I’ve been agonizing about this ever since I was made aware of it in a private e-mail. It has since became the topic of various newspaper articles and blogs. It is about a clash of a principle with an act of common decency. The principle is one which I support, that of not giving any public recognition to heretical movements in Judaism. And the common decency involves how to handle the suffering of a grieving father. Should common decency transcend that principle for one brief moment?
Last week Reform Rabbi, Michael Boyden was denied an opportunity to say a Kel Maleh Rachamim for the fallen soldiers at the annual ceremony for fallen soldiers, Yom Hazikron.
What makes this particular incident remarkable is that Rabbi Boydon lost his own son, Jonathan, in 1993 in a military operation to save soldiers who had come under fire in Lebanon.
I cannot imagine losing a son at all. The pain of it is so difficult that my mind blocks out such thoughts. It refuses that emotion to enter my consciousness. That emotion is too painful to contemplate even for a moment. I suspect the same is true about any loving parent. It is in that spirit that I cannot comprehend the actions taken by the Yad Labanim Board, a committee that commemorates fallen soldiers. They asked Rabbi Boyden if he would be willing to be called up to say a Kel Maleh without being referred to by his title as a Rabbi. He refused.
I certainly understand the reasons for refusing to refer to him that way. The Reform Movement is heretical. And that was cited as the reason for denying Rabbi Boyden this simple kindness.
I agree that we shouldn’t recognize heretical movements under normal circumstances. But was this really the appropriate time to do so? Was denying a grieving father to commemorate his son, who died heroically trying to save Jewish lives an appropriate moment to stand up for this principle? Was this really so wise?
I don’t think so. This should have been an exception. Any parent who has children alive and healthy and lives in a country whose soldiers are committed to their safety should understand this. Giving this Rabbi his moment was the morally correct thing to do. Calling him up Rabbi Boyden, a still grieving father (does the grieving ever end?) would not have destroyed Torah Judaism at all. It would have instead been an act of Ahavas Yisroel. The time for battle against the Reform Movement should have been saved for another time, another place. This was not about a heretic being given a platform to preach. It was not about grantig them legitimacy. It was about common decency and respecting a grieving father’s right to memorialize his son without suffering the indignities of being denied a title which he believes he earned.
One can certainly understand Rabbi Boyden’s refusal to participate in this way. And the cost in ill will this generated is far worse than any principle that is being upheld at a particular moment.
And it makes it a bit more understandable why Rabbi Avi Shafran had the experience he wrote about at cross-currents. While I accept what he writes, as a defense and explanation, I also understand why this perception persists.
Rabbi Shafran refers us to an article written in the Jerusalem Post wherein Dr. Jonathan Schorsch (son of former Chancelor of the Conservative Jewish Theological Seminary Ismar Schrosch) blames Orthodox Jewry itself, for the hatred often encountered by them from Jews of non Orthodox denominations. He says that we are lacking in Ahavas Yisroel and cites “personal experiences of Orthodox Jews insulting him and the Orthodox refusal to accept the Jewish legitimacy of non-Orthodox theologies”.
Proclaiming an individual’s beliefs heretical while professing to love and accept him as Jew will seem contradictory and hollow to an individual whose entire persona is fused with his beliefs. This is easily exacerbated by an event such as that which took place with Rabbi Boyden. Such events tend to speak more loudly than all the explanations to the contrary, valid though they may be.
Rabbi Shafran goes on to correctly condemn words of hatred expressed by some in the Torah world:
"some of what Dr. Schorsch recounts is deeply disturbing. If, indeed, Orthodox Jews seized on the fact that his father is a chancellor emeritus of the Jewish Theological Seminary to berate Dr. Schorsch, that was uncouth, indeed downright rude. And if, indeed, one of his woman friends was assaulted by haredim for carrying a sefer Torah, all I can say is that haredi leaders have explicitly condemned and forbidden any such reactions to even intentionally provocative public displays of that sort."
He then shows that indeed there is tremendous Ahavas Yisroel in the Orthodox world and extols all the various Chesed organizations that never discriminate between Jews of any kind of any belief… or even no belief for that matter. But it does not answer the problem of perception created by what happened to Rabbi Boyden.
If we in the Torah world want to win friends and influence people, this is not the way to do it. And all the explanations in the world won’t help, because actions speak louder then words.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Why 'By Any Means Necessary' Isn't Kosher
All rumors and actions to the contrary notwithstanding, Judaism abhors extremism. The great rabbis and sages have always preached moderation and the golden mean of staying in the middle.
The Jerusalem Talmud compares human choices in life and behavior, attitudes and philosophy, to a person who has a choice between two roads. One road is sunlit but burning hot like a desert at high noon. The other road is snow covered and freezing cold.
If the person travels the sunlit road he may die of heat prostration and sunstroke. If the person goes on the snow covered road, than frostbite and even death may eventually occur. What then should the person do? The person should carve out for one's self a third road, one that is warm but not hot, moderate in temperature and condition and not extreme. The Jerusalem Talmud uses this as a metaphor for life generally — and for Jewish life, particularly.
Extremes of behavior and of religious fervor are ultimately negative and harmful. One may feel that one's extremism serves G-d's purposes here on earth. But the Torah teaches us that this is not true. The middle road in life and manners, character traits and lifestyle, is the preferred choice of the Torah and rabbinic tradition. Maimonides called the middle way "the golden path" in life. Extremism, in his opinion, was allowed only in order to achieve a return to the golden middle way.
Extremism negates tolerance, increases hatreds and brings about verbal and physical abuse and inevitability violence as well. It is counterproductive to its own goals and eventually, usually after a heavy price is extracted in human feelings, reputations and even human lives, it collapses of its own weight and misdeeds. But instead of learning this clear lesson of history, extremism on many fronts remains alive and well in our world.
There is a great attraction to extremism. It provides certainty in a very uncertain world and gives one's hatreds, prejudices and frustrations a moral underpinning. Extremism is therefore very popular. Moderation is much more difficult to maintain and popularize for it promises no certain, easy answers to the complexities of life that we face. Extremism in religion is especially appealing for then one is convinced that one is accomplishing G-d 's purposes in life in a super fashion. Extremism in religion also breeds, as a byproduct, the rationale of exclusivity. Thus everyone else in the world is wrong, culpable and doomed except for the extremist who knows exactly what G-d's will on this particular matter is.
Anyone who sees things differently, even slightly differently, is a doomed heretic. And as the Moslem extremists prove to us daily, such doomed heretics are fair game to be maimed and murdered. Extremism allows for the worst crimes to be justified and exalted because it skews any sort of proportion in human life and subverts common sense, rational thought and acceptable behavior.
Senator Barry Goldwater in his acceptance speech of the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in 1964 destroyed any hope of actually being elected when he stated that "extremism in the cause of democracy is a virtue." That statement sufficed to frighten away many a potential voter. The tragic truth is that extremism in defense of a just cause often causes unjust means to be employed.
This is the import of the rabbis' disapproval of mitzvah habah b'aveira — a positive commandment of the Torah that was fulfilled through the commission of a sin or an immoral act. The Torah taught us that righteousness as an end goal is ultimately only achieved through righteous means. Zealots and extremists shun such Torah principles and thus poison the atmosphere of life for all of us. Witness the recent debacle of extremist Jews at the Teheran Holocaust denial conference.
Maimonides permits extremism in two areas of life. One is humility. There is no limit to humility for arrogance and false pride creates monstrous people and situations. Moses is complimented in the Torah not for his strength, intellect or even leadership abilities, only for his humility — for being a true servant of G-d. And a second area where extremism is permitted is in the control of anger. The rabbis taught us that when a person loses one's temper and becomes raging angry he "has no G-d." Words spoken and actions committed in anger are lethal to relationships, families, communities and even nations. Therefore one must be extreme in avoiding such angry outbursts. But otherwise in life one must be extreme in avoiding extremism.
Taken in its entirety from JWR. Author: Rabbi Berel Wein
The Jerusalem Talmud compares human choices in life and behavior, attitudes and philosophy, to a person who has a choice between two roads. One road is sunlit but burning hot like a desert at high noon. The other road is snow covered and freezing cold.
If the person travels the sunlit road he may die of heat prostration and sunstroke. If the person goes on the snow covered road, than frostbite and even death may eventually occur. What then should the person do? The person should carve out for one's self a third road, one that is warm but not hot, moderate in temperature and condition and not extreme. The Jerusalem Talmud uses this as a metaphor for life generally — and for Jewish life, particularly.
Extremes of behavior and of religious fervor are ultimately negative and harmful. One may feel that one's extremism serves G-d's purposes here on earth. But the Torah teaches us that this is not true. The middle road in life and manners, character traits and lifestyle, is the preferred choice of the Torah and rabbinic tradition. Maimonides called the middle way "the golden path" in life. Extremism, in his opinion, was allowed only in order to achieve a return to the golden middle way.
Extremism negates tolerance, increases hatreds and brings about verbal and physical abuse and inevitability violence as well. It is counterproductive to its own goals and eventually, usually after a heavy price is extracted in human feelings, reputations and even human lives, it collapses of its own weight and misdeeds. But instead of learning this clear lesson of history, extremism on many fronts remains alive and well in our world.
There is a great attraction to extremism. It provides certainty in a very uncertain world and gives one's hatreds, prejudices and frustrations a moral underpinning. Extremism is therefore very popular. Moderation is much more difficult to maintain and popularize for it promises no certain, easy answers to the complexities of life that we face. Extremism in religion is especially appealing for then one is convinced that one is accomplishing G-d 's purposes in life in a super fashion. Extremism in religion also breeds, as a byproduct, the rationale of exclusivity. Thus everyone else in the world is wrong, culpable and doomed except for the extremist who knows exactly what G-d's will on this particular matter is.
Anyone who sees things differently, even slightly differently, is a doomed heretic. And as the Moslem extremists prove to us daily, such doomed heretics are fair game to be maimed and murdered. Extremism allows for the worst crimes to be justified and exalted because it skews any sort of proportion in human life and subverts common sense, rational thought and acceptable behavior.
Senator Barry Goldwater in his acceptance speech of the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in 1964 destroyed any hope of actually being elected when he stated that "extremism in the cause of democracy is a virtue." That statement sufficed to frighten away many a potential voter. The tragic truth is that extremism in defense of a just cause often causes unjust means to be employed.
This is the import of the rabbis' disapproval of mitzvah habah b'aveira — a positive commandment of the Torah that was fulfilled through the commission of a sin or an immoral act. The Torah taught us that righteousness as an end goal is ultimately only achieved through righteous means. Zealots and extremists shun such Torah principles and thus poison the atmosphere of life for all of us. Witness the recent debacle of extremist Jews at the Teheran Holocaust denial conference.
Maimonides permits extremism in two areas of life. One is humility. There is no limit to humility for arrogance and false pride creates monstrous people and situations. Moses is complimented in the Torah not for his strength, intellect or even leadership abilities, only for his humility — for being a true servant of G-d. And a second area where extremism is permitted is in the control of anger. The rabbis taught us that when a person loses one's temper and becomes raging angry he "has no G-d." Words spoken and actions committed in anger are lethal to relationships, families, communities and even nations. Therefore one must be extreme in avoiding such angry outbursts. But otherwise in life one must be extreme in avoiding extremism.
Taken in its entirety from JWR. Author: Rabbi Berel Wein
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Sex Abuse in Baltimore
What do the Talmudical Academy of Baltimore, Yeshivah Torah Temimah and NCSY have in common? These institutions are victims of sex abuse. That’s right victims. They are suffering the consequences of employing people who have either been convicted or about which there was strong evidence that they have sexually abused people in their care to one extent or another. They have suffered, or are now suffering the consequences of it and their reputations have forever been tarnished. But as has been amply pointed out, they are not purely victims. They are in part responsible for their fate. Not because God- forbid they approved or condoned such behavior by their employees. Of course not. But because they choose to be protective of their reputations and those of the institutions when accusations came up about abuse.
It’s understandable to want to protect an image. Especially when the institution involved is a Torah one. One need be careful before publicizing misdeeds by an employee of a Torah institution. First, the employee himself has a right to that protection since even a false accusation can ruin a reputation for life. And second, an institution representing Torah and which has generally done a good job at it has the same right, even an obligation to protect itself from false accusations.
The problem is that victims have rights too. And the voices of those who have been truly victimized must not be stifled. Justice and fairness demands it.
Questions always arise about how we balance the rights of one individual (or institution) against the rights of another. And what is to be gained by exposing the abuser to the public, if matters can be handled quietly thus saving the reputation of Torah institutions and that of their leaders?
I think the answer can be found in an article describing the latest such incident. It involves disclosing the identity of a sexual abuser 20 years after his death. The abuser in this case was a long term principal of a school as well as a rabbi for some synagogues over his career. He apparently sexually abused many victims over the years. And no one except for the victims and their immediate families seemed to be the wiser. I suspect when this abuser died, he died with honor, having otherwise served the community with distinction. His family though bereaved was probably very proud of him. He must have received wonderful accolades at his eulogy.
When accusations about his being an abuser started popping up in the The Baltimore Jewish Times, I can’t imagine the reaction of his family, whose memory of him here-to-fore had been nothing but glorious. The horror of hearing that your, husband, father, or grandfather had secretly been a sexual abuser for many years with many victims must have been impossible to take.
According to the article, Rabbi Moshe Heinemann was so upset by these belated allegations about a respected Mechanech with an exemplary reputation… a man who died 20 years ago... that he organized a boycott against the Times. What could possibly be gained , he reasoned, by such a revelation now? He has been dead for 20 years. Why dredge it all up now? Even f it is true, it surely cannot happen again since he is no longer here? All it accomplished was to besmirch the school he led along with his wife, children, grandchildren, and by extension all of Orthodoxy. He was joined in his outrage by Rabbi Abba Cohen of Agudath Israel.
These of course are all valid questions. But there are valid answers. Those answers are first to be found in the numerous victims who were abused all of those years. These people cannot and should not be swept under the rug. They have a right to closure. They have a right to make it known that they were abused in a Frum environment. But that isn’t all. The more important answer is the need to keep Torah institutions free of sexual abusers.
The legitimate desire to keep a Torah institution free of controversy enabled sexual abusers to continue. And that is illegitimate. Little if anything was ever done when accusations were made in the above named institutions. Their leaders either never believed the accusers or thought the problem could be handled internally without hanging dirty laundry in public.
But they were wrong. It was badly mishandled and abuse was allowed to continue. Of course none of it was intentional. No Torah leader would ever countenance such behavior by any employee, least of all a school principal. And also, to be fair to the Talmudical Academy of Baltimore, there is no evidence I am aware of that anyone ever knew about the abuse while it was happening other than the victims and their immediate families. But in all of the other cases I mentioned and in others that I didn’t, there was such evidence. And it was buried.
As a result of the exposure of this sexual predator, the Baltimore rabbinic community came out almost in unison with a strongly worded letter titled “Abuse in Our Community” acknowledging mistakes and calling for major innovations in the system to help prevent anything like this from ever occurring again. Will this end all abuse? I don’t know. I hope so. But at least they are facing the problem now and for the first time they have pledged to do something tangible about it.
Rabbi Heinemann signed the letter too. He has quietly discarded his call for boycotting The Baltimore Jewish Times. He has apparently re-thought his position and perhaps now realizes the value of exposing this individual.
This still leaves the unintended consequences for the family of the deceased perpetrator. They remain victims. Twenty years after his death they now face a life of humiliation. And that is indeed very sad. Hopefully the community will be understanding and accepting of these victims too and continue to treat them with the kindness and warmth of friendship they received before all this happened.
Had there been an effort in place to implement the measures outlined in the letter from the rabbinic community before exposure, I might have agreed that exposing him now would do more damage to his family than it would to help his victims. But, the initial reaction by Rav Heinemann tells quite a different story. The story needed full exposure. The shock needed to be felt by the community leadership. And it was… to a positive effect. And it is a lesson that the entire world of Orthodoxy should learn.
It’s understandable to want to protect an image. Especially when the institution involved is a Torah one. One need be careful before publicizing misdeeds by an employee of a Torah institution. First, the employee himself has a right to that protection since even a false accusation can ruin a reputation for life. And second, an institution representing Torah and which has generally done a good job at it has the same right, even an obligation to protect itself from false accusations.
The problem is that victims have rights too. And the voices of those who have been truly victimized must not be stifled. Justice and fairness demands it.
Questions always arise about how we balance the rights of one individual (or institution) against the rights of another. And what is to be gained by exposing the abuser to the public, if matters can be handled quietly thus saving the reputation of Torah institutions and that of their leaders?
