact that there are prominent Charedi leaders who think along these lines gives me great hope for the future. Had I uttered the following, I would have of course been accused of Charedi bashing. And I’m certain that I will now be accused of it again just for posting his words. I will probably also be challenged about the veracity of my claim that it is indeed a Charedi Rav. Some will say that this Rav is not really Charedi at all, or that my definition of Charedi is wrong, or that I just made the whole thing up. Well, I can’t help what some people’s biases will force them to conclude. But the fact is that this Rav is Charedi is an indisputable fact. A prominent one. I guarantee it. You’ll just have to take me at my word.
Here is his reaction to that news:
This silliness in Lakewood encapsulates all that the once proud yeshiva movement has become. Let me count the ways:
1) Why are they so scared of their own shadows and feel that a bus driver will destroy the souls of their kids? Didn't their own Roshei Yeshiva ride with non-Jewish bus drivers? Didn't all gedolim and Chassidic rebbis hire gentile wagon drivers?
2) There seem to be serious issues about misrepresenting or misallocating public funds. Is all this above record? Is it legal to slip the drivers extra money after they are paid public funds? Isn't that cause for concern?
3) Did any of the Lakewood leaders think about the chilul Hashem this will cause when it gets out (and get out it will)?? Imagine the headlines, "Orthodox Children Fear Contamination by Gentile Bus Drivers?
4) A bus driver is an honest profession, to be sure. But are the Lakewood leaders thinking about the fact that so many of the post-kollel yungerleit are taking menial jobs? Why is a 4th generation American young man taking a job as a bus driver?
5) we find so many instances in the gemorah where our chachomim made takonos to SAVE money for individuals. Why are all the takonos coming out of Lakewood and Eretz Yisroel coming on the backs of the poor kollel familes who are bearing the brunt of these needless chumros? (burn your shaitel, don't go for a masters teaching degree, on and on). And this bus nonsense has no basis in halacha at all!!!
6) Again, today's leaders are avoiding the necessary task of looking in the mirror and blaming it all of THOSE GOYIM. It is OK to "sweep things under the rug" and not remove OUR child molesters. All we need to worry about are the goyim....
Yirmiyahu could write an entire megilas eicha on this.
Modified: 3/28/07 2:54 CDT
The potential for perpetuating this kind of thinking to masses of Torah Jews is very great. Lakewood, one should remember, is the premier Yeshiva in the Western hemisphere. It is the only Yeshiva any card carrying Ben Torah in Amercia worth his salt would even consider. If a young Ben Torah wants to get married, the “Lakewood” credential is the starting place for finding a good Shidach.
Lakewood’s administration knows this and that’s why they implemented their “freezer” policy: the six month period waiting period where their students aren’t allowed to date anyone except for daughters of the Lakewood Klei Kodesh. They probably see themselves as the true vangaurd for the Torah world. The protectors of the faith. The final word in the Torah world. That is how most of their students and supporters see them as well.
So enrollment is swelled to the max. It is by far the largest Yeshiva as well as the most prestgious. And to its credit, a lot of serious Torah learning takes place there. If there is a secular counterpart in terms of education and prestige, it would be Harvard. And that’s what makes this kind of thinking so dangerous. Add to that the almost abject fear of questioning DaasTorah (defined here as any edict coming out of Lakewood’s rabbinic administration) and you have a prescription for the kind of foolishness and danger to the fabric of Klal Yisroel that this news represents.
What should be the proper response to this kind of nonsense be? I am at a loss for words. But I do have a reaction to this by a Charedi Rav who sent me a link (above) to the post from a blog called “Lakewood Kollel Wife”, which is what generated today’s post.
The fact that there are prominent Charedi leaders who think along these lines gives me great hope for the future. Had I uttered the following, I would have of course been accused of Charedi bashing. And I’m certain that I will now be accused of it again just for posting his words. I will probably also be challenged about the veracity of my claim that it is indeed a Charedi Rav. Some will say that this Rav is not really Charedi at all, or that my definition of Charedi is wrong, or that I just made the whole thing up. Well, I can’t help what some people’s biases will force them to conclude. But the fact is that this Rav is Charedi is an indisputable fact. A prominent one. I guarantee it. You’ll just have to take me at my word.
Here is his reaction to that news:
This silliness in Lakewood encapsulates all that the once proud yeshiva movement has become. Let me count the ways:
1) Why are they so scared of their own shadows and feel that a bus driver will destroy the souls of their kids? Didn't their own Roshei Yeshiva ride with non-Jewish bus drivers? Didn't all gedolim and Chassidic rebbis hire gentile wagon drivers?
2) There seem to be serious issues about misrepresenting or misallocating public funds. Is all this above record? Is it legal to slip the drivers extra money after they are paid public funds? Isn't that cause for concern?
3) Did any of the Lakewood leaders think about the chilul Hashem this will cause when it gets out (and get out it will)?? Imagine the headlines, "Orthodox Children Fear Contamination by Gentile Bus Drivers?
4) A bus driver is an honest profession, to be sure. But are the Lakewood leaders thinking about the fact that so many of the post-kollel yungerleit are taking menial jobs? Why is a 4th generation American young man taking a job as a bus driver?
5) we find so many instances in the gemorah where our chachomim made takonos to SAVE money for individuals. Why are all the takonos coming out of Lakewood and Eretz Yisroel coming on the backs of the poor kollel familes who are bearing the brunt of these needless chumros? (burn your shaitel, don't go for a masters teaching degree, on and on). And this bus nonsense has no basis in halacha at all!!!
6) Again, today's leaders are avoiding the necessary task of looking in the mirror and blaming it all of THOSE GOYIM. It is OK to "sweep things under the rug" and not remove OUR child molesters. All we need to worry about are the goyim....
Yirmiyahu could write an entire megilas eicha on this.
Modified: 3/28/07 2:54 CDT
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
The Lubavitcher Rebbe’s Legacy
The Lubavitcher Rebbe may well go down in Jewish history as one of the leading Jewish figures of the 20th century. His great impact on Jewry world-wide cannot be disputed. But will his legacy exclusively be one of great achievement? Or will it be tarnished by the events of our day taking place within in its own environs right now? Events that I believe can be directly attributed to the Rebbe, who near the end of his life over focused on the coming of Moshiach, predicting his arrival was imminent.
A couple of weeks ago, there was an item in the news that went mostly unnoticed. In fact I hardly noticed it myself. It was an article about a lawsuit currently taking place that is making its way through the Court of the state of New York. It centers on who will ultimately control the fate of the main Shul in the building at 770 Eastern Parkway which is considered Chabad World Headquarters to all Lubavitcher Chasidim. Anyone who has ever read anything at all I have written about Lubavitch will know that amongst various problems facing Klal Yisroel now, the Messianism of Lubavitch is one of the bigger ones. There are two stridently opposing factions.
There are the Meshichists, rabid supporters of the notion that the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson was or is the Messiah and either died and will soon be resurrected in a second coming to complete his mission here on earth… or is in fact still physically alive and is merely waiting until the right time to lead his the Jewish people out of Galus in the final redemption.
Then there are the Lubavitch anti Meshichists, those strongly opposed to them. And they have been doing everything they can to quiet down the Lubavitch Meshichists. They correctly believe that the Meshichists are making a laughing stock out of Chabad and will destroy all the good works Lubavitch has done. So a fight ensues. And it is so acrimonious that it has been taken out of the Lubavitch’s religious court system and has gone to the secular courts to be adjudicated. They are about to embark on a full blown trial.
The lawsuit is, in effect, about who will ultimately control the face of Lubavitch… the Messianists or the anti-Messianists. And this is no small thing. Why is that building so important? I’m not sure but 770 has had an important place in Chabad theology for quite some time now. The building has been replicated in many parts of the world including Israel. I’m told that many in Lubavitch feel that this building is or will serve as the Beis HaMikdash… or at least it should be considered as holy… or some such nonsense. I’m not sure how accurate that statement is but the fact that it has been replicated brick for brick in Israel and so many other places is indicative of how important that building is to all of them.
As I understand it the purse strings of Lubavitch are controlled by the saner, anti-Meshichists. And the leadership as a whole seems to stem from them as well. But to the Meshchists that is far from a settled issue and I’m sure they would dispute that assertion.
They in fact seem to have an unlimited supply of funds for their ads, posters, glitzy publications, and other antics. The actual Shul which is the centrpeice of 770 is controlled by the Messianists to this day. To experience what goes on there any given day would shock just about any non-Lubavithcer. And if the proliferation of Messianist posters, Moshiach flags on cars, the rise of Beis Moshiachs all over the world, and yarmulkes on the heads of children (and even some adults) …all of which proclaim the Rebbe as the Messiah… are any indication, the Moshichists are winning.
What is the source of the lawsuit? Form an article in the Forward:
“The roots of the lawsuit lie in a fracas over just this very matter back in 2004. In the middle of a November night, a band of rowdy youngsters tore out a plaque that had recently been installed at 770 by the global leaders of Chabad, who own the building. The youths were angered by the plaque because it referred to Schneerson with a Hebrew acronym used for dead people, which conflicted with the youngsters’ view that the rebbe is a still living messiah.”
To me this entire episode is yet another indication of the true feelings of just about all Lubavitchers on the issue of whether the Rebbe is the Messiah and will be resurrected in a second coming. The following statement, I believe, reveals the innermost thinking of vast numbers of Lubavitchers.
“In his affidavit, the lead gabbai, Rabbi Zalman Lipskier, wrote that “the real issue in dispute involves conflicting views on how our faith views the passing of the Grand Rebbe Schneerson and whether or not at this time he may be referred to publicly as the Messiah.”
Whether or not at this time he may be referred to publicly as the Messiah?!
I no longer think it can be reasonably argued that the anti Meshichists in Lubavitch can be truly defined as anti-Meshichist. They believe it. They just hold it can’t be proclaimed yet. And this is what the “war” in Lubavitch is all about… a war that has divided families.
Let me repeat what my Rebbe, Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik has said about this belief: It is Shtus! And of course just about every other Rabbinic leader of any stripe outside of Lubavitch would agree.
These beliefs are total nonsense. And I really do not believe enough has been done by the rest of the Torah world to impress this upon Lubavitch. And if Lubavitchers truly care about the Rebbe’s legacy, they will accept that simple truth.
A couple of weeks ago, there was an item in the news that went mostly unnoticed. In fact I hardly noticed it myself. It was an article about a lawsuit currently taking place that is making its way through the Court of the state of New York. It centers on who will ultimately control the fate of the main Shul in the building at 770 Eastern Parkway which is considered Chabad World Headquarters to all Lubavitcher Chasidim. Anyone who has ever read anything at all I have written about Lubavitch will know that amongst various problems facing Klal Yisroel now, the Messianism of Lubavitch is one of the bigger ones. There are two stridently opposing factions.
There are the Meshichists, rabid supporters of the notion that the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson was or is the Messiah and either died and will soon be resurrected in a second coming to complete his mission here on earth… or is in fact still physically alive and is merely waiting until the right time to lead his the Jewish people out of Galus in the final redemption.
Then there are the Lubavitch anti Meshichists, those strongly opposed to them. And they have been doing everything they can to quiet down the Lubavitch Meshichists. They correctly believe that the Meshichists are making a laughing stock out of Chabad and will destroy all the good works Lubavitch has done. So a fight ensues. And it is so acrimonious that it has been taken out of the Lubavitch’s religious court system and has gone to the secular courts to be adjudicated. They are about to embark on a full blown trial.
The lawsuit is, in effect, about who will ultimately control the face of Lubavitch… the Messianists or the anti-Messianists. And this is no small thing. Why is that building so important? I’m not sure but 770 has had an important place in Chabad theology for quite some time now. The building has been replicated in many parts of the world including Israel. I’m told that many in Lubavitch feel that this building is or will serve as the Beis HaMikdash… or at least it should be considered as holy… or some such nonsense. I’m not sure how accurate that statement is but the fact that it has been replicated brick for brick in Israel and so many other places is indicative of how important that building is to all of them.
As I understand it the purse strings of Lubavitch are controlled by the saner, anti-Meshichists. And the leadership as a whole seems to stem from them as well. But to the Meshchists that is far from a settled issue and I’m sure they would dispute that assertion.
They in fact seem to have an unlimited supply of funds for their ads, posters, glitzy publications, and other antics. The actual Shul which is the centrpeice of 770 is controlled by the Messianists to this day. To experience what goes on there any given day would shock just about any non-Lubavithcer. And if the proliferation of Messianist posters, Moshiach flags on cars, the rise of Beis Moshiachs all over the world, and yarmulkes on the heads of children (and even some adults) …all of which proclaim the Rebbe as the Messiah… are any indication, the Moshichists are winning.
What is the source of the lawsuit? Form an article in the Forward:
“The roots of the lawsuit lie in a fracas over just this very matter back in 2004. In the middle of a November night, a band of rowdy youngsters tore out a plaque that had recently been installed at 770 by the global leaders of Chabad, who own the building. The youths were angered by the plaque because it referred to Schneerson with a Hebrew acronym used for dead people, which conflicted with the youngsters’ view that the rebbe is a still living messiah.”
To me this entire episode is yet another indication of the true feelings of just about all Lubavitchers on the issue of whether the Rebbe is the Messiah and will be resurrected in a second coming. The following statement, I believe, reveals the innermost thinking of vast numbers of Lubavitchers.
“In his affidavit, the lead gabbai, Rabbi Zalman Lipskier, wrote that “the real issue in dispute involves conflicting views on how our faith views the passing of the Grand Rebbe Schneerson and whether or not at this time he may be referred to publicly as the Messiah.”
Whether or not at this time he may be referred to publicly as the Messiah?!
I no longer think it can be reasonably argued that the anti Meshichists in Lubavitch can be truly defined as anti-Meshichist. They believe it. They just hold it can’t be proclaimed yet. And this is what the “war” in Lubavitch is all about… a war that has divided families.
Let me repeat what my Rebbe, Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik has said about this belief: It is Shtus! And of course just about every other Rabbinic leader of any stripe outside of Lubavitch would agree.
These beliefs are total nonsense. And I really do not believe enough has been done by the rest of the Torah world to impress this upon Lubavitch. And if Lubavitchers truly care about the Rebbe’s legacy, they will accept that simple truth.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Should Jonathan Pollard Be Released?
In recent weeks I have noticed a new drive to free Jonathan Pollard. This time the list of those who urge doing so includes some very famous and powerful names. It is the first time I have seen these names in this context. Names like Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and Rav Ahron Leib Shteinman. And the plea does not end with only these distinguished names, both of whom are Gedolim, one of whom many consider to be the Gadol HaDor. The full force and prestige of the entire Moeztes of Agudah is now also on board as well.
So in effect it seems we have almost the entire Torah world actively seeking his release, a release that many feel is long over-due. And no less in the forefront of those efforts was my own Rebbe, Rav Aaron Soloveichik who during his lifetime made personal visits to Mr. Pollard and publicly called for his release.
