Rabbi Avi Shafran has weighed in on the subject of J-blogs. In an article published in at least two different blogs, Yeshiva World and cross-currents, Rabbi Shafran has shown why he is such a valuable asset to the Agudah. At the same time he shows why the Agudah has such a long way to go before it lives up to its claim to being the umbrella organization of Torah Jewry. I’m sure the latter point was not his intent, but that does not make it any less so.
Unlike the Zvi Frankel article on Frum J-blogs in the official magazine of Agudah, the Jewish Observer, Rabbi Avi Shafran has written a thoughtful and well reasoned evaluation of the world of Orthodox Jewish blogging. In fact there is hardly anything there I disagree with. I’m not sure how he would evaluate my own blog. I hope at least somewhat favorably. But it doesn’t matter. The point is that he states his case well and in fact there is really very little to disagree with.
Rabbi Shafran does something unusual for someone who represents the Charedi world (although not unusual for Rabbi Shafran, himslef). He makes distinctions. On this subject he distinguishes between responsible bloggers and irresponsible ones. Zvi Frankel does not. That is the key difference. Rather than doing the typical Charedi thing of just condemning an entire enterprise because of some of the negative content to be found there as Zvi Frankel does.
Zvi Frankel paints with a broad brush and condemns everyone. Not so Rabbi Shafran. He rightly condemns that which deserves to be condemned. He does not think in black and white – yes and no terms. That is one reason I have such a high degree of respect for him. We may not always agree, but he is a man of integrity who is not afraid to think for himself - and then say what he thinks.
If one takes Rabbi Shafran’s article and combines it with what was posted on Hirhurim by Rav Asher Meir on this subject, it truly blows Zvi Frankel’s article on the subject out of the water.
The unfortunate thing is that Zvi Frankel’s view is the all too common way in which most people at the Agudah think. And even sadder is the fact that the Jewish Observer never retracts its views. If they ever change their policy on that - I can think of a few more retractions I’d like to see.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
The Tragic Deaths of Two Jews
A tragic event occurred last Friday. Two religious Jews - soldiers on leave from the Israel Defense Forces and sons of two religious Zionist rabbis - were gunned down by Palestinian terrorists as they went hiking near Chevron.
I cannot imagine the pain of the loss suffered by their loved ones, especially their parents. The mere thought of losing a child is so terrible to me, that my mind won’t allow even a 'split second' thought of it. It is blocked out! The pain must be beyond description. Only a small fraction of the pain actually felt by their loved ones could therefore be seen at the funeral of these two young men - where voices choking with tears were heard eulogizing them.
May their blood be avenged by God.
As sad and tragic as these murders were, I can’t help thinking about something I saw in last week’s Parsha, the Torah portion of Shemos. It is illustrative of why this tragedy could have… even should have… been avoided.
When Moshe Rabbenu was directed by God to go back to Egypt to carry out his mission, God told him that those who sought to kill him (which is why he fled in the first place) were now dead.
Rabbi Meir Simcha HaCohen in his Sefer, Or Sameach tells us that even where one is in a position to save many Jews one may not venture into a place where there is even a question of danger to his own life. And in his commentary on Chumash, Meshech Chochma - R. Meir Simcha explains that this is why God added the information about the death of those who sought to kill Moshe Rabbenu. He was told that the danger had been removed. Had he not been told, Moshe would not have been required to endanger himself even with a Godly mandate to go there and save his own people.
The tragedy of the deaths of the two Jewish hikers is therefore multiplied and made even more tragic. I’m sure that this fact will not give solace to the mourners. I’m quite sure that the two victims will be seen as heroes or even martyrs by their religious Zionist families, who live in Kiryat Arba, a city near Chevron.
But they weren’t.
They had absolutely no obligation to go there even if it was to save the lives of others… which it wasn’t. They placed themselves at risk… and paid dearly for it. It cannot be ignored that had they heeded Halacha and not gone into a Makom Sakana, a dangerous place they would still be alive today.
This Halacha seems to have been lost on the Religious Zionist rabbis who praised these two hikers for having the ‘courage’ to hike in dangerous territory. Instead of conveying a message of how dangerous it was to go hiking there they are adding to their image as martyrs.
While I understand that a eulogy should never be an admonition, neither should it be an opportunity to promote an agenda. But here is what one eulogizer, Rabbi Dov Lior said:
You can't lock the young people into a ghetto. The people of Israel returned to its land to live a life of courage and heroism, not [to live] behind concrete barriers. Young people will continue to hike and to redeem the land," Lior said.
Rabbi Lior, in his eulogy, said that both Rubin and Amihai fulfilled the commandment to travel the length and breadth of Israel in their lives, and in their deaths. "They fell in the war for the right to live and move freely in our holy land," Lior said.
Why do they go? What is ultimately gained? Two of our finest – dead! What was accomplished? How has Klal Yisroel benefited from this ‘martyrdom’? Has it made our claim to all of Eretz Yisroel any stronger?
When will certain religious Zionist rabbis learn that rhetoric like Rabbi Lior’s serves only to perpetuate tragic events like this and does nothing to further the goal of keeping all of Eretz Yisroel in Jewish hands. All it is doing is adding to the rolls of the dead!
I cannot imagine the pain of the loss suffered by their loved ones, especially their parents. The mere thought of losing a child is so terrible to me, that my mind won’t allow even a 'split second' thought of it. It is blocked out! The pain must be beyond description. Only a small fraction of the pain actually felt by their loved ones could therefore be seen at the funeral of these two young men - where voices choking with tears were heard eulogizing them.
May their blood be avenged by God.
As sad and tragic as these murders were, I can’t help thinking about something I saw in last week’s Parsha, the Torah portion of Shemos. It is illustrative of why this tragedy could have… even should have… been avoided.
When Moshe Rabbenu was directed by God to go back to Egypt to carry out his mission, God told him that those who sought to kill him (which is why he fled in the first place) were now dead.
Rabbi Meir Simcha HaCohen in his Sefer, Or Sameach tells us that even where one is in a position to save many Jews one may not venture into a place where there is even a question of danger to his own life. And in his commentary on Chumash, Meshech Chochma - R. Meir Simcha explains that this is why God added the information about the death of those who sought to kill Moshe Rabbenu. He was told that the danger had been removed. Had he not been told, Moshe would not have been required to endanger himself even with a Godly mandate to go there and save his own people.
The tragedy of the deaths of the two Jewish hikers is therefore multiplied and made even more tragic. I’m sure that this fact will not give solace to the mourners. I’m quite sure that the two victims will be seen as heroes or even martyrs by their religious Zionist families, who live in Kiryat Arba, a city near Chevron.
But they weren’t.
They had absolutely no obligation to go there even if it was to save the lives of others… which it wasn’t. They placed themselves at risk… and paid dearly for it. It cannot be ignored that had they heeded Halacha and not gone into a Makom Sakana, a dangerous place they would still be alive today.
This Halacha seems to have been lost on the Religious Zionist rabbis who praised these two hikers for having the ‘courage’ to hike in dangerous territory. Instead of conveying a message of how dangerous it was to go hiking there they are adding to their image as martyrs.
While I understand that a eulogy should never be an admonition, neither should it be an opportunity to promote an agenda. But here is what one eulogizer, Rabbi Dov Lior said:
You can't lock the young people into a ghetto. The people of Israel returned to its land to live a life of courage and heroism, not [to live] behind concrete barriers. Young people will continue to hike and to redeem the land," Lior said.
Rabbi Lior, in his eulogy, said that both Rubin and Amihai fulfilled the commandment to travel the length and breadth of Israel in their lives, and in their deaths. "They fell in the war for the right to live and move freely in our holy land," Lior said.
Why do they go? What is ultimately gained? Two of our finest – dead! What was accomplished? How has Klal Yisroel benefited from this ‘martyrdom’? Has it made our claim to all of Eretz Yisroel any stronger?
When will certain religious Zionist rabbis learn that rhetoric like Rabbi Lior’s serves only to perpetuate tragic events like this and does nothing to further the goal of keeping all of Eretz Yisroel in Jewish hands. All it is doing is adding to the rolls of the dead!
Friday, December 28, 2007
Skokie - Part Seven
Now or Never
Chicago's Yeshiva, The Hebrew Theological College, has undergone a crisis this year not experienced since the days of Rabbi Aaron Soloveichck’s tenure.
Once again a Rosh HeYeshiva’s employment there was terminated. And it was not done in the most honorable of ways. It was a coup. He was ousted by a faculty - many of whom were disaffected with his leadership.
I am not here to judge now former Rosh HaYeshiva, HaRav Shlomo Morgenstern Shlita, …or the faculty ..or the administration …or the board of directors that implemented the faculty’s wishes. Everyone here acted L’Shma. All parties here want what is best for the Yeshiva.
I have already expressed my praise and admiration for Rav Morgenstern previously. I honor his achievements. Without getting into details suffice it to say that in the over 20 years of his tenure as Rosh HaYeshiva, he took it from near obscurity and ignominy to prominence and respectably. He took a Yeshiva that had hit its nadir and that had begun a successful recovery process under former President Rabbi Don ...and turned it in into the most successful Yeshiva High school in the city. And he maintained the Yeshiva’s success through his leadership and guidance for many years.
Among the many successes besides its high school were: a great summer camp learning program for the community’s 7th and 8th graders from all the day schools… full accreditation as a college… fully accrediting the Anne M. Blitstein Teacher’s Institute for Woman. ..and various successful community wide projects.
But the one area the Yeshiva has failed in is in fact the most important one: That of being a Yeshiva.
By definition, a Yeshiva is about advanced and intensive Torah learning post high school. Most of the great Yeshivos of the world are exactly that and nothing more. Lakewood, Mir, Ponevezh, all have that feature and nothing else. Of course there are other institutions which include other programs such as Ner Israel which allows college attendance… and Yeshiva University, which of course has a great university on its campus. But even at YU - its essence as President emeritus Dr. Norman Lamm has always said is its Beis HaMedrash: The Rabbeinu Itzchak Elchanan Theological Seminary (REITS). Without that, YU would just be another college… with perhaps a Judaic studies program.
How does a Yeshiva achieve greatness? How does it attract quality students? Not by its college program. Of course in my view a college program is an important part of any Torah education. That is what Torah U’Mada is about. But it is not the main part. The main part of any Yeshiva is the Torah learning. That is what is going to build the Yeshiva. The rest is important, but secondary.
The Yeshiva is currently trying to re-organize itself. They are working without a Rosh Yeshiva. And they want to be very careful in hiring the right one. But that should not be their only goal. They need to build their Beis HaMedrash now!
There are also pressures on high school enrollment currently from both the right and left. A new Yeshiva has opened up attracting potential HTC high school students from the right and an improved co-ed academy is attracting students form the left. I do not have a fool proof solution for Skokie. But I do think they have missed the boat on one very important area.
One of the things that successful Yeshivos have in common across the Hashkafic spectrum, from Mir… to Ner Israel… to YU is a major Talmid Chacham who has established himself as a true Gadol in Torah learning. In many cases it is not the Rosh HaYeshiva himself but someone who has risen to that level through the force of his own brilliance and efforts. Mir has Rav Asher Arieli. Ner Israel has Rav Tzvi Berkovitz. YU has Rav Hershel Shachter. Each of those Talmidei Chacahim teach Torah at the highest levels. Young people who want to learn seriously seek Yeshivos like that. They want to learn from the best. And those Gedolei Torah are the ones who ‘speak that language’ to them.
Skokie has not had that since the days of Rav Aharon. At least not when it would have made any difference. Rav Moshe Herschler who followed Rav Ahron did not speak English and his tenure was very short. Rav Yechzkel Lichtmam had the misfortune to be hired when the Yeshiva was at the lowest period of enrollment in its history.
But for over a decade now, Skokie has been very ripe for such people. And while there were and are some very big people in learning on its faculty there now, there is no one like the three individuals I mentioned above. The Yeshiva did not do what’s necessary in my view to create a true Yeshiva. They instead concentrated on their very succesful high school and on their college/learning program. The latter has not been a successful enticement to Beis Hamedrash students. There were …and are some good students there but far too few to call it a successful Yeshiva.
Chicago has no other attractions. We are not New York. If Skokie is going to attract good students to populate their Beis Hamedrash there is only one way to do it. They need to hire a Beis Hamedrash Rebbe who is a Gadol BaTorah …or at least has the potential to become one. They need someone who is steeped in Torah . Someone who is relatively young and who is a product of American culture.
There are such people. The Yeshiva knows that. There is a vacancy there now through very unfortunate circumstances. It behooves the Yeshiva to not simply shift around its current staff to fill that position.
They need to get serious about that. This can be the beginning of the end if they don’t. They have an opportunity to literally reach for the stars. I hope they do it ...and do it soon. Because if they don't - I might have a campus to sell you.
Chicago's Yeshiva, The Hebrew Theological College, has undergone a crisis this year not experienced since the days of Rabbi Aaron Soloveichck’s tenure.
Once again a Rosh HeYeshiva’s employment there was terminated. And it was not done in the most honorable of ways. It was a coup. He was ousted by a faculty - many of whom were disaffected with his leadership.
I am not here to judge now former Rosh HaYeshiva, HaRav Shlomo Morgenstern Shlita, …or the faculty ..or the administration …or the board of directors that implemented the faculty’s wishes. Everyone here acted L’Shma. All parties here want what is best for the Yeshiva.
I have already expressed my praise and admiration for Rav Morgenstern previously. I honor his achievements. Without getting into details suffice it to say that in the over 20 years of his tenure as Rosh HaYeshiva, he took it from near obscurity and ignominy to prominence and respectably. He took a Yeshiva that had hit its nadir and that had begun a successful recovery process under former President Rabbi Don ...and turned it in into the most successful Yeshiva High school in the city. And he maintained the Yeshiva’s success through his leadership and guidance for many years.
Among the many successes besides its high school were: a great summer camp learning program for the community’s 7th and 8th graders from all the day schools… full accreditation as a college… fully accrediting the Anne M. Blitstein Teacher’s Institute for Woman. ..and various successful community wide projects.
But the one area the Yeshiva has failed in is in fact the most important one: That of being a Yeshiva.
By definition, a Yeshiva is about advanced and intensive Torah learning post high school. Most of the great Yeshivos of the world are exactly that and nothing more. Lakewood, Mir, Ponevezh, all have that feature and nothing else. Of course there are other institutions which include other programs such as Ner Israel which allows college attendance… and Yeshiva University, which of course has a great university on its campus. But even at YU - its essence as President emeritus Dr. Norman Lamm has always said is its Beis HaMedrash: The Rabbeinu Itzchak Elchanan Theological Seminary (REITS). Without that, YU would just be another college… with perhaps a Judaic studies program.
How does a Yeshiva achieve greatness? How does it attract quality students? Not by its college program. Of course in my view a college program is an important part of any Torah education. That is what Torah U’Mada is about. But it is not the main part. The main part of any Yeshiva is the Torah learning. That is what is going to build the Yeshiva. The rest is important, but secondary.
The Yeshiva is currently trying to re-organize itself. They are working without a Rosh Yeshiva. And they want to be very careful in hiring the right one. But that should not be their only goal. They need to build their Beis HaMedrash now!
There are also pressures on high school enrollment currently from both the right and left. A new Yeshiva has opened up attracting potential HTC high school students from the right and an improved co-ed academy is attracting students form the left. I do not have a fool proof solution for Skokie. But I do think they have missed the boat on one very important area.