I think the answer can be found in an article describing the latest such incident. It involves disclosing the identity of a sexual abuser 20 years after his death. The abuser in this case was a long term principal of a school as well as a rabbi for some synagogues over his career. He apparently sexually abused many victims over the years. And no one except for the victims and their immediate families seemed to be the wiser. I suspect when this abuser died, he died with honor, having otherwise served the community with distinction. His family though bereaved was probably very proud of him. He must have received wonderful accolades at his eulogy.
When accusations about his being an abuser started popping up in the The Baltimore Jewish Times, I can’t imagine the reaction of his family, whose memory of him here-to-fore had been nothing but glorious. The horror of hearing that your, husband, father, or grandfather had secretly been a sexual abuser for many years with many victims must have been impossible to take.
According to the article, Rabbi Moshe Heinemann was so upset by these belated allegations about a respected Mechanech with an exemplary reputation… a man who died 20 years ago... that he organized a boycott against the Times. What could possibly be gained , he reasoned, by such a revelation now? He has been dead for 20 years. Why dredge it all up now? Even f it is true, it surely cannot happen again since he is no longer here? All it accomplished was to besmirch the school he led along with his wife, children, grandchildren, and by extension all of Orthodoxy. He was joined in his outrage by Rabbi Abba Cohen of Agudath Israel.
These of course are all valid questions. But there are valid answers. Those answers are first to be found in the numerous victims who were abused all of those years. These people cannot and should not be swept under the rug. They have a right to closure. They have a right to make it known that they were abused in a Frum environment. But that isn’t all. The more important answer is the need to keep Torah institutions free of sexual abusers.
The legitimate desire to keep a Torah institution free of controversy enabled sexual abusers to continue. And that is illegitimate. Little if anything was ever done when accusations were made in the above named institutions. Their leaders either never believed the accusers or thought the problem could be handled internally without hanging dirty laundry in public.
But they were wrong. It was badly mishandled and abuse was allowed to continue. Of course none of it was intentional. No Torah leader would ever countenance such behavior by any employee, least of all a school principal. And also, to be fair to the Talmudical Academy of Baltimore, there is no evidence I am aware of that anyone ever knew about the abuse while it was happening other than the victims and their immediate families. But in all of the other cases I mentioned and in others that I didn’t, there was such evidence. And it was buried.
As a result of the exposure of this sexual predator, the Baltimore rabbinic community came out almost in unison with a strongly worded letter titled “Abuse in Our Community” acknowledging mistakes and calling for major innovations in the system to help prevent anything like this from ever occurring again. Will this end all abuse? I don’t know. I hope so. But at least they are facing the problem now and for the first time they have pledged to do something tangible about it.
Rabbi Heinemann signed the letter too. He has quietly discarded his call for boycotting The Baltimore Jewish Times. He has apparently re-thought his position and perhaps now realizes the value of exposing this individual.
This still leaves the unintended consequences for the family of the deceased perpetrator. They remain victims. Twenty years after his death they now face a life of humiliation. And that is indeed very sad. Hopefully the community will be understanding and accepting of these victims too and continue to treat them with the kindness and warmth of friendship they received before all this happened.
Had there been an effort in place to implement the measures outlined in the letter from the rabbinic community before exposure, I might have agreed that exposing him now would do more damage to his family than it would to help his victims. But, the initial reaction by Rav Heinemann tells quite a different story. The story needed full exposure. The shock needed to be felt by the community leadership. And it was… to a positive effect. And it is a lesson that the entire world of Orthodoxy should learn.
Friday, April 27, 2007
The Truth Is...
An article by Rabbi Jacob J. Schacter (Torah U’Madda Journal Volume 8) opens up with the following incident. It is a classic illustration of one of the fundamental differences between the Hashkafos of certain Charedim and Centrist Hashkafos.
The Yated Ne’eman had published a biography of Rav Eliyahu Dessler upon his fortieth Yahrzeit. It told of the Hashkafos of his father, Rav Reuven Dov, a Talmid of R. Simcha Zisel Ziv who was in turn a Talmid of R. Yisroel Salanter.
Rav Simcha Zisel founded a Yeshiva which included the teachings of the Russian language, history, geography, and other secular studies, in addition to the normal Yeshiva curriculum. He felt that Balei Batim would have to know more than Torah and Mussar in order to succeed in life. Rav Reuven Dov learned in that Yeshiva and absorbed the Hashkafos of his Rebbe and made it his goal to transmit what he had learned in his Yeshiva to his son Rav Eliyahu. True to those principles, he made sure that world literature was included in his son’s curriculum, including many classics translated into Russian, among them, Uncle Tom’s Cabin. All this in the Yated.
You can guess what happened next. A letter to the Yated was published excoriating the editor for daring to publish such things. How dare they say about this Gadol V”Atzum that that he read “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”?! What does this teach our Bnei Torah?! How will this advance their Yiras and Ahavas HaShem?!
This is in a nutshell is how some in the Charedi world think. We had a similar letter to Mishpacha Magazine just recently, upon which I commented.
*And such attitudes are what result in banning of historical volumes like “The Making of Gadol.” To them truth is not as important as making sure people have the “right” Hashkafos. And currently those Hashkafos deny any value to the kinds of subjects Rav Dessler studied in his youth. Studies that he never repudiated. And of course as the book “Making of a Gadol” tells us, it wasn’t only Rav Dessler who read world literature. Rav Ahron Kotler did too, as did Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky. They believed such studies had enough value to spend their very valuable time on them. Of course that was in addition to their Torah learning which was primary and took up the vast majority of their time. But none of them ever repudiated reading world literature either. R.Yaakov had even mentioned reading Shaekespeare in his Shiurim.
One of the most famous incidents along those lines was a book written by Professor Marc Shapiro about Rav Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg, the Seridei Eish. In a well researched and documented biography Professor Shapiro tells us details about Rav Weinberg’s life that to the Charedi world are extremely unflattering to them, including correspondences he had with Dr. Samuel Atlas, a professor at the Reform Hebrew Union College. Dr. Shapiro also documents severe criticisms Rav Weinberg had with Agudah. Much of this in letters he had discovered written by Rav Weinberg to Rabbi Atlas.
At the time the Charedi world was understandably upset by all this. First they believed that unflattering information should never be made public. And secondly they believed that the private letters written by any individual were meant to be kept private and divulging them violated Halacha. I’m not sure how since he had passed on. But I’m not here to discuss that aspect of it.
What I point out is that the best defense against those who say that secular studies have no value is truth. The truth is unassailable here. These Gedolim studied Mada. Not only the Mada of science or math which I’m sure they studied too. But the study of literature. And that is what some in the Charedi world want to deny the validity of. Literature, they say is a waste of time.
The truth of history cannot, and should not be denied. What the Gedolim of the 20th century did, how they conducted their lives, what they learned, how they acted to others, Jews as well as non-Jews should be lessons for us and never be ignored because of the politics of our time. And that’s all it is. Politics.
The politics of the “right” in this instance is to insure their hegemony over the masses. Politics created in an unrealistic fear of assimilation. Understandable perhaps because of how they viewed Haskala, which led to masses of Jewry leaving observance. They blamed it on assimilation. There may be some truth to that but their response to it is way over the top, as I have said many times.
It is in that context one should read an interview the Jewish Press had with Professor Shapiro.
Here are some interesting excerpts:
Jewish Press (JP): Rabbi Weinberg wrote, “For the members of Agudah, every unimportant rabbi who joins them is considered a great gaon.” Can you elaborate?
Professor Marc Shapiro(MS): Rabbi Weinberg wrote in his private letters that politics in Agudah circles is what makes you a gadol; it’s not how much Torah you have. They determine that Rav Soloveitchik is not a gadol because he’s not in their circle. Rav Elyashiv was never considered a gadol when he was with the [Israeli government] rabbanut.
(JP) Rabbi Weinberg wrote that “perhaps we [the Jewish people] also bear some guilt” for anti-Semitism. What did he mean by that?
(MS) Rabbi Weinberg raised the possibility that perhaps the way Jews treat non-Jews contributes to anti-Semitism. He no doubt had in mind things such as how the Jew treated the Polish peasant and wondered if this didn’t have some impact on how the Poles viewed the Jews. Many Orthodox Jews thought it was okay to be less than honest in their business dealing with non-Jews.
Rabbi Weinberg argued that we must formally declare that we hold like the Meiri [13th century French sage], that all the negative things in the Talmud against non-Jews were only stated with regard to the wicked pagans of old, but didn’t apply to non-Jews as a whole.
We must relate to non-Jews just like to Jews, being absolutely honest in all monetary matters and regard them as having dignity as creations of God.
There are other very fascinating and controversial items in this interview. The interview is generating comments about banning Proffesor Shapiro. But I don’t think he will banned anymore that Rabbi Slifkin was. Only certain of his books were banned. But perhaps the Jewish Press will for publishing it.
* This essay originally had a portion inadvertantly left out at this point. It is now restored. I apologize for the inconvenence.
The Yated Ne’eman had published a biography of Rav Eliyahu Dessler upon his fortieth Yahrzeit. It told of the Hashkafos of his father, Rav Reuven Dov, a Talmid of R. Simcha Zisel Ziv who was in turn a Talmid of R. Yisroel Salanter.
Rav Simcha Zisel founded a Yeshiva which included the teachings of the Russian language, history, geography, and other secular studies, in addition to the normal Yeshiva curriculum. He felt that Balei Batim would have to know more than Torah and Mussar in order to succeed in life. Rav Reuven Dov learned in that Yeshiva and absorbed the Hashkafos of his Rebbe and made it his goal to transmit what he had learned in his Yeshiva to his son Rav Eliyahu. True to those principles, he made sure that world literature was included in his son’s curriculum, including many classics translated into Russian, among them, Uncle Tom’s Cabin. All this in the Yated.
You can guess what happened next. A letter to the Yated was published excoriating the editor for daring to publish such things. How dare they say about this Gadol V”Atzum that that he read “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”?! What does this teach our Bnei Torah?! How will this advance their Yiras and Ahavas HaShem?!
This is in a nutshell is how some in the Charedi world think. We had a similar letter to Mishpacha Magazine just recently, upon which I commented.
*And such attitudes are what result in banning of historical volumes like “The Making of Gadol.” To them truth is not as important as making sure people have the “right” Hashkafos. And currently those Hashkafos deny any value to the kinds of subjects Rav Dessler studied in his youth. Studies that he never repudiated. And of course as the book “Making of a Gadol” tells us, it wasn’t only Rav Dessler who read world literature. Rav Ahron Kotler did too, as did Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky. They believed such studies had enough value to spend their very valuable time on them. Of course that was in addition to their Torah learning which was primary and took up the vast majority of their time. But none of them ever repudiated reading world literature either. R.Yaakov had even mentioned reading Shaekespeare in his Shiurim.
One of the most famous incidents along those lines was a book written by Professor Marc Shapiro about Rav Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg, the Seridei Eish. In a well researched and documented biography Professor Shapiro tells us details about Rav Weinberg’s life that to the Charedi world are extremely unflattering to them, including correspondences he had with Dr. Samuel Atlas, a professor at the Reform Hebrew Union College. Dr. Shapiro also documents severe criticisms Rav Weinberg had with Agudah. Much of this in letters he had discovered written by Rav Weinberg to Rabbi Atlas.
At the time the Charedi world was understandably upset by all this. First they believed that unflattering information should never be made public. And secondly they believed that the private letters written by any individual were meant to be kept private and divulging them violated Halacha. I’m not sure how since he had passed on. But I’m not here to discuss that aspect of it.
What I point out is that the best defense against those who say that secular studies have no value is truth. The truth is unassailable here. These Gedolim studied Mada. Not only the Mada of science or math which I’m sure they studied too. But the study of literature. And that is what some in the Charedi world want to deny the validity of. Literature, they say is a waste of time.
The truth of history cannot, and should not be denied. What the Gedolim of the 20th century did, how they conducted their lives, what they learned, how they acted to others, Jews as well as non-Jews should be lessons for us and never be ignored because of the politics of our time. And that’s all it is. Politics.
The politics of the “right” in this instance is to insure their hegemony over the masses. Politics created in an unrealistic fear of assimilation. Understandable perhaps because of how they viewed Haskala, which led to masses of Jewry leaving observance. They blamed it on assimilation. There may be some truth to that but their response to it is way over the top, as I have said many times.
It is in that context one should read an interview the Jewish Press had with Professor Shapiro.
Here are some interesting excerpts:
Jewish Press (JP): Rabbi Weinberg wrote, “For the members of Agudah, every unimportant rabbi who joins them is considered a great gaon.” Can you elaborate?
Professor Marc Shapiro(MS): Rabbi Weinberg wrote in his private letters that politics in Agudah circles is what makes you a gadol; it’s not how much Torah you have. They determine that Rav Soloveitchik is not a gadol because he’s not in their circle. Rav Elyashiv was never considered a gadol when he was with the [Israeli government] rabbanut.
(JP) Rabbi Weinberg wrote that “perhaps we [the Jewish people] also bear some guilt” for anti-Semitism. What did he mean by that?
(MS) Rabbi Weinberg raised the possibility that perhaps the way Jews treat non-Jews contributes to anti-Semitism. He no doubt had in mind things such as how the Jew treated the Polish peasant and wondered if this didn’t have some impact on how the Poles viewed the Jews. Many Orthodox Jews thought it was okay to be less than honest in their business dealing with non-Jews.
Rabbi Weinberg argued that we must formally declare that we hold like the Meiri [13th century French sage], that all the negative things in the Talmud against non-Jews were only stated with regard to the wicked pagans of old, but didn’t apply to non-Jews as a whole.
We must relate to non-Jews just like to Jews, being absolutely honest in all monetary matters and regard them as having dignity as creations of God.
There are other very fascinating and controversial items in this interview. The interview is generating comments about banning Proffesor Shapiro. But I don’t think he will banned anymore that Rabbi Slifkin was. Only certain of his books were banned. But perhaps the Jewish Press will for publishing it.
* This essay originally had a portion inadvertantly left out at this point. It is now restored. I apologize for the inconvenence.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
The 10% Solution?
A few days ago I happened to be speaking with a Charedi friend of mine who was in Kollel for many years and eventually went into Chinuch. He told me something shocking, at least to me. It was quite telling and is perhaps one reason why poverty in that community is perpetuated.
He mentioned to me that when after several years of learning in Kollel and being very frugal about how he spent his money, he ended up in debt, borrowing a few hundred dollars from one of the Gemachs in Israel.
Now, according to most opinions there is a Halachic requirement to give 10% of one’s after tax income to charity… Maaser K’safim. He justifiably felt that borrowing money so that he could give it to charity was not in the spirit of the Halacha. One can easily appreciate that his own need for Tzedaka over-rode his obligation to give it. Depressed about his situation he decided to ask a Shaila to someone whom many consider a Gadol. He wanted to know if he could be exempted from his Maaser K’safim obligation.
The Gadol asked him how much he was in debt. He answered about $500, if I recall correctly. The Gadol smiled and said, “That’s all?” “I know Avrechim who are many thousands of dollars in debt.” “This is nothing!” “You’re not going to get an exemption from me!”
He then proceeded to tell this Avreich the story the GRA. It goes something like this:
The GRA had calculated based on his circumstances that he needed every dollar he had to purchase the bare minimum for sustenance and exmpted himself from the Maaser K’safim obligation. He then sent a Shaliach to fetch some water from a well. The Sheliach took a bucket from the GRA and lowered it down the well. The bucket fell in. It was a pretty deep well and he couldn’t pull it out. Frustrated he went back to the GRA and told him about it. The GRA said, “I have no extra money for new buckets, please try and retrieve the bucket from the well.
The Sheliach got a hatchet from the GRA, tied it to a rope and lowered it into the well so as to “hook” the bucket with the hatchet and raise it up. The hatchet then fell in too!
He went back to the GRA and told him about it. The GRA exclaimed, “That bucket and that hatchet equal 10% of my wealth which could have gone to Tzedaka!” He took this as a sign that his Psak about his obligation to give Tzedaka was wrong.
So, this Gadol, based on this story, did not exempt this Avreich from his 10% Tzedaka obligation.
But I do not understand this at all. How is it possible to say that one must put himself in debt so that he can give charity? I can’t imagine the pressure this puts on Avreichim. And on the Gemach’s. It’s one thing to borrow money in order to live. That alone can make normal people depressed. But to on top of that, to force them to give charity from money they do not have seems like a prescription for disaster. How many Avrechim are in this kind of situation? How many live on borrowed money and raise their debt so they can give 10% of their money to other people when they need it just as much themselves?