Is his release justified? One would think so in light o all the rabbinic support for it. There is also the little matter of Pidyan Sh’vuyim. Although I’m not sure Mr. Pollard qualifies. If he does, I’m sure Rav Elyashiv and Agudah wouldn’t have been pretty much silent all these years.
There seems to be an over-whelming sense that what ever he did, Mr. Pollard has long ago paid is debt to society… serving over 22 years of a life sentence. And this, after agreeing to co-operate in a plea bargained deal for leniency, which he was later denied. Many perceive this to be a gross miscarriage of justice. What happened was, President Reagan’s Defense Secretary, Casper Weinberger testified that the highly classified documents Mr. Pollard disseminated to his Israeli handlers so severely compromised US security that the maximum sentence was the only fair punishment. Some saw this as pure anti-Semitism. And it has been alleged that the intelligence community is full of such prejudice.
For those who do not recall the circumstances of the case, Jonathan Pollard, a Naval intelligence analyst at the time, photographed tons of classified documents containing information he believed to be vital to Israeli interests but which the intelligence community refused to share with them. The number of highly secret documents stolen by Mr. Pollard were massive. Since they were classified, we do not really know exactly what was in them. We just had Casper Weinberger’s word for it. If I recall correctly it was alleged that those contained not only information of value to Israel, but information about the names of undercover spies which compromised their ability to function as well as putting their lives in danger.
The fact that it was released to a friendly nation didn’t matter. Once that information was leaked, it may as well have been leaked to our worst enemies, At least that’s what the intelligence community asserted and it is how Casper Weinberger characterized it. The prosecution also claimed that Mr. Pollard’s primary motivation was the money he was paid by his Israeli handlers, not the altruism he claimed it to be. Had he not taken any money, would it have helped his case? I don’t know. Israel for its part has denied any participation in this adventure and has called it a rouge action, thus washing their hands of it.
So the proverbial book was indeed thrown at Mr. Pollard and he was given a life sentence.
Was this anti-Semitism of the most nefarious kind disguised as national security needs? Or was it a just sentence in light of the damage he supposedly caused to the security of this country? I don’t know.
It has been argued that whatever Mr. Pollards crime was, no matter how serious… it was has long since become irrelevant and no longer presents any danger to this country, Add to that that he has fared no better than some of the worst traitors in American history, people like Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen both of whom admitted that they sold American secrets to our enemies for money, makes his punishment seem more than excessive.
So the question remains is his release justified? Should we agitate on his behalf? Was his punishment too excessive? Was it justified at all? And what will be the impact of agitating for his release be on Klal Yisroel? Should we pull out all the stops to do so? And even if we do, will it work? Or will he stay in prison and just make us look like a bunch of parochialists that are interested only in our own welfare and not that of anyone else’s?
The truth is I have no real answers to these questions. My guess is that neither did Agudah or Rav Elyashiv up until recently, since this is the first time they have made any public attempts to secure his release.
Of course there are those who would say, The Gedolim have spoken. But that does not release me from questioning if this is indeed the time to agitate for his release if there ever is …or was one.
And I know that I am not alone in questioning whether it is appropriate or not to seek his release. There are reasons to oppose it. For one thing, we have no clue as to what he did. The details of it are still classified, to the best of my knowledge. And it is also true that every single President since Jonathan Pollard’s sentencing, including President Reagan himself, was very sympathetic to Israel and the Jewish people. Yet none of them would grant him clemency, not even President Clinton, who tried to do so but was told of massively negative repercussions (what ever that means) if he did. The counter to that is the fact that the media and many other government spokesmen have been sympathetic to the argument that Mr. Pollard was unjustly treated from the very start and that it is certainly long past due to correct that injustice.
Indeed, on the face of it, it would seem that to be so. 22 years is a long time. He was never an enemy of the US, just a friend of Israel, and though he was misguided and foolish he long ago paid his dues. And it seems obvious to me that he is paying the same high price that traitors far worse than he, are paying. That is a miscarriage of justice. So I lean toward supporting his release through clemency or any other means. But it should be understood, that we do so at our own peril and without complete knowledge of his misdeeds. Nor will we ever really know what his true motives really were. And we will likely never know the true motives of those who wish to see his continued incarceration. Were they really anti-Semitic, or not?
But, after 22 years in prison, the time has finally come. I believe justice will be better served by a commutation of his sentence.
So in effect it seems we have almost the entire Torah world actively seeking his release, a release that many feel is long over-due. And no less in the forefront of those efforts was my own Rebbe, Rav Aaron Soloveichik who during his lifetime made personal visits to Mr. Pollard and publicly called for his release.
Is his release justified? One would think so in light o all the rabbinic support for it. There is also the little matter of Pidyan Sh’vuyim. Although I’m not sure Mr. Pollard qualifies. If he does, I’m sure Rav Elyashiv and Agudah wouldn’t have been pretty much silent all these years.
There seems to be an over-whelming sense that what ever he did, Mr. Pollard has long ago paid is debt to society… serving over 22 years of a life sentence. And this, after agreeing to co-operate in a plea bargained deal for leniency, which he was later denied. Many perceive this to be a gross miscarriage of justice. What happened was, President Reagan’s Defense Secretary, Casper Weinberger testified that the highly classified documents Mr. Pollard disseminated to his Israeli handlers so severely compromised US security that the maximum sentence was the only fair punishment. Some saw this as pure anti-Semitism. And it has been alleged that the intelligence community is full of such prejudice.
For those who do not recall the circumstances of the case, Jonathan Pollard, a Naval intelligence analyst at the time, photographed tons of classified documents containing information he believed to be vital to Israeli interests but which the intelligence community refused to share with them. The number of highly secret documents stolen by Mr. Pollard were massive. Since they were classified, we do not really know exactly what was in them. We just had Casper Weinberger’s word for it. If I recall correctly it was alleged that those contained not only information of value to Israel, but information about the names of undercover spies which compromised their ability to function as well as putting their lives in danger.
The fact that it was released to a friendly nation didn’t matter. Once that information was leaked, it may as well have been leaked to our worst enemies, At least that’s what the intelligence community asserted and it is how Casper Weinberger characterized it. The prosecution also claimed that Mr. Pollard’s primary motivation was the money he was paid by his Israeli handlers, not the altruism he claimed it to be. Had he not taken any money, would it have helped his case? I don’t know. Israel for its part has denied any participation in this adventure and has called it a rouge action, thus washing their hands of it.
So the proverbial book was indeed thrown at Mr. Pollard and he was given a life sentence.
Was this anti-Semitism of the most nefarious kind disguised as national security needs? Or was it a just sentence in light of the damage he supposedly caused to the security of this country? I don’t know.
It has been argued that whatever Mr. Pollards crime was, no matter how serious… it was has long since become irrelevant and no longer presents any danger to this country, Add to that that he has fared no better than some of the worst traitors in American history, people like Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen both of whom admitted that they sold American secrets to our enemies for money, makes his punishment seem more than excessive.
So the question remains is his release justified? Should we agitate on his behalf? Was his punishment too excessive? Was it justified at all? And what will be the impact of agitating for his release be on Klal Yisroel? Should we pull out all the stops to do so? And even if we do, will it work? Or will he stay in prison and just make us look like a bunch of parochialists that are interested only in our own welfare and not that of anyone else’s?
The truth is I have no real answers to these questions. My guess is that neither did Agudah or Rav Elyashiv up until recently, since this is the first time they have made any public attempts to secure his release.
Of course there are those who would say, The Gedolim have spoken. But that does not release me from questioning if this is indeed the time to agitate for his release if there ever is …or was one.
And I know that I am not alone in questioning whether it is appropriate or not to seek his release. There are reasons to oppose it. For one thing, we have no clue as to what he did. The details of it are still classified, to the best of my knowledge. And it is also true that every single President since Jonathan Pollard’s sentencing, including President Reagan himself, was very sympathetic to Israel and the Jewish people. Yet none of them would grant him clemency, not even President Clinton, who tried to do so but was told of massively negative repercussions (what ever that means) if he did. The counter to that is the fact that the media and many other government spokesmen have been sympathetic to the argument that Mr. Pollard was unjustly treated from the very start and that it is certainly long past due to correct that injustice.
Indeed, on the face of it, it would seem that to be so. 22 years is a long time. He was never an enemy of the US, just a friend of Israel, and though he was misguided and foolish he long ago paid his dues. And it seems obvious to me that he is paying the same high price that traitors far worse than he, are paying. That is a miscarriage of justice. So I lean toward supporting his release through clemency or any other means. But it should be understood, that we do so at our own peril and without complete knowledge of his misdeeds. Nor will we ever really know what his true motives really were. And we will likely never know the true motives of those who wish to see his continued incarceration. Were they really anti-Semitic, or not?
But, after 22 years in prison, the time has finally come. I believe justice will be better served by a commutation of his sentence.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Rabbi Michael J. Broyde on Yeshiva Chovevei Torah
Rabbi Student's blog has an important statement with respect to Yeshiva Chovevei Torah by Rabbi Michael Broyde. I am very impressed with Rabbi Broyde's approach to the current flap. He addresses the specific issues I had problems with, adds a few others I did not deal with, and asks the right questions about all of them.
In my view YCT has a lot to answer for. But just as I have until now, I believe they have not yet crossed any lines that should make us question their membership in Orthodoxy. But as I have also written that some of YCT’s Musmachim have crossed some lines.
I believe the responses YCT provide (should they choose to do so, and I hope they do) to Rabbi Broyde's concerns will in fact determine their true status within Orthodoxy… or if indeed they should be considered Orthodox at all.
One final thought. Although I am generally disinclined to support this kind of Modern Orthodox institution for the reasons I have stated many times in the past, I never-the-less recognize that they may very well fill a legitimate niche. They help retain a certain type of very left wing Orhtodox Jew within the fold who might otherwise find a home in Conservative Judaism or worse. Such Jews are encouraged to stay observant… keeping them Shomer Shabbos, Shomer Kashrus, Shomer Tahras HaMishpacha… all while insisting that heretical concepts like the denial of Torah Misinai be kept out.
But as Rabbi Broyde suggests, they need to better explain their position on the controversial issues that have arisen about them recently and repudiate those who have spoken in their name, and about events that have occured there, positions that are at best, less than their own ideal and at worst, outright Aveiros. Admitting to some of their mistakes as was suggested by Rabbi Broyde would be a good start.
In my view YCT has a lot to answer for. But just as I have until now, I believe they have not yet crossed any lines that should make us question their membership in Orthodoxy. But as I have also written that some of YCT’s Musmachim have crossed some lines.
I believe the responses YCT provide (should they choose to do so, and I hope they do) to Rabbi Broyde's concerns will in fact determine their true status within Orthodoxy… or if indeed they should be considered Orthodox at all.
One final thought. Although I am generally disinclined to support this kind of Modern Orthodox institution for the reasons I have stated many times in the past, I never-the-less recognize that they may very well fill a legitimate niche. They help retain a certain type of very left wing Orhtodox Jew within the fold who might otherwise find a home in Conservative Judaism or worse. Such Jews are encouraged to stay observant… keeping them Shomer Shabbos, Shomer Kashrus, Shomer Tahras HaMishpacha… all while insisting that heretical concepts like the denial of Torah Misinai be kept out.
But as Rabbi Broyde suggests, they need to better explain their position on the controversial issues that have arisen about them recently and repudiate those who have spoken in their name, and about events that have occured there, positions that are at best, less than their own ideal and at worst, outright Aveiros. Admitting to some of their mistakes as was suggested by Rabbi Broyde would be a good start.
Mr. Ben Torah, How Great Thou Art!
Once again I must thank Marty Bluke for citing excerpts from yet another terrific Jonathan Rosenblum article with which I entirely agree. The article speaks about the sense of entitlement many Yeshiva Bachurim have about their status as Bnei Torah. And this sense of entitlement spans every area of their lives. Many of them believe that because they are spending their lives learning in the Beis Hamedrash, it exempts them from virtually every other responsibility. The following quote from that article pretty much sums up this attitude
“Oh, so you expect your in-laws to support you for twenty years, but, chas v'Shalom, you should ever have to do anything for them." No doubt such bald-faced selfishness is rare, but the extreme examples often reveal more than we care to admit.”
Yes it is true that this may very well is an extreme example, but it does sum up the thought processes running through the minds of the many of the Bnei HaYeshivos.
Where Rabbi Rosenblum ends I begin. One must ask why this is the case. Why do they feel so entitled, so above the fray, so... elite? Part of the problem is the “doting parent”. As Rabbi Rosenblum puts it:
“One can certainly understand how a parent's heart swells with pride at the sight of a bochur who at the end of a long winter zman still wants nothing more than to put in a full day in the beis medrash”
Yes, young Charedi parents today... themselves not long ago part of that system... are indeed taught to highly value learning Torah. So they do support with pride their son’s decisions during Bein HaZmanim, to go learn at the local Kollel Beis Hamedrash all day and thereby avoid any of the more mundane responsibilities to their families.
In my view this is indicative of exactly the problem. Over the past 60 years Charedi Mechanchim have been so successful in planting the values of Torah learning into the psyche of their Charedi consituants that it has had the unintended consequences of instilling an undeserved sense of entitlement to them.
Rabbi Rosenblum points out that this is an across the borard phenomenon that has negatively impacted other areas of their lives such as the Shidach situation. The “Better” Bachurim are now demanding huge stipends from prospective father in laws in exchange for marrying their daughters. In many cases they are being encouraged to do so by their Roshei Yeshiva. And this in my view is just plain wrong. In effect the advice in the Gemarah for a young man to seek a Bas Talmid Chacham (daughter of a Talmudic Scholar) has been replaced by the seeking a Bas Gvir (daughter of a wealthy man) so that he can be supported in the style of life to which he feels he is entitled. Those fathers who have given their lives over to learning full time and are now Talmidei Chachamim find their own daughters to be second class citizens in the Shiddach scene. And if this process is carried forward into the future, the daughters of these young Chasanim will not be “worthy” of the better Bachurim either!
I can certainly understand why this attitude was articulated 60 years ago. Then the Zeitgeist was one of assimilation and success in the workplace. The American dream was a part of the human psyche then even amongst the Orthodox. It was all about going to college and succeeding in one’s profession, both materially and socially. This is what every parent wanted for his child… a better life. The idea of sitting in a Kollel was practically unheard of then. Both here in the US and in pre-Ponevezh Israel, Yeshiva learning was miniscule. With the holocaust destroying the world of Torah in Europe every effort was needed to re-establish it here. They needed to combat the assimilationist mindset and replace it with a Torah mindset.
America was the last best hope at that time. So the Gedolei HaDor proceeded to try and establish the concept of learning Torh as the highest ideal. They were of course very persuasive and after decades of that kind of indoctrination, it worked. Torah learning is now the highest value in American Orthodoxy. The world of Torah, once almost non-existent here is now the Orthodox mainstream whose ultimate potential can... and perhaps someday will... encompass almost all of Orthodoxy. Torah learning is the now highest of ideals.