One of the things that successful Yeshivos have in common across the Hashkafic spectrum, from Mir… to Ner Israel… to YU is a major Talmid Chacham who has established himself as a true Gadol in Torah learning. In many cases it is not the Rosh HaYeshiva himself but someone who has risen to that level through the force of his own brilliance and efforts. Mir has Rav Asher Arieli. Ner Israel has Rav Tzvi Berkovitz. YU has Rav Hershel Shachter. Each of those Talmidei Chacahim teach Torah at the highest levels. Young people who want to learn seriously seek Yeshivos like that. They want to learn from the best. And those Gedolei Torah are the ones who ‘speak that language’ to them.
Skokie has not had that since the days of Rav Aharon. At least not when it would have made any difference. Rav Moshe Herschler who followed Rav Ahron did not speak English and his tenure was very short. Rav Yechzkel Lichtmam had the misfortune to be hired when the Yeshiva was at the lowest period of enrollment in its history.
But for over a decade now, Skokie has been very ripe for such people. And while there were and are some very big people in learning on its faculty there now, there is no one like the three individuals I mentioned above. The Yeshiva did not do what’s necessary in my view to create a true Yeshiva. They instead concentrated on their very succesful high school and on their college/learning program. The latter has not been a successful enticement to Beis Hamedrash students. There were …and are some good students there but far too few to call it a successful Yeshiva.
Chicago has no other attractions. We are not New York. If Skokie is going to attract good students to populate their Beis Hamedrash there is only one way to do it. They need to hire a Beis Hamedrash Rebbe who is a Gadol BaTorah …or at least has the potential to become one. They need someone who is steeped in Torah . Someone who is relatively young and who is a product of American culture.
There are such people. The Yeshiva knows that. There is a vacancy there now through very unfortunate circumstances. It behooves the Yeshiva to not simply shift around its current staff to fill that position.
They need to get serious about that. This can be the beginning of the end if they don’t. They have an opportunity to literally reach for the stars. I hope they do it ...and do it soon. Because if they don't - I might have a campus to sell you.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Begging for Dollars
Beggars. That is now the most common profession in the Charedi world of Torah in Israel. Harsh words? I don’t think so. Not if it’s true.
It is undeniably also true that there is more Torah learning in Charedi Israel then any where on earth… and probably at any time in history. We ought to truly appreciate and praise that accomplishment. It is impressive. Charedim in Israel has a lot to be proud of in that respect. But just as we should not overlook the accomplishments we can neither overlook the economic and demoralizing circumstances which have resulted from it.
New statistics on poverty in Israel show that one in five Israeli wage earners live below the poverty line. Most of those are Israeli Arabs. This means that government subsidies to poor Israelis will not be increased any time soon. And that unfortunately has always been the solution of first resort by the Charedi rabbinic leadership. It has relied heavily upon government subsidies to alleviate their terrible economic circumstances. Without any increase from the Israeli government, ‘begging for dollars’ will have to increase. I have indeed noticed a substantial increase even this year in beggars coming into Shuls with their green authentication cards.
I have in the past discussed the many reasons why there is such a dearth of Charedim in the work force. Some are more valid than others. But one I have not mentioned before is an illegitimate pattern of thinking that has developed. Once you have become accustomed to not working it becomes foreign to you. If you have become so used to the Kollel lifestyle, then an office or any other work place is going to seem like Mars to you!
I am mostly not talking about those who continue to learn B’Hasmada Rabba… that is - with great intensity, piety, and dedication. But even they should eventually think about supporting their families at some point… unless they have the potential for their own Gadlus. Those deserve our full support. But very few qualify for that.
I am talking about those who no longer learn full time. They should be in the workforce. But far too many of them are turning into schnorrers whose livelihood is begging for charity.
Along with all the tremendous credit that leaders in the world of Torah deserve for building the post holocaust the world of Torah, they must also be strongly criticized for creating or at least allowing that same world to have so much poverty.
The Charedi culture is one that survives on handouts from others - a culture of begging for charity. Whether it is through their political representatives in the Knesset begging for subsidies, or as individuals begging from their parents or in-laws …or with green schnorrers cards begging their way through life - going door to door… Shul to Shul. All while having a sense of entitlement. And that makes for one huge Chilul HaShem.
This has diminished the need and the desire to work for a living. Handouts tend to create that kind of mindset. Why work if you don’t have to?
I am not alone in seeing things this way. There are people in the Charedi world who have almost identical views. In fact that is where I got the inspiration for this essay. Almost all the views expressed here are taken from a Charedi thinker. The people who have the ability to change things there ought to listen to him.
It is undeniably also true that there is more Torah learning in Charedi Israel then any where on earth… and probably at any time in history. We ought to truly appreciate and praise that accomplishment. It is impressive. Charedim in Israel has a lot to be proud of in that respect. But just as we should not overlook the accomplishments we can neither overlook the economic and demoralizing circumstances which have resulted from it.
New statistics on poverty in Israel show that one in five Israeli wage earners live below the poverty line. Most of those are Israeli Arabs. This means that government subsidies to poor Israelis will not be increased any time soon. And that unfortunately has always been the solution of first resort by the Charedi rabbinic leadership. It has relied heavily upon government subsidies to alleviate their terrible economic circumstances. Without any increase from the Israeli government, ‘begging for dollars’ will have to increase. I have indeed noticed a substantial increase even this year in beggars coming into Shuls with their green authentication cards.
I have in the past discussed the many reasons why there is such a dearth of Charedim in the work force. Some are more valid than others. But one I have not mentioned before is an illegitimate pattern of thinking that has developed. Once you have become accustomed to not working it becomes foreign to you. If you have become so used to the Kollel lifestyle, then an office or any other work place is going to seem like Mars to you!
I am mostly not talking about those who continue to learn B’Hasmada Rabba… that is - with great intensity, piety, and dedication. But even they should eventually think about supporting their families at some point… unless they have the potential for their own Gadlus. Those deserve our full support. But very few qualify for that.
I am talking about those who no longer learn full time. They should be in the workforce. But far too many of them are turning into schnorrers whose livelihood is begging for charity.
Along with all the tremendous credit that leaders in the world of Torah deserve for building the post holocaust the world of Torah, they must also be strongly criticized for creating or at least allowing that same world to have so much poverty.
The Charedi culture is one that survives on handouts from others - a culture of begging for charity. Whether it is through their political representatives in the Knesset begging for subsidies, or as individuals begging from their parents or in-laws …or with green schnorrers cards begging their way through life - going door to door… Shul to Shul. All while having a sense of entitlement. And that makes for one huge Chilul HaShem.
This has diminished the need and the desire to work for a living. Handouts tend to create that kind of mindset. Why work if you don’t have to?
I am not alone in seeing things this way. There are people in the Charedi world who have almost identical views. In fact that is where I got the inspiration for this essay. Almost all the views expressed here are taken from a Charedi thinker. The people who have the ability to change things there ought to listen to him.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Questioning the Prohibition against Homosexuality
An individual who identifies herself as Kendra has asked a profound question. I have excerpted the essence of it in the following quotes:
How can you dismiss the problem of homosexual urges (by those with no heterosexual urges) as "just an issue of controlling your desires"?
There is the story about Yohnan ben Zakai's response to those who said that Jews shouldn't eat meat or wine after the destruction of the Temple. … it is too much to ask your fellows to bear." So not going without wine or meat is "too much to bear" but "going without sex" much less "going without a mate" is bearable?"
But I don't see how you can compare "resisting the urge to eat bacon" with "resisting the urge to have sex at all". Do you hear any tales of some Jew killing themselves because they were scared they were going to give in to the urge to eat bacon again?
I’m not sure I have any really good answers for her. It is especially tragic when an individual becomes so depressed that they commit suicide.
Kendra is quite correct in her observation. The sex drive is one of mankind’s basic urges, much like sleeping and eating. The only difference is in that the latter two cases it is a physical impossibility to survive without them. Surviving without sex is physically possible. But for the vast majority of mankind it is nonetheless a psychological impossibility. How can God expect so much of us? As she correctly points out, the rabbis factored in difficulty levels when instituting their prohibitions. Isn’t it reasonable to assume that God, among whose 13 attributes is that of Chesed … would have the same compassion as the rabbis when issuing His laws?
I have often said that on the issue of homosexuality, one need only condemn the actual sinful act and not an individual who has the desire. The sex drive is very strong. That is a universal truth that is reflected numerous times and in numerous ways in the Gemarah. Freud masterfully corroborated this in his own independent study. The culture we live in testifies to it. Just about every aspect of American culture is suffused with sex.
The sex drive is not exactlt the same in every person. There are individual differences. There is of course the obvious male female difference. But another difference is heterosexuality versus homosexuality. The vast majority of people on earth are heterosexual. However, in a significant minority of individuals the attraction is to the same sex. And the primary method of satisfying that desire is forbidden. Often the sex drive can be very intense. To ask people to be celibate under these conditions seems like a near impossible task. How can God ask that of people who love Him and want to observe His Mitzvos?
I don’t think one has to be an expert to understand the nature of the problem. And I don’t really have any great answers.
But let us examine a few things in an attempt to try and gain at least some understanding.
It should be pointed out that until about 40 years ago, homosexuality was considered to be abnormal behavior. It was thought of as a misdirected drive that somehow got detoured at a very early age usually because of some traumatic experience a child had. Like a sexual molestation. I think that there is some evidence to that as being - at least in part - a causative factor.
But generally that theory was abandoned in the seventies by the American Psychological Association. They decided that homosexuality was no longer considered an abnormality but rather an alternative lifestyle choice. Later scientists discovered a gene that is linked to homosexuality, thus making the case for normality even stronger.
Until the seventies, one could have dealt with the biblical prohibition somewhat. God was just forbidding abnormal behavior. But now it has been determined that homosexuality is biological.
If so, how can God then tell us that it is wrong? How can God give man a biological trait and call it an abomination worthy of the death penalty? That is very difficult. And it is one of the reasons I’m personally not all that convinced of there being an exclusively biological cause. It may well be proven at some point but I think the jury is still out. But… let us assume it is.
Perhaps we can look at a forbidden heterosexual scenario and get at least a partial answer. If for example a man has an uncontrollable attraction to a married woman, what is he to do? He is attracted to no other woman. Just this one. And he may even be despondent over his inability to fulfill his desire. How is it possible for God to deny this man his only outlet? To say he should just re-direct his lust is an impossibility in his case.
I know the analogy is not perfect but I think it might help to understand a little. Forbidden desire which includes no realistic outlet - still remains forbidden. That it is impossibly difficult to live by, doesn’t matter, if this is what God wants of His people. We can’t know God’s motives for these kinds of prohibitions. And we can’t compare God’s edicts with man’s. The Rabbis can say that one of their own prohibitions is too difficult to bear, but they cannot say that about God’s prohibitions.
I am aware of many men who are homosexual and are married with children leading happy normal lives. The homosexual urges are still there, but they deal with them. And they are obviously not celibate. God does not require celibacy of the homosexual man. This can be achieved either on one’s own or through psychotherapy. Is it ideal? No.
The ideal would be if everyone could fulfill their sex drives in a manner most appropriate to their own biological or psychological makeup. But we are enjoined by God from doing that no matter what our sexual orientation. We all have prohibitions that deny us that kind of sexual freedom. No less is the case with homosexuals. It may be harder for them to live by the law, but I don’t think it is impossible, nor do I think that a life of celibacy is necessarily the only option.
One final thing - and I cannot stress this enough. If someone transgresses and violates the biblical commandment against homosexuality, he should not be treated any differently than one who violates any of the other 613 Mitzvos. As long as he realizes it is sinful behavior and doesn’t try to trumpet it as a lifestyle choice. That would be the same as denying the clear Issur (sin) written in the Torah.
It is one thing to struggle with a personal failing and sometimes succumb to temptation. When that happens there is a little thing called Teshuva that can help individuals repent. Hopefully, the Teshuva will stick and prevent further violation of this Issur. But even if it doesn’t and an individual succumbs multiple times, he should not be treated with anything more than the compassion and human dignity that he deserves.
How can you dismiss the problem of homosexual urges (by those with no heterosexual urges) as "just an issue of controlling your desires"?
There is the story about Yohnan ben Zakai's response to those who said that Jews shouldn't eat meat or wine after the destruction of the Temple. … it is too much to ask your fellows to bear." So not going without wine or meat is "too much to bear" but "going without sex" much less "going without a mate" is bearable?"
But I don't see how you can compare "resisting the urge to eat bacon" with "resisting the urge to have sex at all". Do you hear any tales of some Jew killing themselves because they were scared they were going to give in to the urge to eat bacon again?
I’m not sure I have any really good answers for her. It is especially tragic when an individual becomes so depressed that they commit suicide.
Kendra is quite correct in her observation. The sex drive is one of mankind’s basic urges, much like sleeping and eating. The only difference is in that the latter two cases it is a physical impossibility to survive without them. Surviving without sex is physically possible. But for the vast majority of mankind it is nonetheless a psychological impossibility. How can God expect so much of us? As she correctly points out, the rabbis factored in difficulty levels when instituting their prohibitions. Isn’t it reasonable to assume that God, among whose 13 attributes is that of Chesed … would have the same compassion as the rabbis when issuing His laws?
I have often said that on the issue of homosexuality, one need only condemn the actual sinful act and not an individual who has the desire. The sex drive is very strong. That is a universal truth that is reflected numerous times and in numerous ways in the Gemarah. Freud masterfully corroborated this in his own independent study. The culture we live in testifies to it. Just about every aspect of American culture is suffused with sex.
The sex drive is not exactlt the same in every person. There are individual differences. There is of course the obvious male female difference. But another difference is heterosexuality versus homosexuality. The vast majority of people on earth are heterosexual. However, in a significant minority of individuals the attraction is to the same sex. And the primary method of satisfying that desire is forbidden. Often the sex drive can be very intense. To ask people to be celibate under these conditions seems like a near impossible task. How can God ask that of people who love Him and want to observe His Mitzvos?
I don’t think one has to be an expert to understand the nature of the problem. And I don’t really have any great answers.
But let us examine a few things in an attempt to try and gain at least some understanding.
It should be pointed out that until about 40 years ago, homosexuality was considered to be abnormal behavior. It was thought of as a misdirected drive that somehow got detoured at a very early age usually because of some traumatic experience a child had. Like a sexual molestation. I think that there is some evidence to that as being - at least in part - a causative factor.
But generally that theory was abandoned in the seventies by the American Psychological Association. They decided that homosexuality was no longer considered an abnormality but rather an alternative lifestyle choice. Later scientists discovered a gene that is linked to homosexuality, thus making the case for normality even stronger.
Until the seventies, one could have dealt with the biblical prohibition somewhat. God was just forbidding abnormal behavior. But now it has been determined that homosexuality is biological.
If so, how can God then tell us that it is wrong? How can God give man a biological trait and call it an abomination worthy of the death penalty? That is very difficult. And it is one of the reasons I’m personally not all that convinced of there being an exclusively biological cause. It may well be proven at some point but I think the jury is still out. But… let us assume it is.
Perhaps we can look at a forbidden heterosexual scenario and get at least a partial answer. If for example a man has an uncontrollable attraction to a married woman, what is he to do? He is attracted to no other woman. Just this one. And he may even be despondent over his inability to fulfill his desire. How is it possible for God to deny this man his only outlet? To say he should just re-direct his lust is an impossibility in his case.
I know the analogy is not perfect but I think it might help to understand a little. Forbidden desire which includes no realistic outlet - still remains forbidden. That it is impossibly difficult to live by, doesn’t matter, if this is what God wants of His people. We can’t know God’s motives for these kinds of prohibitions. And we can’t compare God’s edicts with man’s. The Rabbis can say that one of their own prohibitions is too difficult to bear, but they cannot say that about God’s prohibitions.
I am aware of many men who are homosexual and are married with children leading happy normal lives. The homosexual urges are still there, but they deal with them. And they are obviously not celibate. God does not require celibacy of the homosexual man. This can be achieved either on one’s own or through psychotherapy. Is it ideal? No.