Isn’t this kind of ironic? If giving money to a Gemach is considered Tzedaka, and an acceptable avenue for one’s Maaser K’safim, then giving money that you borrow from it back to that Gemach does not reduce one’s loan by one penny! How ridiculous is that?!
But more importantly if this scenario is played out enough times, I can easily see how it can cause Shalom Bayis problems which then may even contribute to the delinquency of their children! I know of at least one Avreich where this kind of poverty was a major contributing factor to some of his children going “off the Derech”.
Yet this is what one Gadol told an Avreich to do. Borrow money and give it to charity! (…not in that order, but the effect is the same). He in essence was telling this Avreich that living in debt is a perfectly normal way of life for an Avreich and does not exempt anyone from giving his own charity. I guess they think that if business people can have great wealth, give huge amounts of Tzedaka and be in debt at the same time, why not an Avreich?
Right. Same thing.
He mentioned to me that when after several years of learning in Kollel and being very frugal about how he spent his money, he ended up in debt, borrowing a few hundred dollars from one of the Gemachs in Israel.
Now, according to most opinions there is a Halachic requirement to give 10% of one’s after tax income to charity… Maaser K’safim. He justifiably felt that borrowing money so that he could give it to charity was not in the spirit of the Halacha. One can easily appreciate that his own need for Tzedaka over-rode his obligation to give it. Depressed about his situation he decided to ask a Shaila to someone whom many consider a Gadol. He wanted to know if he could be exempted from his Maaser K’safim obligation.
The Gadol asked him how much he was in debt. He answered about $500, if I recall correctly. The Gadol smiled and said, “That’s all?” “I know Avrechim who are many thousands of dollars in debt.” “This is nothing!” “You’re not going to get an exemption from me!”
He then proceeded to tell this Avreich the story the GRA. It goes something like this:
The GRA had calculated based on his circumstances that he needed every dollar he had to purchase the bare minimum for sustenance and exmpted himself from the Maaser K’safim obligation. He then sent a Shaliach to fetch some water from a well. The Sheliach took a bucket from the GRA and lowered it down the well. The bucket fell in. It was a pretty deep well and he couldn’t pull it out. Frustrated he went back to the GRA and told him about it. The GRA said, “I have no extra money for new buckets, please try and retrieve the bucket from the well.
The Sheliach got a hatchet from the GRA, tied it to a rope and lowered it into the well so as to “hook” the bucket with the hatchet and raise it up. The hatchet then fell in too!
He went back to the GRA and told him about it. The GRA exclaimed, “That bucket and that hatchet equal 10% of my wealth which could have gone to Tzedaka!” He took this as a sign that his Psak about his obligation to give Tzedaka was wrong.
So, this Gadol, based on this story, did not exempt this Avreich from his 10% Tzedaka obligation.
But I do not understand this at all. How is it possible to say that one must put himself in debt so that he can give charity? I can’t imagine the pressure this puts on Avreichim. And on the Gemach’s. It’s one thing to borrow money in order to live. That alone can make normal people depressed. But to on top of that, to force them to give charity from money they do not have seems like a prescription for disaster. How many Avrechim are in this kind of situation? How many live on borrowed money and raise their debt so they can give 10% of their money to other people when they need it just as much themselves?
Isn’t this kind of ironic? If giving money to a Gemach is considered Tzedaka, and an acceptable avenue for one’s Maaser K’safim, then giving money that you borrow from it back to that Gemach does not reduce one’s loan by one penny! How ridiculous is that?!
But more importantly if this scenario is played out enough times, I can easily see how it can cause Shalom Bayis problems which then may even contribute to the delinquency of their children! I know of at least one Avreich where this kind of poverty was a major contributing factor to some of his children going “off the Derech”.
Yet this is what one Gadol told an Avreich to do. Borrow money and give it to charity! (…not in that order, but the effect is the same). He in essence was telling this Avreich that living in debt is a perfectly normal way of life for an Avreich and does not exempt anyone from giving his own charity. I guess they think that if business people can have great wealth, give huge amounts of Tzedaka and be in debt at the same time, why not an Avreich?
Right. Same thing.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Where There is Mishpacha, There is Sanity
Many of the problems I’ve had with the insular world of Charedim in Israel are in fact being dealt with by this a magazine whose success is quite encouraging. An article in Forgien Policy sent to me via Joey Fried's e-mail list makes that quite clear.
What’s unique about Mishpacha Magazine, is that it is written by Charedim themselves… Charedim who apparently have the same problems with their own community that I have.
I recall reading a while back about an attempt by one of the Charedi newspapers, I believe it was Hamodia, attempting to close down Mishpacha by suing them in a Beis Din. They claimed that the Torah world can’t trust Mishpacha since they they are independent and do not pass their articles before Gedolim for their approval. The Beis Din consisted of Rabbanim who are very supportive of Hamodia and the Yated. But they lost. The Beis Din Paskin’d that Mishpacha can continue.
And this it has done… in spades, creaming it’s competition. If I understand correctly they now have the biggest share by far of the Charedi market. Bigger than Hamodia and the Yated combined.
As I understand it, both the Yated and Hamodia are basically the newspapers whose articles are approved by Charedi Gedolim or their representatives. .. and that nothing gets published in those papers without their specific approval.
Why is Mishpacha so successful? I think it is largely because of their ability to be independent and their freedom to choose content. While their Hashkafos are Charedi and generally follow Charedi guidelines and they do have a “spiritual advisory board” …they never-the-less feature content that includes such Charedi issues as: education, poverty, women in the work world, secular studies, and kids at risk. And they also have within their pages subjects like art, fiction, and leisure. Mishpacha even deals with controversial science. “I don’t see any problem with evolution as long as we know who sparked it,” says Moshe Grylak, the magazine’s editor in chief.” As well Mishpacha has published articles on “positive figures from non-Jewish cultures, such as Martin Luther King”.
That Mishpacha won a lawsuit in a Charedi Beis Din shows that there is at least an awareness that all is not perfect in the world of Charedim and a realization that things need fixing… and that public discussion about them do no harm. Perhaps it can even do some good and give rise to suggestions for improvement from thoe very people who need them.
By allowing Mishpacha to publish without any direct editorial control shows that they deem permissible public discourse and that not everything under the sun needs a Psak from a Gadol. … and that there are things outside of Torah knowledge worthy of our time, including art and leisure.
Mishpacha… the Emes Ve-Emunah of the Charedi world.
What’s unique about Mishpacha Magazine, is that it is written by Charedim themselves… Charedim who apparently have the same problems with their own community that I have.
I recall reading a while back about an attempt by one of the Charedi newspapers, I believe it was Hamodia, attempting to close down Mishpacha by suing them in a Beis Din. They claimed that the Torah world can’t trust Mishpacha since they they are independent and do not pass their articles before Gedolim for their approval. The Beis Din consisted of Rabbanim who are very supportive of Hamodia and the Yated. But they lost. The Beis Din Paskin’d that Mishpacha can continue.
And this it has done… in spades, creaming it’s competition. If I understand correctly they now have the biggest share by far of the Charedi market. Bigger than Hamodia and the Yated combined.
As I understand it, both the Yated and Hamodia are basically the newspapers whose articles are approved by Charedi Gedolim or their representatives. .. and that nothing gets published in those papers without their specific approval.
Why is Mishpacha so successful? I think it is largely because of their ability to be independent and their freedom to choose content. While their Hashkafos are Charedi and generally follow Charedi guidelines and they do have a “spiritual advisory board” …they never-the-less feature content that includes such Charedi issues as: education, poverty, women in the work world, secular studies, and kids at risk. And they also have within their pages subjects like art, fiction, and leisure. Mishpacha even deals with controversial science. “I don’t see any problem with evolution as long as we know who sparked it,” says Moshe Grylak, the magazine’s editor in chief.” As well Mishpacha has published articles on “positive figures from non-Jewish cultures, such as Martin Luther King”.
That Mishpacha won a lawsuit in a Charedi Beis Din shows that there is at least an awareness that all is not perfect in the world of Charedim and a realization that things need fixing… and that public discussion about them do no harm. Perhaps it can even do some good and give rise to suggestions for improvement from thoe very people who need them.
By allowing Mishpacha to publish without any direct editorial control shows that they deem permissible public discourse and that not everything under the sun needs a Psak from a Gadol. … and that there are things outside of Torah knowledge worthy of our time, including art and leisure.
Mishpacha… the Emes Ve-Emunah of the Charedi world.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
And The Vote Goes On
I just want to remind everyone that there is a tight race in some of the categories, and in others, I’m being creamed. I can’t understand why since I clearly have the best blog in all categories. So I ask once again all those who enjoy this blog, if you haven’t voted yet; please do it now. It will only take a minute or two and I will be eternally grateful. I may even send you money. Winning will give me bragging rights for an entire year!
Here are the links with a description of how things are shaping up as of this posting:
Best Overall Blog Vote - Lazer Beams is creaming me here. He’s currently ahead by 61 votes. Common, We can do better than that. Who does Lazer think he is, anyway?
Best Large Blog Vote – Only ten vote separate me from Treppenwitz. With a name like that he’s got to be good. But it doesn’t matter since my blog is better. Common guys. I know we can do it.
Best Religious Blog Vote – This one is temporarily suspended due to vote irregularity. Number one: Mystical Paths has 251 votes. Number two: Lazer Beams has 70. I have 34. Obviously the first two guys are cheating. Nothing mystical there. (Just kidding. Please... no reprimands about Motzie Shem Ra)
Best Torah Blog Vote – Obviously when it comes to Torah, I have no peers in the blog world. I’m winning this one. But let’s not take anything for granted. Go stuff the ballot boxes.
Best Anti Establishment Blog Vote - Only 3 votes separate number 4 from number 1. This is where your vote can really help make a difference. All those of you who think my blog is all about bashing... this is your moment to prove it and vote for my blog in this category.
Here are the links with a description of how things are shaping up as of this posting:
Best Overall Blog Vote - Lazer Beams is creaming me here. He’s currently ahead by 61 votes. Common, We can do better than that. Who does Lazer think he is, anyway?
Best Large Blog Vote – Only ten vote separate me from Treppenwitz. With a name like that he’s got to be good. But it doesn’t matter since my blog is better. Common guys. I know we can do it.
Best Religious Blog Vote – This one is temporarily suspended due to vote irregularity. Number one: Mystical Paths has 251 votes. Number two: Lazer Beams has 70. I have 34. Obviously the first two guys are cheating. Nothing mystical there. (Just kidding. Please... no reprimands about Motzie Shem Ra)
Best Torah Blog Vote – Obviously when it comes to Torah, I have no peers in the blog world. I’m winning this one. But let’s not take anything for granted. Go stuff the ballot boxes.
Best Anti Establishment Blog Vote - Only 3 votes separate number 4 from number 1. This is where your vote can really help make a difference. All those of you who think my blog is all about bashing... this is your moment to prove it and vote for my blog in this category.
Killing Babies
The Supreme Court of the United States has just come out with a controversial decision about which many supporters of abortion rights are screaming bloody murder... which is kind of ironic if you think about it. In a 5-4 decision the court ruled that a Missouri law banning the procedure is constitutional held that groups challenging it "have not demonstrated that the Act, as a facial matter, is void for vagueness, or that it imposes an undue burden on a woman's right to abortion based on its overbreadth or lack of a health exception."
As a matter of principle I am opposed to those who would put restrictions on the procedure, the so called “Pro-Life” movement. Because I truly believe that it could interfere with the Halacha if the procedure were broadly banned. And though in spirit I am on the pro life side of the issue, in fact, I am on the pro choice side. This is why I have always had a problem with Agudah’s identification with pro-choicers and their opposition to Roe V Wade.
For Jews, abortion is not automatically always Assur. And life does not begin at conception. Aborting a fetus is never considered murder, although in most cases it is Assur. There are however various circumstances where there is universal agreement amongst the Poskim that abortion is permitted. And there are additional circumstances where Poskim disagree, some permitting… some not. Baning the procedure could make it difficult to receive almost any Halachic abortion, especially where there is disagreement amongst the Poskim.
One example of a controversial Psak amongst the Poskim is the that of the Tzitz Eliezer (Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg). He permits aborting Tay-Sachs babies. Some Poskim take into account the psychological welfare of a pregnant woman in allowing for abortions. There are also certain leniencies up to forty days after conception. These and perhaps other cases would Halachicly allow the procedure. But they quite possibly would encounter difficulties in obtaining an abortions for some of these situations. So I am absolutely opposed to overturning Roe V Wade.
But Agudah is in favor of overturning it. Now I know that Agudah is just as concerened about permitting legal abortions as I am. But their public position is to be pro-life so as not be perceived as supporting the very liberal pro-choice side.
To be sure the pro choice position on abortion is based largely on the right of a woman to have abortion on demand for what ever reason she chooses, even as a belated form of birth control. They argue, that it’s her body and her right to do with it as she pleases, including getting an abortion whenever she chooses. This is decidedly against Halacha.
But I still cannot understand siding with one wrong side, pro-life… to avoid being identified with the other wrong side, pro-choice. The only correct position for a Jew to have in my view is the Halachic one. And that entails leaving abortion safe and legal. In other words one should not be pro-choice, just pro keeping the procedure legal.
And this brings me back to partial birth abortions. On this issue Agudah’s position is the correct one. Partial birth abortion is truly a misnomer. Once the head is out of the body, the baby is considered born according to Halacha. Killing a baby is murder. It cannot be called an abortion in any true sense of the word, certainly not in the Halachic sense. Agudah’s position is spelled out quite nicely by Rabbi Avi Shafran. The only time another human being may be killed is when he is a Rodef… attempting to kill you. That would be considered Halachicly justifiable homicide. But make no mistake, killing a baby that has been Halachicly born (not partially born as the name implies) is murder, not abortion.
As a matter of principle I am opposed to those who would put restrictions on the procedure, the so called “Pro-Life” movement. Because I truly believe that it could interfere with the Halacha if the procedure were broadly banned. And though in spirit I am on the pro life side of the issue, in fact, I am on the pro choice side. This is why I have always had a problem with Agudah’s identification with pro-choicers and their opposition to Roe V Wade.
For Jews, abortion is not automatically always Assur. And life does not begin at conception. Aborting a fetus is never considered murder, although in most cases it is Assur. There are however various circumstances where there is universal agreement amongst the Poskim that abortion is permitted. And there are additional circumstances where Poskim disagree, some permitting… some not. Baning the procedure could make it difficult to receive almost any Halachic abortion, especially where there is disagreement amongst the Poskim.
One example of a controversial Psak amongst the Poskim is the that of the Tzitz Eliezer (Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg). He permits aborting Tay-Sachs babies. Some Poskim take into account the psychological welfare of a pregnant woman in allowing for abortions. There are also certain leniencies up to forty days after conception. These and perhaps other cases would Halachicly allow the procedure. But they quite possibly would encounter difficulties in obtaining an abortions for some of these situations. So I am absolutely opposed to overturning Roe V Wade.
But Agudah is in favor of overturning it. Now I know that Agudah is just as concerened about permitting legal abortions as I am. But their public position is to be pro-life so as not be perceived as supporting the very liberal pro-choice side.
To be sure the pro choice position on abortion is based largely on the right of a woman to have abortion on demand for what ever reason she chooses, even as a belated form of birth control. They argue, that it’s her body and her right to do with it as she pleases, including getting an abortion whenever she chooses. This is decidedly against Halacha.
But I still cannot understand siding with one wrong side, pro-life… to avoid being identified with the other wrong side, pro-choice. The only correct position for a Jew to have in my view is the Halachic one. And that entails leaving abortion safe and legal. In other words one should not be pro-choice, just pro keeping the procedure legal.
And this brings me back to partial birth abortions. On this issue Agudah’s position is the correct one. Partial birth abortion is truly a misnomer. Once the head is out of the body, the baby is considered born according to Halacha. Killing a baby is murder. It cannot be called an abortion in any true sense of the word, certainly not in the Halachic sense. Agudah’s position is spelled out quite nicely by Rabbi Avi Shafran. The only time another human being may be killed is when he is a Rodef… attempting to kill you. That would be considered Halachicly justifiable homicide. But make no mistake, killing a baby that has been Halachicly born (not partially born as the name implies) is murder, not abortion.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Don’t Forget to Vote
At Cazzie's suggestion I took note of R. Gil’s links and have adapted them here. I hope it makes voting for my blog easier. Here are the categories in which my blog was nominated.
Best Overall Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
Best Large Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
Best Jewish Religious Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
Best Torah Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
Best Jewish Anti-Establishment Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
A word about this last category. I do not consider myself anti-establishment. But in the sense that I often disagree with the mainstream on certain issues, I guess I qualify.