But that success has now turned into the source of some of our biggest problems. And not a small one is the phenomenon described by Rabbi Rosenblum, the feeling of superiority and entitlement on the part of far too many Bachurim… a feeling that absolves them of any other responsibility in life, can and does cause Shiddach problems, even higher rates of divorce, and many of the other problems often discussed here.
The attitudes created in the America of 60 years ago in response to a necessarily hostile climate, still exist as though things have not changed.
Wouldn’t it serve Klal Yiroeal better if the Roshei Yeshiva took a different path now? Shouldn’t they re-establish as a goal for a Talmid Chacham to seek a Bas Talmid Chacham and not a Bas G’vir? Shouldn’t a sense of humility be more impressed upon the Bnei Torah than they are getting now? Is still necessary to harangue at every opportunity about how great the Ben Torah who learns full time is… about how far above the average Bal Habos he is, no matter what the Bal Habos’s achievements are in life?
While I hope, as Rabbi Rosenblum does, that the majority of Bnei Torah are not really that haughty, both he and I conclude that there is definitely at some level a mindset of entitlement.
The time for change is now, I think Bnei Torah already know how great they are… all too well.
“Oh, so you expect your in-laws to support you for twenty years, but, chas v'Shalom, you should ever have to do anything for them." No doubt such bald-faced selfishness is rare, but the extreme examples often reveal more than we care to admit.”
Yes it is true that this may very well is an extreme example, but it does sum up the thought processes running through the minds of the many of the Bnei HaYeshivos.
Where Rabbi Rosenblum ends I begin. One must ask why this is the case. Why do they feel so entitled, so above the fray, so... elite? Part of the problem is the “doting parent”. As Rabbi Rosenblum puts it:
“One can certainly understand how a parent's heart swells with pride at the sight of a bochur who at the end of a long winter zman still wants nothing more than to put in a full day in the beis medrash”
Yes, young Charedi parents today... themselves not long ago part of that system... are indeed taught to highly value learning Torah. So they do support with pride their son’s decisions during Bein HaZmanim, to go learn at the local Kollel Beis Hamedrash all day and thereby avoid any of the more mundane responsibilities to their families.
In my view this is indicative of exactly the problem. Over the past 60 years Charedi Mechanchim have been so successful in planting the values of Torah learning into the psyche of their Charedi consituants that it has had the unintended consequences of instilling an undeserved sense of entitlement to them.
Rabbi Rosenblum points out that this is an across the borard phenomenon that has negatively impacted other areas of their lives such as the Shidach situation. The “Better” Bachurim are now demanding huge stipends from prospective father in laws in exchange for marrying their daughters. In many cases they are being encouraged to do so by their Roshei Yeshiva. And this in my view is just plain wrong. In effect the advice in the Gemarah for a young man to seek a Bas Talmid Chacham (daughter of a Talmudic Scholar) has been replaced by the seeking a Bas Gvir (daughter of a wealthy man) so that he can be supported in the style of life to which he feels he is entitled. Those fathers who have given their lives over to learning full time and are now Talmidei Chachamim find their own daughters to be second class citizens in the Shiddach scene. And if this process is carried forward into the future, the daughters of these young Chasanim will not be “worthy” of the better Bachurim either!
I can certainly understand why this attitude was articulated 60 years ago. Then the Zeitgeist was one of assimilation and success in the workplace. The American dream was a part of the human psyche then even amongst the Orthodox. It was all about going to college and succeeding in one’s profession, both materially and socially. This is what every parent wanted for his child… a better life. The idea of sitting in a Kollel was practically unheard of then. Both here in the US and in pre-Ponevezh Israel, Yeshiva learning was miniscule. With the holocaust destroying the world of Torah in Europe every effort was needed to re-establish it here. They needed to combat the assimilationist mindset and replace it with a Torah mindset.
America was the last best hope at that time. So the Gedolei HaDor proceeded to try and establish the concept of learning Torh as the highest ideal. They were of course very persuasive and after decades of that kind of indoctrination, it worked. Torah learning is now the highest value in American Orthodoxy. The world of Torah, once almost non-existent here is now the Orthodox mainstream whose ultimate potential can... and perhaps someday will... encompass almost all of Orthodoxy. Torah learning is the now highest of ideals.
But that success has now turned into the source of some of our biggest problems. And not a small one is the phenomenon described by Rabbi Rosenblum, the feeling of superiority and entitlement on the part of far too many Bachurim… a feeling that absolves them of any other responsibility in life, can and does cause Shiddach problems, even higher rates of divorce, and many of the other problems often discussed here.
The attitudes created in the America of 60 years ago in response to a necessarily hostile climate, still exist as though things have not changed.
Wouldn’t it serve Klal Yiroeal better if the Roshei Yeshiva took a different path now? Shouldn’t they re-establish as a goal for a Talmid Chacham to seek a Bas Talmid Chacham and not a Bas G’vir? Shouldn’t a sense of humility be more impressed upon the Bnei Torah than they are getting now? Is still necessary to harangue at every opportunity about how great the Ben Torah who learns full time is… about how far above the average Bal Habos he is, no matter what the Bal Habos’s achievements are in life?
While I hope, as Rabbi Rosenblum does, that the majority of Bnei Torah are not really that haughty, both he and I conclude that there is definitely at some level a mindset of entitlement.
The time for change is now, I think Bnei Torah already know how great they are… all too well.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Desperate Times, Desperate Tactics
As is so often the case the confluence of a number e-mails and blogposts I have read yesterday and today motivates me to express once again my sadness and disappointment with the way things are developing in the Torah world. While one must be grateful and give due credit for the unprecedented amount of Torah learning and the growing numbers of Bnei Torah we have in the world today, the cost of achieving our current successes is at an unsustainable high. We have reached at a critical mass. The numbers of poor young Bnei Torah capable of earning a Parnassa yet living in dire poverty has reached an all time high and is growing exponentially.
We now have an unprecedented number of poverty stricken Avreichim. The numbers are so large that there has been a clarion call on the part of the rabbinic leadership in Israel and the United States to increase the amounts of Tzedaka to young able bodied Avreichim who are none-the-less unable to provide for the basic needs of their families. Massive charities like Kupat Ha’ir widely supported by Gedolim, have been created to help relieve their plight. And indeed their approbations appear on advertisement brochures. The needs are great. These young men have sacrificed much of their material well being as well as that of their large and growing families so they could all become Talmidei Chachamim. But many can no longer sustain themesleves without the help of charity.
It doesn’t end there. My dear friend Rabbi Shael Siegel discusses a letter he saw in the Jewish Press. It is indeed a very sad tale: A young man has apparently written an open begging for funds to help pay for his own upcoming wedding. It is heart rending to read his words. His father is ill. Shael writes: "In his open letter he claims desperation and the “lack of other options…” He continues to write in his letter that raising sufficient money for the wedding will be comforting for his sick father: “I hope that when I tell my dear father of this, his stress of the financial burden will decrease in intensity...” He concludes his letter with “Please rush your tax deductible contribution to...” and this letter, Shael point out is “Endorsed by these Gedolei Hatorah( Torah Sages): Moshe Wolfson, Yaakov Perlow, Aryeh Kutler and Yechezchel Ratah." Shael’s take on this is quite right.
It is quite disturbing to see an able bodied young man begging for charity to make his own wedding. And it is even more disturbing when such efforts are endorsed by rabbinic leadership. Don’t get me wrong. I do not say one shouldn’t contribute. They need our help and we ought to give it. But, it so obvious to me that many if not all of these scenarios could have been avoided. The fact that young people in Israel are forbidden to prepare for Parnassa and forbidden to study secular subjects is in part, a major cause of the problem. And American Yeshivos are trending away from secular study too, probably looking to the Israeli model as the deal. Earning a living is the very last thing a Right Wing Ben Torah is taught to value. The message is: better to stay in learning and accept charity if need be.
Most Right Wing Bnei Torah will admit that secular studies in their Yeshivas, should they exist at all, are considered a joke and never treated seriously. A poster on Areivim admitted in an e-mail today that this was his experience in high school and that is generally how it is treated by the right.
There already exist Yeshiva high schools in New York that offer no secular subjects. It is my understanding that even those that do, like “Philly” do not allow the teachers to assign homework anymore. And let’s not forget Ner Israel Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Feldman belittling the importance of secular studies by saying schools should allow their "best and brightest" to be exempt from studying them. What respectable father would consider his son anything less than “the best and brightest”? So the trend is away from secular subjects even in the US. And Bnei Torah descend rapidly into a “dark age” of ignorance and lack of training for the workforce.
And we end up with a desperate situation requiring huge Tzedaka funds and letters endorsed by rabbinic leaders.
Because of the desperation, a desperation that could have been reduced, if not avoided entirely, it doesn’t just end with general appeals. Mr. Joey Fried has sent me via his e-mail list the following which just furthers my irritation over the tactics of an otherwise honorable Tzedaka organization, Kupat Ha’ir.
From that e-mail:
"The current issue of The Jewish Press contains a 12 page, four color brochure which solicits charity for Agudas Beis Avrohom. The cover of the brochure purports that this charity has the support of HaRov C. Kanievsky, HaRov N. Karelitz and HoRav Y. Adelstein. An envelope stapled into the middle of the brochure for your convenience is addressed to American Friends of Agudas Bais Avrohom, C/o Rabbi Moshe Wolfson. Within the brochure under a header of “And I will POUR OUT for you blessing…” is the following story: “Nachum E. flew to America to Israel. He arrived in Israel with an amount of cash significantly greater than customs authorities permitted. Nachum tried to walk through but no luck; they called him over. “In a situation like this, there is absolutely nothing a person can do-except for pledging a sum of money to Beis Avrohom and offering a quick, silent prayer to our Father in Heaven. That is what Nachum did. He pledged $100 to Beis Avrohom as they were opening one zipper after another, somehow missing one small compartment where the money happened to be.“The customs official closed up Nachum’s handbag, and he proceeded on his way with a faint smile on his face."
I echo Mr. Fried’s reaction: "I cringe with embarrassment every time I see the flyers for Kupat Haa'ir."
Let us put our house in order. Let us change a system that is unsustainable. Let us urge out rabbinic leaders both here and in Israel to change course. To allow secular studies into the Yeshivos and allow Bnei Torah to value them. Allow the young Bnei Torah prepare for their financial well being for their future, before they get married.
It’s time to make a u-turn back to the time where secular studies were treated more seriously and where even Right Wing Yeshivos had truly great secular studies programs. There is no reason we can’t have Torah U’Parnasa taught in our schools both here and in Israel. And once and for all eliminate the need for a Kupat Ha’ir and their embarrassing tactics.
We now have an unprecedented number of poverty stricken Avreichim. The numbers are so large that there has been a clarion call on the part of the rabbinic leadership in Israel and the United States to increase the amounts of Tzedaka to young able bodied Avreichim who are none-the-less unable to provide for the basic needs of their families. Massive charities like Kupat Ha’ir widely supported by Gedolim, have been created to help relieve their plight. And indeed their approbations appear on advertisement brochures. The needs are great. These young men have sacrificed much of their material well being as well as that of their large and growing families so they could all become Talmidei Chachamim. But many can no longer sustain themesleves without the help of charity.
It doesn’t end there. My dear friend Rabbi Shael Siegel discusses a letter he saw in the Jewish Press. It is indeed a very sad tale: A young man has apparently written an open begging for funds to help pay for his own upcoming wedding. It is heart rending to read his words. His father is ill. Shael writes: "In his open letter he claims desperation and the “lack of other options…” He continues to write in his letter that raising sufficient money for the wedding will be comforting for his sick father: “I hope that when I tell my dear father of this, his stress of the financial burden will decrease in intensity...” He concludes his letter with “Please rush your tax deductible contribution to...” and this letter, Shael point out is “Endorsed by these Gedolei Hatorah( Torah Sages): Moshe Wolfson, Yaakov Perlow, Aryeh Kutler and Yechezchel Ratah." Shael’s take on this is quite right.
It is quite disturbing to see an able bodied young man begging for charity to make his own wedding. And it is even more disturbing when such efforts are endorsed by rabbinic leadership. Don’t get me wrong. I do not say one shouldn’t contribute. They need our help and we ought to give it. But, it so obvious to me that many if not all of these scenarios could have been avoided. The fact that young people in Israel are forbidden to prepare for Parnassa and forbidden to study secular subjects is in part, a major cause of the problem. And American Yeshivos are trending away from secular study too, probably looking to the Israeli model as the deal. Earning a living is the very last thing a Right Wing Ben Torah is taught to value. The message is: better to stay in learning and accept charity if need be.
Most Right Wing Bnei Torah will admit that secular studies in their Yeshivas, should they exist at all, are considered a joke and never treated seriously. A poster on Areivim admitted in an e-mail today that this was his experience in high school and that is generally how it is treated by the right.
There already exist Yeshiva high schools in New York that offer no secular subjects. It is my understanding that even those that do, like “Philly” do not allow the teachers to assign homework anymore. And let’s not forget Ner Israel Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Feldman belittling the importance of secular studies by saying schools should allow their "best and brightest" to be exempt from studying them. What respectable father would consider his son anything less than “the best and brightest”? So the trend is away from secular subjects even in the US. And Bnei Torah descend rapidly into a “dark age” of ignorance and lack of training for the workforce.
And we end up with a desperate situation requiring huge Tzedaka funds and letters endorsed by rabbinic leaders.
Because of the desperation, a desperation that could have been reduced, if not avoided entirely, it doesn’t just end with general appeals. Mr. Joey Fried has sent me via his e-mail list the following which just furthers my irritation over the tactics of an otherwise honorable Tzedaka organization, Kupat Ha’ir.
From that e-mail:
"The current issue of The Jewish Press contains a 12 page, four color brochure which solicits charity for Agudas Beis Avrohom. The cover of the brochure purports that this charity has the support of HaRov C. Kanievsky, HaRov N. Karelitz and HoRav Y. Adelstein. An envelope stapled into the middle of the brochure for your convenience is addressed to American Friends of Agudas Bais Avrohom, C/o Rabbi Moshe Wolfson. Within the brochure under a header of “And I will POUR OUT for you blessing…” is the following story: “Nachum E. flew to America to Israel. He arrived in Israel with an amount of cash significantly greater than customs authorities permitted. Nachum tried to walk through but no luck; they called him over. “In a situation like this, there is absolutely nothing a person can do-except for pledging a sum of money to Beis Avrohom and offering a quick, silent prayer to our Father in Heaven. That is what Nachum did. He pledged $100 to Beis Avrohom as they were opening one zipper after another, somehow missing one small compartment where the money happened to be.“The customs official closed up Nachum’s handbag, and he proceeded on his way with a faint smile on his face."
I echo Mr. Fried’s reaction: "I cringe with embarrassment every time I see the flyers for Kupat Haa'ir."
Let us put our house in order. Let us change a system that is unsustainable. Let us urge out rabbinic leaders both here and in Israel to change course. To allow secular studies into the Yeshivos and allow Bnei Torah to value them. Allow the young Bnei Torah prepare for their financial well being for their future, before they get married.