The ideal would be if everyone could fulfill their sex drives in a manner most appropriate to their own biological or psychological makeup. But we are enjoined by God from doing that no matter what our sexual orientation. We all have prohibitions that deny us that kind of sexual freedom. No less is the case with homosexuals. It may be harder for them to live by the law, but I don’t think it is impossible, nor do I think that a life of celibacy is necessarily the only option.
One final thing - and I cannot stress this enough. If someone transgresses and violates the biblical commandment against homosexuality, he should not be treated any differently than one who violates any of the other 613 Mitzvos. As long as he realizes it is sinful behavior and doesn’t try to trumpet it as a lifestyle choice. That would be the same as denying the clear Issur (sin) written in the Torah.
It is one thing to struggle with a personal failing and sometimes succumb to temptation. When that happens there is a little thing called Teshuva that can help individuals repent. Hopefully, the Teshuva will stick and prevent further violation of this Issur. But even if it doesn’t and an individual succumbs multiple times, he should not be treated with anything more than the compassion and human dignity that he deserves.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Meah Shearim Jew - Conservative Jew
Administrative Note
Due to the vast misunderstanding of what I was trying to convey in this post -which is due to my poor execution in expressing it properly - I have decided to do something that I have done only two other times in the history of this blog. I am deleting the entire content this post. I have no choice but to do that. It is counter productive to the intent of this blog to generate ill will -especially when it is based on my own blunders.
I do want to make one thing absolutely clear however. I do not consider the Conservative movement to be a legitimate Torah movement in any way. The fact that it legitimizes believing that the Torah was not given at Sinai but rather written by man at various times by different people – delegitimizes the movement itself. Belief in Torah MiSinai is a fundamental belief of Judaism as quoted in the 13 Maimonidean principles of faith.
Once again. My apologies for any misunderstanding.
Due to the vast misunderstanding of what I was trying to convey in this post -which is due to my poor execution in expressing it properly - I have decided to do something that I have done only two other times in the history of this blog. I am deleting the entire content this post. I have no choice but to do that. It is counter productive to the intent of this blog to generate ill will -especially when it is based on my own blunders.
I do want to make one thing absolutely clear however. I do not consider the Conservative movement to be a legitimate Torah movement in any way. The fact that it legitimizes believing that the Torah was not given at Sinai but rather written by man at various times by different people – delegitimizes the movement itself. Belief in Torah MiSinai is a fundamental belief of Judaism as quoted in the 13 Maimonidean principles of faith.
Once again. My apologies for any misunderstanding.
Monday, December 24, 2007
T’was a Night… to Remember
Last night, I had an amazing experience. I attented a wedding. It was an ‘intermarriage’. Not the kind most people think of when they use that word. This marriage was between two religious Jews. The Chasan was a product of the world of right wingYeshivos. He had attended Telshe and other Yeshivos of that type. His father is a product of Telshe. We were in fact school mates. He is also very close with the Telzer Roshei Yeshiva. Additionlly he is also the long time leader of Agudah’s youth organization here in Chicago, Pirchei.
The Kala is a Lubavitcher. Well not exactly. But her father is. And that’s how she was apparently raised.
But the truth is that neither of them seemed to be representative of their parents Hashkafos. The Chasan wore no hat except under the Chupa. The Kala sat with her husband at the same table and went over to the men’s side of the dance floor to watch the men dance and perform shtick. Neither of which is accepted practice by Lubavitch.
So in essence there were three distinct factions there that are often at great odds with each other. It was quite an unusual sight.
The Mesder Kedushin (officiating rabbi) was The Agudah Moetzes member and Rosh HaYeshiva of Telshe, Rabbi Avrohom Chaim Levin. The Kesubah was read by Rabbi Baruch Hertz, the Rabbi of the flagship Lubavitch Shul in Chicago, Bnei Ruven. One of the two exclusive witnesses to the wedding was Rabbi Moshe Soloveichik. The last Sheva Bracha of Nisuin (the wedding ceremony under the Chupah) was given to Rabbi Chaim D. Keller, one of the biggest critics of Lubavitch. The crowd was quite mixed. Lubavitchers, Telzers, and Chicago Briskers... amogst others. All sitting together… eating together… and dancing together… all with the same goal: to be Mesameach the Chasan V’Kalla… to make the couple rejoice.
This was a singular moment in time that will be burned into my memory for a long time. There were plenty of people there saying that this could be a beginning of a new chapter of Achdus… unity… in the Torah world. There were lots of smiling faces. For one magical moment there was Achdus because of Simcha and not tragedy! Definitely something to think about.
But I fear that this will only be a one time event. Even if any thing like this ever happens again, I don’t see it leading to a new rapport between various factions in Orthodox Judaism.
It is obvious that the modern Orthodoxy of the Chasan and Kalla is not a product of their upbringing. They are probably not Hashkafically Centrist in their beliefs. They have it seems simply adopted a more modern Orthodox lifestyle. They have chosen that path in spite of their upbringing. And their good parents embraced it. They know that not all rebellion is evil or that it necessarily leads to dropping religious observance. Thus the event was filled with love all around. You could feel it in the air. The young couple made conscious decisions to accept modernity into their lives and their parents embraced them. And the children reciprocated.
The camaraderie last night between the Telzers and Lubavithers was real… truly sincere. But it does not wipe away the strong differences that divide them. The biggest issue of course is Lubavitch’s emphasis on Messianism, whether it is the overt Messianists among them or those who oppose them but nonetheless legitimatize their Messianist philosophy.
Rabbi Keller has not moderated his views because just because he participated in this ‘mixed marriage’. He still believes that the biggest problem Lubavtich has is that they are Rebbe centered and not God centered (to use his phrase). That certainly accounts for why they validate a belief in a resurrected Messiah that will have a second coming. It also probably accounts for some other out of the mainstream practices I have seen at Lubavitch weddings (although last might this was not the case).
One such practice is that they have an honored guest read a letter from the Lubavitcher Rebbe under the Chupah. They read it in the present tense as though he were still alive. It is a letter that was at one time a standard letter sent by the Rebbe to young couples giving them his personal blessings. But it is written as though it were personalized saying something to the effect that “I (the Rebbe) have heard about your pending nuptials…” Everyone is told to rise while the letter is read.
Another practice limited to the overt Messianists, yet quite common, is the recitation under the Chupah of the famous ‘Yechi…’ (Long live the Rebbe King Messiah etc) It is recited 3 times responsively by everyone present.
These and other things like it indicate just how Rebbe centered this particular brand of Chasidus is. They are obsessed with the Rebbe and they don’t even realize it. They see it as a way of giving him or his memory honor. And thereby consider themselves to be the most loyal of Chasidim. I think that’s right. They are… to a fault.
As long as these kinds of things are part of their culture, Messianism will continue plague them. And as long as that is the case, I don’t see how any true Achdus will ever be achieved.
But for one magical moment in time - on Decmeber 23 of 2007, Achdus was truly there. Everyone forgot their differences. And it was truly a beautiful sight!
The Kala is a Lubavitcher. Well not exactly. But her father is. And that’s how she was apparently raised.
But the truth is that neither of them seemed to be representative of their parents Hashkafos. The Chasan wore no hat except under the Chupa. The Kala sat with her husband at the same table and went over to the men’s side of the dance floor to watch the men dance and perform shtick. Neither of which is accepted practice by Lubavitch.
So in essence there were three distinct factions there that are often at great odds with each other. It was quite an unusual sight.
The Mesder Kedushin (officiating rabbi) was The Agudah Moetzes member and Rosh HaYeshiva of Telshe, Rabbi Avrohom Chaim Levin. The Kesubah was read by Rabbi Baruch Hertz, the Rabbi of the flagship Lubavitch Shul in Chicago, Bnei Ruven. One of the two exclusive witnesses to the wedding was Rabbi Moshe Soloveichik. The last Sheva Bracha of Nisuin (the wedding ceremony under the Chupah) was given to Rabbi Chaim D. Keller, one of the biggest critics of Lubavitch. The crowd was quite mixed. Lubavitchers, Telzers, and Chicago Briskers... amogst others. All sitting together… eating together… and dancing together… all with the same goal: to be Mesameach the Chasan V’Kalla… to make the couple rejoice.
This was a singular moment in time that will be burned into my memory for a long time. There were plenty of people there saying that this could be a beginning of a new chapter of Achdus… unity… in the Torah world. There were lots of smiling faces. For one magical moment there was Achdus because of Simcha and not tragedy! Definitely something to think about.
But I fear that this will only be a one time event. Even if any thing like this ever happens again, I don’t see it leading to a new rapport between various factions in Orthodox Judaism.
It is obvious that the modern Orthodoxy of the Chasan and Kalla is not a product of their upbringing. They are probably not Hashkafically Centrist in their beliefs. They have it seems simply adopted a more modern Orthodox lifestyle. They have chosen that path in spite of their upbringing. And their good parents embraced it. They know that not all rebellion is evil or that it necessarily leads to dropping religious observance. Thus the event was filled with love all around. You could feel it in the air. The young couple made conscious decisions to accept modernity into their lives and their parents embraced them. And the children reciprocated.
The camaraderie last night between the Telzers and Lubavithers was real… truly sincere. But it does not wipe away the strong differences that divide them. The biggest issue of course is Lubavitch’s emphasis on Messianism, whether it is the overt Messianists among them or those who oppose them but nonetheless legitimatize their Messianist philosophy.
Rabbi Keller has not moderated his views because just because he participated in this ‘mixed marriage’. He still believes that the biggest problem Lubavtich has is that they are Rebbe centered and not God centered (to use his phrase). That certainly accounts for why they validate a belief in a resurrected Messiah that will have a second coming. It also probably accounts for some other out of the mainstream practices I have seen at Lubavitch weddings (although last might this was not the case).
One such practice is that they have an honored guest read a letter from the Lubavitcher Rebbe under the Chupah. They read it in the present tense as though he were still alive. It is a letter that was at one time a standard letter sent by the Rebbe to young couples giving them his personal blessings. But it is written as though it were personalized saying something to the effect that “I (the Rebbe) have heard about your pending nuptials…” Everyone is told to rise while the letter is read.
Another practice limited to the overt Messianists, yet quite common, is the recitation under the Chupah of the famous ‘Yechi…’ (Long live the Rebbe King Messiah etc) It is recited 3 times responsively by everyone present.
These and other things like it indicate just how Rebbe centered this particular brand of Chasidus is. They are obsessed with the Rebbe and they don’t even realize it. They see it as a way of giving him or his memory honor. And thereby consider themselves to be the most loyal of Chasidim. I think that’s right. They are… to a fault.
As long as these kinds of things are part of their culture, Messianism will continue plague them. And as long as that is the case, I don’t see how any true Achdus will ever be achieved.
But for one magical moment in time - on Decmeber 23 of 2007, Achdus was truly there. Everyone forgot their differences. And it was truly a beautiful sight!
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Cheating the Government
I have been told by several sources that the investigation of the Spinka Rebbe is just the tip of the iceberg. And I have reason to believe that. If the Spinka Rebbe is guilty of what he has been accused of and cooperates with the government, there are going to be a lot more indictments of those people who took advantage of his scheme.
Assuming that the charges against the Rebbe are true then it wasn’t just a momentary lapse in judgment on his part - he did not in a moment of desperation decide to offer a wealthy donor an illegal tax deduction. He actually planned an elaborate scheme involving many people in many countries. And then had the arrogance to think he’d get away with it.
It is truly sad that a man who probably did not personally gain from this Chilul HaShem and only wanted to fund his charities and schools has to now being made to pay such a heavy price for it. Both in this world and probably in the next.
But he is not the only one responsible for this Chilul HaShem. It takes two to tango. There are probably a lot more people on the other side of this transaction who participated in this scam. Any Jew, especially if they are observant, who laundered their money this way to evade taxes on it are just as guilty of Chilul HaShem as the Spinka Rebbe is if the charges in the indictment are true.
Why do otherwise Frum people do such things? There are many reasons having to do with money power, influence and just plain greed. The attitude is often one that sees an illegal tax deduction as a victimless crime. And they believe that their ends justify their means. Plus there is an arrogance that many have that they are much smarter than a bunch of bureaucratic hacks!. They will therefore never get caught!
But it isn’t only a personal rationalization. There are too many people with this attitude to make it a random one. The cause is bad chinuch. Any institution that fails to instill in their students the importance of being honest in all their dealings with all of mankind is failing in its mission.
I have heard the same thing from so many different people about what their Rebbeim taught them when they were in various Yeshivos… that cheating the government is just fine as ling as you don’t get caught. Just yesterday, a former student of a very prominent Yeshiva in New York told me that this is how the Talmidim in his school were indoctrinated by Rabbeim there! And that Yeshiva isn’t one that you might have expected it from. He told me that, based on conversations he’s had with friends who attended similar institutions… that it was the rule in the more right wing Yeshivos to teach their students this way.
I know that this is not the way it is taught in every right wing Yeshiva. And by the saem token the phenomenon of cheating on taxes is not a RW one. There are all mkinds of ‘observant’ Jews who do that. And I’m sure there will be many people who will testify that their RW Yeshiva didn’t teach people to be dishonest to anyone but instead to be scrupulous in their dealings with everyone!
But at the same time, there is enough testimony from those who haven’t been taught this way to that allow something like the Spinka Rebbe’s indictment happen.
There is no doubt in my mind that both types of Chinuch are taught. The only question in my mind is how wide spread is the teaching of young people that it’s OK to be unethical in their financial dealings with the government... if they can get away with it.
Don’t they know what the consequences of such Chinuch will be? Don’t they realize how wrong they are in doing this? How can it be that a Judaism that is supposed to have the highest system of ethics in the world and is supposed to be a light unto the nations teach its people it’s OK to cheat if they can get away with it?
What will it take to turn things around so that Rebbeim who teach these kinds of things are disabused of those notions?
This must become a high priority for all rabbinic leadership, no matter what their Hashkafos. If it doesn’t, things the resultant Chilul HaShem will be so great it will make what the Spinka Rebbe is accused of look like child’s play.
Assuming that the charges against the Rebbe are true then it wasn’t just a momentary lapse in judgment on his part - he did not in a moment of desperation decide to offer a wealthy donor an illegal tax deduction. He actually planned an elaborate scheme involving many people in many countries. And then had the arrogance to think he’d get away with it.
It is truly sad that a man who probably did not personally gain from this Chilul HaShem and only wanted to fund his charities and schools has to now being made to pay such a heavy price for it. Both in this world and probably in the next.
But he is not the only one responsible for this Chilul HaShem. It takes two to tango. There are probably a lot more people on the other side of this transaction who participated in this scam. Any Jew, especially if they are observant, who laundered their money this way to evade taxes on it are just as guilty of Chilul HaShem as the Spinka Rebbe is if the charges in the indictment are true.
Why do otherwise Frum people do such things? There are many reasons having to do with money power, influence and just plain greed. The attitude is often one that sees an illegal tax deduction as a victimless crime. And they believe that their ends justify their means. Plus there is an arrogance that many have that they are much smarter than a bunch of bureaucratic hacks!. They will therefore never get caught!
But it isn’t only a personal rationalization. There are too many people with this attitude to make it a random one. The cause is bad chinuch. Any institution that fails to instill in their students the importance of being honest in all their dealings with all of mankind is failing in its mission.
I have heard the same thing from so many different people about what their Rebbeim taught them when they were in various Yeshivos… that cheating the government is just fine as ling as you don’t get caught. Just yesterday, a former student of a very prominent Yeshiva in New York told me that this is how the Talmidim in his school were indoctrinated by Rabbeim there! And that Yeshiva isn’t one that you might have expected it from. He told me that, based on conversations he’s had with friends who attended similar institutions… that it was the rule in the more right wing Yeshivos to teach their students this way.