And as does R. Gil, I too recommend checking out the other categories.
Best Overall Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
Best Large Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
Best Jewish Religious Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
Best Torah Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
Best Jewish Anti-Establishment Blog: First Round - Group A: Vote
A word about this last category. I do not consider myself anti-establishment. But in the sense that I often disagree with the mainstream on certain issues, I guess I qualify.
And as does R. Gil, I too recommend checking out the other categories.
Eyes Eastward
From a true Ohaiv Yisroel who served Am Yisroel in the Israeli Defense forces with honor:
“I took an oath at the Kotel many years ago to stand in defense of Am Yisrael and Medinat Yisrael. That pledge has never left my consciousness from that moment. Although I was discharged from Zahal a long time ago, I was never discharged from the oath I took. Not once, and not twice I put my life on the line when in defense of my brothers and sisters in the shtachim.”
As members of Klal Yisroel this mindset, expressed by my good friend Rabbi Shael Siegel, is one we should all have. And this is especially true on this day of the Jewish calendar, the fifth of Iyar, Yom Ha’atzmaut. For it was on this day that the people of Israel once again were in possession of Artzenu HaK'dosha, the holy land of Israel …the first time since the Churban Bayis Sheni, the destruction of the second Temple in Jerusalem.
No matter what Hashkafa one has, the significance of this simple fact should not be lost. And though there are many Rabbinic leaders both past and present who did not see this day as significant, there are many who did and many who still do. And to whatever extent one feels it should be expressed, there is no doubt in my mind that there should be some tangible expression of recognition on this day.
But as I indicated, there are some who refuse to recognize it at all and some who actually tear Kriya, or at least think they should… on this day. Most notably Neturei Karta and Satmar. But they can be forgiven for not celebrating this day because it is a theologically based opposition.
On the other hand there are those who do not share that theological view. They believe we are currently B’Ikvesa D’Meshicha, in the pre-Messainic era. Yet their opposition to celebrating this day is strident. One such individual, perhaps the most prominent of recent years, is former Ponevezh Rosh HaYeshiva, Rav Elazar Menachem Man Shach. He said Tachanun on that day. This was in stark contrast to his predecessor and founding (in Israel) Rosh HaYeshiva, Rabbi Yosef Shlomo Kahaneman, who did not. Nor did he allow his Yeshiva to say it.
So there was Rav Shach, saying Tachnun all by himself. What a strange sight that must have been. And when he became Rosh Hayeshiva at Ponevezh, he instituted his attitude into his Yeshiva. I’m told that The Chazon Ish once said Tachnun on Yom Ha’Atzmaut at a Bris where he was the Sandek so that people wouldn’t think he in some way was acknowledging that day’s significance. It boggles the mind, really. Yet, this Hashkafa has now been adopted by all of Charedi Klal Yisroel.
How sad this development considering this video. Anyone who watches it and still thinks there is no significance to the founding of the State of Israel has no heart.
Certainly almost anyone who survived the holocaust thought there was significance. My wife’s unlce, a devout Gerer Chasid who was very close with the Gerer Rebbe, the Beis Yisroel. On Yom Ha’atzmaut he left his Gerer Shteibel in Tel Aviv and Daven’d with a local Mizrachi Shul so that he could say Hallel with a Minyan.
There is also the story of a Chasidic Rebbe (I don’t recall which one) who was made to sweep the streets at his Nazi death camp during the holocaust. He made a pledge to God that if he survives, he will sweep the streets of Eretz Yisroel. He survived and every Yom Ha’atzmaut he would wake up early and sweep the streets. Two inspiring stories that should serve as additional inspiration to us about the significance of Yom Ha’atzmaut.
My Rebbe, Rav Aaron Soloveichik, thought there was significance. He said Hallel on that day. And so did his Yeshiva, Yeshivas Brisk. And indeed, he never understood the need to be Docha that day as the Rabbanut in Israel has done in Israel this year. Heh Iyar is the day that should be recognized religiously.
The Rabbanut has moved the celebration to the sixth day of Iyar this year because of a technical problem. Yom Ha’atzmaut is always preceded by Yom HaZikaron, Israel’s memorial day, where they honor fallen soldiers who died defending Am Yisroel. Since many of the celebrations begin the preceding night, the Halachic beginning of the calendar day, the Rabbanut felt that Chilul Shabbos would increase if Yom HaZikaron were to be on it’s actual day, beginning Motzei Shabbos. So they moved both days up on the calendar.
But, as I said, it is a technicality. Yom HaZikaron is really not a religious day. Yom Ha’Atzmaut is and should in some way be celebrated on its original date.
Rav Ahron understood the significance of that day. I am not on my Rebbe’s level. I do not say Hallel on Yom Ha’Atzmaut. But I do not say Tachnun either because whatever the level of significance may be, I feel that there is at least enough to not say Tachanun. That day is worthy of at least that much recognition. Much the same way Rav Kahaneman felt, I suppose.
But the opposition to Yom Ha’atzmaut has long since become the accepted attitude in right wing circles, most probably because of Rav Shach.. And that is a sorrowful state for Klal Yisroel to be in. The opposition to Yom Ha’atzmaut is very strong. And it is illustrated by the following very sorrowful incident.
A group of Baale Battim, unsatisfied with any of the Yeshivos in the Chicago area, came to Rav Eliyahu Soloveichik and offered to reconstitute Yeshiva’s Brisk which had been unable to succeed in the final years before its demise (for reasons too complex to get into here). They respected Rav Ahron and understood and respected the immense Torah scholarship of his son, Rav Eliyahu. The only condition: They had to drop their celebration of Yom Ha’atzmaut. No more Hallel.
Of course Rav Eliyahu refused. And that was the end of Brisk Yeshiva. I will never forget the hurt in Rav Eliyahu’s eyes when I spoke to him about it. He understood that some people don’t say Hallel. But where is the Hakaras Hatov? Where is some tangible recognition of what the advent of the sate has meant to Torah learning? Where is the recognition that since the advent of the state, there has been an unprecedented amount of Torah learning in Israel? Where is the recognition of all the support the State of Israel has given to the Torah world over the last sixty years, all of which would not be possible without Eretz Yisroel’s returning to Jewish hands? And what about the financial aid and the exemptions from army service?
The government isn’t Frum?! Imagine what Israel would look like today if the Arabs had won in 1948? Would there be a Ponevezh, a Mir? Would Israel have tens of thousands of Talmidim learning Torah B’Hasmada Rabbah?
I don’t think so. Those secular pioneers dedicated their lives to Am Yisroel. Many of them sacrificed their lives in the process. And, with the help of God, whether they recognized it or not, a country was founded.
If the secular leadership in Israel do not realize God’s participation in it, we most certainly should. Tangibly.
“I took an oath at the Kotel many years ago to stand in defense of Am Yisrael and Medinat Yisrael. That pledge has never left my consciousness from that moment. Although I was discharged from Zahal a long time ago, I was never discharged from the oath I took. Not once, and not twice I put my life on the line when in defense of my brothers and sisters in the shtachim.”
As members of Klal Yisroel this mindset, expressed by my good friend Rabbi Shael Siegel, is one we should all have. And this is especially true on this day of the Jewish calendar, the fifth of Iyar, Yom Ha’atzmaut. For it was on this day that the people of Israel once again were in possession of Artzenu HaK'dosha, the holy land of Israel …the first time since the Churban Bayis Sheni, the destruction of the second Temple in Jerusalem.
No matter what Hashkafa one has, the significance of this simple fact should not be lost. And though there are many Rabbinic leaders both past and present who did not see this day as significant, there are many who did and many who still do. And to whatever extent one feels it should be expressed, there is no doubt in my mind that there should be some tangible expression of recognition on this day.
But as I indicated, there are some who refuse to recognize it at all and some who actually tear Kriya, or at least think they should… on this day. Most notably Neturei Karta and Satmar. But they can be forgiven for not celebrating this day because it is a theologically based opposition.
On the other hand there are those who do not share that theological view. They believe we are currently B’Ikvesa D’Meshicha, in the pre-Messainic era. Yet their opposition to celebrating this day is strident. One such individual, perhaps the most prominent of recent years, is former Ponevezh Rosh HaYeshiva, Rav Elazar Menachem Man Shach. He said Tachanun on that day. This was in stark contrast to his predecessor and founding (in Israel) Rosh HaYeshiva, Rabbi Yosef Shlomo Kahaneman, who did not. Nor did he allow his Yeshiva to say it.
So there was Rav Shach, saying Tachnun all by himself. What a strange sight that must have been. And when he became Rosh Hayeshiva at Ponevezh, he instituted his attitude into his Yeshiva. I’m told that The Chazon Ish once said Tachnun on Yom Ha’Atzmaut at a Bris where he was the Sandek so that people wouldn’t think he in some way was acknowledging that day’s significance. It boggles the mind, really. Yet, this Hashkafa has now been adopted by all of Charedi Klal Yisroel.
How sad this development considering this video. Anyone who watches it and still thinks there is no significance to the founding of the State of Israel has no heart.
Certainly almost anyone who survived the holocaust thought there was significance. My wife’s unlce, a devout Gerer Chasid who was very close with the Gerer Rebbe, the Beis Yisroel. On Yom Ha’atzmaut he left his Gerer Shteibel in Tel Aviv and Daven’d with a local Mizrachi Shul so that he could say Hallel with a Minyan.
There is also the story of a Chasidic Rebbe (I don’t recall which one) who was made to sweep the streets at his Nazi death camp during the holocaust. He made a pledge to God that if he survives, he will sweep the streets of Eretz Yisroel. He survived and every Yom Ha’atzmaut he would wake up early and sweep the streets. Two inspiring stories that should serve as additional inspiration to us about the significance of Yom Ha’atzmaut.
My Rebbe, Rav Aaron Soloveichik, thought there was significance. He said Hallel on that day. And so did his Yeshiva, Yeshivas Brisk. And indeed, he never understood the need to be Docha that day as the Rabbanut in Israel has done in Israel this year. Heh Iyar is the day that should be recognized religiously.
The Rabbanut has moved the celebration to the sixth day of Iyar this year because of a technical problem. Yom Ha’atzmaut is always preceded by Yom HaZikaron, Israel’s memorial day, where they honor fallen soldiers who died defending Am Yisroel. Since many of the celebrations begin the preceding night, the Halachic beginning of the calendar day, the Rabbanut felt that Chilul Shabbos would increase if Yom HaZikaron were to be on it’s actual day, beginning Motzei Shabbos. So they moved both days up on the calendar.
But, as I said, it is a technicality. Yom HaZikaron is really not a religious day. Yom Ha’Atzmaut is and should in some way be celebrated on its original date.
Rav Ahron understood the significance of that day. I am not on my Rebbe’s level. I do not say Hallel on Yom Ha’Atzmaut. But I do not say Tachnun either because whatever the level of significance may be, I feel that there is at least enough to not say Tachanun. That day is worthy of at least that much recognition. Much the same way Rav Kahaneman felt, I suppose.
But the opposition to Yom Ha’atzmaut has long since become the accepted attitude in right wing circles, most probably because of Rav Shach.. And that is a sorrowful state for Klal Yisroel to be in. The opposition to Yom Ha’atzmaut is very strong. And it is illustrated by the following very sorrowful incident.
A group of Baale Battim, unsatisfied with any of the Yeshivos in the Chicago area, came to Rav Eliyahu Soloveichik and offered to reconstitute Yeshiva’s Brisk which had been unable to succeed in the final years before its demise (for reasons too complex to get into here). They respected Rav Ahron and understood and respected the immense Torah scholarship of his son, Rav Eliyahu. The only condition: They had to drop their celebration of Yom Ha’atzmaut. No more Hallel.
Of course Rav Eliyahu refused. And that was the end of Brisk Yeshiva. I will never forget the hurt in Rav Eliyahu’s eyes when I spoke to him about it. He understood that some people don’t say Hallel. But where is the Hakaras Hatov? Where is some tangible recognition of what the advent of the sate has meant to Torah learning? Where is the recognition that since the advent of the state, there has been an unprecedented amount of Torah learning in Israel? Where is the recognition of all the support the State of Israel has given to the Torah world over the last sixty years, all of which would not be possible without Eretz Yisroel’s returning to Jewish hands? And what about the financial aid and the exemptions from army service?
The government isn’t Frum?! Imagine what Israel would look like today if the Arabs had won in 1948? Would there be a Ponevezh, a Mir? Would Israel have tens of thousands of Talmidim learning Torah B’Hasmada Rabbah?
I don’t think so. Those secular pioneers dedicated their lives to Am Yisroel. Many of them sacrificed their lives in the process. And, with the help of God, whether they recognized it or not, a country was founded.
If the secular leadership in Israel do not realize God’s participation in it, we most certainly should. Tangibly.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
The Voting Begins
OK. Put on your voting shoes. The first round of voting for Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards is on and my blog has been nominated in several categories. Please go over there and vote for it.
Click here to vote. And in the best of Chicago traditions I urge everyone to vote early and vote often.
Just kidding. Don’t do that. It will probably disqualify your vote.
If you truly seek Emes and Emunah, please follow the rules for voting listed over there and place your vote for this blog in all the categories in which it has been nominated.
And thank you for your support.
Click here to vote. And in the best of Chicago traditions I urge everyone to vote early and vote often.
Just kidding. Don’t do that. It will probably disqualify your vote.
If you truly seek Emes and Emunah, please follow the rules for voting listed over there and place your vote for this blog in all the categories in which it has been nominated.
And thank you for your support.
Secular Jew, Righteous Jew
The story has been told all over the Jewish world. The Jewish media, both print and electronic have been paying homage to a hero of the Virginia Tech massacre. His name was Liviu Librescu.
I was going to comment earlier but so many people had already said the things I wanted to say that I decided not to just duplicate the efforts of others. For those who haven’t heard or read about this man, Dr. Librescu was a 76 year old holocaust survivor. He was an aeronautical and mechanical engineering professor who came to the United States during a sabbatical from teaching at Tel Aviv University in 1985 and stayed on because of the research opportunities he found there.
It’s one thing when the Jewish world focuses on one of its own. But Yesterday’s Chicago Tribune had a front page story about Dr. Librescu. Front page! It seemed to be more in depth than anything I’ve read so far. And after I read it my eyes started watering. It was truly a remarkable story.
The fact that he gave his life to protect his students was a huge Kiddush HaShem for this secular Jew. I believe that at that single moment he was Koneh his portion in Olam HaBah. …As did many such heroes during the holocaust who were secular and gave their lives for their religion.
The article goes on to tell more details about his life and how he gave it up to protect his students. But I want to focus on the fact that it was a secular newspaper, one that has often been accused of being anti-Semitic that not only featured that story of heroism, but featured it on their front page. This, they felt was one of the most important stories of the day... the story of how a Jew, a holocaust survivor gave up his life for his students. There on the front page, was a picture of the hero wearing a Yarmulkee. At the end of he story there were testimonials from the students he saved about his heroism.
I point this out to demonstrate once again the basic decency of the American people. The fact that stories of Jewish heroism are published on the front pages of major metropolitan newspapers, speaks volumes about them. To characterize the American people as a bunch of Esavs who hate Yaakov just is not true in our time. And this is yet another instance of it.
The Chicago Tribune, the students at Virginia Tech, the President of the United States, and even the Romanian government … all paid tribute to this Jew, this holocaust survivor who gave his life on Yom HaShoah to save fellow human beings. There was not a hateful moment in any of it. Just love, admiration, and sympathy for his bereaved family in Israel. The emotions were genuine. No one could fake them.
It has been said that universities have become hotbeds of anti-Semitism. In fact that seems to be the case. It has become very fashionable to bash Israel in universities where students have been indoctrinated to look at Israel as an oppressor nation and Palestinians as their victims. But not Virginia Tech. Not that day.
A while back I had written an article about why this is not 1938. I think this article shows why.
I was going to comment earlier but so many people had already said the things I wanted to say that I decided not to just duplicate the efforts of others. For those who haven’t heard or read about this man, Dr. Librescu was a 76 year old holocaust survivor. He was an aeronautical and mechanical engineering professor who came to the United States during a sabbatical from teaching at Tel Aviv University in 1985 and stayed on because of the research opportunities he found there.
It’s one thing when the Jewish world focuses on one of its own. But Yesterday’s Chicago Tribune had a front page story about Dr. Librescu. Front page! It seemed to be more in depth than anything I’ve read so far. And after I read it my eyes started watering. It was truly a remarkable story.