It’s time to make a u-turn back to the time where secular studies were treated more seriously and where even Right Wing Yeshivos had truly great secular studies programs. There is no reason we can’t have Torah U’Parnasa taught in our schools both here and in Israel. And once and for all eliminate the need for a Kupat Ha’ir and their embarrassing tactics.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
A Different Kind of Minyan
Do we really need these kinds of innovations in Klal Yisroel, self generated new “Minyanim”, designed for “special people”? Read on.
One of the advantages of living in a metropolitan area with a large Orthodox Jewish population is the existence of a ‘Minyan Center’ – a synagogue where one can find a quorum for prayer at almost any hour of the day or night. If the hour is late and ten adult males are not present immediately, one individual usually waits outside the shul and cajoles passers-by to enter and form the requisite quorum. A minyan is a spiritual gathering, where individuals take time from their hectic days to join in prayer and bring meaning to their lives. In the course of human events, there are many other types of gatherings. People band together for comfort, for camaraderie, to share common interests and hobbies.
What motivated me to write my first article on at-risk teens in 1996 was my observation that the disenfranchised young men and women who were not achieving success in our school system were beginning to ‘make their own minyanim.’ Now, eleven years later, I am watching this happen on a much larger scale and I am shaken to the core in fear of what I see coming in the years ahead – unless we go backwards in time and recapture the ‘chinuch hayoshon’ in which my generation was raised. One where every child felt valued and appreciated, where there was a more balanced curriculum, where there was an allowance for diverse life/career paths among boys and girls, and perhaps most importantly, where there was a far greater tolerance level for diversity of thought and appearance. That, my dear readers, is what is driving me to write this series of columns. Allow me to explain.
For three decades or so, until the early 1990’s, kids who dropped out of our Yeshiva/Beis Yaakov system and became non-observant were doing so quietly and unobtrusively. A boy here. A girl there. Perhaps two or three at a time. In the aggregate, the children who left school may have been a significant number, but there were not enough to ‘form a minyan’.
About 1995 or so, a number of cultural changes occurred that transformed the at-risk phenomenon from isolated individuals to more of a trend. Our population grew exponentially, b’eh, swelling the number of adolescent children in our school system. At the same time, schools began responding to parental pressure by significantly raising their acceptance standards and lowering their tolerance level for non-conformance to societal norms. These two factors combined to create a huge increase in the number of ‘drop-out teenagers’ in our community. Once that happened, the kids began forming their own informal social support groups where they ‘hung out’ together and provided each other with the acceptance and solidarity that had heretofore eluded them.
Then, seemingly overnight, a sociological phenomenon occurred. A ‘tipping point’ was reached and the kids no longer felt intimidated by the social constraints of our frum society. Suddenly teenage boys and girls who were raised in observant homes – some whose parents were very distinguished members in our community – were openly flaunting their rejection of Torah values. Things hit rock bottom and were thrust into the public eye when dozens of frum teens – many of them clad in white shirts, dark slacks and wearing yarmulkes – began gathering each Friday night on Ocean Parkway (a main thoroughfare in the Flatbush section of Brooklyn) smoking cigarettes and ‘hanging out’ while frum couples strolled by after their Shabbos evening meal. What happened? The kids discovered that they had their own minyan, which changed the entire dynamics of their social status.
Our community responded magnificently by creating a host of diverse intervention and prevention programs to help these children – and their younger siblings. Special schools were created for at-risk kids, and support groups for their parents.
So why the worry, you ask? My fear is that there are far, far too many ‘outer ring’ children who are in danger of heading for the exits. As I pointed out in the previous column(s), over the past ten to fifteen years we have dramatically raised the bar for entry to our schools. That inadvertently results in disenfranchising a portion of our children.
One, Two…
The shift over these years from a balanced kodesh curriculum to an almost gemorah-only learning program, which is a virtual Gan-Eden for those who love learning gemorah, also excludes a portion of our boys from the ‘inner-ring’ of our community.
Three, four…
Finally, many mainstream schools are becoming – or being forced to become – far less tolerant of the misdeeds of children nowadays. This is causing an explosion in the number of our children drifting to the ‘outer rings’ of our society. Many of these kids may still be in our schools, but they do not really feel connected.
Five, six…
Most frightening of all, from my perspective, is the interactive nature of the Internet, cell phones and PDA’s. Kids who aren’t making it in our schools don’t need to go to Ocean Parkway to find comfort and friendship. They are already finding each other over the airwaves. The nature of the rapidly evolving technology will allow them to more efficiently and effectively communicate with each other – all around the world. Things have not reached the tipping point – yet. But all the warning signs are there. And when and if that happens, the snowball may roll completely out of our control.
I pray to Hashem that my fear is misplaced. But all I see from my vantage point is a rapidly growing group of children who are not finding success in our school system. They are searching for friendship and a sense of belonging. This basic need will be fulfilled somewhere. The question is only where that place will be.
Seven, eight, nine…
This article was written by Rabbi Yakov Horowitz and is published in the most recent edition of Mishpacha Magazine. It was originally entitled “Seven, Eight, Nine …A Virtual Ocean Parkway” It is republished here with permission. It exactly reflects my thoughts on this issue. I normally don't post the columns of other people in their entirety even when I agree with them. But in this case The words are so true to my convinctions, That I have nothing to add.
Post Script: Almost as if by Divine provdence, these images just came to my attention. We get a glimpse of what this world is about. It accompanies an article in the NewYork Times on an establishment recently written about here.
Modified: 3/22/07 10:23 CDT
One of the advantages of living in a metropolitan area with a large Orthodox Jewish population is the existence of a ‘Minyan Center’ – a synagogue where one can find a quorum for prayer at almost any hour of the day or night. If the hour is late and ten adult males are not present immediately, one individual usually waits outside the shul and cajoles passers-by to enter and form the requisite quorum. A minyan is a spiritual gathering, where individuals take time from their hectic days to join in prayer and bring meaning to their lives. In the course of human events, there are many other types of gatherings. People band together for comfort, for camaraderie, to share common interests and hobbies.
What motivated me to write my first article on at-risk teens in 1996 was my observation that the disenfranchised young men and women who were not achieving success in our school system were beginning to ‘make their own minyanim.’ Now, eleven years later, I am watching this happen on a much larger scale and I am shaken to the core in fear of what I see coming in the years ahead – unless we go backwards in time and recapture the ‘chinuch hayoshon’ in which my generation was raised. One where every child felt valued and appreciated, where there was a more balanced curriculum, where there was an allowance for diverse life/career paths among boys and girls, and perhaps most importantly, where there was a far greater tolerance level for diversity of thought and appearance. That, my dear readers, is what is driving me to write this series of columns. Allow me to explain.
For three decades or so, until the early 1990’s, kids who dropped out of our Yeshiva/Beis Yaakov system and became non-observant were doing so quietly and unobtrusively. A boy here. A girl there. Perhaps two or three at a time. In the aggregate, the children who left school may have been a significant number, but there were not enough to ‘form a minyan’.
About 1995 or so, a number of cultural changes occurred that transformed the at-risk phenomenon from isolated individuals to more of a trend. Our population grew exponentially, b’eh, swelling the number of adolescent children in our school system. At the same time, schools began responding to parental pressure by significantly raising their acceptance standards and lowering their tolerance level for non-conformance to societal norms. These two factors combined to create a huge increase in the number of ‘drop-out teenagers’ in our community. Once that happened, the kids began forming their own informal social support groups where they ‘hung out’ together and provided each other with the acceptance and solidarity that had heretofore eluded them.
Then, seemingly overnight, a sociological phenomenon occurred. A ‘tipping point’ was reached and the kids no longer felt intimidated by the social constraints of our frum society. Suddenly teenage boys and girls who were raised in observant homes – some whose parents were very distinguished members in our community – were openly flaunting their rejection of Torah values. Things hit rock bottom and were thrust into the public eye when dozens of frum teens – many of them clad in white shirts, dark slacks and wearing yarmulkes – began gathering each Friday night on Ocean Parkway (a main thoroughfare in the Flatbush section of Brooklyn) smoking cigarettes and ‘hanging out’ while frum couples strolled by after their Shabbos evening meal. What happened? The kids discovered that they had their own minyan, which changed the entire dynamics of their social status.
Our community responded magnificently by creating a host of diverse intervention and prevention programs to help these children – and their younger siblings. Special schools were created for at-risk kids, and support groups for their parents.
So why the worry, you ask? My fear is that there are far, far too many ‘outer ring’ children who are in danger of heading for the exits. As I pointed out in the previous column(s), over the past ten to fifteen years we have dramatically raised the bar for entry to our schools. That inadvertently results in disenfranchising a portion of our children.
One, Two…
The shift over these years from a balanced kodesh curriculum to an almost gemorah-only learning program, which is a virtual Gan-Eden for those who love learning gemorah, also excludes a portion of our boys from the ‘inner-ring’ of our community.
Three, four…
Finally, many mainstream schools are becoming – or being forced to become – far less tolerant of the misdeeds of children nowadays. This is causing an explosion in the number of our children drifting to the ‘outer rings’ of our society. Many of these kids may still be in our schools, but they do not really feel connected.
Five, six…
Most frightening of all, from my perspective, is the interactive nature of the Internet, cell phones and PDA’s. Kids who aren’t making it in our schools don’t need to go to Ocean Parkway to find comfort and friendship. They are already finding each other over the airwaves. The nature of the rapidly evolving technology will allow them to more efficiently and effectively communicate with each other – all around the world. Things have not reached the tipping point – yet. But all the warning signs are there. And when and if that happens, the snowball may roll completely out of our control.
I pray to Hashem that my fear is misplaced. But all I see from my vantage point is a rapidly growing group of children who are not finding success in our school system. They are searching for friendship and a sense of belonging. This basic need will be fulfilled somewhere. The question is only where that place will be.
Seven, eight, nine…
This article was written by Rabbi Yakov Horowitz and is published in the most recent edition of Mishpacha Magazine. It was originally entitled “Seven, Eight, Nine …A Virtual Ocean Parkway” It is republished here with permission. It exactly reflects my thoughts on this issue. I normally don't post the columns of other people in their entirety even when I agree with them. But in this case The words are so true to my convinctions, That I have nothing to add.
Post Script: Almost as if by Divine provdence, these images just came to my attention. We get a glimpse of what this world is about. It accompanies an article in the NewYork Times on an establishment recently written about here.
Modified: 3/22/07 10:23 CDT
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Shoving Religion Down People’s Throats
An editorial in today’s Ha’aretz brings to light the question of religious coercion in Israel. There has recently been an appointment of 15 new rabbinical court judges in the State of Israel, which by itself would not raise any eyebrows. But in this instance the appointees were all chosen by only one segement of Orthodox Jewry… you guessed it, the Charedi rabbinc leadership.
Now I have no problem with the concept of judges for Orthodox rabbinical courts being chosen by the greatest rabbinic leaders in Israel of our generation. Who better to decide those best qualified for that postion?
The problem is the backlash generated by such a monopolistic and heavy-handed approach. And because of their recent track record in creating new and in my view intolerable Chumros for members of their own community, I have to ask, is this just another step in that direction? I assume this is the case since all the candidates seem to be Charedi according to the article. I can only surmise that the Charedi rabbinic leadership wants to monopolize and control every aspect of Israeli society it can. This is nothing new and I even understand their reasons for doing so. After all if they have the power to influence the people of Israel and guide them in the Hashkafos they think best, why not exercise that power for the greater good of Klal Yisroel? But as always actions have consequences. And often those consequences are not only unintended, but reflexive and counter-productive to the goals so well intentioned. And sometimes this results in far worse circumstances than were extant before those actions were taken.
Now Ha’are tz is a secular newspaper which is often accused of anti Charedi bias. I’m not so sure about that. But in any case, I think this editorial makes a valid point:
“What is upsetting is not the color of the new appointees' skullcaps or even their not having served in the army, but their subordination to a hard-line halakhic worldview that in recent years has received an even more stringent interpretation by (Rav) Elyashiv's followers.”
This is exactly right. I do not see how shoving even more chumros down people’s throats through the court system is going to win any hearts and minds among the Jewsih people, Certainly not among the secular but not even among the Daatim (MO in Israel).
And this has been a reason in my view of why so many secular Jews in Israel have come to despise religious Jews of any stripe. It isn’t because they hate what religious Jews look like or how they live their lives. If that were so, American Relgious Jews would be feeling the same kind of backlash from secular Jews here. It is because they hate being forced to observe Halacha. Closing stores and roads on Shabbos and similar edicts may be be very high minded as a goal for a Jewish nation but when a population that is secular is not ready for it, it can only serve to foster hatred and create a big backlash. It was this kind of thing that created Tommy Lapid and Shiui. And that caused major losses in political clout and the governement funding of the Charedi Torah institutions.
Do we need to see a repeat of that? I don’t think so. Not that I am any kind of fan of the government subsidizing and thereby helping to perpetuate the Charedi welfare state. I’m not. But neither do I like the idea of any reduction of funds to come about in as the result of a backlash either. I would rather see a change in the system itself so that that the Charedi community in Israel can become more self sufficient.
Now I’m not necessarily saying Shinui or worse will happen again. Certainly Shinui got its due and the party has since been disbanded... or at least it has no real power anymore. But one has to see the fruit of ones efforts before excersizing power even if one is legitimatey able to do so.
I don’t know exactly how the Charedi leadership received the authority to make these appomintments exclusively. But they did. I just wish it would consider more carefully the consequences of its actions.
One cannot shove religion down the throats of people who don’t want it and not expect a backlash. Shouldn’t we have learned that from the Shinui experience? Just because we have seen the demise of Shiuni doesn’t mean it can’t be resureected in another even more stridently anti religious incarnation than before. You can catch a lot more flies with honey than you an with vinegar. I wish the Charedi rabbinic leadership would try that approach more often.
Now I have no problem with the concept of judges for Orthodox rabbinical courts being chosen by the greatest rabbinic leaders in Israel of our generation. Who better to decide those best qualified for that postion?
The problem is the backlash generated by such a monopolistic and heavy-handed approach. And because of their recent track record in creating new and in my view intolerable Chumros for members of their own community, I have to ask, is this just another step in that direction? I assume this is the case since all the candidates seem to be Charedi according to the article. I can only surmise that the Charedi rabbinic leadership wants to monopolize and control every aspect of Israeli society it can. This is nothing new and I even understand their reasons for doing so. After all if they have the power to influence the people of Israel and guide them in the Hashkafos they think best, why not exercise that power for the greater good of Klal Yisroel? But as always actions have consequences. And often those consequences are not only unintended, but reflexive and counter-productive to the goals so well intentioned. And sometimes this results in far worse circumstances than were extant before those actions were taken.
Now Ha’are tz is a secular newspaper which is often accused of anti Charedi bias. I’m not so sure about that. But in any case, I think this editorial makes a valid point:
“What is upsetting is not the color of the new appointees' skullcaps or even their not having served in the army, but their subordination to a hard-line halakhic worldview that in recent years has received an even more stringent interpretation by (Rav) Elyashiv's followers.”