I know that this is not the way it is taught in every right wing Yeshiva. And by the saem token the phenomenon of cheating on taxes is not a RW one. There are all mkinds of ‘observant’ Jews who do that. And I’m sure there will be many people who will testify that their RW Yeshiva didn’t teach people to be dishonest to anyone but instead to be scrupulous in their dealings with everyone!
But at the same time, there is enough testimony from those who haven’t been taught this way to that allow something like the Spinka Rebbe’s indictment happen.
There is no doubt in my mind that both types of Chinuch are taught. The only question in my mind is how wide spread is the teaching of young people that it’s OK to be unethical in their financial dealings with the government... if they can get away with it.
Don’t they know what the consequences of such Chinuch will be? Don’t they realize how wrong they are in doing this? How can it be that a Judaism that is supposed to have the highest system of ethics in the world and is supposed to be a light unto the nations teach its people it’s OK to cheat if they can get away with it?
What will it take to turn things around so that Rebbeim who teach these kinds of things are disabused of those notions?
This must become a high priority for all rabbinic leadership, no matter what their Hashkafos. If it doesn’t, things the resultant Chilul HaShem will be so great it will make what the Spinka Rebbe is accused of look like child’s play.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Choosing to Save Lives
Baruch Rofeh Cholim. Blessed is the Healer of the sick. This is of course a reference to God the true Healer. But I would use the same phrase about a man to whom God has entrusted this gift. God bless this healer of the sick.I don’t know Dr. Yashar Hirshaut. But I am told he is an Orthodox Jew. Not that it makes any difference. His contributions to humanity would be the same whether he is a religious Jew or a Buddhist monk.
But it still makes me proud that there are people like this in the world. People who are observant Jews and dedicate their lives to finding cures for deadly diseases. In the case of Dr. Hirshaut, the disease he is fighting is cancer. What he has done is described in an article in the New York Daily News. And it is truly amazing. Here are some excerpts from the article:
“When I first came to Sloan-Kettering, a small glass cabinet held all the cancer drugs that were known,” says Dr. Yashar Hirshaut.
"So I've seen the transition from a very primitive time till now, where people have chances they didn't have before."
His efforts have included treating patients, writing and raising funds to support research. He does the latter as chairman of the board of the Israel Cancer Research Fund (ICRF), a nonprofit that supports cancer researchers in Israel.
They started small: raising $25,000 to make grants of $5,000 each. They were scrupulous from the start to assemble some of the best researchers, including the late Dr. Henry Kaplan, a pioneer in radiation therapy for Hodgkin's disease, and the late Dr. Charlotte Friend, who discovered the Friend leukemia virus, to decide which researchers to fund.
One of the early projects they helped fund, research by Israeli scientist Yair Reisner, yielded advances in transplantation of bone marrow.
This subject is obviously very near and dear to me. My grandson, Reuven is the beneficiary of people like him. The new chemotherapy treatment program he has begun will require a life saving bone marrow transplant.
Thank God there are people like him whom God has entrusted with the skill, dedication and determination to search and find cures for cancer.
This is the best argument I can think of for providing a secular education to all children in the Torah world, no matter what their Hashkafos… and giving bright people choices.
Dr. Hirshaut is probably quite brilliant. Certainly enough so that had he been indoctrinated to stay in learning full time and not given any secular education in high school, he would not have become a doctor. He may have become a much greater Talmid Chacham than he is now. That is certainly possible… maybe not a Rav Moshe… but a fine Talmid Chacham none the less.
But think of the loss this would have meant to my grandson, Reuven. He is on the left side of the above family picture taken just before he started his new chemotherapy treatment. Of course he no longer looks like that. He has lost his hair again. But not his spirit.
And think of the many other patients who owe their lives to people like him! Instead of staying in learning full time, he followed his passion and he has become a ‘Rav Moshe’ of medicine. God bless this man. He is a shining example of what a Jew can become when given the freedom to choose. Because only choice will give us ‘Rav Moshes’ in all fields.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
The Grand Rabbi of Spinka
Is it OK to launder money through a tax deductible charity? Arie Crown Hebrew Day School is sometimes asked this question. Certain people looking for tax deductions have approached members of the board and asked if they could donate huge sums of money, get a tax deductible receipt and then get a kick back for most of it… leaving behind – say – 5% to the school. They are always of course told no. It is fraud… it is against the law… and it is unethical. The school would lose its tax exempt status and most importantly it would be major Chilul HaShem.
But I guess not everyone feels that way. At least that appears to be the case in a story reported by KNBC in Los Angeles:
Naftali Tzi Weisz, the 59-year-old Grand Rabbi of Spinka, and Gabbai Moshe E. Zigelman, 60, both of Brooklyn, N.Y., were named Tuesday in a federal grand jury's 37-count indictment in Los Angeles.
The indictment, unsealed Wednesday morning, claims that Weisz and Zigelman promised to secretly refund up to 95 percent of millions of dollars of contributions to several Spinka charities.
The contributors could claim the full amount for tax deductions, even though they gave as little as five percent of the amount declared on federal income tax returns, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office.
I can hear all the nay-sayers already: “Oh, come now! …Are you going to pay any attention to a biased media source? These news organizations are out for sensationalism and attention. They will say anything to acheive that, including besmirching the names of prominent people. Especially Chasidic rabbis.
Maybe so. But the US Attorney’s office does not go around arresting prominent rabbis unless there is evidence of wrong doing. In this case 37 instances of it.
Can anyone blame general society for thinking Jews are just a bunch of greedy crooks? I am amazed in fact that the American people are so understanding. People tend to realize that one individual does not reflect on the nature of an entire people. But if this kind of thing keeps happening, that may change.
This isn’t just any Jew. It is a Grand Rabbi… The Spinka Rebbe.
Every man is innocent until proven guilty. And I would love to give this man the benefit of the doubt. But honestly… it is difficult for me to do that when there seems to be so much evidence here.
What also makes this believable is that such shenanigans are not all that uncommon unfortunately. Some institutions seem to think that what ever they get away with is legitimate. The only Chilul HaShem in their eyes is getting caught.
I’ve discussed this before. The rationale in the Chasidic world is carried over from the historic experiences of anti Semitism in Europe. Many Of those governments oppressed their Jewish citizens. Pogroms were the order of the day. The only way to survive was to sometimes to do things under the table such as in a black market. Who can blame anyone for trying to get away with things under those conditions? It was almost impossible to live without it.
But that was pre war Europe. Not America of the 21st century.
In my view it is the insularity of these communities today that perpetuates this attitude. Combined with the indoctrination of a carried over hatred of ‘the Goy’ from their European grandparents makes far too many Chasidim think,: “Goyim are out to get us… anything we can do and get away with is legitimate”.
So when a Chasidic leader can make some money for his institutions, by laundering charitable contributions, why not? Just don’t get caught because it will be a Chilul HaShem.
I remember not too long ago a prominent Charedi Rav… not Chasidic… had been heard expressing a similar attitude... that certain types of questionable financial transactions with non Jews were permissible according to Halacha as long as one wasn’t caught. He furthered his Chilul HaShem by saying that if he were quoted he would deny he ever said it. Did he really say that? No way of really knowing since he will deny it in any case. But it is quite plausable because he is not the only one who feels this way.
There was another prominent Charedi Rav who also said something similar to a constituent. He had advised him that he could cheat on his income taxes in ways that would not be detectable. This Rav was challenged on this issue by another Rav who was told of that Psak. He responded that he didn’t encourage that kind of behavior but when he was asked about it by one of his constituents, he replied with what he believed to be the letter of the law. Absent Chilul HaShem - it was permissible!
With this kind of sickening attitude being disseminated by certain authority figures in the Torah world, it isn’t all that hard to believe that the Spinka Rebbe is guilty… and that his remorse, if he has any will extend only to the fact that he was caught.
Now as I said, he may be proven innocent. I hope he is. But if the Spinka Rebbe is found to be guilty or was involved in any way, then he fully guilty of perpetrating a huge Chilul HaShem. It doesn’t matter if he didn’t think he was going to get caught. And the more stature one has, the bigger the Chilul HaShem.
I will never forget the time about 14 years ago where the Spinka Rebbe was invited to be Mesader Kedushin at a wedding I attended. When he walked in with his entourage, it was like royalty had walked into the room. If he is found guilty and goes to jail, I doubt he will be able to take his entourage with him. And that's a good thing. Such people don't deserve such Kavod.
But I guess not everyone feels that way. At least that appears to be the case in a story reported by KNBC in Los Angeles:
Naftali Tzi Weisz, the 59-year-old Grand Rabbi of Spinka, and Gabbai Moshe E. Zigelman, 60, both of Brooklyn, N.Y., were named Tuesday in a federal grand jury's 37-count indictment in Los Angeles.
The indictment, unsealed Wednesday morning, claims that Weisz and Zigelman promised to secretly refund up to 95 percent of millions of dollars of contributions to several Spinka charities.
The contributors could claim the full amount for tax deductions, even though they gave as little as five percent of the amount declared on federal income tax returns, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office.
I can hear all the nay-sayers already: “Oh, come now! …Are you going to pay any attention to a biased media source? These news organizations are out for sensationalism and attention. They will say anything to acheive that, including besmirching the names of prominent people. Especially Chasidic rabbis.
Maybe so. But the US Attorney’s office does not go around arresting prominent rabbis unless there is evidence of wrong doing. In this case 37 instances of it.
Can anyone blame general society for thinking Jews are just a bunch of greedy crooks? I am amazed in fact that the American people are so understanding. People tend to realize that one individual does not reflect on the nature of an entire people. But if this kind of thing keeps happening, that may change.
This isn’t just any Jew. It is a Grand Rabbi… The Spinka Rebbe.
Every man is innocent until proven guilty. And I would love to give this man the benefit of the doubt. But honestly… it is difficult for me to do that when there seems to be so much evidence here.
What also makes this believable is that such shenanigans are not all that uncommon unfortunately. Some institutions seem to think that what ever they get away with is legitimate. The only Chilul HaShem in their eyes is getting caught.
I’ve discussed this before. The rationale in the Chasidic world is carried over from the historic experiences of anti Semitism in Europe. Many Of those governments oppressed their Jewish citizens. Pogroms were the order of the day. The only way to survive was to sometimes to do things under the table such as in a black market. Who can blame anyone for trying to get away with things under those conditions? It was almost impossible to live without it.
But that was pre war Europe. Not America of the 21st century.
In my view it is the insularity of these communities today that perpetuates this attitude. Combined with the indoctrination of a carried over hatred of ‘the Goy’ from their European grandparents makes far too many Chasidim think,: “Goyim are out to get us… anything we can do and get away with is legitimate”.
So when a Chasidic leader can make some money for his institutions, by laundering charitable contributions, why not? Just don’t get caught because it will be a Chilul HaShem.
I remember not too long ago a prominent Charedi Rav… not Chasidic… had been heard expressing a similar attitude... that certain types of questionable financial transactions with non Jews were permissible according to Halacha as long as one wasn’t caught. He furthered his Chilul HaShem by saying that if he were quoted he would deny he ever said it. Did he really say that? No way of really knowing since he will deny it in any case. But it is quite plausable because he is not the only one who feels this way.
There was another prominent Charedi Rav who also said something similar to a constituent. He had advised him that he could cheat on his income taxes in ways that would not be detectable. This Rav was challenged on this issue by another Rav who was told of that Psak. He responded that he didn’t encourage that kind of behavior but when he was asked about it by one of his constituents, he replied with what he believed to be the letter of the law. Absent Chilul HaShem - it was permissible!
With this kind of sickening attitude being disseminated by certain authority figures in the Torah world, it isn’t all that hard to believe that the Spinka Rebbe is guilty… and that his remorse, if he has any will extend only to the fact that he was caught.
Now as I said, he may be proven innocent. I hope he is. But if the Spinka Rebbe is found to be guilty or was involved in any way, then he fully guilty of perpetrating a huge Chilul HaShem. It doesn’t matter if he didn’t think he was going to get caught. And the more stature one has, the bigger the Chilul HaShem.
I will never forget the time about 14 years ago where the Spinka Rebbe was invited to be Mesader Kedushin at a wedding I attended. When he walked in with his entourage, it was like royalty had walked into the room. If he is found guilty and goes to jail, I doubt he will be able to take his entourage with him. And that's a good thing. Such people don't deserve such Kavod.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Tuition Free Torah Education
Providing a Jewish education for every Jewish child is a goal that the Torah world should truly strive for. Money should never ever be an obstacle to that. No matter what the financial condition of any parent or his disposition to Torah is. The decision to educate ones children Jewishly should be free of any financial impediments so that anyone can send his child to a religious school as easily as to a public school.
But is that possible? Or is it a pipe dream? I think it’s possible.
And the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago has taken a big step in that direction. Too acheive the goal of a new initiative many of the wealthiest Orthodox Jews in Chicago have already pledged major sums of money to it. But before I get to a description of this project, a question arises. Should one ever support an institution like the Federation that gives money equally to Orthodox day schools and non orthodox day schools? The answer seems to be a resounding yes!
There has been much discussion in the world of Orthodoxy about local Jewish federations and their relationship with the Torah world. The argument has been that the Torah world should avoid supporting them at all even if it means forgoing theor contributions since many of their leaders often anti Frum. The claim is that they throw ‘peanuts’ at us that come with unwanted strings attached and in exchange we give credibility to an organization that supports heterodox movements that are antithetical to Torah Judaism.
I can’t speak for communities outside of Chicago, but this has not been the attitude here. The Torah world not only advocates supporting the Jewish Fedration, but is the beneficiary of tremendous financial support from it. The Federation not only supports religious institutions financially, it supports them morally as well. Federation leadership here has learned long ago the value of Jewish education and has been prioritizing much of its monetary allocations to religious schools of all denominations. The Orthodox day schools are the largest beneficiaries of those funds. We get the lion’s share of that money. By far. That’s because we have the most educational institutions.
This didn’t happen over-night. The relationships we in the Torah world have with the Federation was cultivated over decades by dedicated Orthodox lay and religious leadership that has been on the Federation board during all that time. Relationships of true friendship now exist between us.
And this is one of many reasons Chicago does not seem to be going through the tremendous struggles and high tuitions that many other Jewish communities are enduring. This doesn’t mean that every day school is flush with money, far from it. Many are still operating on deficit budgets. But not all are and certainly not as much as other Jewish communities it seems.
The project at hand is the creation of an endowment fund. This is an unprecedented fund-raising initiative... at least here in the Chicago Jewish community. From the Federation’s JUF News website:
The Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago crafted a plan targeting the schools' greatest financial dilemma: how to create a long-term source of funding as they struggle to find money for immediate needs. Working with 15 schools throughout the Chicago area, the Federation agreed to ask major donors to pledge $100,000 or more each to its Jewish Day School Guaranty Trust, an endowment that will generate revenue for the schools in perpetuity. Then, to meet current needs, the Federation came up with a way to significantly boost payments to the schools even before that money is received.
What makes this so incredible is that there actually is enough wealth in this community for such a project to succeed. I presume that not only will Orthodox benefactors contribute but so too will many non Orthodox ones.
I have always maintained that the crises in funding Jewish education was solvable. That there was enough wealth in the Torah world to do it. That the typical middle class parent does not have to be milked bone dry by oppressive tuition bills that actually lower the standard of living for many families so that their children will receive a decent Torah education. And this project proves it. The money is indeed there.
But what about the concern that money donated to this project will also go toward supporting heterodox movements?