The fact that he gave his life to protect his students was a huge Kiddush HaShem for this secular Jew. I believe that at that single moment he was Koneh his portion in Olam HaBah. …As did many such heroes during the holocaust who were secular and gave their lives for their religion.
The article goes on to tell more details about his life and how he gave it up to protect his students. But I want to focus on the fact that it was a secular newspaper, one that has often been accused of being anti-Semitic that not only featured that story of heroism, but featured it on their front page. This, they felt was one of the most important stories of the day... the story of how a Jew, a holocaust survivor gave up his life for his students. There on the front page, was a picture of the hero wearing a Yarmulkee. At the end of he story there were testimonials from the students he saved about his heroism.
I point this out to demonstrate once again the basic decency of the American people. The fact that stories of Jewish heroism are published on the front pages of major metropolitan newspapers, speaks volumes about them. To characterize the American people as a bunch of Esavs who hate Yaakov just is not true in our time. And this is yet another instance of it.
The Chicago Tribune, the students at Virginia Tech, the President of the United States, and even the Romanian government … all paid tribute to this Jew, this holocaust survivor who gave his life on Yom HaShoah to save fellow human beings. There was not a hateful moment in any of it. Just love, admiration, and sympathy for his bereaved family in Israel. The emotions were genuine. No one could fake them.
It has been said that universities have become hotbeds of anti-Semitism. In fact that seems to be the case. It has become very fashionable to bash Israel in universities where students have been indoctrinated to look at Israel as an oppressor nation and Palestinians as their victims. But not Virginia Tech. Not that day.
A while back I had written an article about why this is not 1938. I think this article shows why.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Two Rabbis
There are two things virtual ink has been spilled on in the world of virtual reality at this moment. One is a letter to the editor written in Mishpahca Magazine about one of my heroes, Rabbi Yakov Horowitz, and the other is an essay written by my good friend Rabbi Shael Siegel. Both of these give me much grief.
In the case of the letter to Mishpacha Magazine, unfortunately it is not a surprising letter at all. I see thoughts like this expressed here all the time. In essence the letter writer states his strong opposition to the views expressed in an article by Rabbi Horowitz who is one of the more sensible voices in the Charedi world. There-in the letter writer expresses his indignation and strong objections to Rabbi Horowitz’s suggestion that the entirety of our children would be better served if they were taught “Al Pi Darko”.
This is, as many know, a subject that is near and dear to my heart. And it is one upon which Rabbi Horowitz and I see pretty much eye to eye. In that column he in essence is suggests that that the curricula of our Yeshivos should be broadened to include more secular subjects so it can address those children for whom the narrow focus of Gemarah study is not suited to their abilities. Not that those children aren’t intelligent. But they just have different personalities and abilities which can be better developed in other areas. This is a constant theme of mine.
But as is often the case here, there are people who cannot handle diversity. There are individuals who will lambaste any divergence from what they perceive to be Daas Torah. They will cite support from any and every source, ancient as well as current. And with those examples they inadvertently advocate the destruction of huge numbers of Klal Yisroel. All because of what they think they heard a “Rav Shach” say... And then will point to what they see as a viable system in Israel that shuns secular studies. Here is one very telling line from that letter:
“The Likutei Moharan (64) explains in depth that secular subjects cause heresy.”
Heresy. I see. That’s what Rabbi Horowitz is advocating. The teaching of heresy.
But, as I said, I am not surprised. I’ve heard it all before. Many times. Right here. And that mentality helps perpetuate an intolerable situation. Those that advocate learning Torah full time for everyone for the rest of their lives to the exclusion of everything else, have developed an educational system that follows that Hashkafa completely. It may be an ideal for path in life for some, but for everyone… it is the road paved to hell on earth. Because not everyone is cut out for that and the psychological pressure to do so overwhelms almost everyone within that system… capable or not. It psychologically forces them to stay in learning far beyond any reasonable time and forces them to ignore, nay…DISDAIN any realistic preparation for their future. In many cases that means a life doomed to poverty and in some cases, resentment. In has even been the cause of divorce and the break up of families. I’ve seen it happen.
But the individuals like this letter writer do not want to be confused with reality. All they know is the word “Gedolim”. That’s all that matters. If there’s a problem The Gedolim will be the ones to solve it. “Let THEM decide” is the clarion call! Well they have decided. It’s called Kupat Ha’ir! That’s their solution. Well, it’s not mine, and it’s not Rabbi Horowitz’s. Kupat Ha’ir is a band-aid to a wound that will soon out grow its ability to protect it.
On the other side of the spectrum there is my good friend Rabbi Shael Siegel. Shael and I have been friends since high school and has one of the most brilliant minds I know. But in his most recent post he crosses a line that I cannot allow to pass without comment.
In an essay entitled, “Hakol Kol Yaakov V’hayidayim…” he takes to task the Agudah position on Conservative Judaism, or more accurately their position on other denominations of Jewry. Without getting into the merit of his arguments, with which I disagree, the extent and tone of his condemnation goes way beyond all decency.
Most people who read this blog regularly know that on some issues I have often been very critical of Agudah myself. But at the same time I know where they are coming from and I respect their views, even when I don’t agree with them. And the truth happens to be that on most issues I do agree with them, certainly on this issue. Those who work for Agudah are some of the most dedicated people in Klal Yisroel. And those who are on the Agudah Moetzes are in the lead in that respect. No one is more concerned about Klal Yisroel than they are. It has been said by some of my detractors that every fiber of their being is devoted to the welfare of every member of the Jewish people. And I agree with them. I have never said otherwise. My disagreement with them has only been in how to achieve what is best. Never that they God forbid didn’t care …or were duplicitous or deceptive.
And that’s what makes me so sad that my good friend Shael has taken this attitude about Agudah. Here are his descriptions. They are guilty of corruption, lies, and deception (Geneivas Daas). Why? Because they claim to accept all Jews as legitimate no matter what their affiliation as long as they were born of a Jewish mother or had a Halachic conversion, yet they will not accept a conversion done by a Conservative Rabbi no matter how Halachic it was.
I do not want to get into the validity of his argument. But I object to the implications that they are hypocrites. It is just not true and to say it the way my friend Shael does is not only untrue but unfair. Agudah, it’s rabbinic and lay leaders and spokesman are some of the most Ehrlich people in the Jewish world. No one can seriously say otherwise. To be so accusatory and inflammatory about them is at best to misunderstand them entirely. And frankly it surprises me. I know Shael to be a kind and gentle soul who loves every single Jew. Why does he not reserve some of that love for his brethren in Agudah? Even if though he disagrees with them and thinks they are justifiably wrong, to accuse them of being liars, etc. is way beyond the pale. And I strongly protest it.
In the case of the letter to Mishpacha Magazine, unfortunately it is not a surprising letter at all. I see thoughts like this expressed here all the time. In essence the letter writer states his strong opposition to the views expressed in an article by Rabbi Horowitz who is one of the more sensible voices in the Charedi world. There-in the letter writer expresses his indignation and strong objections to Rabbi Horowitz’s suggestion that the entirety of our children would be better served if they were taught “Al Pi Darko”.
This is, as many know, a subject that is near and dear to my heart. And it is one upon which Rabbi Horowitz and I see pretty much eye to eye. In that column he in essence is suggests that that the curricula of our Yeshivos should be broadened to include more secular subjects so it can address those children for whom the narrow focus of Gemarah study is not suited to their abilities. Not that those children aren’t intelligent. But they just have different personalities and abilities which can be better developed in other areas. This is a constant theme of mine.
But as is often the case here, there are people who cannot handle diversity. There are individuals who will lambaste any divergence from what they perceive to be Daas Torah. They will cite support from any and every source, ancient as well as current. And with those examples they inadvertently advocate the destruction of huge numbers of Klal Yisroel. All because of what they think they heard a “Rav Shach” say... And then will point to what they see as a viable system in Israel that shuns secular studies. Here is one very telling line from that letter:
“The Likutei Moharan (64) explains in depth that secular subjects cause heresy.”
Heresy. I see. That’s what Rabbi Horowitz is advocating. The teaching of heresy.
But, as I said, I am not surprised. I’ve heard it all before. Many times. Right here. And that mentality helps perpetuate an intolerable situation. Those that advocate learning Torah full time for everyone for the rest of their lives to the exclusion of everything else, have developed an educational system that follows that Hashkafa completely. It may be an ideal for path in life for some, but for everyone… it is the road paved to hell on earth. Because not everyone is cut out for that and the psychological pressure to do so overwhelms almost everyone within that system… capable or not. It psychologically forces them to stay in learning far beyond any reasonable time and forces them to ignore, nay…DISDAIN any realistic preparation for their future. In many cases that means a life doomed to poverty and in some cases, resentment. In has even been the cause of divorce and the break up of families. I’ve seen it happen.
But the individuals like this letter writer do not want to be confused with reality. All they know is the word “Gedolim”. That’s all that matters. If there’s a problem The Gedolim will be the ones to solve it. “Let THEM decide” is the clarion call! Well they have decided. It’s called Kupat Ha’ir! That’s their solution. Well, it’s not mine, and it’s not Rabbi Horowitz’s. Kupat Ha’ir is a band-aid to a wound that will soon out grow its ability to protect it.
On the other side of the spectrum there is my good friend Rabbi Shael Siegel. Shael and I have been friends since high school and has one of the most brilliant minds I know. But in his most recent post he crosses a line that I cannot allow to pass without comment.
In an essay entitled, “Hakol Kol Yaakov V’hayidayim…” he takes to task the Agudah position on Conservative Judaism, or more accurately their position on other denominations of Jewry. Without getting into the merit of his arguments, with which I disagree, the extent and tone of his condemnation goes way beyond all decency.
Most people who read this blog regularly know that on some issues I have often been very critical of Agudah myself. But at the same time I know where they are coming from and I respect their views, even when I don’t agree with them. And the truth happens to be that on most issues I do agree with them, certainly on this issue. Those who work for Agudah are some of the most dedicated people in Klal Yisroel. And those who are on the Agudah Moetzes are in the lead in that respect. No one is more concerned about Klal Yisroel than they are. It has been said by some of my detractors that every fiber of their being is devoted to the welfare of every member of the Jewish people. And I agree with them. I have never said otherwise. My disagreement with them has only been in how to achieve what is best. Never that they God forbid didn’t care …or were duplicitous or deceptive.
And that’s what makes me so sad that my good friend Shael has taken this attitude about Agudah. Here are his descriptions. They are guilty of corruption, lies, and deception (Geneivas Daas). Why? Because they claim to accept all Jews as legitimate no matter what their affiliation as long as they were born of a Jewish mother or had a Halachic conversion, yet they will not accept a conversion done by a Conservative Rabbi no matter how Halachic it was.
I do not want to get into the validity of his argument. But I object to the implications that they are hypocrites. It is just not true and to say it the way my friend Shael does is not only untrue but unfair. Agudah, it’s rabbinic and lay leaders and spokesman are some of the most Ehrlich people in the Jewish world. No one can seriously say otherwise. To be so accusatory and inflammatory about them is at best to misunderstand them entirely. And frankly it surprises me. I know Shael to be a kind and gentle soul who loves every single Jew. Why does he not reserve some of that love for his brethren in Agudah? Even if though he disagrees with them and thinks they are justifiably wrong, to accuse them of being liars, etc. is way beyond the pale. And I strongly protest it.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Who is… DovBear?!
Who is DovBear? What does he stand for? The answer to those questions is: I don’t know. But I’m not sure anyone who does not know him personally knows exactly what he stands for. In fact, quite the opposite is probably the case. People will often make snap judgments about others based on a single misread or misunderstood comment.
It is the nature of blogging that commenters are often brought to inflammatory remarks. This is due in part to the anonymity feature. That enables anyone to post their thoughts without any concern about the repercussions. It used as a “release”… a way of saying what you really think and not worrying about what your family, friends, or neighbors will say or think about you.
But the knee jerk type comment that is often the result of not caring what others will say can result in snap judgments about people that are highly inaccurate. People will quickly jump to conclusions about others without bothering to analyze that individual’s words. I experience this all the time from the some of the anonymous commenters on this blog.
For the most part bloggers with controversial opinions have learned to shrug off the misperceptions and/or ad hominems. But every once in a while if you are a blogger it can “get to you”. Someone will make an assumption or accusation so outrageous or inaccurate that it will “press your hot buttons”. This has happened to me as well.
A few days ago I received a personal e-mail from the mega popular Dov Bear. He had mentioned to me that he often feels unjustly vilified by some of the people who comment on my blog. He asked me if I would agree to help clear up misconceptions about him and I agreed. The result is the following interview. I would just like to state that all answers given in this interview do not necessarily reflect my own view. They may or may not. But I do feel that any individual who feels unjustly characterized deserves to set the record straight about himself and provide a bit of a profile about exactly who he is and what he stands for. And this is certainly true for a prominent blogger who is all too often an easy target. With that in mind, here is the interview.
HM (Harry Maryles): Are you married?
DB (Dov Bear): Yes.
HM: Children?
DB: Yes.
HM: Are your parents religious?
DB: Yes. And so were my grandparents, who, not incidently, were American-born. They were here, living rich Jewish lives before the war.
HM: Where were you educated?
DB: I went to a right wing Jewish day school. We were co-ed in theearly grades, strictly separate after that and, from sixth grade andon, almost all of the limudei kodesh teachers were rabbis from name-brand yeshivot. I don't think I had a "YU Rabbi" until the very end of high school and, in general, we mocked them, I'm sorry to say.I grew up thinking I was pretty frum. Fast forward to my early twenties, though, and suddenly my Judaism isn't Jewish enough. It was very hard. (perhaps you've seen the blog?)
HM: Did you attend university and do you have any degrees?
DB: Yes.
HM: Did you attend any post high school Yeshivas?
DB: Yes.
HM: Where and what type?
DB: In the US and Israel. They were both "black-hat lite" places.You'll be surprised to hear this, but I fit in there, pretty well. It's also where I "discovered" Samson Rephael Hirsh, the Morah Nevuchim, the Igeret Harambam, and others.. Some of what these books said about hashkafa was radically different from what the Rabanim were saying. I was almost always able to point this out, however, and good conversations usually ensued.
HM: Has your Hashkafa changed at all since you finished your formal schooling?
DB: Of course. I can't imagine anyone could say otherwise.
HM: Why did you change?
DB: I read more, studied more, met more people, from different perspectives and different backgrounds. In other words, I grew up.
HM: Do you send your children to day schools?
DB: Yes, to yeshivot, and bes yaakovs in fact.
HM: Why?
DB: I ask myself that every day. No, kidding. The real answer is this:I want my kids to understand their community and their culture. Iwon't mind one bit if they start making the same discoveries I made (and I plan to help them, of course) but I want it to be rooted in the baseline knowledge you can only acquire from formal Jewish schooling.
HM: Do you consider yourself Orthodox?
DB: Yes. I keep Orthodox law.
HM: Are you Koveiah Itim?
DB: Yes. I keep three regular learning sessions: Tanach, and two different mesechtas.
HM: What is your Hashkafic perspective now?
DB: I don't fit neatly into boxes (again, perhaps you've seen theblog? :) ) I can try to tell you what I think about specific hashkafic issues, if you like.
HM: OK. How do you feel for example about Chasidim or Lubavitch?
DB: I don't think Hasidut will withstand the test of time. From the time of the Alter Rebbe, Hasidut has been trying to integrate itself into the Torah world, and they've had very good success, of course.They'll either complete this intergaration or go the route of the Karriaites. We'll know in 200 years or so. I think messianicLubavitch, unfortunately, is exactly where the Church was at the timeof the kerygma (ie in the 40-80 years between the death of Jesus and the publication of the gospels) . The similarities are numerous.
HM: Charedim?
DB: I have no problem at all with the non-Hasidic community called "Haredi" though I'm fond of pointing out that SOME of them can be narrow-minded, ignorant of history and science, unfair to women and fraudulently pious. This is one of my many deficiencies. (again,perhaps you've seen the blog.) I hasten to add though that none of this is unique to Haredi Judaism. Its an unfortunate symptom of fundementalism.
HM: Modern Orthodox? Religious Zionists?
DB: Zionists and MO Jews can be fundementalists, too, and where they are the same kind of bad behavior is often exhibited.
HM: What is your view about the State of Israel?
DB: It's the fulfillment of ancient prophesy, and the world's teshuva for 2000 years of crimes against us.
HM: Do you say Hallel on Yom Hatazmaut?
DB: No [see this post]
HM: Tachanun?