This is exactly right. I do not see how shoving even more chumros down people’s throats through the court system is going to win any hearts and minds among the Jewsih people, Certainly not among the secular but not even among the Daatim (MO in Israel).
And this has been a reason in my view of why so many secular Jews in Israel have come to despise religious Jews of any stripe. It isn’t because they hate what religious Jews look like or how they live their lives. If that were so, American Relgious Jews would be feeling the same kind of backlash from secular Jews here. It is because they hate being forced to observe Halacha. Closing stores and roads on Shabbos and similar edicts may be be very high minded as a goal for a Jewish nation but when a population that is secular is not ready for it, it can only serve to foster hatred and create a big backlash. It was this kind of thing that created Tommy Lapid and Shiui. And that caused major losses in political clout and the governement funding of the Charedi Torah institutions.
Do we need to see a repeat of that? I don’t think so. Not that I am any kind of fan of the government subsidizing and thereby helping to perpetuate the Charedi welfare state. I’m not. But neither do I like the idea of any reduction of funds to come about in as the result of a backlash either. I would rather see a change in the system itself so that that the Charedi community in Israel can become more self sufficient.
Now I’m not necessarily saying Shinui or worse will happen again. Certainly Shinui got its due and the party has since been disbanded... or at least it has no real power anymore. But one has to see the fruit of ones efforts before excersizing power even if one is legitimatey able to do so.
I don’t know exactly how the Charedi leadership received the authority to make these appomintments exclusively. But they did. I just wish it would consider more carefully the consequences of its actions.
One cannot shove religion down the throats of people who don’t want it and not expect a backlash. Shouldn’t we have learned that from the Shinui experience? Just because we have seen the demise of Shiuni doesn’t mean it can’t be resureected in another even more stridently anti religious incarnation than before. You can catch a lot more flies with honey than you an with vinegar. I wish the Charedi rabbinic leadership would try that approach more often.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Bad Kiruv
Once again I am drawn to the plight of Baalei Teshuva. I read with interest an essay written by Yaakov Astor. And it was quite poignant as to the trials and tribulations that many of them go through. And indeed my heart goes out to those who have to travel down this difficult road. I once again I state my awe of their trek and their commitment to Judaism, coming from a past that is often relatively empty of it. The sincerity they bring to the table should be a model for all of us.
Mr. Astor asks a question about divorce rates and wonders whether a statistic someone cited to him is accurate. Is it true that Baalei Teshuva have the same high rate of divorce as does the secular world? The answer seems to be yes, it does.
One wonders why that should be the case. After all what better way to start a life together can two people have than the shared experience of becoming Frum? Both have similar backgrounds and both are going in the same direction. Both are sincere and not frivolous people. What gives?
Mr. Astor goes on to list several reasons why, among them, a lack of parental support system in many cases, and the increased financial burden of being Frum. And it was suggested to him that the courtship process should be longer for Baalei Teshuva than those who are raised Frum from birth (FFB): six months versus 6 weeks! This may very well be a good idea and I would even add that those of us who are raised FFB should in many cases consider longer courtships as well.
But I think there is an additional and very serious cause to the high divorce rate as it applies in the Charedi world especially in Israel. It comes in the form of both marriage partners having unrealistic expectations. Many are young men, Baalei Teshuva, say in their early twenties, who have been Frum for a few years and learning in Yeshivos. As newcomers to the Torah world, they are brought along in a process that emphasizes the Charedi Hashkafa of learning full time for as long as possible. They are indoctrinated to believe that working for a living is a B’Dieved at best and that one must sacrifice materially for as long as possible in order to achieve this lofty lifestyle.
This is of course consistent with their overall approach to life. But as it applies to a Baal Teshuva, it can have even more disastrous consequences than it does for those of us who are FFB. Baalei Teshuva are far more susceptible to this kind of indoctrination. That is after all what they are seeking to begin with. They want to know what to do in order to be the best Jew they can. They look to and trust their mentors for guidance and they have no background; no perspective of other Hashkafos. Past Rebbeim or Frum parents or siblings are not available for them to reflect off of in order to understand the possible consequences of decisions made for them. They see their mentors only in the most ideal of lights, men and women in shining armor guiding them down the path of a Torah true lifestyle. Challenging the decisions of those who helped them achieve a Torah lifestyle is completely out of the question. In some cases these teachings will lead to an unexpected life of poverty and misery.
Of course that isn’t how they start out. They see a life of Torah learning and sacrifice that will bring them true happiness… the happiness of Torah. But after a few years of family growth and mounting debt, the strains upon the marriage relationship can quickly go south. And marriages will sometimes reach a breaking point. After ten or fifteen years of marriage, living in cramped quarters with many children, mounds of unpaid bills, and in many cases no family support, the Baal Teshuva who may have begun training for a profession before becoming Frum but stopped short of completing it, will not have any means to start providing for his family even if he wants to.
It is not too difficult to see how resentment may set in and how a husband and wife, once idyllic in the service to God and their chosen lifestyle may now be bitter and resentful to each other. A husband untrained and unable to find work can weigh heavily upon a marriage where a wife goes to the grocery store and is told that she no longer has credit there.
The problem with some Charedi Kiruv workers is that they fail to take into account the backgrounds and strengths of their charges. They pretty much indoctrinate these fine young Jews to reject everything about their past, often insisting they drop out of college and instaed learn full time. This is not true of all Charedi Kiruv workers to be sure. The good ones (and I hope that includes the majority of them) usually tell them to finish their degrees first and guide them into a religious path best suited for them.
But in far too many cases (and I have heard first hand testimony) this is not the case. In one family I know, after over twenty years of marriage and many children, the couple is getting divorced. The husband upon embarking upon his journey toward becoming Frum was told to drop out of his college after completing three of his four years toward a degree. That would have provided him with a wonderful Parnassa. But he was idealistic about it his future as a Frum Jew learning full time and so was his wife. The result many years later was the scenario I described above. No job, No prospects. The strain was too much. Now I am not saying there weren’t other issues. But the financial strain was a huge part of it.
Not every Charedi Baal Teshuva subjected to this kind of indoctrination ends up this way of course. Some of them with tremendous courage “escape” the tyranny of the system. But they do look at it as an escape. They went against the grain of being advised to “tough it out”. Those Baalei Teshuva got out early enough to prevent the kind of descending poverty that grips those who “stayed too long at the fair”.
I think it is time for those rabbinic leaders who are involved with Kiruv to take another look at the system and change things. That should even be a priority over my oft expressed desire to overhaul the entire educational system. Baalei Teshuva are far too precious an asset to end up at the rock bottom of the Torah world.
Mr. Astor asks a question about divorce rates and wonders whether a statistic someone cited to him is accurate. Is it true that Baalei Teshuva have the same high rate of divorce as does the secular world? The answer seems to be yes, it does.
One wonders why that should be the case. After all what better way to start a life together can two people have than the shared experience of becoming Frum? Both have similar backgrounds and both are going in the same direction. Both are sincere and not frivolous people. What gives?
Mr. Astor goes on to list several reasons why, among them, a lack of parental support system in many cases, and the increased financial burden of being Frum. And it was suggested to him that the courtship process should be longer for Baalei Teshuva than those who are raised Frum from birth (FFB): six months versus 6 weeks! This may very well be a good idea and I would even add that those of us who are raised FFB should in many cases consider longer courtships as well.
But I think there is an additional and very serious cause to the high divorce rate as it applies in the Charedi world especially in Israel. It comes in the form of both marriage partners having unrealistic expectations. Many are young men, Baalei Teshuva, say in their early twenties, who have been Frum for a few years and learning in Yeshivos. As newcomers to the Torah world, they are brought along in a process that emphasizes the Charedi Hashkafa of learning full time for as long as possible. They are indoctrinated to believe that working for a living is a B’Dieved at best and that one must sacrifice materially for as long as possible in order to achieve this lofty lifestyle.
This is of course consistent with their overall approach to life. But as it applies to a Baal Teshuva, it can have even more disastrous consequences than it does for those of us who are FFB. Baalei Teshuva are far more susceptible to this kind of indoctrination. That is after all what they are seeking to begin with. They want to know what to do in order to be the best Jew they can. They look to and trust their mentors for guidance and they have no background; no perspective of other Hashkafos. Past Rebbeim or Frum parents or siblings are not available for them to reflect off of in order to understand the possible consequences of decisions made for them. They see their mentors only in the most ideal of lights, men and women in shining armor guiding them down the path of a Torah true lifestyle. Challenging the decisions of those who helped them achieve a Torah lifestyle is completely out of the question. In some cases these teachings will lead to an unexpected life of poverty and misery.
Of course that isn’t how they start out. They see a life of Torah learning and sacrifice that will bring them true happiness… the happiness of Torah. But after a few years of family growth and mounting debt, the strains upon the marriage relationship can quickly go south. And marriages will sometimes reach a breaking point. After ten or fifteen years of marriage, living in cramped quarters with many children, mounds of unpaid bills, and in many cases no family support, the Baal Teshuva who may have begun training for a profession before becoming Frum but stopped short of completing it, will not have any means to start providing for his family even if he wants to.
It is not too difficult to see how resentment may set in and how a husband and wife, once idyllic in the service to God and their chosen lifestyle may now be bitter and resentful to each other. A husband untrained and unable to find work can weigh heavily upon a marriage where a wife goes to the grocery store and is told that she no longer has credit there.
The problem with some Charedi Kiruv workers is that they fail to take into account the backgrounds and strengths of their charges. They pretty much indoctrinate these fine young Jews to reject everything about their past, often insisting they drop out of college and instaed learn full time. This is not true of all Charedi Kiruv workers to be sure. The good ones (and I hope that includes the majority of them) usually tell them to finish their degrees first and guide them into a religious path best suited for them.
But in far too many cases (and I have heard first hand testimony) this is not the case. In one family I know, after over twenty years of marriage and many children, the couple is getting divorced. The husband upon embarking upon his journey toward becoming Frum was told to drop out of his college after completing three of his four years toward a degree. That would have provided him with a wonderful Parnassa. But he was idealistic about it his future as a Frum Jew learning full time and so was his wife. The result many years later was the scenario I described above. No job, No prospects. The strain was too much. Now I am not saying there weren’t other issues. But the financial strain was a huge part of it.
Not every Charedi Baal Teshuva subjected to this kind of indoctrination ends up this way of course. Some of them with tremendous courage “escape” the tyranny of the system. But they do look at it as an escape. They went against the grain of being advised to “tough it out”. Those Baalei Teshuva got out early enough to prevent the kind of descending poverty that grips those who “stayed too long at the fair”.
I think it is time for those rabbinic leaders who are involved with Kiruv to take another look at the system and change things. That should even be a priority over my oft expressed desire to overhaul the entire educational system. Baalei Teshuva are far too precious an asset to end up at the rock bottom of the Torah world.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Imagine
There is a fascinating observation made by Rabbi Emanuel Feldman in Jewish Action. I have been a fan of Rabbi Feldman from the very first time I read him. We are almost always on the same page Hashkafically. And I find it quite interesting that his brother is Ner Israel Rosh HaYeshiva, Rabbi Aharon Feldman whose Hashkafos are so different than mine. For those who don’t remember, Rabbi Aharon Feldman is in the forefront of trying to impress upon the American Charedi mindset the importance of eliminating the study of secular subjects from exceptional Torah students.
In any case, I once again find myself in complete agreement with Rabbi Emanuel Feldman. I have written about this issue many times, most recently in an article from last year in the Jewish Press.
In the current article Rabbi Emanuel Feldman writes of the “stunning and almost shocking” surprise he got from a study about the ascendancy of Orthodox Judaism in our time:
“A recently issued study by the American Jewish Committee and that in the decades to come it is destined to exercise major influence on the quality and direction of American Jewish life.”
As I have pointed out in the past, many non-Orthodox movements are rejecting the rejectionist ways of their forebearers and are incorporating many of the trappings once reserved for only the most Orthodox of Jewry. Reform Rabbis are now wearing Kipot once anathema to them, and urging Mitzvah observance albeit not mandatorily and have even established Kollelim… as a way perpetuating their existence. Both the Conservative and Reform movements now have their own elementary schools and the Conservatives even have their own high schools. While it is true that the Conservatives are in the midst of an identity crisis, it may yet self resolve because of this new and apparently successful phenomenon.
So what was once an “orthodoxy” of the American secular Jewish mindset to totally assimilate out of Jewish practice is now almost an apostasy. They have done an almost complete 180. And that’s a good thing. Secular Jewry has seen the fruit of old policies. Dropping observance has turned into intermarriage and many Jews hardly identify at all as Jews and have virtually no Jewish identity. The once predicted demise of Orthodox Jewry has morphed into an emulation of Orthodox practices.
But there’s a fly in the ointment. All is not well in candyland. Rabbi Feldman correctly laments that in essence, we are our own worst enemy. We cannot be content to celebrate our successes and move forward in unison. We instead quite because of our success, fight amongst ourselves. Instead of uniting in common cause in Orthodox brotherhood, we have taken to factionalizing and narrowing our circles so as to exclude those with whom we have even the slightest of differences.
It is one thing to reject extremism that might be on the fringes of both ends of the Orthodox spectrum. I could understand drawing those lines and draw them myself. But we have come to a point where we are drawing our circles smaller and smaller in an effort to more narrowly define what we believe to be authentic Judaism. And in the process we do more harm to ourselves as a whole than we gain in our subsets.
Who knows? Maybe someday this kind of thinking will be recognized for the harm it causes and we can once again return to the days of Rav Aharon Kotler and the Rav who could work together for the same purpose while differing Hashkafically, and yet could actually respect each others views. Imagine how wonderful that would be!
I will end with the following from Rabbi Feldman’s article: It is a virtual clone of my own dream although expressed far more eloquently than I ever could:
A Jewish fantasy: An emergency joint task force of the leadership of the Orthodox Union and other MO institutions, and of Agudath Israel and other Yeshiva Orthodoxy (YO) institutions, is established. It has a single, circumscribed purpose: It will focus on ways to fight the onslaught of Jewish ignorance and intermarriage. Neither group necessarily accepts the others’ worldview; perspectives on Torah and Jewish life remain unchanged. But in this critical eit la’asot situation—and in fulfillment of the words of the Talmud Yerushalmi in Sotah (7:4), and of Ramban (Devarim 27:26), that those who are able to influence others to be loyal to Torah and do not care to do so, do not find favor in the eyes of our Creator—stereotypes and intolerance are put aside, and resources and energies are combined for this single objective.
Imagine the electric impact on the Jewish world even of such a limited cooperation.
In any case, I once again find myself in complete agreement with Rabbi Emanuel Feldman. I have written about this issue many times, most recently in an article from last year in the Jewish Press.