Not a problem. At least not according to 2 of the biggest Torah personalities in the city and perhaps the United States or even the world:
Rabbi Avrohom Chaim Levin and Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz, the pre-eminent spiritual leaders of Chicago's Orthodox community, have called the initiative "remarkable and innovative.…This program has our fullest support. We are deeply committed to helping it succeed.…There is no greater challenge for Tzedaka (charity) in our community than to significantly increase funding for day schools."
The first announced contributor to this fund is Andrew Hochberg. He is donating 1 million dollars. He is not Orthodox but is an active board member of the Federation.
But he is not the largest contributor. This morning I happened to see a donor list at Bnei Ruven where I attend a Daf Yomi Shiur. There were many familiar names on that list in various different categories... many people I know, many of those I am friends with. But there was only one name at the top, in a category by himself: Rabbi Morris I. Esformes.
But is that possible? Or is it a pipe dream? I think it’s possible.
And the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago has taken a big step in that direction. Too acheive the goal of a new initiative many of the wealthiest Orthodox Jews in Chicago have already pledged major sums of money to it. But before I get to a description of this project, a question arises. Should one ever support an institution like the Federation that gives money equally to Orthodox day schools and non orthodox day schools? The answer seems to be a resounding yes!
There has been much discussion in the world of Orthodoxy about local Jewish federations and their relationship with the Torah world. The argument has been that the Torah world should avoid supporting them at all even if it means forgoing theor contributions since many of their leaders often anti Frum. The claim is that they throw ‘peanuts’ at us that come with unwanted strings attached and in exchange we give credibility to an organization that supports heterodox movements that are antithetical to Torah Judaism.
I can’t speak for communities outside of Chicago, but this has not been the attitude here. The Torah world not only advocates supporting the Jewish Fedration, but is the beneficiary of tremendous financial support from it. The Federation not only supports religious institutions financially, it supports them morally as well. Federation leadership here has learned long ago the value of Jewish education and has been prioritizing much of its monetary allocations to religious schools of all denominations. The Orthodox day schools are the largest beneficiaries of those funds. We get the lion’s share of that money. By far. That’s because we have the most educational institutions.
This didn’t happen over-night. The relationships we in the Torah world have with the Federation was cultivated over decades by dedicated Orthodox lay and religious leadership that has been on the Federation board during all that time. Relationships of true friendship now exist between us.
And this is one of many reasons Chicago does not seem to be going through the tremendous struggles and high tuitions that many other Jewish communities are enduring. This doesn’t mean that every day school is flush with money, far from it. Many are still operating on deficit budgets. But not all are and certainly not as much as other Jewish communities it seems.
The project at hand is the creation of an endowment fund. This is an unprecedented fund-raising initiative... at least here in the Chicago Jewish community. From the Federation’s JUF News website:
The Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago crafted a plan targeting the schools' greatest financial dilemma: how to create a long-term source of funding as they struggle to find money for immediate needs. Working with 15 schools throughout the Chicago area, the Federation agreed to ask major donors to pledge $100,000 or more each to its Jewish Day School Guaranty Trust, an endowment that will generate revenue for the schools in perpetuity. Then, to meet current needs, the Federation came up with a way to significantly boost payments to the schools even before that money is received.
What makes this so incredible is that there actually is enough wealth in this community for such a project to succeed. I presume that not only will Orthodox benefactors contribute but so too will many non Orthodox ones.
I have always maintained that the crises in funding Jewish education was solvable. That there was enough wealth in the Torah world to do it. That the typical middle class parent does not have to be milked bone dry by oppressive tuition bills that actually lower the standard of living for many families so that their children will receive a decent Torah education. And this project proves it. The money is indeed there.
But what about the concern that money donated to this project will also go toward supporting heterodox movements?
Not a problem. At least not according to 2 of the biggest Torah personalities in the city and perhaps the United States or even the world:
Rabbi Avrohom Chaim Levin and Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz, the pre-eminent spiritual leaders of Chicago's Orthodox community, have called the initiative "remarkable and innovative.…This program has our fullest support. We are deeply committed to helping it succeed.…There is no greater challenge for Tzedaka (charity) in our community than to significantly increase funding for day schools."
The first announced contributor to this fund is Andrew Hochberg. He is donating 1 million dollars. He is not Orthodox but is an active board member of the Federation.
But he is not the largest contributor. This morning I happened to see a donor list at Bnei Ruven where I attend a Daf Yomi Shiur. There were many familiar names on that list in various different categories... many people I know, many of those I am friends with. But there was only one name at the top, in a category by himself: Rabbi Morris I. Esformes.
Morrie
Question: Who is the individual who is most responsible for the enormous amount of Torah learning by Baalei Batim that takes place in Chicago? Answer: Rabbi Morris I. Esformes.
Who is that? Morrie as he is known by his friends and acquaintances all over the world is a modern Orthodox businessman who is one of the wealthiest Jewish philanthropists in Chicago. How wealthy? I don’t know. Is he the wealthiest? Again, I don’t know. But if one travels around Chicago or around the world his name can be seen on the buildings of many Orthodox institutions as the sole or chief donor. Beneficiaries of his generosity include Lakewood, Telshe, HTC, Brisk, Lubavitch, and probably hundreds of institutions like that. He does not discriminate. And his name is always on top of every donor list.
I’ve known Morrie since high school in Skokie Yeshiva (HTC). He and I graduated together. He received Semicha from Rav Aaron Soloveichik two years ahead of me.
He comes from a modest background and is of Sefardi heritage. He came to the Yeshiva for high school from Los Angeles and grew in his Torah learning. And he was also quite popular - with many friends. After high school he was one of the few in those days to go to Israel and learn in a Yeshiva. It was Kerem B’Yavneh. (Yes, you will see his name prominently on display there too.)
After he got married he went to work in the nursing home industry. Early in his career, he decided to into business for himself. He got up the capital to buy a nursing home, borrowing much of the investment capital from his parents, who were of modest means.
It was Divine providence. As he tells the story, he bought a home that was losing $20,000 per month in empty beds. Just about that time, the State of Illinois decided to release all of its mental health patients because of a shortage of funds. Morrie filled the beds. Practically over night, that nursing home went from a $20,000 per month loser to a $20,000 per month winner. He took profits from there and built an empire of nursing homes. From there he diversified his investments into real estate and other ventures and the rest, as they say, is history.
I’ve lost touch with my friend over the last few years. His business, philanthropic, and personal ventures have taken him out of Chicago a great deal of the time. We used to spend many a winter vacation in Florida together. And we both served many years on the Arie Crown Hebrew Day School executive board together where he was one of the most successful presidents and generous donors that school ever had.
So why do I say he is responsible for all the Torah learning by Baalei Battim in Chicago? The answer can be found in the Chicago Community Kollel.
This Kollel may very well be the model for all Lakewood type community Kollelim to follow. Their in-reach program has been successful beyond its wildest dreams. They came to Chicago and took the Orthodox community by storm. By pure force of personality of the Roshei Kollel and the original Avreichim, Chicago came to love the Kollel. Orthodox Jews from virtually every segment and every neighborhood in greater Chicago came to learn in the Kollel, either with Chavrusos, or to hear weekly or daily Shiurim.
Daf Yomi, which already existed in Chicago with a very small number of participants, exploded after the Kollel started giving Daf Yomi Shiurim. This led to many others as more people wanted to participate. It seems that every new cycle breeds new Shiurim. There are now dozens that are well attended all over Chicago, from the Modern Orthodox Shuls to the Charedi Yeshivos. Some Shuls have multiple Shiurim throughout the day. I have been told by knowledgeable people who travel often to other cities for various reasons that, as a percentage of the whole - Chicago probably has more Baalei Battim learning than any other city including New York.
But the Kollel did not have an easy time getting established here. There was resistance from just about every Orthodox institution. It was felt by many lay and rabbinic leaders that it would be a strain on the fundraising abilities of the other institutions who already had a difficult time meeting their budgets. Telshe complained that Chicago didn’t need a community Kollel as its doors were open to any Bal Habos that wished to learn. Indeed Telshe had Balei Battim learning there. (Of course it was miniscule compared to what is going on today.)
Morrie had heard about the succces that a Lakewood Community Kollel was having in Los Angeles. He decided that it was time for Chicago. Against much opposition he establshed the Kollel here. He committed to paying for their entire budget the first year out of his own pocket. Morrie also enlisted the help of Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky, Rav Shneur Kotler, and other Gedolim to help find the right Avreichim.
He insisted that the Roshei Kollel were to be of highest caliber and wanted the best Lakewood had to offer. Rabbis Dovid Zcuker and Moshe Francis filled the bill. Morrie also insited that the well paid Avreichim would be of the highest caliber - both in learning and in dealing with the community. He was not disappointed.
Many of the first Avreichim have gone on to become tremendous assets to the Chicago community and elsewhere filling jobs as Roshei Yeshiva, Shul Rabbanim, professionals, and Kiruv leaders. One of those early Avreichim was Rabbi Zev Cohen. He easily has the most popular Shul in the city. He has started a Choshen Mishpat Kollel of his own, and is perhaps the most charismatic Rav Chicago ever had. And he has ‘chasidim’ all over the world who call him for Psak Halacha and advice. The Chicago Eruv was built by him and a prominent modern Orthodox Rav. He was even invited to the White house by former President Bill Clinton, who had heard about him.
Morrie Esformes almost single handidly created a huge Makom Torah in Chicago... a Makom where Baalei Battim learn. He gets a chelek… a portion of every word of Torah learned that this Kollel has generated. I envy his Olam Haba.
What about the worries others had about competing for the same funds? Chicago has one of the most successful educational schools systems in the country. Some schools actually are able to raise their entire budgets without overly straining parents tuitions bills. The wealth was here and it grew. And the desire to support increased. And it was Morrie who got the big philanthropy started. He set the example and ‘taught’ Chicago philanthropists how to give. And they did and still do.
I am a fan of this man. His personal struggles never impeded his resolve to build Torah in every corner of the world nor did it diminish his generosity. Not even by the prostate cancer which he has successfuly conquered.
May he have continued success in all his endeavors. May he see much Nachas from his children. He has a Lichtige Gan Eden ahead of him. I think that is practically assured.
Who is that? Morrie as he is known by his friends and acquaintances all over the world is a modern Orthodox businessman who is one of the wealthiest Jewish philanthropists in Chicago. How wealthy? I don’t know. Is he the wealthiest? Again, I don’t know. But if one travels around Chicago or around the world his name can be seen on the buildings of many Orthodox institutions as the sole or chief donor. Beneficiaries of his generosity include Lakewood, Telshe, HTC, Brisk, Lubavitch, and probably hundreds of institutions like that. He does not discriminate. And his name is always on top of every donor list.
I’ve known Morrie since high school in Skokie Yeshiva (HTC). He and I graduated together. He received Semicha from Rav Aaron Soloveichik two years ahead of me.
He comes from a modest background and is of Sefardi heritage. He came to the Yeshiva for high school from Los Angeles and grew in his Torah learning. And he was also quite popular - with many friends. After high school he was one of the few in those days to go to Israel and learn in a Yeshiva. It was Kerem B’Yavneh. (Yes, you will see his name prominently on display there too.)
After he got married he went to work in the nursing home industry. Early in his career, he decided to into business for himself. He got up the capital to buy a nursing home, borrowing much of the investment capital from his parents, who were of modest means.
It was Divine providence. As he tells the story, he bought a home that was losing $20,000 per month in empty beds. Just about that time, the State of Illinois decided to release all of its mental health patients because of a shortage of funds. Morrie filled the beds. Practically over night, that nursing home went from a $20,000 per month loser to a $20,000 per month winner. He took profits from there and built an empire of nursing homes. From there he diversified his investments into real estate and other ventures and the rest, as they say, is history.
I’ve lost touch with my friend over the last few years. His business, philanthropic, and personal ventures have taken him out of Chicago a great deal of the time. We used to spend many a winter vacation in Florida together. And we both served many years on the Arie Crown Hebrew Day School executive board together where he was one of the most successful presidents and generous donors that school ever had.
So why do I say he is responsible for all the Torah learning by Baalei Battim in Chicago? The answer can be found in the Chicago Community Kollel.
This Kollel may very well be the model for all Lakewood type community Kollelim to follow. Their in-reach program has been successful beyond its wildest dreams. They came to Chicago and took the Orthodox community by storm. By pure force of personality of the Roshei Kollel and the original Avreichim, Chicago came to love the Kollel. Orthodox Jews from virtually every segment and every neighborhood in greater Chicago came to learn in the Kollel, either with Chavrusos, or to hear weekly or daily Shiurim.
Daf Yomi, which already existed in Chicago with a very small number of participants, exploded after the Kollel started giving Daf Yomi Shiurim. This led to many others as more people wanted to participate. It seems that every new cycle breeds new Shiurim. There are now dozens that are well attended all over Chicago, from the Modern Orthodox Shuls to the Charedi Yeshivos. Some Shuls have multiple Shiurim throughout the day. I have been told by knowledgeable people who travel often to other cities for various reasons that, as a percentage of the whole - Chicago probably has more Baalei Battim learning than any other city including New York.
But the Kollel did not have an easy time getting established here. There was resistance from just about every Orthodox institution. It was felt by many lay and rabbinic leaders that it would be a strain on the fundraising abilities of the other institutions who already had a difficult time meeting their budgets. Telshe complained that Chicago didn’t need a community Kollel as its doors were open to any Bal Habos that wished to learn. Indeed Telshe had Balei Battim learning there. (Of course it was miniscule compared to what is going on today.)
Morrie had heard about the succces that a Lakewood Community Kollel was having in Los Angeles. He decided that it was time for Chicago. Against much opposition he establshed the Kollel here. He committed to paying for their entire budget the first year out of his own pocket. Morrie also enlisted the help of Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky, Rav Shneur Kotler, and other Gedolim to help find the right Avreichim.
He insisted that the Roshei Kollel were to be of highest caliber and wanted the best Lakewood had to offer. Rabbis Dovid Zcuker and Moshe Francis filled the bill. Morrie also insited that the well paid Avreichim would be of the highest caliber - both in learning and in dealing with the community. He was not disappointed.
Many of the first Avreichim have gone on to become tremendous assets to the Chicago community and elsewhere filling jobs as Roshei Yeshiva, Shul Rabbanim, professionals, and Kiruv leaders. One of those early Avreichim was Rabbi Zev Cohen. He easily has the most popular Shul in the city. He has started a Choshen Mishpat Kollel of his own, and is perhaps the most charismatic Rav Chicago ever had. And he has ‘chasidim’ all over the world who call him for Psak Halacha and advice. The Chicago Eruv was built by him and a prominent modern Orthodox Rav. He was even invited to the White house by former President Bill Clinton, who had heard about him.
Morrie Esformes almost single handidly created a huge Makom Torah in Chicago... a Makom where Baalei Battim learn. He gets a chelek… a portion of every word of Torah learned that this Kollel has generated. I envy his Olam Haba.
What about the worries others had about competing for the same funds? Chicago has one of the most successful educational schools systems in the country. Some schools actually are able to raise their entire budgets without overly straining parents tuitions bills. The wealth was here and it grew. And the desire to support increased. And it was Morrie who got the big philanthropy started. He set the example and ‘taught’ Chicago philanthropists how to give. And they did and still do.
I am a fan of this man. His personal struggles never impeded his resolve to build Torah in every corner of the world nor did it diminish his generosity. Not even by the prostate cancer which he has successfuly conquered.