DB: No, I don't say tachanun. When the Jewish world is celebrating tachnun is inappropriate. As I have said before: Hasidim, typically,take every possible excuse to avoid saying tachnun. They don't say it at mincha. Many won't say it on Friday or Sunday. They skip it on important yartzheits. Lubovs, in fact, skip it on the day their Rebbe was released from jail. So why not skip it on the day that every Jew in the world was released from jail?
HM: Those are my practices as well. Are you happy with the way Charedim in Israel treat their governmentt?
DB: No. Israel is the world's best father-in-law, and it should be appreciated.
HM: Do you support universal army service for all able bodied residents?
DB: No, but more haredim should serve. There's no reason for the ordinary guy to have a free pass. The best and the brightest should stay in the Beis Hamedrash, even on the public's dime. The hamon am should not.
HM: What is your view about Gedloim andDaas Torah? How far does yourrespect for the current Gedolim go, if at all?
DB: Depends. Some of them are more deserving of respect than others,but I know little about them in particular.
HM: Who would you include or not include as a Gadol?
DB: I don't even accept the idea of a category called "Gedolim." Someof the people called Gedolim are great, transcendently great; others are out of their depth. And there are great people who no one calls "Godol" , though by every objective standard they are.
HM: Do you accept that they are Daas Torah? Do you even believe in theconcept of Daas Torah?
DB: No. Of course not. They have wisdom, experience, and other resources. They often give sage advise and expert counsel. But theycan't speak ex cathedra.
HM: Of the following rabbinic leaders, who do you most identify, Rabbi Avi Weiss? Rabbi Hershel Shacter? Or RavMatisyahu Salomon?
DB: Defacto, I identify more completely with Rav Hershel Shachter.
HM: Have you ever publicly denigrated a Torah personality?
DB: No. I'm a mild mannered guy who enjoys good realtions with the local clergy.
HM: What is your view of organizations like Agudah, MIzrachi, NCSY,Bnei Akiva?
DB: I think they should merge. Too much duplication of services, and they create unecessary divisions between Jews.
HM: How do you feel about the singles situation? Do you have an opinion on the problems facing singles today?
DB: Not really, no.
HM: Why do you choose to remain anonymous?
DB: I don't trust people. yetzer machshevot libo rak rah kol hayom
HM: Are your views not known by your community?
DB: My friends know where I stand on most things.
This ends the interview. I hope this dispells any misconceptions about DovBear. And by the same token I hope this interview makes clear that one should never make snap judgements about anyone based on an isolated random comment "here or there". It is almost always inaccurate and a completely unfair apparisal of an individual's character and beliefs.
It is the nature of blogging that commenters are often brought to inflammatory remarks. This is due in part to the anonymity feature. That enables anyone to post their thoughts without any concern about the repercussions. It used as a “release”… a way of saying what you really think and not worrying about what your family, friends, or neighbors will say or think about you.
But the knee jerk type comment that is often the result of not caring what others will say can result in snap judgments about people that are highly inaccurate. People will quickly jump to conclusions about others without bothering to analyze that individual’s words. I experience this all the time from the some of the anonymous commenters on this blog.
For the most part bloggers with controversial opinions have learned to shrug off the misperceptions and/or ad hominems. But every once in a while if you are a blogger it can “get to you”. Someone will make an assumption or accusation so outrageous or inaccurate that it will “press your hot buttons”. This has happened to me as well.
A few days ago I received a personal e-mail from the mega popular Dov Bear. He had mentioned to me that he often feels unjustly vilified by some of the people who comment on my blog. He asked me if I would agree to help clear up misconceptions about him and I agreed. The result is the following interview. I would just like to state that all answers given in this interview do not necessarily reflect my own view. They may or may not. But I do feel that any individual who feels unjustly characterized deserves to set the record straight about himself and provide a bit of a profile about exactly who he is and what he stands for. And this is certainly true for a prominent blogger who is all too often an easy target. With that in mind, here is the interview.
HM (Harry Maryles): Are you married?
DB (Dov Bear): Yes.
HM: Children?
DB: Yes.
HM: Are your parents religious?
DB: Yes. And so were my grandparents, who, not incidently, were American-born. They were here, living rich Jewish lives before the war.
HM: Where were you educated?
DB: I went to a right wing Jewish day school. We were co-ed in theearly grades, strictly separate after that and, from sixth grade andon, almost all of the limudei kodesh teachers were rabbis from name-brand yeshivot. I don't think I had a "YU Rabbi" until the very end of high school and, in general, we mocked them, I'm sorry to say.I grew up thinking I was pretty frum. Fast forward to my early twenties, though, and suddenly my Judaism isn't Jewish enough. It was very hard. (perhaps you've seen the blog?)
HM: Did you attend university and do you have any degrees?
DB: Yes.
HM: Did you attend any post high school Yeshivas?
DB: Yes.
HM: Where and what type?
DB: In the US and Israel. They were both "black-hat lite" places.You'll be surprised to hear this, but I fit in there, pretty well. It's also where I "discovered" Samson Rephael Hirsh, the Morah Nevuchim, the Igeret Harambam, and others.. Some of what these books said about hashkafa was radically different from what the Rabanim were saying. I was almost always able to point this out, however, and good conversations usually ensued.
HM: Has your Hashkafa changed at all since you finished your formal schooling?
DB: Of course. I can't imagine anyone could say otherwise.
HM: Why did you change?
DB: I read more, studied more, met more people, from different perspectives and different backgrounds. In other words, I grew up.
HM: Do you send your children to day schools?
DB: Yes, to yeshivot, and bes yaakovs in fact.
HM: Why?
DB: I ask myself that every day. No, kidding. The real answer is this:I want my kids to understand their community and their culture. Iwon't mind one bit if they start making the same discoveries I made (and I plan to help them, of course) but I want it to be rooted in the baseline knowledge you can only acquire from formal Jewish schooling.
HM: Do you consider yourself Orthodox?
DB: Yes. I keep Orthodox law.
HM: Are you Koveiah Itim?
DB: Yes. I keep three regular learning sessions: Tanach, and two different mesechtas.
HM: What is your Hashkafic perspective now?
DB: I don't fit neatly into boxes (again, perhaps you've seen theblog? :) ) I can try to tell you what I think about specific hashkafic issues, if you like.
HM: OK. How do you feel for example about Chasidim or Lubavitch?
DB: I don't think Hasidut will withstand the test of time. From the time of the Alter Rebbe, Hasidut has been trying to integrate itself into the Torah world, and they've had very good success, of course.They'll either complete this intergaration or go the route of the Karriaites. We'll know in 200 years or so. I think messianicLubavitch, unfortunately, is exactly where the Church was at the timeof the kerygma (ie in the 40-80 years between the death of Jesus and the publication of the gospels) . The similarities are numerous.
HM: Charedim?
DB: I have no problem at all with the non-Hasidic community called "Haredi" though I'm fond of pointing out that SOME of them can be narrow-minded, ignorant of history and science, unfair to women and fraudulently pious. This is one of my many deficiencies. (again,perhaps you've seen the blog.) I hasten to add though that none of this is unique to Haredi Judaism. Its an unfortunate symptom of fundementalism.
HM: Modern Orthodox? Religious Zionists?
DB: Zionists and MO Jews can be fundementalists, too, and where they are the same kind of bad behavior is often exhibited.
HM: What is your view about the State of Israel?
DB: It's the fulfillment of ancient prophesy, and the world's teshuva for 2000 years of crimes against us.
HM: Do you say Hallel on Yom Hatazmaut?
DB: No [see this post]
HM: Tachanun?
DB: No, I don't say tachanun. When the Jewish world is celebrating tachnun is inappropriate. As I have said before: Hasidim, typically,take every possible excuse to avoid saying tachnun. They don't say it at mincha. Many won't say it on Friday or Sunday. They skip it on important yartzheits. Lubovs, in fact, skip it on the day their Rebbe was released from jail. So why not skip it on the day that every Jew in the world was released from jail?
HM: Those are my practices as well. Are you happy with the way Charedim in Israel treat their governmentt?
DB: No. Israel is the world's best father-in-law, and it should be appreciated.
HM: Do you support universal army service for all able bodied residents?
DB: No, but more haredim should serve. There's no reason for the ordinary guy to have a free pass. The best and the brightest should stay in the Beis Hamedrash, even on the public's dime. The hamon am should not.
HM: What is your view about Gedloim andDaas Torah? How far does yourrespect for the current Gedolim go, if at all?
DB: Depends. Some of them are more deserving of respect than others,but I know little about them in particular.
HM: Who would you include or not include as a Gadol?
DB: I don't even accept the idea of a category called "Gedolim." Someof the people called Gedolim are great, transcendently great; others are out of their depth. And there are great people who no one calls "Godol" , though by every objective standard they are.
HM: Do you accept that they are Daas Torah? Do you even believe in theconcept of Daas Torah?
DB: No. Of course not. They have wisdom, experience, and other resources. They often give sage advise and expert counsel. But theycan't speak ex cathedra.
HM: Of the following rabbinic leaders, who do you most identify, Rabbi Avi Weiss? Rabbi Hershel Shacter? Or RavMatisyahu Salomon?
DB: Defacto, I identify more completely with Rav Hershel Shachter.
HM: Have you ever publicly denigrated a Torah personality?
DB: No. I'm a mild mannered guy who enjoys good realtions with the local clergy.
HM: What is your view of organizations like Agudah, MIzrachi, NCSY,Bnei Akiva?
DB: I think they should merge. Too much duplication of services, and they create unecessary divisions between Jews.
HM: How do you feel about the singles situation? Do you have an opinion on the problems facing singles today?
DB: Not really, no.
HM: Why do you choose to remain anonymous?
DB: I don't trust people. yetzer machshevot libo rak rah kol hayom
HM: Are your views not known by your community?
DB: My friends know where I stand on most things.
This ends the interview. I hope this dispells any misconceptions about DovBear. And by the same token I hope this interview makes clear that one should never make snap judgements about anyone based on an isolated random comment "here or there". It is almost always inaccurate and a completely unfair apparisal of an individual's character and beliefs.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Changing the Paradigm
There is video available on YouTube which, set to music, which tells of many facts and accomplishments of the State of Israel during its relatively short history. Add to that the relatively hostile conditions and military obligations of all of its citizens and it is indeed quite remarkable. I am not going to link it because it contains one image that is somewhat objectionable. It is also may be inappropriate for Sefira for those who do not listen to recorded music then.
But the impact it makes is very powerful and testifies to the intelligence and the industriousness of the Jewish people. We have indeed contributed much to the world.
Here is a partial list:
*Israel has more patents per person than any other country.
*Israel has more scientists and engineers per capita than any other country in the world.
*Israeli companies pioneered voicemail, and other cell phone services.
*Israel has the highest per capita concentration of high-tech companies in the world.
*AOL instant messaging technology was developed in 1996 by a team of four young Israelis.
*Israeli engineers developed the world’s first cell phone in Motorola’s lab in Haifa, its largest research center in the world.
*Microsoft’s windows XP operating system was developed in Israel.
*An Israeli company developed the first high resolution camera that fits onto a single electronic chip small enough to fit on a cell phone.
*An Israeli company developed a camera so small it fits into a pill sized capsule one can swallow for digestive tract examinations.
And from a Torah perspective one would have to of course include the enourmous amount of Limud HaTorah that takes place there now… more than any place in the world including the US. I would venture to say that the amount, depth and scope of Torah learning taking place there now rivals almost any period in history since the oral law was redacted into the Mishna and Talmud.
This is not to say that there wasn’t more depth in earlier periods. Of course there was. How many Rambam’s are there today? How many have there been since? Of course the Rishonim were deeper and broaders in Torah knowledge than we are today. But in terms of sheer numbers combined with the depth of their study, I would guess that the learning Torah situation in Israel is unparalleled.
Can anyone imagine what would happen if some of our best and brightest Bnei Torah in Israel were allowed to pursue other fields? The limits seem endless!
We have tens of thousands of Bnei Torah in the system learning full time. Would it be so terrible if a few of them were allowed to pursue areas of their own choosing and achieve great hieghts in other fields? Does Klal Yisrael really need so many of our best and brightests learning full time and then later scrounging around for low paying jobs, because of a lack of training?
Wouldn’t it be better if those who had a penchant for other fields were allowed or even encouraged to follow their talents and learn and train in those fields? Let those who’s true Tachlis is learning Torah do so. Let us support them. We need Torah leaders in Judaism. But by the same token we need doctors, scientists and the many other people whose services are vital to our existence and the quality of our lives. Why not change the paradigm and allow for more diversity in the Torah world? Imagine the possibilities!
But the impact it makes is very powerful and testifies to the intelligence and the industriousness of the Jewish people. We have indeed contributed much to the world.
Here is a partial list:
*Israel has more patents per person than any other country.
*Israel has more scientists and engineers per capita than any other country in the world.
*Israeli companies pioneered voicemail, and other cell phone services.
*Israel has the highest per capita concentration of high-tech companies in the world.
*AOL instant messaging technology was developed in 1996 by a team of four young Israelis.
*Israeli engineers developed the world’s first cell phone in Motorola’s lab in Haifa, its largest research center in the world.
*Microsoft’s windows XP operating system was developed in Israel.
*An Israeli company developed the first high resolution camera that fits onto a single electronic chip small enough to fit on a cell phone.
*An Israeli company developed a camera so small it fits into a pill sized capsule one can swallow for digestive tract examinations.
And from a Torah perspective one would have to of course include the enourmous amount of Limud HaTorah that takes place there now… more than any place in the world including the US. I would venture to say that the amount, depth and scope of Torah learning taking place there now rivals almost any period in history since the oral law was redacted into the Mishna and Talmud.
This is not to say that there wasn’t more depth in earlier periods. Of course there was. How many Rambam’s are there today? How many have there been since? Of course the Rishonim were deeper and broaders in Torah knowledge than we are today. But in terms of sheer numbers combined with the depth of their study, I would guess that the learning Torah situation in Israel is unparalleled.
Can anyone imagine what would happen if some of our best and brightest Bnei Torah in Israel were allowed to pursue other fields? The limits seem endless!
We have tens of thousands of Bnei Torah in the system learning full time. Would it be so terrible if a few of them were allowed to pursue areas of their own choosing and achieve great hieghts in other fields? Does Klal Yisrael really need so many of our best and brightests learning full time and then later scrounging around for low paying jobs, because of a lack of training?
Wouldn’t it be better if those who had a penchant for other fields were allowed or even encouraged to follow their talents and learn and train in those fields? Let those who’s true Tachlis is learning Torah do so. Let us support them. We need Torah leaders in Judaism. But by the same token we need doctors, scientists and the many other people whose services are vital to our existence and the quality of our lives. Why not change the paradigm and allow for more diversity in the Torah world? Imagine the possibilities!
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Departing from the Path of One’s Parents
Do young people who want to change from the right wing Hashkafos of their parents to a more modern one… fall into the category of “At Risk Children?
Some people would assert that they do. The argument goes something like this: When a child from a Charedi home becomes Modern Orthodox, it is almost invariably due to a desire to run away from observance. And expressing such a desire is just a first step toward that.
On the surface that might seem to be true. Certainly going from Charedi to Modern Orthodox would lighten the load of a young person. But is it the slippery slope these parents are worried about? Perhaps. but, not necessarily. It is very possible that such young people do want to be observant. They just don’t want to be Charedi. Their motivations may be very much the same as those who, like myself, feel that Charedi Hashkafos are unnecessarily depriving them of legitmate resources of knowledge and entertainment. Or that their parents Hashkafos are depriving them of career opportunities by shunning college. They will observe Frum professionals and wonder why not them? Perhaps they just see forbidding things permitted to other Orthodox Jews as unfair and want the same for themselves.
True, in many cases, a desire for modernity is not motivated by a desire to be more caeful about observance. So when a child rebels even in this way, it can easily be cause for concern to a parent. Especially when a parent has been preaching the ills of modernity to his children all their lives.
Some parents view such rebellion as near tantamount to leaving Yiddishkeit! But is that the case? Perhaps sometimes it can become so. Surely a teen who expresses such desires is undergoing some from of rebellion.
But In my view a parent will be well served to consider the circumstances of their own particular situation evaluate all possible options and choose a path in which their child can succeed. As upsetting as it may be that a child is not following in a parents footsteps, it is far better to be Modern Orthodox than it is to be non observant. That kind of rebellion is indeed something to be concerned about. And as we all know dropping all observance is an all too common occurrence even in the best of households. A parent can easily fear an irreligious end for a child who expresses an interest in being more modern, as embarking on that “slippery slope” away from any observance.