In the current article Rabbi Emanuel Feldman writes of the “stunning and almost shocking” surprise he got from a study about the ascendancy of Orthodox Judaism in our time:
“A recently issued study by the American Jewish Committee and that in the decades to come it is destined to exercise major influence on the quality and direction of American Jewish life.”
As I have pointed out in the past, many non-Orthodox movements are rejecting the rejectionist ways of their forebearers and are incorporating many of the trappings once reserved for only the most Orthodox of Jewry. Reform Rabbis are now wearing Kipot once anathema to them, and urging Mitzvah observance albeit not mandatorily and have even established Kollelim… as a way perpetuating their existence. Both the Conservative and Reform movements now have their own elementary schools and the Conservatives even have their own high schools. While it is true that the Conservatives are in the midst of an identity crisis, it may yet self resolve because of this new and apparently successful phenomenon.
So what was once an “orthodoxy” of the American secular Jewish mindset to totally assimilate out of Jewish practice is now almost an apostasy. They have done an almost complete 180. And that’s a good thing. Secular Jewry has seen the fruit of old policies. Dropping observance has turned into intermarriage and many Jews hardly identify at all as Jews and have virtually no Jewish identity. The once predicted demise of Orthodox Jewry has morphed into an emulation of Orthodox practices.
But there’s a fly in the ointment. All is not well in candyland. Rabbi Feldman correctly laments that in essence, we are our own worst enemy. We cannot be content to celebrate our successes and move forward in unison. We instead quite because of our success, fight amongst ourselves. Instead of uniting in common cause in Orthodox brotherhood, we have taken to factionalizing and narrowing our circles so as to exclude those with whom we have even the slightest of differences.
It is one thing to reject extremism that might be on the fringes of both ends of the Orthodox spectrum. I could understand drawing those lines and draw them myself. But we have come to a point where we are drawing our circles smaller and smaller in an effort to more narrowly define what we believe to be authentic Judaism. And in the process we do more harm to ourselves as a whole than we gain in our subsets.
Who knows? Maybe someday this kind of thinking will be recognized for the harm it causes and we can once again return to the days of Rav Aharon Kotler and the Rav who could work together for the same purpose while differing Hashkafically, and yet could actually respect each others views. Imagine how wonderful that would be!
I will end with the following from Rabbi Feldman’s article: It is a virtual clone of my own dream although expressed far more eloquently than I ever could:
A Jewish fantasy: An emergency joint task force of the leadership of the Orthodox Union and other MO institutions, and of Agudath Israel and other Yeshiva Orthodoxy (YO) institutions, is established. It has a single, circumscribed purpose: It will focus on ways to fight the onslaught of Jewish ignorance and intermarriage. Neither group necessarily accepts the others’ worldview; perspectives on Torah and Jewish life remain unchanged. But in this critical eit la’asot situation—and in fulfillment of the words of the Talmud Yerushalmi in Sotah (7:4), and of Ramban (Devarim 27:26), that those who are able to influence others to be loyal to Torah and do not care to do so, do not find favor in the eyes of our Creator—stereotypes and intolerance are put aside, and resources and energies are combined for this single objective.
Imagine the electric impact on the Jewish world even of such a limited cooperation.
Rabbi Meir Yaakov Soloveichik
Rav Meir Yaakov Soloveichick is a friend of mine. I saw him grow from a brilliant student in Yeshivas Brisk to a brilliant student in Yeshiva University, to a brilliant thinker in his own right. He is truly a man for the future. And although he is my Rebbe’s grandson in body, he is his is great uncle’s grandson in spirit. His brilliance in Torah knowledge speaks for itself. But as a PhD candidate in philosophy he clearly comes closer in thought to his great uncle than to his grandfather.
Of course I do not mean to compare his greatness to that of his illustrious uncle or even his grandfather. Nor would I even compare him to his own father, Rav Eliyahu Soloveichik, who is one of the great Talmidei Chachamim of our generation. I am absolutely convinced Rav Meir would agree with me about that. But that just speaks of the magnitudes of order of greatness that Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik and his brother Rav Aaron Soloveichik stood out in comparrison to the great Torah figures of the present time. Though not yet reaching their level, Rav Meir is still a giant… a budding one to be sure but a giant still among men, none the less.
He has written an article in commentary magazine that is discussed by Rabbi Adlerstein which speaks to an issue touched upon here, most recently yesterday… the issue of interfaith dialogue.
Rav Meir Soloveichik writes in Commentary Magazine a critique of a book written by Oxford-trained Catholic theologian, Maria Johnson, Strangers and Neighbors: What I Have Learned About Christianity by Living Among Orthodox Jews .
As Rav Adlersaten describes it, he basically uses her book to lambaste those Jewish theologians like A.J. Heshel, David Hartman, and Irving Greenberg who have advocated dialogue and claim that the specificities of Judaism’s rituals are not as important as the universal truths that all faiths have in common. Dr. Johnson’s book refutes this notion. She claims the opposite to be the case. She “has learned to appreciate how the constant focus on G-d’s Will does bring people closer to Him.”
This, says Rav Addlerstien, harkens back to the Rav’s own views:
“In a 1964 talk that remains the position paper of Orthodoxy regarding interfaith theological dialogue, Rav Soloveichik opined that “Standardization of practices, equalization of dogmatic certitudes, and the waiving of eschatological claims spell the end of the vibrant and great faith experience of any religious community.” Attempting to bring faith communities closer together by diluting the strength of their beliefs would be destructive to the faiths of both.”
I recall my time spent with Rav Meir on those occasions when he was a student at Yeshiva University. He was a dear friend to my daughter and son in law who was also a student at YU at the time and he would often come by on a Shabbos when I was there and we would have some great discussions. So also when he would visit his parents in Chicago for the Yomim Tovim. Our views were pretty close then as I recall. And it seems, they still are.
Of course I do not mean to compare his greatness to that of his illustrious uncle or even his grandfather. Nor would I even compare him to his own father, Rav Eliyahu Soloveichik, who is one of the great Talmidei Chachamim of our generation. I am absolutely convinced Rav Meir would agree with me about that. But that just speaks of the magnitudes of order of greatness that Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik and his brother Rav Aaron Soloveichik stood out in comparrison to the great Torah figures of the present time. Though not yet reaching their level, Rav Meir is still a giant… a budding one to be sure but a giant still among men, none the less.
He has written an article in commentary magazine that is discussed by Rabbi Adlerstein which speaks to an issue touched upon here, most recently yesterday… the issue of interfaith dialogue.
Rav Meir Soloveichik writes in Commentary Magazine a critique of a book written by Oxford-trained Catholic theologian, Maria Johnson, Strangers and Neighbors: What I Have Learned About Christianity by Living Among Orthodox Jews .
As Rav Adlersaten describes it, he basically uses her book to lambaste those Jewish theologians like A.J. Heshel, David Hartman, and Irving Greenberg who have advocated dialogue and claim that the specificities of Judaism’s rituals are not as important as the universal truths that all faiths have in common. Dr. Johnson’s book refutes this notion. She claims the opposite to be the case. She “has learned to appreciate how the constant focus on G-d’s Will does bring people closer to Him.”
This, says Rav Addlerstien, harkens back to the Rav’s own views:
“In a 1964 talk that remains the position paper of Orthodoxy regarding interfaith theological dialogue, Rav Soloveichik opined that “Standardization of practices, equalization of dogmatic certitudes, and the waiving of eschatological claims spell the end of the vibrant and great faith experience of any religious community.” Attempting to bring faith communities closer together by diluting the strength of their beliefs would be destructive to the faiths of both.”
I recall my time spent with Rav Meir on those occasions when he was a student at Yeshiva University. He was a dear friend to my daughter and son in law who was also a student at YU at the time and he would often come by on a Shabbos when I was there and we would have some great discussions. So also when he would visit his parents in Chicago for the Yomim Tovim. Our views were pretty close then as I recall. And it seems, they still are.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
How Big, the Tent of Modern Orthodoxy?
YCT graduate and spiritual leader of KiDMa, Rabbi Darren Kleinberg has moved me to challenge his co-opting the use of the term Modern Orthodox. Rabbi Kleinberg explains his reasons for choosing to list himself as a Modern Orthodox Shul.
He then rather benignly suggests that the reason he defines himself that way is as follows:
“We are a community guided by Jewish law; Shabbat is observed in the traditional Orthodox fashion, dietary laws are observed and prayer follows the traditional liturgy.At the same time, we encourage greater involvement on the part of women, we welcome Jews of all levels of observance equally and we see non-Orthodox movements as our partners.The qualifier "Modern" (as in "Modern Orthodox") refers to each of these and other distinguishing characteristics. We are not "Traditionally Orthodox" as it were; we are “Modern Orthodox.”
At first glance, it sounds quite normal. It even sounds laudable, Shmiras HaMitzvos, inclusiveness for women, outreach to non-Orthodox Jews. What’s wrong with that?
But as is often the case “the devil is in the details”. As was pointed out in an earlier post, Rabbi Kleinberg is far from just a rabbi of a Shul that is more modern in outlook than other Modern Orthodox Shuls. His Shul is about more than outreach to non-Orthodox Jews. He seeks to distort Orthodoxy into something that is unrecognizable. And this is quite in concert with why he says YCT was founded:
“YCT was founded in 2000 by Rabbi Avi Weiss "to transform Orthodoxy. "From the role of women in ritual, to recognition of the value of non-Orthodox movements…”
To his credit, he does admit that he does “not speak on behalf of the institution.” He doesn’t want any aspersions to be cast due to any of his own innovations. But the fact is that he simply put into practice the mission statement of "Open Orthodoxy" of his school.
The radical departure from the traditional roles for women that YCT advocates and Rabbi Kleinberg implements is not what disturbs me. That would just make his version of Orthodoxy a very left wing modern orthodox one. It would still be technically Orthodox.
What disturbs me is his declaration that his version of Modern Orthodoxy includes a partnership with other denominations. This goes much further than having dialogue with them which is by itself a departure from the near universal condemnation of such a practice. It grants them total legitimacy… equal partnership. I do not see how anyone with htis view can claim as part of their title “Orthodoxy”. It is modern…. but is it really Orthodox? How can recognition of those who deny Torah MiSinai; those who accept the view that the Torah was written by man, or that none of the events listed in the Torah actually happened…as an Orthodox approach? This approach cannot be sanctioned by anyone who calls himself Orthodox in any way. And this says nothing of his flirting with non Jewish denominations as equals “praising” and “praying” with them at an ecumenical event not long ago.
And this is the danger of YCTs open Orthodoxy. The slippery slope of dialogue quickly deteriorated into recognition via partnership.
There may be a place in the Torah world for a left wing Modern Orthodox rabbinical seminary. But such an institution must be clear about legitimizing heretical movements. It cannot allow its graduates to remain in good standing if they declare partnerships with them. Accepting Rabbi Kleinberg’s approach de-legitimizes YCT’s claim to be Modern Orthodox. They would do well to remove the word “Orthodox” from its identity.
Modern Orthodoxy should be a big tent. It should include the right and the left. But it cannot include partnerships with the heretical.
He then rather benignly suggests that the reason he defines himself that way is as follows:
“We are a community guided by Jewish law; Shabbat is observed in the traditional Orthodox fashion, dietary laws are observed and prayer follows the traditional liturgy.At the same time, we encourage greater involvement on the part of women, we welcome Jews of all levels of observance equally and we see non-Orthodox movements as our partners.The qualifier "Modern" (as in "Modern Orthodox") refers to each of these and other distinguishing characteristics. We are not "Traditionally Orthodox" as it were; we are “Modern Orthodox.”
At first glance, it sounds quite normal. It even sounds laudable, Shmiras HaMitzvos, inclusiveness for women, outreach to non-Orthodox Jews. What’s wrong with that?
But as is often the case “the devil is in the details”. As was pointed out in an earlier post, Rabbi Kleinberg is far from just a rabbi of a Shul that is more modern in outlook than other Modern Orthodox Shuls. His Shul is about more than outreach to non-Orthodox Jews. He seeks to distort Orthodoxy into something that is unrecognizable. And this is quite in concert with why he says YCT was founded:
“YCT was founded in 2000 by Rabbi Avi Weiss "to transform Orthodoxy. "From the role of women in ritual, to recognition of the value of non-Orthodox movements…”
To his credit, he does admit that he does “not speak on behalf of the institution.” He doesn’t want any aspersions to be cast due to any of his own innovations. But the fact is that he simply put into practice the mission statement of "Open Orthodoxy" of his school.
The radical departure from the traditional roles for women that YCT advocates and Rabbi Kleinberg implements is not what disturbs me. That would just make his version of Orthodoxy a very left wing modern orthodox one. It would still be technically Orthodox.
What disturbs me is his declaration that his version of Modern Orthodoxy includes a partnership with other denominations. This goes much further than having dialogue with them which is by itself a departure from the near universal condemnation of such a practice. It grants them total legitimacy… equal partnership. I do not see how anyone with htis view can claim as part of their title “Orthodoxy”. It is modern…. but is it really Orthodox? How can recognition of those who deny Torah MiSinai; those who accept the view that the Torah was written by man, or that none of the events listed in the Torah actually happened…as an Orthodox approach? This approach cannot be sanctioned by anyone who calls himself Orthodox in any way. And this says nothing of his flirting with non Jewish denominations as equals “praising” and “praying” with them at an ecumenical event not long ago.
And this is the danger of YCTs open Orthodoxy. The slippery slope of dialogue quickly deteriorated into recognition via partnership.
There may be a place in the Torah world for a left wing Modern Orthodox rabbinical seminary. But such an institution must be clear about legitimizing heretical movements. It cannot allow its graduates to remain in good standing if they declare partnerships with them. Accepting Rabbi Kleinberg’s approach de-legitimizes YCT’s claim to be Modern Orthodox. They would do well to remove the word “Orthodox” from its identity.
Modern Orthodoxy should be a big tent. It should include the right and the left. But it cannot include partnerships with the heretical.
Friday, March 16, 2007
The Second Mi Sheberach
There is one practice in the Torah world that is very common and in my view very wrong. It is the practice of making an automatic second Mi SheBerach after an Aliyah on Shabbos in exchange for a donation. An individual will be called to the Torah for his Aliyah. After the reading of his Torah portion he will make the second blessing. That is followed immediately with a Mi SheBerach, a request from God to bless the individual who just performed the great Mitzvah of blessing the Torah and then either reading his portion himself, or having the Baal Koreh do it as his Shaliach, his agent.
But in many Shuls it doesn’t end there. A second Mi SheBerach is automatically added. The Oleh (person who was called to the Torah) is turned to in the middle of the Mi SheBerach and asked who else he wants to request of God to be blessed. At that point people will mention any number of names, usually, but not limited to, immediate family members. Near the end of that Mi SheBerach there is a portion that states that the Oleh pledges money to the Shul as part of it the request for a Godly blessing for those he included in the Mi SheBerach.