May he have continued success in all his endeavors. May he see much Nachas from his children. He has a Lichtige Gan Eden ahead of him. I think that is practically assured.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Kosher Sex
A subject that is sorely lacking in the Torah world is that of sex education. I’m not talking about the laws of sexual purity. Those courses do exist and are a must for every Chasan and Kallah. I am talking about frank discussion about sexual relationships between husband and wife. Based on discussion I’ve had with a retired Orthodox Jewish psychologist friend of mine who dealt with patients who have these issues, the amount of ignorance about this important subject among some young Bnei Torah is shocking.
That should not be too surprising however based on all the strong taboos surrounding sex in the Torah world… taboos that include avoiding frank discussions about it with young people.
To the credit of at least some women who teach Kala classes here in Chicago, sexual intmacy is discussed very frankly and matter of factly. The same is true with Chasan classes here. At least as it involves two teachers that I am familiar with. But I am not sure that is universally the case. Especially in Chasidic circles. Sexual subjects there of any kind are off the table based on what my psychologist friend tells me. It is truly shocking how little some of them know.
Issues relating to intimacy between couples is an important feature of any successful marriage and ought to be discussed openly and frankly before it occurs. No Chasan and Kala should be shy about it. Any and all questions should be asked of those people who are knowledgeable on the subject both technically and Halachically. But who trains the Chasan and Kalla class teachers? Is there a universally accepted approach? Or is it pretty much designed by each individual teacher on their own as they go along?
Obviously there are variations between teachers as to the knowledge of the subject, the ability to convey the information, shyness on the part of a teacher, and their level of experience. Many such teachers may for example feel that these intimacy issues should not be a part of any Chasan or Kala class program …that it is in general inappropriate to discuss these issues.
To that extent, I am happy to report that The Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance (JOFA) is recruiting teachers for a program to uniformly train teacher for precisely that. It is supported by both Drisha and Yeshivat Chovevei Torah.
These organizations are not ones that I usually find myself agreeing with. Sometimes my disagreements are quite strong. In the case of JOFA that is even more true.
They are problematic to me because feminism is the very reason for its existence. My view is that feminism ...or any 'ism' ...should never be the guiding purpose of any Torah organization.
But here they are providing a valuable service to the Torah world. But there are never the less problems with it. One such problem is that because of who is sponsoring it, there will be resistance to it from the right. But there shouldn’t be. When something is being done correctly for the benefit if the entire community it ought to be judged on that basis alone As long as Halacha is the guiding principle and that no particular Hashkafa is being espoused.
There is another issue I wonder about. I’m not sure if it is positive, innocuous, or a deal breaker. The classes are to be co-ed. That is one of the requirements of joining the program. Teachers must be willing to discuss these issues in the company of both male and female students.
On the negative side, frank discussion on issues of intimacy in a group setting that is both male and female, may be somewhat problematic in terms of Tznius. On the other hand teaching a Chasan and Kala at the same time and by the same teacher will go a long way to eliminating the conflicts that often arise when there are different teachers for each. The group setting should put an end to that. The question remaining might be, why the necessity for a group? Why not just a couple at a time? That may indeed be the ideal but it is highly impractical.
Do the benefits of a standardized program teaching a group in this way outweigh the Tznius concerns? I think so. It is far better for a Chasan and Kalla to be on the same Halachic page in a marriage than not …especially when it comes to matters involving their sex lives. At least that’s my thinking on the subject.
That should not be too surprising however based on all the strong taboos surrounding sex in the Torah world… taboos that include avoiding frank discussions about it with young people.
To the credit of at least some women who teach Kala classes here in Chicago, sexual intmacy is discussed very frankly and matter of factly. The same is true with Chasan classes here. At least as it involves two teachers that I am familiar with. But I am not sure that is universally the case. Especially in Chasidic circles. Sexual subjects there of any kind are off the table based on what my psychologist friend tells me. It is truly shocking how little some of them know.
Issues relating to intimacy between couples is an important feature of any successful marriage and ought to be discussed openly and frankly before it occurs. No Chasan and Kala should be shy about it. Any and all questions should be asked of those people who are knowledgeable on the subject both technically and Halachically. But who trains the Chasan and Kalla class teachers? Is there a universally accepted approach? Or is it pretty much designed by each individual teacher on their own as they go along?
Obviously there are variations between teachers as to the knowledge of the subject, the ability to convey the information, shyness on the part of a teacher, and their level of experience. Many such teachers may for example feel that these intimacy issues should not be a part of any Chasan or Kala class program …that it is in general inappropriate to discuss these issues.
To that extent, I am happy to report that The Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance (JOFA) is recruiting teachers for a program to uniformly train teacher for precisely that. It is supported by both Drisha and Yeshivat Chovevei Torah.
These organizations are not ones that I usually find myself agreeing with. Sometimes my disagreements are quite strong. In the case of JOFA that is even more true.
They are problematic to me because feminism is the very reason for its existence. My view is that feminism ...or any 'ism' ...should never be the guiding purpose of any Torah organization.
But here they are providing a valuable service to the Torah world. But there are never the less problems with it. One such problem is that because of who is sponsoring it, there will be resistance to it from the right. But there shouldn’t be. When something is being done correctly for the benefit if the entire community it ought to be judged on that basis alone As long as Halacha is the guiding principle and that no particular Hashkafa is being espoused.
There is another issue I wonder about. I’m not sure if it is positive, innocuous, or a deal breaker. The classes are to be co-ed. That is one of the requirements of joining the program. Teachers must be willing to discuss these issues in the company of both male and female students.
On the negative side, frank discussion on issues of intimacy in a group setting that is both male and female, may be somewhat problematic in terms of Tznius. On the other hand teaching a Chasan and Kala at the same time and by the same teacher will go a long way to eliminating the conflicts that often arise when there are different teachers for each. The group setting should put an end to that. The question remaining might be, why the necessity for a group? Why not just a couple at a time? That may indeed be the ideal but it is highly impractical.
Do the benefits of a standardized program teaching a group in this way outweigh the Tznius concerns? I think so. It is far better for a Chasan and Kalla to be on the same Halachic page in a marriage than not …especially when it comes to matters involving their sex lives. At least that’s my thinking on the subject.
The Value of a Frum Blog
Hirhurim has an important article today by Rabbi Asher Meir. It is in response to the article in the Jewish Observer by Zvi Frankel on the subject of Frum blogs and it is an excellent evaluation of the issues. I do not think I can add anything to it. Here is an excerpt which I think sums up Rabbi Meir’s position and pretty much reflects my own:
So while blogs are an ideal medium to spread lashon hara, they are an even more ideal medium to refute lashon hara. When rumors are spread furtively they have tendency to be vague, rapidly exaggerated, difficult to track down and nearly impossible to refute. But when they can be precisely tracked down to a public blog post, there is a full opportunity to make a proper refutation.
I think that we can all think of instances where blogs, including Hirhuim, have been instrumental in publicizing pertinent and reliable information defending people against hurtful and unfounded accusations.
Another important point is that blogs are not only a vehicle for discussing people. They are at least important as a forum to discuss ideas. The unique transparency of a blog makes it an ideal medium to discuss controversial topics. When controversies arise, it is both impossible and also unhealthy to suppress discussion on the appropriate position and direction for the community. We are not gifted with prophecy, but chacham adif minavi (a sage is preferable to a prophet) and nowadays we arrive at the truth by the method of the beit midrash – open and learned discussion within the limits of our beliefs. Many will promote positions that the community, and perhaps even the individual himself, may later conclude are mistaken. But there is a very broad opportunity to make one's thoughts and objections known.
Here is Rabbi Meir's bio from Hirhurim:
Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir is Research Director of the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem. Rabbi Dr. Meir received his PhD in Economics from MIT, and previously studied at Harvard. He subsequently studied at various Israeli yeshivot, and received his ordination from the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. Prior to moving to Israel, he worked at the Council of Economic Advisers in the Reagan administration. Rabbi Dr. Meir is also a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Jerusalem College of Technology and has published several articles on the subjects of modern business and economics and Jewish law.
So while blogs are an ideal medium to spread lashon hara, they are an even more ideal medium to refute lashon hara. When rumors are spread furtively they have tendency to be vague, rapidly exaggerated, difficult to track down and nearly impossible to refute. But when they can be precisely tracked down to a public blog post, there is a full opportunity to make a proper refutation.
I think that we can all think of instances where blogs, including Hirhuim, have been instrumental in publicizing pertinent and reliable information defending people against hurtful and unfounded accusations.
Another important point is that blogs are not only a vehicle for discussing people. They are at least important as a forum to discuss ideas. The unique transparency of a blog makes it an ideal medium to discuss controversial topics. When controversies arise, it is both impossible and also unhealthy to suppress discussion on the appropriate position and direction for the community. We are not gifted with prophecy, but chacham adif minavi (a sage is preferable to a prophet) and nowadays we arrive at the truth by the method of the beit midrash – open and learned discussion within the limits of our beliefs. Many will promote positions that the community, and perhaps even the individual himself, may later conclude are mistaken. But there is a very broad opportunity to make one's thoughts and objections known.
Here is Rabbi Meir's bio from Hirhurim:
Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir is Research Director of the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem. Rabbi Dr. Meir received his PhD in Economics from MIT, and previously studied at Harvard. He subsequently studied at various Israeli yeshivot, and received his ordination from the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. Prior to moving to Israel, he worked at the Council of Economic Advisers in the Reagan administration. Rabbi Dr. Meir is also a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Jerusalem College of Technology and has published several articles on the subjects of modern business and economics and Jewish law.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Will the Pendulum Swing?
I have been informed by a reliable source that two new Yeshiva high schools for boys have recently opened in Lakewood with no secular studies.
As I’ve said many times I fear the Israeli Charedi Hashkafa about secular education is slowly finding its way here. And this is further evidence of it. Most people know my views on this subject. It is on a level of criminally negligent behavior to raise one’s children without any preparation for their future material well-being. This goes beyond any Hashkafa of Torah u Mada or Torah Im Derech Eretz.
Judging by what seems to be a trend in Lakewood, children are expected to concentrate solely on the Torah learning. No matter what their capabilities are. It is inconceivable to me that anyone with half a brain can allow so many of our youth to be destined to fall through the cracks.
Not every child is on a level to achieve great heights in learning Torah. Nor is intelligence the only measure important to that end. Desire has to be a part of it or one will fail no matter how brilliant he is. But that clear fact has apparently been lost on the rabbinic leadership in Lakewood that has either encouraged or at least allowed this development to take place.
Many Charedim in Israel who have been raised under that system are currently experiencing crushing poverty. Some of that has caused family crises to occur. Marriages have been taken to the breaking point and in some cases have surpassed it.
Kupat Ha’ir and other charities like it which are designed to relieve some of that poverty are at the limit of their fund raising capacity while resorting to all kinds of questionable fund-raising tactics!
And that is in Israel where they have some government support. There is no such thing here. The reliance by many Avreichim both here and Israel on parental support will dry up in a single generation. The geometric swelling of the ranks in this community in the next generation will not have that support. That money is drying up. The Yungeleit parents of today who are on food stamps will not be able to provide the kind of help to their many children (in some cases over ten) that they received from their working parents. The money just won’t be there.
Lakewood’s answer to this seems to be cutting off any education that will direct some of its members into decent jobs in the future.
I have said in a recent post that the two worlds of the right wing modern Orthodox and the moderate Charedim will eventually megre. I still think that’s true. It is already happening. On the other hand if one looks at the trend in Lakewood I am beginning to wonder if that is the ultimate trend. If Lakewood is the model community to the world of Charedi Bnei Torah, it will surely follow their example.
How many moderate Charedim will there be if they follow that Hashkafa and eliminate all secular studies in all Charedi high schools? Is it possible to contemplate a day that someone who sends his son to a high school that has any secular studies program be frowned upon? And how long will it take for Lakewood to say that anyone who went to a high school that had a secular studies program will not be admitted?
We’re not there yet. Not even in Israel. But the current anti-secular studies trend certainly points in that direction.
Over the years I keep here about some mythical pendulum that will swing back. I don’t see any pendulum. Does anyone?
Update: Post has been modfied to reflect more accurate information.
As I’ve said many times I fear the Israeli Charedi Hashkafa about secular education is slowly finding its way here. And this is further evidence of it. Most people know my views on this subject. It is on a level of criminally negligent behavior to raise one’s children without any preparation for their future material well-being. This goes beyond any Hashkafa of Torah u Mada or Torah Im Derech Eretz.
Judging by what seems to be a trend in Lakewood, children are expected to concentrate solely on the Torah learning. No matter what their capabilities are. It is inconceivable to me that anyone with half a brain can allow so many of our youth to be destined to fall through the cracks.
Not every child is on a level to achieve great heights in learning Torah. Nor is intelligence the only measure important to that end. Desire has to be a part of it or one will fail no matter how brilliant he is. But that clear fact has apparently been lost on the rabbinic leadership in Lakewood that has either encouraged or at least allowed this development to take place.
Many Charedim in Israel who have been raised under that system are currently experiencing crushing poverty. Some of that has caused family crises to occur. Marriages have been taken to the breaking point and in some cases have surpassed it.
Kupat Ha’ir and other charities like it which are designed to relieve some of that poverty are at the limit of their fund raising capacity while resorting to all kinds of questionable fund-raising tactics!
And that is in Israel where they have some government support. There is no such thing here. The reliance by many Avreichim both here and Israel on parental support will dry up in a single generation. The geometric swelling of the ranks in this community in the next generation will not have that support. That money is drying up. The Yungeleit parents of today who are on food stamps will not be able to provide the kind of help to their many children (in some cases over ten) that they received from their working parents. The money just won’t be there.
Lakewood’s answer to this seems to be cutting off any education that will direct some of its members into decent jobs in the future.
I have said in a recent post that the two worlds of the right wing modern Orthodox and the moderate Charedim will eventually megre. I still think that’s true. It is already happening. On the other hand if one looks at the trend in Lakewood I am beginning to wonder if that is the ultimate trend. If Lakewood is the model community to the world of Charedi Bnei Torah, it will surely follow their example.
How many moderate Charedim will there be if they follow that Hashkafa and eliminate all secular studies in all Charedi high schools? Is it possible to contemplate a day that someone who sends his son to a high school that has any secular studies program be frowned upon? And how long will it take for Lakewood to say that anyone who went to a high school that had a secular studies program will not be admitted?
We’re not there yet. Not even in Israel. But the current anti-secular studies trend certainly points in that direction.
Over the years I keep here about some mythical pendulum that will swing back. I don’t see any pendulum. Does anyone?
Update: Post has been modfied to reflect more accurate information.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
If There is a Rabbinic Will…
Yet another disturbing article about the community of Satmar in Kiryas Joel has appeared in the pages of the New York Times leading once again to a Chilul HaShem.
This time it is about harassment of one of their own Chasidim, one Mrs. Toby Greenberg. The Times reports that:
According to the police, Mrs. Greenberg said she was singled out because she chose to wear denim skirts, long, natural-looking wigs made of human hair, and stockings without a visible seam.
I understand the right of any community to have their own standards of modesty, even if those standards are beyond those of mainstream of Orthodoxy. But harassing an individual for that type of deviation goes too far. In fact harassment is never a legitimate option. How was she harassed? From the Times:
In September, the tires of their Chevrolet Impala were slashed and the warning “Get out, defiled person” was slathered in Yiddish in white paint on a window of their Mazda CX-7.
I remember when this story was first reported. I was appalled at the time. And I still feel that way. The latest development is that the investigation has been closed. The community refuses to co-operate with the police making it difficult to investigate. And so it goes as we keep seeing this kind of activity continue from time to time.
As has been noted many times, the kind of hooliganism that occurred to Mrs. Greeneberg is not condoned by the leadership of Satmar, nor is it condoned by most of its members. So why does it happen?