But I would advise any parent so concerned to step back and analyze what is really going on. It may be true that in Charedi families such a child is “going in the wrong direction, if he or she seeks things which here-to-fore has been forbidden to them, like watching television. But even if that is the case, the reaction to it is an all important factor with respect to how that child will ultimately turn out. If a parent is horrified and reacts that way to a child, that child will surely react in a negative way. A child will see that his or her parents have rejected him and then see no point in observance at all. And that can easily result in a complete and total rebellion away from any obvservance and even self destructive behavior like using drugs and having casual sex.
The words Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko are very important here. They are more than knowing which school to send your child too, although that is very important. It is equally important to know as best as one can the psychological makeup of one’s child. What their desires and dreams are, what their capabilities are… their strengths, and their weaknesses. And to make sure that there is never any rejection. By doing so and basically accepting them for who they are, one can be relatively certain that that child’s love for his parents will be returned along with a healthy respect for Torah observance.
I know several Charedi families who had this experience with their own children, three of them Chasidic. In almost all cases the children grew up to be responsible Frum adults who married and are living exemplary lives, albeit not the same Hashkafos they grew up with. This is because the parents all practiced Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko. They allowed their children to be who they were and did not force them into any straight jackets that couldn’t be handled. Some of those children actually returned, at least partially to their parents paths.
But even for those that didn’t and are now Modern Orthodox, they are observant only because their parents did not reject them. Instead they loved them and helped guide them on their chosen paths. Some Yeshivishe parents sent their teenagers to mixed gender high schools. Some Chasidishe teens shaved, and traded in their Chasidishe Levush for the more modern Yeshivishe look… or the look of Modern Orthodoxy. And in all the cases I am thinking of, these young people are quite Frum and very Ehrlich. They all got married and live an observant lifestyle. And they have great relationships with their parents.
I therefore think that any parent who looks down at a child who expresses a wish to become more modern is in effect hurting that child more than can be imagined. And I’ve seen those results, too. They are the one’s who are the dropout and in some cases get into serious trouble.
Of course, as always, there are no guarantees. Sometimes an intolerant parent will be able to force their child back into the fold. And sometimes a loving and accepting parent will fail. But the odds are that love, acceptance, and proper guidance will work far better and more often than intolerance and rejection.
And the reverse is also true. Many Modern Orhtodox parents “lose” their children to Charedi Hashkafos. But there the danger is not leaving Yiddishkeit. It is whether there will be a relationship between parent and child. Tolerance and love go a long way there too. One needs to be prepared for any possibilities in life and deal with them properly. Acceptance, love, and guidance along a chosen path is the key with respect to how one’s children will turn out and whether a parent/child relationship will always remain a loving one. Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko are some of the wisest words ever written. When it comes to our children, it behooves all of us to practice them.
Some people would assert that they do. The argument goes something like this: When a child from a Charedi home becomes Modern Orthodox, it is almost invariably due to a desire to run away from observance. And expressing such a desire is just a first step toward that.
On the surface that might seem to be true. Certainly going from Charedi to Modern Orthodox would lighten the load of a young person. But is it the slippery slope these parents are worried about? Perhaps. but, not necessarily. It is very possible that such young people do want to be observant. They just don’t want to be Charedi. Their motivations may be very much the same as those who, like myself, feel that Charedi Hashkafos are unnecessarily depriving them of legitmate resources of knowledge and entertainment. Or that their parents Hashkafos are depriving them of career opportunities by shunning college. They will observe Frum professionals and wonder why not them? Perhaps they just see forbidding things permitted to other Orthodox Jews as unfair and want the same for themselves.
True, in many cases, a desire for modernity is not motivated by a desire to be more caeful about observance. So when a child rebels even in this way, it can easily be cause for concern to a parent. Especially when a parent has been preaching the ills of modernity to his children all their lives.
Some parents view such rebellion as near tantamount to leaving Yiddishkeit! But is that the case? Perhaps sometimes it can become so. Surely a teen who expresses such desires is undergoing some from of rebellion.
But In my view a parent will be well served to consider the circumstances of their own particular situation evaluate all possible options and choose a path in which their child can succeed. As upsetting as it may be that a child is not following in a parents footsteps, it is far better to be Modern Orthodox than it is to be non observant. That kind of rebellion is indeed something to be concerned about. And as we all know dropping all observance is an all too common occurrence even in the best of households. A parent can easily fear an irreligious end for a child who expresses an interest in being more modern, as embarking on that “slippery slope” away from any observance.
But I would advise any parent so concerned to step back and analyze what is really going on. It may be true that in Charedi families such a child is “going in the wrong direction, if he or she seeks things which here-to-fore has been forbidden to them, like watching television. But even if that is the case, the reaction to it is an all important factor with respect to how that child will ultimately turn out. If a parent is horrified and reacts that way to a child, that child will surely react in a negative way. A child will see that his or her parents have rejected him and then see no point in observance at all. And that can easily result in a complete and total rebellion away from any obvservance and even self destructive behavior like using drugs and having casual sex.
The words Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko are very important here. They are more than knowing which school to send your child too, although that is very important. It is equally important to know as best as one can the psychological makeup of one’s child. What their desires and dreams are, what their capabilities are… their strengths, and their weaknesses. And to make sure that there is never any rejection. By doing so and basically accepting them for who they are, one can be relatively certain that that child’s love for his parents will be returned along with a healthy respect for Torah observance.
I know several Charedi families who had this experience with their own children, three of them Chasidic. In almost all cases the children grew up to be responsible Frum adults who married and are living exemplary lives, albeit not the same Hashkafos they grew up with. This is because the parents all practiced Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko. They allowed their children to be who they were and did not force them into any straight jackets that couldn’t be handled. Some of those children actually returned, at least partially to their parents paths.
But even for those that didn’t and are now Modern Orthodox, they are observant only because their parents did not reject them. Instead they loved them and helped guide them on their chosen paths. Some Yeshivishe parents sent their teenagers to mixed gender high schools. Some Chasidishe teens shaved, and traded in their Chasidishe Levush for the more modern Yeshivishe look… or the look of Modern Orthodoxy. And in all the cases I am thinking of, these young people are quite Frum and very Ehrlich. They all got married and live an observant lifestyle. And they have great relationships with their parents.
I therefore think that any parent who looks down at a child who expresses a wish to become more modern is in effect hurting that child more than can be imagined. And I’ve seen those results, too. They are the one’s who are the dropout and in some cases get into serious trouble.
Of course, as always, there are no guarantees. Sometimes an intolerant parent will be able to force their child back into the fold. And sometimes a loving and accepting parent will fail. But the odds are that love, acceptance, and proper guidance will work far better and more often than intolerance and rejection.
And the reverse is also true. Many Modern Orhtodox parents “lose” their children to Charedi Hashkafos. But there the danger is not leaving Yiddishkeit. It is whether there will be a relationship between parent and child. Tolerance and love go a long way there too. One needs to be prepared for any possibilities in life and deal with them properly. Acceptance, love, and guidance along a chosen path is the key with respect to how one’s children will turn out and whether a parent/child relationship will always remain a loving one. Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko are some of the wisest words ever written. When it comes to our children, it behooves all of us to practice them.
Vote for Stone
For those of us in the 50th ward in Chicago today is a run–off election between Alderman Bernard Stone and Ms. Naisy Dolar. Bot candidates are fine people and I’m relatively certain that both candidates would serve us, their constituency, with honor. So why do I support Mr. Stone? It is because he is a proven entity who has served us well for several decades. When things needed to get done, Berny was there for us. When Hanna Sacks Bais Yaakov needed a public school building, he was instrumental in helping secure it for us in the face of much opposition from the public school parents who opposed us. I know, I was there as an elected member of that public school's local school council. And if anything like that ever happens again, I know we can count on him.
As a political matter, I am opposed to big labor. It is big labor who worked to defeat all candidates who voted with Mayor Daley to veto and defeat the “Big Box Ordiance” that would have prevented Walmart from opening up a store on the “West Side” and thereby providing hundreds of job opportunities for the very people who need them the most.
And when the ordinance was finally defeated, indeed there were many more applicants than there were jobs available. The West side community leaders and the community at large wanted Walmart there, but the Alderman, who I guess were in the pockets of “big labor” didn’t care and passed an ordinance to prevent them from opening, because Walmart does not abide by big labor’s pay-scale guidelines. Berny stood up to them and now residents of the West Side are better off. Obviously since Ms. Dolar is supported by big labor, we know what her vote would have most likely been. I am not interested in perpetuating big labor at all. And for me that alone is enough of a reason to vote for Alderman Stone.
So I urge all voters in the 50th ward who read my blog to go out today and support a proven friend of the Jewish community and a champion of doing the right thing for the city, despite threats of repercussions from big labor. A win for Berny is a win for all the people. Jew and gentile alike.
As a political matter, I am opposed to big labor. It is big labor who worked to defeat all candidates who voted with Mayor Daley to veto and defeat the “Big Box Ordiance” that would have prevented Walmart from opening up a store on the “West Side” and thereby providing hundreds of job opportunities for the very people who need them the most.
And when the ordinance was finally defeated, indeed there were many more applicants than there were jobs available. The West side community leaders and the community at large wanted Walmart there, but the Alderman, who I guess were in the pockets of “big labor” didn’t care and passed an ordinance to prevent them from opening, because Walmart does not abide by big labor’s pay-scale guidelines. Berny stood up to them and now residents of the West Side are better off. Obviously since Ms. Dolar is supported by big labor, we know what her vote would have most likely been. I am not interested in perpetuating big labor at all. And for me that alone is enough of a reason to vote for Alderman Stone.
So I urge all voters in the 50th ward who read my blog to go out today and support a proven friend of the Jewish community and a champion of doing the right thing for the city, despite threats of repercussions from big labor. A win for Berny is a win for all the people. Jew and gentile alike.
Monday, April 16, 2007
An Appropriate Day?
Yesterday was Yom HaShoah. A lot of ink has been spilled about the propriety of having holocaust remembrance day during the month of Nissan, when certain Minhagim with respect to Aveilus are forbidden. For example, no Hespedim are allowed during any funerals held during this month. How important is this Halacha? Well, it seems to be observed more in the breach. I rarely go to a funeral during Nissan which does not include Hespedim even by the most right wing of Rabbanim or Roshei Yeshiva. It is usually accompanied by a preface to the effect of: “We’re not supposed to give Hespedim during Nissan, but I feel I must say some Divrei Shevach about the Niftar.” And then comes the Hespid.
But when it comes to Yom HaShoah it’s quite another story. “The Chutzpah of the Godless Medinah!” “Making a holocaust remembrance day during Nissan!” That’s the typical refrain from those who refuse to observe it.
It is true that most Charedim have enough sensitivity to not make any public Macha’ah. But privately... words of scorn for those who chose that day to remember the holocaust. “Those Reshaim... How dare they!” ...is kind of the attitude.
In my view the real reason for heaping all this scorn has little to do with making that day during the month of Nissan. I believe it is an almost innate hatred of the
It doesn’t much matter any more that 27 Nissan is the chosen day. It too, can be prefaced by “I know it we aren’t supposed to have any Hespedim in Nissan.” Holocaust survivors deserve a unique day to remember the holocaust. This is the day chosen by a national government of Jews ...for Jews... to observe. And everyone needs to respect it. That is the reality now. Holocaust survivors deserve at least that much from those of us who weren’t there.
But there are other reasons cited for the inappropriateness of the day chosen. Much has been made of the fact that it was based on the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. The accusation is that it celebrates the “Kochi V’Otzem Yodi” mentality of a Godless Israeli government. It reflects the attitude that all military accomplishments are achieved through “the strength of my own hand”, implying a lack of Divine participation. I’m sure there is some truth to that. Many of the founding fathers of the State were in fact anti-religious. But that should not diminish the importance of fighting back with all means at one’s disposal for survival... as was the case with the Warsaw Ghetto uprising or even the partisans who fought with the Nazis underground.
Jews need to be disabused of the notion that they went to the slaughter like sheep. This is in fact an image many people have of those long lines of Jews walking quietly to their deaths in the Nazi the gas chambers in places like Auschwitz. The Warsaw Ghetto uprising is the antithesis of that and it is an important event to be remembered. Using it as the date for Yom HaShoah is quite appropriate in my view.
Many would disagree and say, no. Judaism is not about violent resistance but about martyrdom for Torah. The true Tachlis of every Jew is to remain loyal to Torah U’Mitzvos. Violence is for Cossacks, not for Jews. This, they say is yet another reason to protest using the Warsaw Ghetto uprising as a focal point of Yom HaShoah. (...although one would be hard pressed to say that Judaism is not about violence with all the violent bickering going on in the Torah world today. But that is another issue.)
But I would argue that this is not so. Fighting for one’s physical existence is not only permitted, it is required. Martyrdom comes when we are given alternatives: Violate Halacha or die! That’s when one should be a martyr. But when one’s life is threatened as it most certainly was at the Warsaw Ghetto uprising one is required to resist. Standing meekly while Nazis bulldoze your city and then round you up for the gas chambers is in no way a mandate for us. Certainly not in the face of certain annihilation as was the case during the holocaust. Those who say otherwise, well... they were just not there. They are theorizing at the expense of the victims and the survivors.
This subject always comes up this time of year for obvious reason. And opposition to Yom HaShoah needs to be put to bed. That this day is not as appropriate as another day might have been, is beside the point.
This is their day now, and we ought to honor it. In my view choosing other days such as Asarah B’Teves does a disservice to the many survivors who now see this as their day. And as long as there is still one survivor alive that sees meaning in this day we ought to stand up for him or her. And it matters not how religious or irreligious they are. They are all holy.
That said, the holocaust should not be the focus of Judaism. On the contrary, Judaism is not about the holocaust. It is about Torah and Mitzvos. And that should be the focus of our lives. But the holocaust should not be ignored or forgotten. It is a seminal tragedy as are other tragedies of great magnitude throughout Jewish history. The Chuban Beis HaMikdash is considered the most tragic. And indeed the deaths occurring during that period were many in number. As a percentage of the total, perhaps it was the greatest. But in terms of sheer numbers I think it is well established that the greatest number of Jewish deaths occurred during the holocaust. And tortures? Many people say that the entirety of the Tochecha was experienced by the Jews of Europe.
Whether this day should forever remain the day of observance is a question for posterity. I should not be debated now. Perhaps someday it can be folded into Tisha B’Av along with all other tragedies that befell us. But for now, to make even the mildest protest is a Chilul HaShem of major proportion in my view.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
And Now… It’s Vishnitz
I am a descendant of a great Chasidic master, Rav Shimon Yaroslaver. Though unfamiliar to most of the Lithuanian type Yeshiva world, Rav Shimon has a relatively high place in the Chasidic world. He is considered the Talmid Muvhak of the Chozeh MiLublin. He wrote a Sefer called Toras Shimon on the Parsha. My father was named for him. And whenever I am in Chasidic circles I get a lot of “oohs and ahs” when I mention my Yichus.
Rav Shimon greatly honored his father, Rav Yisorel Leib Elbaum an avowed Misnagid. The break away from tradition was difficult for Rav Shimon. But Chasidus attracted him, first through his association with the Noam Elimelech and then later with the Chozeh. He never-the-less so honored his father that he chaged his last name from Elbaum to Maryles which is an acronym in Hebrew for MeRav Yisroel Leib’S (MRYLS). Translated, it simply means descendant of Rav Yisroel Leib.
As I said, Rav Yisroel Leib was an adamant Misnagid. He lived during the time of the Mezritcher Magid who tried to “convert” him with absolutely no success. It so pained him that his son went “off the track” that on his death bed, he decreed to his son that if he added “VeYatzmach Purkane V’Korev Mishichei” to the “mourner’s Kaddish” …as is the Minhag of Chasidim, he should not say Kaddish for him at all!
I have rejected my Chasidic roots a long time ago. I have changed my Nusach HaTeffilah to Nusach Ashkenaz with the approval of both my father and my Rebbe, and in general have reverted to the Hashkafa of Rav Shimon’s father.
I bring this up only to show my bona fides in both Chasidus and Misnagdus. And, as I said I have rejected my Chasidic roots for many of the reasons I have stated in the past with respect to the problems I see in both their philosophy and Mehalech. But I won’t go into details here.
One of the things I wondered about in the past was if Chasidim could hold things together in light of all the in-fighting that is occurring now. Some of the biggest Chasidic Movements in Judaism seem to be on a warpath. Satmar, Lubavitch, Bobov, and to a lesser extent Ger, are having major battles about who is their legitimate leader. And Lubavitch as is well known is in the fight of its life to determine the very character of the movement. Will it be a messianic one or not?
One of the largest and wealthiest Chasidic movements is now in turmoil as well. Factions of Vishnitzer Chasidim are turning to violence over who their successor "Rebbe" will be too.