Aside from lengthening the amount of time spent in Shul, this practice in my view is nothing short of extortion. It is bad enough that these Mi Sheberachs are of questionable origin. I have yet to see it in any Siddur I’ve looked into. But assuming they are even legitimate, to make them automatic is just plain wrong. One should at least be asked if he wants one made. By doing it automatically and demanding a donation as part of it, it becomes something far less than a Kibud, the honor it is supposed to be. It instead becomes a burden.
But what is an Oleh to do? He is a “prisoner of circumstance”… too embarrassed to not give anything. So he will pledge something.
Now no Shul demands any specific amount. What ever an individual wants to give is accepted graciously. But that doesn’t change the fact that it is a forced donation. It doesn’t really matter that one can donate even an insignificant amount if he chooses to fulfill his obligation that way. Often people will just say the word 'Matanah' (gift) in the “pledge space” of the Mi sheberach. And then he can give as little as he wants… even a penny. But it doesn’t matter. It is extortion no less. And it is wrong.
I know many Shuls need the money. They often operate in a constant state of debt and provide a great service to their community. They deserve to be supported by their community. And they may very well consider this an indispensable way of raising badly needed funds. I’m told quite a bit of money is raised that way over the course of a year. But that still doesn’t make it right.
One might ask, “Why not just refuse the Aliyah?” It doesn’t work that way. It’s not right to refuse an Aliyah to the Torah and one does not embarrass himself by refusing it. Nor does one embarrass himself by telling the Shul to refrain from the second Misheberach when it is always done. That would be wrong, too. So you are called to the Torah and once the Aliyah is over, you owe the Shul… something.
What right do Shuls have to extort money in this way? What justification is there? What is the Halachic basis for this extortion? Yet, it is an accepted practice in many Shuls. And I am here to inform everyone who reads this blog that Halacha does not require anyone to pay any pledge that is extracted in this way. It is not a pledge at all but extortion, albeit for a good cause. How do I know that one does not have to pay any pledge made in a forced Mi SheBerach situation?
The subject came up during the course of learning Shas. Several years ago, Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer informed me and the rest of my Daf Yomi Shiur on the basis of a respected Posek that one is not obligated to pay such “pledges”. However one must be careful not answer Amen to the MiSheberach.
And that has been my policy ever since. If an organization wants a donation it ought to be up front and ask for one directly. This is how I give Tzedaka. I see a need and if I am sympathetic to it, I give to the best of my ability. I never turn down any individual who is in need and asks me for donation. But attempt at extortion, no matter how Frum a Mi SheBerach may sound our how needy the Shul, will get a big zero.
Modified: 3/18/07 - 6:50 CDT
But in many Shuls it doesn’t end there. A second Mi SheBerach is automatically added. The Oleh (person who was called to the Torah) is turned to in the middle of the Mi SheBerach and asked who else he wants to request of God to be blessed. At that point people will mention any number of names, usually, but not limited to, immediate family members. Near the end of that Mi SheBerach there is a portion that states that the Oleh pledges money to the Shul as part of it the request for a Godly blessing for those he included in the Mi SheBerach.
Aside from lengthening the amount of time spent in Shul, this practice in my view is nothing short of extortion. It is bad enough that these Mi Sheberachs are of questionable origin. I have yet to see it in any Siddur I’ve looked into. But assuming they are even legitimate, to make them automatic is just plain wrong. One should at least be asked if he wants one made. By doing it automatically and demanding a donation as part of it, it becomes something far less than a Kibud, the honor it is supposed to be. It instead becomes a burden.
But what is an Oleh to do? He is a “prisoner of circumstance”… too embarrassed to not give anything. So he will pledge something.
Now no Shul demands any specific amount. What ever an individual wants to give is accepted graciously. But that doesn’t change the fact that it is a forced donation. It doesn’t really matter that one can donate even an insignificant amount if he chooses to fulfill his obligation that way. Often people will just say the word 'Matanah' (gift) in the “pledge space” of the Mi sheberach. And then he can give as little as he wants… even a penny. But it doesn’t matter. It is extortion no less. And it is wrong.
I know many Shuls need the money. They often operate in a constant state of debt and provide a great service to their community. They deserve to be supported by their community. And they may very well consider this an indispensable way of raising badly needed funds. I’m told quite a bit of money is raised that way over the course of a year. But that still doesn’t make it right.
One might ask, “Why not just refuse the Aliyah?” It doesn’t work that way. It’s not right to refuse an Aliyah to the Torah and one does not embarrass himself by refusing it. Nor does one embarrass himself by telling the Shul to refrain from the second Misheberach when it is always done. That would be wrong, too. So you are called to the Torah and once the Aliyah is over, you owe the Shul… something.
What right do Shuls have to extort money in this way? What justification is there? What is the Halachic basis for this extortion? Yet, it is an accepted practice in many Shuls. And I am here to inform everyone who reads this blog that Halacha does not require anyone to pay any pledge that is extracted in this way. It is not a pledge at all but extortion, albeit for a good cause. How do I know that one does not have to pay any pledge made in a forced Mi SheBerach situation?
The subject came up during the course of learning Shas. Several years ago, Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer informed me and the rest of my Daf Yomi Shiur on the basis of a respected Posek that one is not obligated to pay such “pledges”. However one must be careful not answer Amen to the MiSheberach.
And that has been my policy ever since. If an organization wants a donation it ought to be up front and ask for one directly. This is how I give Tzedaka. I see a need and if I am sympathetic to it, I give to the best of my ability. I never turn down any individual who is in need and asks me for donation. But attempt at extortion, no matter how Frum a Mi SheBerach may sound our how needy the Shul, will get a big zero.
Modified: 3/18/07 - 6:50 CDT
Thursday, March 15, 2007
The Wrong Solution to the Poverty of Avreichim
There is an interesting post today in Marty Bluke’s blog.
Apparently the Tzedaka fund Kupat Ha’ir has crossed a line. They are now using questionable quotes by Gedloim for their own fundraising purposes. They have quoted Rav Chaim Kanieavsky in an ad promoting their Tzedaka and I find it very distasteful. I’m not saying Rav Kanievasky would disapprove of this Tzedaka fund or that he would mind being quoted as a supporter of it. Quite the contrary. Im sure that he is a large supporter of this type of Tzedaka. But I really doubt that he had anything to do with this statement. Which says the following as translated by Marty Bluke:
'With the starting of tractate Moed Katan, R' Chaim Kanievsky said that it is known in the name of the Chasam Sofer that there is a concern in learning Moed Katan because of the fact they you are learning the halachos of mourning. Therefore the Chasam Sofer said that a person should give charity before learning this tractate.R' Kanievsky added that certainly someone who gives charity to "Kupat Hair" will be saved from any pain and anguish and has nothing to worry about.As always, the names of all donors will be passed on to R' Kanievsky for a blessing.'
I wonder if he truly did say this. And I even wonder if the Chasam Sofer did? The fact that it is quoted in the name of the Chasam Sofer without citing a source makes me very skeptical. But even if it’s true, the tactic of using an obscure and questionable quote to raise money strikes me as mercenary, trading on the fears of the average man and implying that every donation will generate a Bracha from Rav Kanievsky.
I wonder how many people in the past gave money to Tzedaka before learning Moed Katan? Let me hazard a guess: Zero. And as Marty points out: “The mesora that I got from my Rabbeim was diametrically opposed to this approach.” I’m sure his rebbeim aren’t the only ones who feel this way.
And then there's the fact that they will pass on names of contributors to Rav Kanievsky. That does not gaurentee he will take the time to bless every single one of them. At least not individually if at all. Highly deceptive tactic if you ask me.
I am told that Kupat Ha’ir is a respectable charity fund with funds going primarily to poor Avreichim in Bnei Brak. But I find the methods often employed in raising those funds by even respectable charities increasingly problematic. I know that poor Avreichim need money. And the vast majority of those needy Avreichim recipients are fine and decent people who literally do not have enough money to meet the bare necessities of life. But do the ends justify the means? Should questionable means be used to raise funds even if they are for a worthy cause? How far do we go with this? Is it OK to steal from the rich and give it to the poor?
This type of charity and the desperate methods used in trying to raise funds, once again points out the failure of the Charedi educational system in Israel. One cannot sustain one’s earthly existence on spirituality alone. The questionable fundraising methods that appeals like this have underscores the magnitude of the problem in Israel. Yet no one seems to be doing anything about it except to keep trying trying to extort ever greater amounts of money from the Govenment and increase the level of charitable donations from the working class in questionable ways.
Perhaps the bubble hasn’t burst yet. But it will if nothing is done. Perhaps within a decade or two, there will be so many poor Avreichim that it will be impossible to generate enough Tzedaka to help them.
The poverty grows. Avenues of Parnassa are denied because of insufficient training for the workplace, and women are prevented from getting decent paying jobs as well by being denied the opportunity to advance their own education.
Those in the community which Kupat Ha'ir serves will say, “ We have to have Bitachon” …faith in the Creator. Well, yes, we should all have Bitachon. But it doesn’t spread well on a slice of stale bread. Bitchaon has to be coupled with Hishtadlus. There are huge numbers of Charedi Avreichim that increase exponentially with every new generation. But when it comes to Hishtadlus for Parnassa there is none. No one from their ranks seems to be offering a solution. Instead they offer only impediments.
Apparently the Tzedaka fund Kupat Ha’ir has crossed a line. They are now using questionable quotes by Gedloim for their own fundraising purposes. They have quoted Rav Chaim Kanieavsky in an ad promoting their Tzedaka and I find it very distasteful. I’m not saying Rav Kanievasky would disapprove of this Tzedaka fund or that he would mind being quoted as a supporter of it. Quite the contrary. Im sure that he is a large supporter of this type of Tzedaka. But I really doubt that he had anything to do with this statement. Which says the following as translated by Marty Bluke:
'With the starting of tractate Moed Katan, R' Chaim Kanievsky said that it is known in the name of the Chasam Sofer that there is a concern in learning Moed Katan because of the fact they you are learning the halachos of mourning. Therefore the Chasam Sofer said that a person should give charity before learning this tractate.R' Kanievsky added that certainly someone who gives charity to "Kupat Hair" will be saved from any pain and anguish and has nothing to worry about.As always, the names of all donors will be passed on to R' Kanievsky for a blessing.'
I wonder if he truly did say this. And I even wonder if the Chasam Sofer did? The fact that it is quoted in the name of the Chasam Sofer without citing a source makes me very skeptical. But even if it’s true, the tactic of using an obscure and questionable quote to raise money strikes me as mercenary, trading on the fears of the average man and implying that every donation will generate a Bracha from Rav Kanievsky.
I wonder how many people in the past gave money to Tzedaka before learning Moed Katan? Let me hazard a guess: Zero. And as Marty points out: “The mesora that I got from my Rabbeim was diametrically opposed to this approach.” I’m sure his rebbeim aren’t the only ones who feel this way.
And then there's the fact that they will pass on names of contributors to Rav Kanievsky. That does not gaurentee he will take the time to bless every single one of them. At least not individually if at all. Highly deceptive tactic if you ask me.
I am told that Kupat Ha’ir is a respectable charity fund with funds going primarily to poor Avreichim in Bnei Brak. But I find the methods often employed in raising those funds by even respectable charities increasingly problematic. I know that poor Avreichim need money. And the vast majority of those needy Avreichim recipients are fine and decent people who literally do not have enough money to meet the bare necessities of life. But do the ends justify the means? Should questionable means be used to raise funds even if they are for a worthy cause? How far do we go with this? Is it OK to steal from the rich and give it to the poor?
This type of charity and the desperate methods used in trying to raise funds, once again points out the failure of the Charedi educational system in Israel. One cannot sustain one’s earthly existence on spirituality alone. The questionable fundraising methods that appeals like this have underscores the magnitude of the problem in Israel. Yet no one seems to be doing anything about it except to keep trying trying to extort ever greater amounts of money from the Govenment and increase the level of charitable donations from the working class in questionable ways.
Perhaps the bubble hasn’t burst yet. But it will if nothing is done. Perhaps within a decade or two, there will be so many poor Avreichim that it will be impossible to generate enough Tzedaka to help them.
The poverty grows. Avenues of Parnassa are denied because of insufficient training for the workplace, and women are prevented from getting decent paying jobs as well by being denied the opportunity to advance their own education.
Those in the community which Kupat Ha'ir serves will say, “ We have to have Bitachon” …faith in the Creator. Well, yes, we should all have Bitachon. But it doesn’t spread well on a slice of stale bread. Bitchaon has to be coupled with Hishtadlus. There are huge numbers of Charedi Avreichim that increase exponentially with every new generation. But when it comes to Hishtadlus for Parnassa there is none. No one from their ranks seems to be offering a solution. Instead they offer only impediments.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Churchill, Friend or Foe?
A recently discovered article by Winston Churchill has cast him a rather unflattering light. It seems to indicate that Churchill’s perception of the Jewish people was of a type that is typically negative and stereotypical. It contains phrases and description one often hears today from some of the most extreme fringe elements in American society, like the KKK or the Neo Nazis. Or any of the "holocaust revisionist" crowd:
"Every Jewish moneylender recalls Shylock and the idea of the Jews as usurers. And you cannot reasonably expect a struggling clerk or shopkeeper, paying 40 or 50 per cent interest on borrowed money to a 'Hebrew Bloodsucker'
And, it seems that this document is not the only instance of anti-semtic references by Churchill. He had on nan earlier occasion referred “to the Russian Bolshevik leadership as "Semitic conspirators" and "Jew Commissars.”
But as is the case with many non Jews who harbor such stereotypes about us, his hatred was not really translated into action. There has been criticism of Churchill not doing enough to help the plight of Jews during the holocaust. He should have been more forthcoming during the holocaust with respect to allowing the British mandatatory in Palestine to open its doors to refugees. The blame, however, cannot be laid entirely at his feet. He had to deal with a British bureaucracy that was at least as inherently anti-Semitic as FDR’s State department. But the truth is that he was appalled by what was happening to the Jews of Europe and unable to really do anything about it politically. Churchill redeemed himself somewhat by his strong support for the State of Israel:
“Churchill supported the Zionist cause throughout his career, often vigorously so and in the face of fierce opposition within his own cabinet.”
And this is true about many of our friends throughout history. In many cases where not so latent anti-Semitic feelings existed, actions spoke louder than words. Harry Truman and Richard Nixon come to mind. Both harbored internal feelings of anti-Semitism and expressed them often in private. This has been documented. But when the need was there, both men unflinchingly lent their support to the Jewish people.
There has always been a latent anti-Semitism in the world. Esav Sonei L’Yaakov in not a modern day invention. Those words were written almost a thousand years ago by Rabbi Shlomo Itzchaki, better know as Rashi. And throughout the history of the Jewish people in the diaspora, those feelings were acted upon, sometimes with a vengeance that reflected the Tochacha, that portion of the Torah that tells of how the Jewish people will fare if they do not listen to the word of God.
Until our present era post holocaust this hatred had existed both in overt and latent forms. As Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik points out in his book “Logic of the Heart, Logic of the Mind”, even Thomas Masaryk who was considered a righteous gentile by his generation, once admitted to a confidant that here was still latent prejudice against Jews in his heart, .