Many people would answer that every community has its thugs and that one should not judge a community by their behavior. True enough. But that doesn’t explain why both here and in Israel we occasionally find this behavior coming out almost excusively from these kinds of people. Why is that? I think the answer can be found in the following which is probably typical of the way that community feels:
On a recent day, villagers on the main commercial street here condemned the vigilantes and the harassment, although they also voiced disapproval of Mrs. Greenberg’s actions.
“People are hot-blooded. They see her on the street and have asked her nicely to stop wearing tight-fitted clothing, but she wouldn’t listen,” said a woman working at Kiryas Joel Shoes, who identified herself only as Sarah. “If she had behaved as she does inside the four walls of her house, it would have been fine, but on the street is different. She turned it into a dirty public thing.”
In other words, of course it’s wrong, but she asked for it!
It isn’t too difficult to see a connection between other communities that have had similar incidents. The common cause always seems to be matters of very extreme standards of Tznius combined with an insularity from the rest of the Orthodox world that borders on imdifference to it. It is in those communities where on can find violent responses to infractions of those standards. Recent events in Ramat Bet Shemesh reflect the same attitude and the same results. Incidents I’ve written about here testify to that fact. It has recently been the subject of an yet another article in Ha’aretz. From that article:
Local resident Nati Shauli did not even consider filing a police complaint two weeks ago after his car was vandalized. He and his wife came out of the grocery store in Ramat Beit Shemesh A, a mostly religious neighborhood, to find that their tires had been slashed. Shauli is convinced that whoever is responsible wanted to keep bare-headed women like his wife away from the ultra-Orthodox shopping center.
One can of course say that Ha’aretz is a biased source and indeed the victims of this vandalism have no proof that it was these Charedi hooligans that actually did it. But there are too many incidents similar to this where there was no mistake about who perpetrated exactly these kinds of acts or why. It is highly unlikely for it to be a coincidence.
There can be no doubt about the Tznius concerns these hooligans use as their excuse for their violence and vandalaism. The pattern is clear. The victims have in common the desire to have a bit more freedom within Halacha than the the community demands of them.
There are sanctions for violating community standards that are built in to a place like Kiryas Joel. That should be enough. If as was reported in the Times article an individual does not live up to the standards of that community, that community has a right to implement those sanctions.
So if, for example an elementary school says that mothers of students must cover their wigs with a hat or the child will not be admitted, that is their right. Even if mainstream Orthodoxy thinks they are wrong for having such a policy. But to slash tires and paint abhorrent messages on a car?! That is unacceptable and the only reason it happens is because the perpetrators can get away with it. The Police?! No one will cooperate with them. Case closed!
These types of communities are insular to the extreme. They are unwilling to be members of greater Klal Yisroel unless it is on their own terms.
As I’ve said before, Satmar does some good things, like their legendary Bikur Cholim Society which does not discriminate at all based on one’s Hashkafos. If someone is sick or in the hospital Satmar goes the extra mile for them showering the sick with kindness. But as wonderful as that is, it is only within the context of their own terms.
If one wants to be a part of their community but does not conform 100% with their extreme Tznius standards, the care and kindness shown to the sick by their Bikur Cholim society evaporates. And the individual is shunned …even if the behavior is well within the limits of mainstream Orthodox practice as was the case with Mrs. Greenberg. And that gives rise to thuggish behavior by certain elements within it.
Until public pressure is asserted on this community to change their attitude, this kind of behavior will continue to rear its ugly head. Many people will say that public pressure won’t work …that if ‘Gedolim’ from outside Satmar say anything, they won’t listen ..that they don’t even listen to their own leaders who do certainly condemn them. But the truth is their condemnations are in words only. Words that have no teeth. The police are shunned. So in the end there is nothing to curb future vigilantism. The vandals get away with it.
A statement made by a body like the Moetzes that condemns not only the behavior of the thugs but that community’s leadership for failing to apply proper sanctions can make a difference. I can’t help but believe that this will work.
But it must be without any equivocation. There can be no statement like “even though we do not condone the Tznius violations’ preceding any condemnation’. It has to be clear and focused only on the vandals and the lack of the leadership in that community doing anything about it. If Charedi rabbinic leaders show that level of disapproval, I don’t think Satmar and other communities like them can ignore it. There just has to be enough of a rabbinic will to do it.
This time it is about harassment of one of their own Chasidim, one Mrs. Toby Greenberg. The Times reports that:
According to the police, Mrs. Greenberg said she was singled out because she chose to wear denim skirts, long, natural-looking wigs made of human hair, and stockings without a visible seam.
I understand the right of any community to have their own standards of modesty, even if those standards are beyond those of mainstream of Orthodoxy. But harassing an individual for that type of deviation goes too far. In fact harassment is never a legitimate option. How was she harassed? From the Times:
In September, the tires of their Chevrolet Impala were slashed and the warning “Get out, defiled person” was slathered in Yiddish in white paint on a window of their Mazda CX-7.
I remember when this story was first reported. I was appalled at the time. And I still feel that way. The latest development is that the investigation has been closed. The community refuses to co-operate with the police making it difficult to investigate. And so it goes as we keep seeing this kind of activity continue from time to time.
As has been noted many times, the kind of hooliganism that occurred to Mrs. Greeneberg is not condoned by the leadership of Satmar, nor is it condoned by most of its members. So why does it happen?
Many people would answer that every community has its thugs and that one should not judge a community by their behavior. True enough. But that doesn’t explain why both here and in Israel we occasionally find this behavior coming out almost excusively from these kinds of people. Why is that? I think the answer can be found in the following which is probably typical of the way that community feels:
On a recent day, villagers on the main commercial street here condemned the vigilantes and the harassment, although they also voiced disapproval of Mrs. Greenberg’s actions.
“People are hot-blooded. They see her on the street and have asked her nicely to stop wearing tight-fitted clothing, but she wouldn’t listen,” said a woman working at Kiryas Joel Shoes, who identified herself only as Sarah. “If she had behaved as she does inside the four walls of her house, it would have been fine, but on the street is different. She turned it into a dirty public thing.”
In other words, of course it’s wrong, but she asked for it!
It isn’t too difficult to see a connection between other communities that have had similar incidents. The common cause always seems to be matters of very extreme standards of Tznius combined with an insularity from the rest of the Orthodox world that borders on imdifference to it. It is in those communities where on can find violent responses to infractions of those standards. Recent events in Ramat Bet Shemesh reflect the same attitude and the same results. Incidents I’ve written about here testify to that fact. It has recently been the subject of an yet another article in Ha’aretz. From that article:
Local resident Nati Shauli did not even consider filing a police complaint two weeks ago after his car was vandalized. He and his wife came out of the grocery store in Ramat Beit Shemesh A, a mostly religious neighborhood, to find that their tires had been slashed. Shauli is convinced that whoever is responsible wanted to keep bare-headed women like his wife away from the ultra-Orthodox shopping center.
One can of course say that Ha’aretz is a biased source and indeed the victims of this vandalism have no proof that it was these Charedi hooligans that actually did it. But there are too many incidents similar to this where there was no mistake about who perpetrated exactly these kinds of acts or why. It is highly unlikely for it to be a coincidence.
There can be no doubt about the Tznius concerns these hooligans use as their excuse for their violence and vandalaism. The pattern is clear. The victims have in common the desire to have a bit more freedom within Halacha than the the community demands of them.
There are sanctions for violating community standards that are built in to a place like Kiryas Joel. That should be enough. If as was reported in the Times article an individual does not live up to the standards of that community, that community has a right to implement those sanctions.
So if, for example an elementary school says that mothers of students must cover their wigs with a hat or the child will not be admitted, that is their right. Even if mainstream Orthodoxy thinks they are wrong for having such a policy. But to slash tires and paint abhorrent messages on a car?! That is unacceptable and the only reason it happens is because the perpetrators can get away with it. The Police?! No one will cooperate with them. Case closed!
These types of communities are insular to the extreme. They are unwilling to be members of greater Klal Yisroel unless it is on their own terms.
As I’ve said before, Satmar does some good things, like their legendary Bikur Cholim Society which does not discriminate at all based on one’s Hashkafos. If someone is sick or in the hospital Satmar goes the extra mile for them showering the sick with kindness. But as wonderful as that is, it is only within the context of their own terms.
If one wants to be a part of their community but does not conform 100% with their extreme Tznius standards, the care and kindness shown to the sick by their Bikur Cholim society evaporates. And the individual is shunned …even if the behavior is well within the limits of mainstream Orthodox practice as was the case with Mrs. Greenberg. And that gives rise to thuggish behavior by certain elements within it.
Until public pressure is asserted on this community to change their attitude, this kind of behavior will continue to rear its ugly head. Many people will say that public pressure won’t work …that if ‘Gedolim’ from outside Satmar say anything, they won’t listen ..that they don’t even listen to their own leaders who do certainly condemn them. But the truth is their condemnations are in words only. Words that have no teeth. The police are shunned. So in the end there is nothing to curb future vigilantism. The vandals get away with it.
A statement made by a body like the Moetzes that condemns not only the behavior of the thugs but that community’s leadership for failing to apply proper sanctions can make a difference. I can’t help but believe that this will work.
But it must be without any equivocation. There can be no statement like “even though we do not condone the Tznius violations’ preceding any condemnation’. It has to be clear and focused only on the vandals and the lack of the leadership in that community doing anything about it. If Charedi rabbinic leaders show that level of disapproval, I don’t think Satmar and other communities like them can ignore it. There just has to be enough of a rabbinic will to do it.
Friday, December 14, 2007
An Interview with Rabbi Pesach Lerner
There is a lengthy interview in the Yated with Rabbi Pesach Lerner, executive director of the National Council of Young Israel (NCYI). It was sent to me as a ‘cut and paste’ by a subscriber to their e-mail version. It should not be surprising that modern orthodox leaders are sometimes asked to write columns or are interviewed in this very right wing Charedi newspaper. If it serves their agenda, they will do it.
I can almost guarantee that the Yated has little in common with the Centrist Hashkafos of Rabbi Dr. David Berger. Yet his views about Lubavitch Meshichism coincide with their own views. So they invited him to write about it and then published it.
I think the same thing can be said about the Young Israel movement. This organization represents synagogues that have a modern Orthodox orientation. That is something which is anathema to the philosophy of the Yated editorial policy. But since it suited its right wing agenda, the Yated interviewed the head of that organization.
The issue is the recent policy decisions of NCYI to implement new rules all of which indicate a strong trend to the right. The Yeshiva University student newspaper, The YU Commnetator, wrote a lengthy article about that. Obvioulsy this move by NCYI is something that is quite welcome by the Yated. Hence, the interview.
It is curious that Rabbi Lerner chose the Yated as the medium in which to respond. Should he not have responded directly to the Commentator? I’m sure they would have given him that opportunity had he asked. Does he now identify more with the philosophy of the Yated than he does with the philosophy of YU?
Perhaps his use of the catch phrase ‘Torah true’ to describe the YI philosophy as pointed out in their constitution... is a clue. That is decidedly a Charedi term which is used to describe their approach to Judasim to the exclusion of all others. Is that the actual language of their constitution?
In fairness, Rabbi Lerner makes some valid points about those decisions, among them refuting the perception that NCYI leadership had made decisions without consulting their member base. They apparently did.
But what is troubling is the response to an apparent contradiction to Rabbi Lerner’s criticism. Here is the pertinent quote by Rabbi Lerner from the Yated:
It is very interesting and puzzling that an article written in the official YU newspaper contains no comments from members of the YU staff, who also serve as rabbonim in Young Israel branches. The article did not contain any comments from Rabbis Zevulun Charlap, Mordechai Willig (a member of the NCYI Vaad Halacha), Kenneth Auman, Reuvein Fink, Shmuel Hain, Shlomo Hochberg, Ari Jacobson, Yaakov Lerner, Aaron Levine, Marc Penner, or Eliyahu Boruch Shulman, who serve as Young Israel rabbis and are employed by Yeshiva Univeristy.
While it is true that these rabbis are listed as Young Israel rabbis as well, the more valid part of the question is that they are YU Roshei Yeshiva. To make editorial comments from an official publication of the Yeshiva, one would expect to hear from its Roshei Yeshiva. That’s true. . But just a few paragraphs later he is asked the following question:
Yated: The article in the Commentator quotes Rabbi Yosef Blau: …“The spirit and ideology of the Young Israel movement has strayed far from its original roots, which were focused on involving a broader segment of young Jews and preserving the tenets of Judaism, rather than elevating minority opinions on women’s megillah readings into standardized law. The Young Israel movement of today is not the Young Israel that I grew up with.”
How do you respond to these words of a member of the rabbinic facility of RIETS?
Rabbi Pesach Lerner: Well, first of all, I would say that it is completely unprofessional for a member of one organization to involve himself in the organizational policies of another organization. I would have thought that a mashgiach ruchani would know better than that! I would suggest that Rabbi Blau focus on issues going on in YU rather than in other organizations with which he has no affiliation.
First he criticizes that no Roshei Yeshiva were consulted by the Commentator. When he is asked about the fact that one indeed was consulted and whose response was negative, he basically responds that Rabbi Blau ought to mind his own business.
Now it’s true that Rabbi Blau is not the rabbi of a Young Israel Shul. But he isn’t exactly ignorant of the movement having grown up in it. To disparage a major Talmid Chacham who is the Mashgiach Ruchani of a major Yeshiva by telling him in print in a widely circulated Charedi publication to ‘mind his own business’ is unacceptable. In my view it cries out for an apology.
I can almost guarantee that the Yated has little in common with the Centrist Hashkafos of Rabbi Dr. David Berger. Yet his views about Lubavitch Meshichism coincide with their own views. So they invited him to write about it and then published it.
I think the same thing can be said about the Young Israel movement. This organization represents synagogues that have a modern Orthodox orientation. That is something which is anathema to the philosophy of the Yated editorial policy. But since it suited its right wing agenda, the Yated interviewed the head of that organization.
The issue is the recent policy decisions of NCYI to implement new rules all of which indicate a strong trend to the right. The Yeshiva University student newspaper, The YU Commnetator, wrote a lengthy article about that. Obvioulsy this move by NCYI is something that is quite welcome by the Yated. Hence, the interview.
It is curious that Rabbi Lerner chose the Yated as the medium in which to respond. Should he not have responded directly to the Commentator? I’m sure they would have given him that opportunity had he asked. Does he now identify more with the philosophy of the Yated than he does with the philosophy of YU?
Perhaps his use of the catch phrase ‘Torah true’ to describe the YI philosophy as pointed out in their constitution... is a clue. That is decidedly a Charedi term which is used to describe their approach to Judasim to the exclusion of all others. Is that the actual language of their constitution?
In fairness, Rabbi Lerner makes some valid points about those decisions, among them refuting the perception that NCYI leadership had made decisions without consulting their member base. They apparently did.
But what is troubling is the response to an apparent contradiction to Rabbi Lerner’s criticism. Here is the pertinent quote by Rabbi Lerner from the Yated:
It is very interesting and puzzling that an article written in the official YU newspaper contains no comments from members of the YU staff, who also serve as rabbonim in Young Israel branches. The article did not contain any comments from Rabbis Zevulun Charlap, Mordechai Willig (a member of the NCYI Vaad Halacha), Kenneth Auman, Reuvein Fink, Shmuel Hain, Shlomo Hochberg, Ari Jacobson, Yaakov Lerner, Aaron Levine, Marc Penner, or Eliyahu Boruch Shulman, who serve as Young Israel rabbis and are employed by Yeshiva Univeristy.