I realize of course that Chasidism is far from extinct. In fact it seems to be growing. Lubavitch for instance will tell you they are bigger than ever. And certainly the infrastructure of the very large Chasidic sects, whether it is in schools, Shteiblach, or Chesed organizations is solidly entrenched in their own communities and beyond. Large sums of money are involved. And many of them, like the Kiruv network of Lubavitch and the Chesed network of Satmar are vital assets to the Torah world.
I cannot therefore really predict their demise. But one has to wonder about the wisdom of a group so centered on the leadership of a central authority, the Rebbe. It is obvious how important that is to them because it is the focus of all the bitter infighting going on now in at least five major Chasidic sects: Vishnitz, Satmar, Bobov, Ger, and Lubavitch. All have issues about their Rebbe and are willing to draw blood over them.
It must be stated that the Lithuanian type communities are not immune to this type of behavior either, as the battle taking place there over who should be the next Rosh HaYeshiva of Ponevezh demonstrates. But that seems to pale in comparison to Chasidic battles when comparing the sheer numbers involved. Perhaps what is going on in Ponevezh demonstrates another phenomenon I’ve written about, the Chasidization of the Yeshiva world.
Roshei Yeshiva are looked at like Chasidic Rebbes now more than any time in the past. On the other hand, our era is not the first to witness fighting in the Yeshiva world about who should be the Rosh HaYeshiva. The famous fight between supporters of the Beis HaLevi and the Netziv in Volozhin a century and a half ago demosnstrtaes that. But it can also not be denied that Yeshivos are being strongly influenced by Chasidic tendencies and perhaps the fight going on in Ponevezh is a refelction of that too.
The bottom line is the following. How can anyone respect any group that displays the kind of behavior that Vishnitz recently displayed? …and Satmar? …and Bobov? That these organizations do wonderful work in various areas of Judaism seems to be overshadowed by the violence and the reasons for it. And this alone makes Chasidus look like the last place I would want to be.
Rav Shimon greatly honored his father, Rav Yisorel Leib Elbaum an avowed Misnagid. The break away from tradition was difficult for Rav Shimon. But Chasidus attracted him, first through his association with the Noam Elimelech and then later with the Chozeh. He never-the-less so honored his father that he chaged his last name from Elbaum to Maryles which is an acronym in Hebrew for MeRav Yisroel Leib’S (MRYLS). Translated, it simply means descendant of Rav Yisroel Leib.
As I said, Rav Yisroel Leib was an adamant Misnagid. He lived during the time of the Mezritcher Magid who tried to “convert” him with absolutely no success. It so pained him that his son went “off the track” that on his death bed, he decreed to his son that if he added “VeYatzmach Purkane V’Korev Mishichei” to the “mourner’s Kaddish” …as is the Minhag of Chasidim, he should not say Kaddish for him at all!
I have rejected my Chasidic roots a long time ago. I have changed my Nusach HaTeffilah to Nusach Ashkenaz with the approval of both my father and my Rebbe, and in general have reverted to the Hashkafa of Rav Shimon’s father.
I bring this up only to show my bona fides in both Chasidus and Misnagdus. And, as I said I have rejected my Chasidic roots for many of the reasons I have stated in the past with respect to the problems I see in both their philosophy and Mehalech. But I won’t go into details here.
One of the things I wondered about in the past was if Chasidim could hold things together in light of all the in-fighting that is occurring now. Some of the biggest Chasidic Movements in Judaism seem to be on a warpath. Satmar, Lubavitch, Bobov, and to a lesser extent Ger, are having major battles about who is their legitimate leader. And Lubavitch as is well known is in the fight of its life to determine the very character of the movement. Will it be a messianic one or not?
One of the largest and wealthiest Chasidic movements is now in turmoil as well. Factions of Vishnitzer Chasidim are turning to violence over who their successor "Rebbe" will be too.
I realize of course that Chasidism is far from extinct. In fact it seems to be growing. Lubavitch for instance will tell you they are bigger than ever. And certainly the infrastructure of the very large Chasidic sects, whether it is in schools, Shteiblach, or Chesed organizations is solidly entrenched in their own communities and beyond. Large sums of money are involved. And many of them, like the Kiruv network of Lubavitch and the Chesed network of Satmar are vital assets to the Torah world.
I cannot therefore really predict their demise. But one has to wonder about the wisdom of a group so centered on the leadership of a central authority, the Rebbe. It is obvious how important that is to them because it is the focus of all the bitter infighting going on now in at least five major Chasidic sects: Vishnitz, Satmar, Bobov, Ger, and Lubavitch. All have issues about their Rebbe and are willing to draw blood over them.
It must be stated that the Lithuanian type communities are not immune to this type of behavior either, as the battle taking place there over who should be the next Rosh HaYeshiva of Ponevezh demonstrates. But that seems to pale in comparison to Chasidic battles when comparing the sheer numbers involved. Perhaps what is going on in Ponevezh demonstrates another phenomenon I’ve written about, the Chasidization of the Yeshiva world.
Roshei Yeshiva are looked at like Chasidic Rebbes now more than any time in the past. On the other hand, our era is not the first to witness fighting in the Yeshiva world about who should be the Rosh HaYeshiva. The famous fight between supporters of the Beis HaLevi and the Netziv in Volozhin a century and a half ago demosnstrtaes that. But it can also not be denied that Yeshivos are being strongly influenced by Chasidic tendencies and perhaps the fight going on in Ponevezh is a refelction of that too.
The bottom line is the following. How can anyone respect any group that displays the kind of behavior that Vishnitz recently displayed? …and Satmar? …and Bobov? That these organizations do wonderful work in various areas of Judaism seems to be overshadowed by the violence and the reasons for it. And this alone makes Chasidus look like the last place I would want to be.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Adolescents and Aliyah
Once again Rabbi Yakov Horowitz's weekly column raises a great question: What is a parent to do when he makes Aliyah with teenage children? I've discussed this problem in the past.
In fact I think that one should rarely if ever consider doing anything like that considering the relatively high instances of young people who become Shababanikim. Those are American young people who have dropped out of society and “hang out” on street corners. In Israel the “street corner” of choice is Kikar Tzion, near the upscale Ben Yehuda shopping mall. As I understand it the young people ending up there have no specific Hashkafic backgrounds. They come from all walks of Jewish religious life. It doesn’t seem to matter if they are American Modern Orthodox Religious Zionists or Yeshivishe Charedim or Chasidic. What they all have in common is the desire to drop out from their respective new communities. Apparently they cannot handle the drastic changes in their lives.
Being an adolescent in our time is hard enough. There are plenty of problems right here in America with dropout children who of course not only drop out of observance but drop into drugs, casual sex, and all manner of self destructive behavior. Add to that the complete change of cultural environment and lifestyle that Aliyah entails, it’s a wonder that any teenager can survive it at all and stay Frum.
The Charedi parent who writes the letter in Rabbi Horowitz’s column is kind of trying to close the barn door after he let the horse out. He (or she) has made Aliyah and damage has been done to his son. Especially since he was not the greatest Yeshiva student while yet in America either.
Now the parents want to “save” their son by sending him to Nachal Charedi. I’m not so sure that will solve the problem. The parents are getting mixed signals about Nachal Charedi and they don’t know what to do. I think the problems their son displays may just be the tip of an iceberg. I don’t know this but the young man in question may be “heading for the exits” of Judaism, if they don’t get professional counciling. It is certainly a big problem that cannot be solved by a stint in the army… even if it is Nachal Charedi.
I know personally of various families who made Aliyah over the years and the dropout rate of their children is frightening. Just recently, a dear old friend dropped by my house who made Aliyah back in the late seventies or early eighties, when his oldest son was about 9 years old. That child is now an adult. He has since moved back to the United States and is no longer Frum. He is currently a professor in a university out west, Stanford, I believe. I asked my good friend whose wife runs a seminary in Israel how he deals with the fact that his son is no longer observant. He answered: Bechira Chafshis. It was his option and that is what he chose. He has a good relationship with him and sees him often. But what a high price my friend paid for making Aliyah a bit later than he should have.
And that’s why I urge anyone with children over the age 6 or 7 to think long and hard about making Aliyah no matter how appealing the idea is to them. It is a noble ideal to make Aliyah as the very name implies. But the cost to your child’s Neshama may be a price too high to pay.
In fact I think that one should rarely if ever consider doing anything like that considering the relatively high instances of young people who become Shababanikim. Those are American young people who have dropped out of society and “hang out” on street corners. In Israel the “street corner” of choice is Kikar Tzion, near the upscale Ben Yehuda shopping mall. As I understand it the young people ending up there have no specific Hashkafic backgrounds. They come from all walks of Jewish religious life. It doesn’t seem to matter if they are American Modern Orthodox Religious Zionists or Yeshivishe Charedim or Chasidic. What they all have in common is the desire to drop out from their respective new communities. Apparently they cannot handle the drastic changes in their lives.
Being an adolescent in our time is hard enough. There are plenty of problems right here in America with dropout children who of course not only drop out of observance but drop into drugs, casual sex, and all manner of self destructive behavior. Add to that the complete change of cultural environment and lifestyle that Aliyah entails, it’s a wonder that any teenager can survive it at all and stay Frum.
The Charedi parent who writes the letter in Rabbi Horowitz’s column is kind of trying to close the barn door after he let the horse out. He (or she) has made Aliyah and damage has been done to his son. Especially since he was not the greatest Yeshiva student while yet in America either.
Now the parents want to “save” their son by sending him to Nachal Charedi. I’m not so sure that will solve the problem. The parents are getting mixed signals about Nachal Charedi and they don’t know what to do. I think the problems their son displays may just be the tip of an iceberg. I don’t know this but the young man in question may be “heading for the exits” of Judaism, if they don’t get professional counciling. It is certainly a big problem that cannot be solved by a stint in the army… even if it is Nachal Charedi.
I know personally of various families who made Aliyah over the years and the dropout rate of their children is frightening. Just recently, a dear old friend dropped by my house who made Aliyah back in the late seventies or early eighties, when his oldest son was about 9 years old. That child is now an adult. He has since moved back to the United States and is no longer Frum. He is currently a professor in a university out west, Stanford, I believe. I asked my good friend whose wife runs a seminary in Israel how he deals with the fact that his son is no longer observant. He answered: Bechira Chafshis. It was his option and that is what he chose. He has a good relationship with him and sees him often. But what a high price my friend paid for making Aliyah a bit later than he should have.
And that’s why I urge anyone with children over the age 6 or 7 to think long and hard about making Aliyah no matter how appealing the idea is to them. It is a noble ideal to make Aliyah as the very name implies. But the cost to your child’s Neshama may be a price too high to pay.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Note to the Shadchan: Only Thin Girls Need Apply
As if the influences of western culture don’t infiltrate the overly sheltered world of Charedim. Throw out your TVs! Don’t dare access the internet! Avoid even the news papers. Heaven forbid that our precious children be exposed to the values of the modern world. Well, Charedim may want heaven to forbid it, but it’s not happening.
Of course we already know about the many Charedi young people “falling through the cracks”. Plenty of ink has been spilled on that subject and many organizations have sprung up dealing with these young people. Who do we blame? There are of course many factors some of which have been discussed here before. But what about the Charedi youth who do not succumb to the “kids at Risk” problems… the ones who are successeful Bnei Torah? Have they avoided the pitfalls of society’s negative values? Well, maybe some of them have. But as this story indicates, not all of them.
The desire to marry the prototypically western ideal size woman who wears a dress size of 2 or less… is all too alive and well in the Charedi world. That’s right. Young men seeking marriage partners seem to require one common thing of their potential mates: They must be “super-model” thin. That’s what they point out to their Shadchanim. Talk about shallow! Can there be anything shallower than specifying a dress size?!… or worse a mother’s dress size?! Here is an excerpt from the story that demonstrates this phenomenon:
“He (Rabbi Abraham Twerski) also pointed out a problem that appears to be unique to segments of the Orthodox Jewish community — in particular, those who rely on a shadchan, or third party, to arrange marriages for their children. Noting that some young men specify the dress size of a prospective spouse — and that this is more likely to be a size 2 than a size 12 — he said that some suitors also want to know the dress size of the girls’ mothers, to get an idea of how the girls will look when they’re older.”
Is this the kind of Bnei Torah Yeshivos are turning out? Do they get these values in the Beis Hamedrash? I don’t think so. They get them from Western culture. You know... the same culture they have been denied all their lives. Sheltering has not only not been unsuccessful it has actually been assimilated by Charedi Bachurim the same way it has on Modern Orthodox Bachurim. Add to this the already well know demand that the “better Bachurim” for financial support and we have quite the monster masquerading as a Ben Torah here.
Dress size of the mother?! This is a value to them?! What are they thinking?!
And what is the Charedi community doing about it? Are they countering with Mussar? I don’t know. But in at least one article I read in the internet Yated, Dei’ah V’Dibur last year, they are catering to it. A Shadchan advised young women on how to actually diet and exercise so that they could have a better chance at getting married! Instead of instilling the higher values one would expect of Bnei Torah and rejecting the superficial values of the general culture.
Just to be clear, a proper diet and exercise is a good idea. It is an important aspect of one’s good health. Nor am I saying that looks don’t matter. Of course they do. Physical attraction is very important. But those aren’t the issues here. We are talking about dress sizes. It is about the value of a superficial trait. And it is about who has these values.
Modern Orthodox Jews? Of course, they have these values, some in the Charedi world will say. They are exposed to the culture. But, Charedi Bnei Torah? Well, I guess so! They put a high value on it too. It has become a very popular a condition of marriage for them these days, it seems!
I do not say that all Charedi or even Modern Orthodox Jews fall into that category. There are young people with very decent values in both camps. But it seems that when it comes to the “looks” of the opposite sex, there is not that much difference between them.
Of course we already know about the many Charedi young people “falling through the cracks”. Plenty of ink has been spilled on that subject and many organizations have sprung up dealing with these young people. Who do we blame? There are of course many factors some of which have been discussed here before. But what about the Charedi youth who do not succumb to the “kids at Risk” problems… the ones who are successeful Bnei Torah? Have they avoided the pitfalls of society’s negative values? Well, maybe some of them have. But as this story indicates, not all of them.
The desire to marry the prototypically western ideal size woman who wears a dress size of 2 or less… is all too alive and well in the Charedi world. That’s right. Young men seeking marriage partners seem to require one common thing of their potential mates: They must be “super-model” thin. That’s what they point out to their Shadchanim. Talk about shallow! Can there be anything shallower than specifying a dress size?!… or worse a mother’s dress size?! Here is an excerpt from the story that demonstrates this phenomenon:
“He (Rabbi Abraham Twerski) also pointed out a problem that appears to be unique to segments of the Orthodox Jewish community — in particular, those who rely on a shadchan, or third party, to arrange marriages for their children. Noting that some young men specify the dress size of a prospective spouse — and that this is more likely to be a size 2 than a size 12 — he said that some suitors also want to know the dress size of the girls’ mothers, to get an idea of how the girls will look when they’re older.”
Is this the kind of Bnei Torah Yeshivos are turning out? Do they get these values in the Beis Hamedrash? I don’t think so. They get them from Western culture. You know... the same culture they have been denied all their lives. Sheltering has not only not been unsuccessful it has actually been assimilated by Charedi Bachurim the same way it has on Modern Orthodox Bachurim. Add to this the already well know demand that the “better Bachurim” for financial support and we have quite the monster masquerading as a Ben Torah here.
Dress size of the mother?! This is a value to them?! What are they thinking?!
And what is the Charedi community doing about it? Are they countering with Mussar? I don’t know. But in at least one article I read in the internet Yated, Dei’ah V’Dibur last year, they are catering to it. A Shadchan advised young women on how to actually diet and exercise so that they could have a better chance at getting married! Instead of instilling the higher values one would expect of Bnei Torah and rejecting the superficial values of the general culture.
Just to be clear, a proper diet and exercise is a good idea. It is an important aspect of one’s good health. Nor am I saying that looks don’t matter. Of course they do. Physical attraction is very important. But those aren’t the issues here. We are talking about dress sizes. It is about the value of a superficial trait. And it is about who has these values.
Modern Orthodox Jews? Of course, they have these values, some in the Charedi world will say. They are exposed to the culture. But, Charedi Bnei Torah? Well, I guess so! They put a high value on it too. It has become a very popular a condition of marriage for them these days, it seems!
I do not say that all Charedi or even Modern Orthodox Jews fall into that category. There are young people with very decent values in both camps. But it seems that when it comes to the “looks” of the opposite sex, there is not that much difference between them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)