So was Churchill an anti-Semite? Not in any meaningful way that would cause us harm. Certainly no worse than Truman or Nixon. And for a European, maybe that’s the best we can hope for.
That said I would re-state my oft made assertion that in our time the vast majority of the American people are not anti-Semitic at all. The worst of them are no worse than Churchill. And the ones that matter, those sometimes referred to as the moral majority, do not as a group, harbor any anti-Semitic feelings. They do not qualify under the rubric of Esav Sonei L’Yaakov at all today for a variety of reasons, mostly having to do with the nature of the American ideal.
The founding fathers were descendants of those who came to these shores because of religious persecution. Freedom of religion was built not only into the constitution but it was in the very fiber of their being. Post holocaust there has been a sea change in attitude amongst those who call themselves fundamentalist Christians and it is they who are the true religious heirs of the Pilgrims. No where is this better demonstrated than by what happened at a recent AIPAC meeting.
Those who might identify as the "moral majority" actually look up to religious Jews as something to admire. This was demonstrated when Senator Joe Lieberman was nominated for VP. That event gave Vice President Al Gore a 10% boost in the polls evening him out with President Bush in the 2000 Presidential election. When voters were asked about whether Lieberman's Orthodoxy was a concern, most replied that they saw it as an asset.
God bless the American people.
"Every Jewish moneylender recalls Shylock and the idea of the Jews as usurers. And you cannot reasonably expect a struggling clerk or shopkeeper, paying 40 or 50 per cent interest on borrowed money to a 'Hebrew Bloodsucker'
And, it seems that this document is not the only instance of anti-semtic references by Churchill. He had on nan earlier occasion referred “to the Russian Bolshevik leadership as "Semitic conspirators" and "Jew Commissars.”
But as is the case with many non Jews who harbor such stereotypes about us, his hatred was not really translated into action. There has been criticism of Churchill not doing enough to help the plight of Jews during the holocaust. He should have been more forthcoming during the holocaust with respect to allowing the British mandatatory in Palestine to open its doors to refugees. The blame, however, cannot be laid entirely at his feet. He had to deal with a British bureaucracy that was at least as inherently anti-Semitic as FDR’s State department. But the truth is that he was appalled by what was happening to the Jews of Europe and unable to really do anything about it politically. Churchill redeemed himself somewhat by his strong support for the State of Israel:
“Churchill supported the Zionist cause throughout his career, often vigorously so and in the face of fierce opposition within his own cabinet.”
And this is true about many of our friends throughout history. In many cases where not so latent anti-Semitic feelings existed, actions spoke louder than words. Harry Truman and Richard Nixon come to mind. Both harbored internal feelings of anti-Semitism and expressed them often in private. This has been documented. But when the need was there, both men unflinchingly lent their support to the Jewish people.
There has always been a latent anti-Semitism in the world. Esav Sonei L’Yaakov in not a modern day invention. Those words were written almost a thousand years ago by Rabbi Shlomo Itzchaki, better know as Rashi. And throughout the history of the Jewish people in the diaspora, those feelings were acted upon, sometimes with a vengeance that reflected the Tochacha, that portion of the Torah that tells of how the Jewish people will fare if they do not listen to the word of God.
Until our present era post holocaust this hatred had existed both in overt and latent forms. As Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik points out in his book “Logic of the Heart, Logic of the Mind”, even Thomas Masaryk who was considered a righteous gentile by his generation, once admitted to a confidant that here was still latent prejudice against Jews in his heart, .
So was Churchill an anti-Semite? Not in any meaningful way that would cause us harm. Certainly no worse than Truman or Nixon. And for a European, maybe that’s the best we can hope for.
That said I would re-state my oft made assertion that in our time the vast majority of the American people are not anti-Semitic at all. The worst of them are no worse than Churchill. And the ones that matter, those sometimes referred to as the moral majority, do not as a group, harbor any anti-Semitic feelings. They do not qualify under the rubric of Esav Sonei L’Yaakov at all today for a variety of reasons, mostly having to do with the nature of the American ideal.
The founding fathers were descendants of those who came to these shores because of religious persecution. Freedom of religion was built not only into the constitution but it was in the very fiber of their being. Post holocaust there has been a sea change in attitude amongst those who call themselves fundamentalist Christians and it is they who are the true religious heirs of the Pilgrims. No where is this better demonstrated than by what happened at a recent AIPAC meeting.
Those who might identify as the "moral majority" actually look up to religious Jews as something to admire. This was demonstrated when Senator Joe Lieberman was nominated for VP. That event gave Vice President Al Gore a 10% boost in the polls evening him out with President Bush in the 2000 Presidential election. When voters were asked about whether Lieberman's Orthodoxy was a concern, most replied that they saw it as an asset.
God bless the American people.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
A Violent Act
If there are two people who are further apart than these two people, I would be greatly surprised. One I admire quite a bit as a true hero and the other is one of the vilest creatures on the face of the earth. Both come from Chasidic backgrounds.
And in what seems to be a most unlikely event, these two individuals personal ended up in the same place at the same time. They were both in Poland to honor my illustrious ancestor’s Rebbe, the Noam Elimelech, one of the early Chasidic masters.
When Zaka founder, Yehuda Meshi-Zahav encountered Neturei Karta member Moshe Arye Freedman, the result was a brawl:
“Meshi-Zahav, along with another ZAKA member, quickly located Freedman and set upon him, punching the man, kicking him and breaking his glasses.”
Is this act worthy of praise? Not in my mind. I certainly agree with Meshi-Zahav’s sentiments. But I do not agree with his methods. Beating someone up is never a good idea. What, after all, does it accomplish? Is Mr. Freedman going to change his ways? Is he now going to say, “What was I thinking?” …and do Teshuva because he was beat up? I don’t think so. It might even have the opposite effect and strengthen his resolve. And it risks permanent injury to both parties and it may even make Mr. Freedman look like a victim to the media. Teshuva should always be the goal and intent when dealing with Reshaim like this. Not violence.
Besides, when a popular and heroic figure like Mr. Meshi- Zahav uses violence in this situation he leaves the impression that violence in general is a legitimate tactic. And we all know that indeed violenlce is often used by some people in that community to get what they want. If it is OK here, then maybe it’s OK to use violence to beat up anyone who upsets communal standards or religious sensitivities. So, I am indeed disappointed in Mr. Meshi-Zahav, although, I understand his passion.
To add insult to injury… what does a Shul do in response to his behavior? They give him an Aliyah, thus rewarding the violence. Apparently they think beatings are a good way to show disapproval of the behavior of those they don’t agree with. It is a bad example. And it is a bad lesson taught to their community… a community already having their share of violent responses to situations they don’t like. And as a result of this event, their reputation for using violence to resolve their issues is further enhanced.
If the Torah world wants to treat the Aryeh Freedmans of the world the way they deserve to be treated, then the answer is not violence but a complete Cherem. People like that have to be shunned by every member of every segment of the Torah world. They cannot be given Aliyos, or counted to a Minyan. They are not to be spoken to but completely ignored, as though they didn’t exist. Public notices to that effect should be made on all forums. They have to be completely ostracized form every segment of Torah Jewry, and the Chasidic community should be in the forefront of doing it since Mr. Freedman stems from it. That’s what this man deserves.
And in what seems to be a most unlikely event, these two individuals personal ended up in the same place at the same time. They were both in Poland to honor my illustrious ancestor’s Rebbe, the Noam Elimelech, one of the early Chasidic masters.
When Zaka founder, Yehuda Meshi-Zahav encountered Neturei Karta member Moshe Arye Freedman, the result was a brawl:
“Meshi-Zahav, along with another ZAKA member, quickly located Freedman and set upon him, punching the man, kicking him and breaking his glasses.”
Is this act worthy of praise? Not in my mind. I certainly agree with Meshi-Zahav’s sentiments. But I do not agree with his methods. Beating someone up is never a good idea. What, after all, does it accomplish? Is Mr. Freedman going to change his ways? Is he now going to say, “What was I thinking?” …and do Teshuva because he was beat up? I don’t think so. It might even have the opposite effect and strengthen his resolve. And it risks permanent injury to both parties and it may even make Mr. Freedman look like a victim to the media. Teshuva should always be the goal and intent when dealing with Reshaim like this. Not violence.
Besides, when a popular and heroic figure like Mr. Meshi- Zahav uses violence in this situation he leaves the impression that violence in general is a legitimate tactic. And we all know that indeed violenlce is often used by some people in that community to get what they want. If it is OK here, then maybe it’s OK to use violence to beat up anyone who upsets communal standards or religious sensitivities. So, I am indeed disappointed in Mr. Meshi-Zahav, although, I understand his passion.
To add insult to injury… what does a Shul do in response to his behavior? They give him an Aliyah, thus rewarding the violence. Apparently they think beatings are a good way to show disapproval of the behavior of those they don’t agree with. It is a bad example. And it is a bad lesson taught to their community… a community already having their share of violent responses to situations they don’t like. And as a result of this event, their reputation for using violence to resolve their issues is further enhanced.
If the Torah world wants to treat the Aryeh Freedmans of the world the way they deserve to be treated, then the answer is not violence but a complete Cherem. People like that have to be shunned by every member of every segment of the Torah world. They cannot be given Aliyos, or counted to a Minyan. They are not to be spoken to but completely ignored, as though they didn’t exist. Public notices to that effect should be made on all forums. They have to be completely ostracized form every segment of Torah Jewry, and the Chasidic community should be in the forefront of doing it since Mr. Freedman stems from it. That’s what this man deserves.
Monday, March 12, 2007
The People of the Book
Hirhurim has an important article today. It is on the subject of Tznius in the workplace. It is based on a book on the subject written from a very right wing perspective and it deals with the Halachos involved in the interaction between men and women in the workplace. And, of course it has Haskamos. As R. Gil says, “This book is highly praised and comes with glowing approbations from leading rabbis.” I haven’t read the book but I’d be willing to bet that all the approbations come from either Chasidic or Charedi Rabbanim.
As Gil describes it this book is a primer in how to turn off your fellow workers. Here are examples from the book that illustrate this as excerpted by R. Gil:
It is forbidden to make small talk about matters unrelated to business. Men and women working together should not discuss politics, current events, recent tragedies or gossip, even if they do not do so regularly. Discussing these matters on a daily basis, is a violation of halachos that border on giluy arayos, which requires one to sacrifice his life rather than transgress.(p.9)
As Gil describes it this book is a primer in how to turn off your fellow workers. Here are examples from the book that illustrate this as excerpted by R. Gil:
It is forbidden to make small talk about matters unrelated to business. Men and women working together should not discuss politics, current events, recent tragedies or gossip, even if they do not do so regularly. Discussing these matters on a daily basis, is a violation of halachos that border on giluy arayos, which requires one to sacrifice his life rather than transgress.(p.9)
When conversing with female employees or co-workers, one must be careful not to us the word "we," so that the man and woman are not referred to as one unit. For example, one should not say, "We must talk with the editor," or "We must purchase that software program." Rather, he should say, "The editor must be consulted," or "Please purchase that program."(pp.10-11)
It is a custom amongst yirei shomayim not to call a woman other than one's wife or immediate family member by her first name, thus keeping a respectful distance between the two parties. Referring to a woman by her first name brings inappropriate familiarity into the relationship. Similarly, a woman should refrain from addressing a man other than hey husband or immediate family member by his first name. (p. 20)
R. Gil’s take on this is right on the money. One cannot live in the real world of workplace and have the kind of standoffish attitude this book advocates. It would mean career suicide to behave in the above manner and a prescription for a miserable daily experience in a work environment where everyone else is being friendly and casual.
I don’t mean to minimize the very real risks one can ,and often does encounter, in the workplace between the sexes. The Michshol could easily become very great. And one needs to be vigilant. There has to be a happy medium. Behavior should reflect a healthy respect for Halacha, and a realization that indeed there are Michsholim. But it should not force one to act like “Marvin Milquetoast” either. Once again knowledge, Yiras Shamayim, and common sense should rule the day. Unfortunately many of our Bnei Torah have abdicated common sense in favor of books full of approbations.
This book reminds me of Rav Falk’s book on Tznius. Instead of dealing with reality it deals with the ideal… the Chumra becomes the standard Halacha LeMa’aseh. Just as in all things Charedi. No Nuances. No exceptions. Black and white. Hard and fast rules with approbations. And what do the Bnei Torah Do? They buy it hook line and sinker. And if they do not meet the standards they feel like failures in their Yiras Shamyim at best and Avaryanim at worst.
They do not look to parents to see how they acted in similar situations. They look in a book. Parents?! …or even grandparents?! They may be well meaning and observant, but what do they know? Did they study the relavant Sugyos in the Gemarah and then look at the Shulchan Aruch and all Halachic Responsa? Of course not. Don’t be ridiculous.
Ah, but they are Ehrliche people who may just have a family Mesorah which is different from “the book”? Nope! You never can be too careful. And so the Chumros prevail and the Torah world continues its slide to the right. Dr. Chaim Soloveitchik is so right. Mimeticism is lost and we are now truly the people of the book. But which book? The Torah? Not exactly. The book that our people are quickly becoming part of is the Sefer HaChumros.
R. Gil’s take on this is right on the money. One cannot live in the real world of workplace and have the kind of standoffish attitude this book advocates. It would mean career suicide to behave in the above manner and a prescription for a miserable daily experience in a work environment where everyone else is being friendly and casual.
I don’t mean to minimize the very real risks one can ,and often does encounter, in the workplace between the sexes. The Michshol could easily become very great. And one needs to be vigilant. There has to be a happy medium. Behavior should reflect a healthy respect for Halacha, and a realization that indeed there are Michsholim. But it should not force one to act like “Marvin Milquetoast” either. Once again knowledge, Yiras Shamayim, and common sense should rule the day. Unfortunately many of our Bnei Torah have abdicated common sense in favor of books full of approbations.
This book reminds me of Rav Falk’s book on Tznius. Instead of dealing with reality it deals with the ideal… the Chumra becomes the standard Halacha LeMa’aseh. Just as in all things Charedi. No Nuances. No exceptions. Black and white. Hard and fast rules with approbations. And what do the Bnei Torah Do? They buy it hook line and sinker. And if they do not meet the standards they feel like failures in their Yiras Shamyim at best and Avaryanim at worst.
They do not look to parents to see how they acted in similar situations. They look in a book. Parents?! …or even grandparents?! They may be well meaning and observant, but what do they know? Did they study the relavant Sugyos in the Gemarah and then look at the Shulchan Aruch and all Halachic Responsa? Of course not. Don’t be ridiculous.
Ah, but they are Ehrliche people who may just have a family Mesorah which is different from “the book”? Nope! You never can be too careful. And so the Chumros prevail and the Torah world continues its slide to the right. Dr. Chaim Soloveitchik is so right. Mimeticism is lost and we are now truly the people of the book. But which book? The Torah? Not exactly. The book that our people are quickly becoming part of is the Sefer HaChumros.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)