While it is true that these rabbis are listed as Young Israel rabbis as well, the more valid part of the question is that they are YU Roshei Yeshiva. To make editorial comments from an official publication of the Yeshiva, one would expect to hear from its Roshei Yeshiva. That’s true. . But just a few paragraphs later he is asked the following question:
Yated: The article in the Commentator quotes Rabbi Yosef Blau: …“The spirit and ideology of the Young Israel movement has strayed far from its original roots, which were focused on involving a broader segment of young Jews and preserving the tenets of Judaism, rather than elevating minority opinions on women’s megillah readings into standardized law. The Young Israel movement of today is not the Young Israel that I grew up with.”
How do you respond to these words of a member of the rabbinic facility of RIETS?
Rabbi Pesach Lerner: Well, first of all, I would say that it is completely unprofessional for a member of one organization to involve himself in the organizational policies of another organization. I would have thought that a mashgiach ruchani would know better than that! I would suggest that Rabbi Blau focus on issues going on in YU rather than in other organizations with which he has no affiliation.
First he criticizes that no Roshei Yeshiva were consulted by the Commentator. When he is asked about the fact that one indeed was consulted and whose response was negative, he basically responds that Rabbi Blau ought to mind his own business.
Now it’s true that Rabbi Blau is not the rabbi of a Young Israel Shul. But he isn’t exactly ignorant of the movement having grown up in it. To disparage a major Talmid Chacham who is the Mashgiach Ruchani of a major Yeshiva by telling him in print in a widely circulated Charedi publication to ‘mind his own business’ is unacceptable. In my view it cries out for an apology.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Flipping Out
Cross currents has a review of the book Flipping Out by my good friend Steve Brizel. It deals with what happens to young people who go to Yeshivos in Israel for a year or two after high school. Flipping out usually means that their children have become too religious… rejecting the values and/or lifestyle they had before they left.
I have not read the book and was very interested in what it had to say. Now I know. Based on his article, it seems like the year spent there is all good. It is all about growth in Judaism and thereby the increased commitment to it. I think that’s probably true. The year in Israel is transformative for most students. They go to Israel with ‘a head full of mush’ (to quote John Houseman’s famous line in the movie The Paper Chase) and return more idealistic and committed than when they left. Or to put it another way, they come back more religious. I think that’s right. The experience I had with my own children bears this out.
But if this is all the book says, I think they are missing a key factor that gave rise to the very term ‘flipping out’. I agree that the term is often misapplied. As Mr. Brizel pointed out from one of the authors:
Dr.Waxman also notes that what many consider as “chumra” is really a more stringent practice than what one had been previously practicing publicly or privately.
I’m sure that’s true in most cases and that this is misinterpreted by many parents. The misinterpretation happens in families where commitment to Orthodoxy is what I like to call Modern Orthodox-Lite. These are observant Jews who are either Jewishly under-edcuated and/or don’t care all that much about that fact. Their observance is more sociological than religious in nature. These are parents who are more modern than Orthodox.
Unfortunately much of the modern Orthodoxy is like that. To such parents it is a defeat for them if a child comes back from Israel in any way changed more religiously. If for example a child changes his plans to attend an Ivy League college in favor of a Yeshiva University or a Ner Israel or just entirely rejects college, from their perspective their child has flipped out. The values they learned in the home if not entirely rejected have become subordinate to the values they picked up in Israel.
From the perspective of someone who takes his Judaism more seriously however, they are not seen as flipping out at all but merely as becoming more committed!
The truth is that flipping out is relative to the kind of background one comes from. It really isn’t fair to characterize it any other way.
But what about families that do take their Judaism seriously? What about the right wing modern Orthodox or the ultra Orthodox? Do they ever see their children flipping out? I think that the answer is yes in many cases.
What if a child goes from being a right wing modern orthodox Jew who has a high commitment to his Judaism and becomes a Charedi? What about a moderate Charedi whose child becomes an extreme Charedi? I know both kinds of families where this has taken place.
A moderate Charedi family who sent their child to Charedi Yeshiovs and Beis Yaakovs and basically supports the Charedi world view, might still want his son to have Parnassa. And to that extent to attend a college like Touro. If that son ends up in Brisk or Lakewood eschewing college completely, is that flipping out?
When a Charedi parent sees his son coming back from Israel and deciding that a life of learning Torah is for him… when before he had plans to at some point go to college to learn a profession and now completely rejects that, I think that might be seen by a moderate Charedi family as flipping out.
I’m not saying that learning isn’t a value to moderate Charedim. Of course it is. But most of them want their children to be able to make a living at some point.
What about a right wing modern Orthodox family that seriously values Torah and Mitzvos but also values college and western culture. How do they look at a child who decides to chuck college and either stay in Israel or go to a very right wing Yeshiva in America that blasts all the values they were taught in the home. Would that not be considered flipping out? I think it would.
If the book does not address these issues it has only done half of its job. It has only looked at the good and not the bad. There are usually two sides to every coin.
Based on Mr. Brizel’s review I don’t think that this book addresses these issues. And they deserve addressing. The phenomenon of ‘moving to the right’ most is definitely influenced by the year in Israel. In far too many cases the indoctrination they get from many of the institutions and their Rebbeim during their year in Israel is far different from what they have gotten at home.
If they come back much Frummer than they left it can be more than just a better appreciation for Torah learning and Mitzvah observance. It can be a rejection of the ideology of one’s parents and the embracing of the ideology of their charismatic Rebbeim in Israel.
There are very Charedi Yeshivos that cater to modern Orthodox students. And in some cases they slowly but surely try wean them away form the Hashkafos of their parents and indoctrinate them to their own. And parents often don’t realize that until it is too late.
The best example of that kind of indoctrination is an incident that I wrote about a while back. It was related to be by a former student of such a Yeshiva. The charismatic Rosh HaYeshiva called the students together to speak about the comments made by the Rosh HaYeshiva of Gush, Rav Aharon Lichtenstein.
Rav Lichtenstein is very favorably disposed to secular studies. He had publicly written that his knowledge of English literature had helped him understand certain portions of the bible much better than if had he not studied them.
That Charedi Rosh HaYeshiva had heard a corrupted version of what Rav Lichtenstein had written. He wasn’t going to allow his students to be influenced with that kind of Hashkafa for even one moment. So he called an assembly of his entire Yeshiva together just so he could condemn what Rav Lichtenstein said. Though he did not mention him by name he said the following. Not only does that Rosh Yeshiva not know Tosephos, he does not even know Shaekespeare. Those young men who came to that Yeshiva with a head full of mush just ate that up unquestioningly!
That my friends is flipping out in my book. One cannot deny that a form of indoctrination takes place in some institutions that recruit in modern orthodox environments.
The bottom line is the following. The year in Israel is an inspiring experience to most students. There is growth in their seriousness about the Torah and their commitment to it. But commitment isn’t the only thing that is going on in some places.
I have not read the book and was very interested in what it had to say. Now I know. Based on his article, it seems like the year spent there is all good. It is all about growth in Judaism and thereby the increased commitment to it. I think that’s probably true. The year in Israel is transformative for most students. They go to Israel with ‘a head full of mush’ (to quote John Houseman’s famous line in the movie The Paper Chase) and return more idealistic and committed than when they left. Or to put it another way, they come back more religious. I think that’s right. The experience I had with my own children bears this out.
But if this is all the book says, I think they are missing a key factor that gave rise to the very term ‘flipping out’. I agree that the term is often misapplied. As Mr. Brizel pointed out from one of the authors:
Dr.Waxman also notes that what many consider as “chumra” is really a more stringent practice than what one had been previously practicing publicly or privately.
I’m sure that’s true in most cases and that this is misinterpreted by many parents. The misinterpretation happens in families where commitment to Orthodoxy is what I like to call Modern Orthodox-Lite. These are observant Jews who are either Jewishly under-edcuated and/or don’t care all that much about that fact. Their observance is more sociological than religious in nature. These are parents who are more modern than Orthodox.
Unfortunately much of the modern Orthodoxy is like that. To such parents it is a defeat for them if a child comes back from Israel in any way changed more religiously. If for example a child changes his plans to attend an Ivy League college in favor of a Yeshiva University or a Ner Israel or just entirely rejects college, from their perspective their child has flipped out. The values they learned in the home if not entirely rejected have become subordinate to the values they picked up in Israel.
From the perspective of someone who takes his Judaism more seriously however, they are not seen as flipping out at all but merely as becoming more committed!
The truth is that flipping out is relative to the kind of background one comes from. It really isn’t fair to characterize it any other way.
But what about families that do take their Judaism seriously? What about the right wing modern Orthodox or the ultra Orthodox? Do they ever see their children flipping out? I think that the answer is yes in many cases.
What if a child goes from being a right wing modern orthodox Jew who has a high commitment to his Judaism and becomes a Charedi? What about a moderate Charedi whose child becomes an extreme Charedi? I know both kinds of families where this has taken place.
A moderate Charedi family who sent their child to Charedi Yeshiovs and Beis Yaakovs and basically supports the Charedi world view, might still want his son to have Parnassa. And to that extent to attend a college like Touro. If that son ends up in Brisk or Lakewood eschewing college completely, is that flipping out?
When a Charedi parent sees his son coming back from Israel and deciding that a life of learning Torah is for him… when before he had plans to at some point go to college to learn a profession and now completely rejects that, I think that might be seen by a moderate Charedi family as flipping out.
I’m not saying that learning isn’t a value to moderate Charedim. Of course it is. But most of them want their children to be able to make a living at some point.
What about a right wing modern Orthodox family that seriously values Torah and Mitzvos but also values college and western culture. How do they look at a child who decides to chuck college and either stay in Israel or go to a very right wing Yeshiva in America that blasts all the values they were taught in the home. Would that not be considered flipping out? I think it would.
If the book does not address these issues it has only done half of its job. It has only looked at the good and not the bad. There are usually two sides to every coin.
Based on Mr. Brizel’s review I don’t think that this book addresses these issues. And they deserve addressing. The phenomenon of ‘moving to the right’ most is definitely influenced by the year in Israel. In far too many cases the indoctrination they get from many of the institutions and their Rebbeim during their year in Israel is far different from what they have gotten at home.
If they come back much Frummer than they left it can be more than just a better appreciation for Torah learning and Mitzvah observance. It can be a rejection of the ideology of one’s parents and the embracing of the ideology of their charismatic Rebbeim in Israel.
There are very Charedi Yeshivos that cater to modern Orthodox students. And in some cases they slowly but surely try wean them away form the Hashkafos of their parents and indoctrinate them to their own. And parents often don’t realize that until it is too late.
The best example of that kind of indoctrination is an incident that I wrote about a while back. It was related to be by a former student of such a Yeshiva. The charismatic Rosh HaYeshiva called the students together to speak about the comments made by the Rosh HaYeshiva of Gush, Rav Aharon Lichtenstein.
Rav Lichtenstein is very favorably disposed to secular studies. He had publicly written that his knowledge of English literature had helped him understand certain portions of the bible much better than if had he not studied them.
That Charedi Rosh HaYeshiva had heard a corrupted version of what Rav Lichtenstein had written. He wasn’t going to allow his students to be influenced with that kind of Hashkafa for even one moment. So he called an assembly of his entire Yeshiva together just so he could condemn what Rav Lichtenstein said. Though he did not mention him by name he said the following. Not only does that Rosh Yeshiva not know Tosephos, he does not even know Shaekespeare. Those young men who came to that Yeshiva with a head full of mush just ate that up unquestioningly!
That my friends is flipping out in my book. One cannot deny that a form of indoctrination takes place in some institutions that recruit in modern orthodox environments.
The bottom line is the following. The year in Israel is an inspiring experience to most students. There is growth in their seriousness about the Torah and their commitment to it. But commitment isn’t the only thing that is going on in some places.
Human Reason versus Godly Mandates
A commenter by the name of Kylopod challenged me with the following:
If you argue that it isn't women's role to serve in rabbinic positions, you're putting yourself at odds not just with a few left-wing professors, but with the entire body of modern thinking on women's rights. Admit it, and then we can have a discussion.
Is this true? Let me reframe it as a question. Is it sexist to deny equal participation by women based on religious restrictions? I obviously completely disagree with that assessment. Religious restrictions override our own human understanding of the unfairness of sexism. And indeed sexism is unfair from the perspective of human reason.
First let me state that I am for full and equal participation by both sexes in all areas where innate physical differences do not matter. I am however opposed to lowering physical standards of certain professions such as police or the military so as to allow more women to participate. This is not sexist. This is common sense.
But when it comes to religious values, one cannot just apply an external value arbitrarily. One must first try and understand God’s ultimate will and follow it as precisely as one can.
God’s will is not subject to our conceptions of fairness. If it were, I would have a lot more questions of Him about what I think is fair… for example the classic question of Tzadik V’Ra Lo… why bad things happen to good people. There is nothing that seems fair about that if human reason had anything to say about it. And there are plenty of other examples that beg the question of fairness.
Of course fairness is eminently a Godly value. But it isn’t always human reason that defines it. When there is no Godly mandate, we must apply fairness in the best way we understand it. Which is where feminism comes in. In the realm of economic equity mankind can and should apply its own understanding of fairness. Feminism has shown us that women should be paid equally for equal work and that there should be no economic discrimination based on gender. A man and a woman who apply for the same job should be judged on their ability to perform and then be paid according to their ability, not their gender. Leaving out concepts like Yichud and Tznius, this is the right approach.
But in religious ritual feminist concepts of equality of the sexes is at best a secondary consideration. When there are directives by God in how to proceed, we proceed along those lines and not along the lines of our own human reason. When doctrines of feminism contradict Halacha, Halacha wins.
The problem arises in trying to figure out ways to accommodate both Halacha and feminism. The results are often a strange hybrid of Halacha and feminism that resemble male practices. The best example of this is the women’s Tefilah groups (WTGs). They are not vested with any of the Kedusha that attaches to a Minyan of men. Mitzvos that a Minyan of men generates can in no way be generated by a ‘Minyan’ of women. At best one can only achieve a psychological boost in such an arrangement.
I’m not saying there is no benefit at all to WTGs. I’m sure that many women feel a raised sense of spirituality in a group of ten women praying together and reading out a Torah as a form of study. It may actually increase their Kavana (concentration and intent) during prayer. But that is not based on anything more than the psychology of the moment. It is no different than a women’s Tehilim group in that sense. Or any other contrivance that one might feel uplifted by. For example, some people might feel more inspired in their Davening if they are an environment that shows the majesty of God’s creation. Such as the Swiss Alps.
In my view the spiritual boost of a WTG is a psychological one based on the fact that they see men do it and understand all the spirituality that a Minyan generates for them. But that is a real spirituality. It has a special level of Kedusha, holiness vested by the Torah itself. There is Barach Hu, Keduasha, Brachos on the Torah or Kaddish. Those things are forbidden except in the raised level of holiness vested in a male Minyan. That holiness is generated by the Torah thru Chazal whose edicts were themselves vested with a Torah status by virtue of the commandment of Lo Sasur. A ‘Minyan’ of ten women does not generate that Kedusha. And one cannot say any of those things in a ‘Minyan’ of women. Does that seem fair to me? No. But that is the Halacha. It doesn’t matter what I think.
The test of the purity of one’s motive for WTGs is the following. Would any woman have chosen to pray together with ten other women or to read out a Sefer Torah as a value if there were no such practice by men? My answer to that is: absolutely not. Even though there is benefit derived, the entirety of this practice is based on the practice of men.
If you argue that it isn't women's role to serve in rabbinic positions, you're putting yourself at odds not just with a few left-wing professors, but with the entire body of modern thinking on women's rights. Admit it, and then we can have a discussion.
Is this true? Let me reframe it as a question. Is it sexist to deny equal participation by women based on religious restrictions? I obviously completely disagree with that assessment. Religious restrictions override our own human understanding of the unfairness of sexism. And indeed sexism is unfair from the perspective of human reason.
First let me state that I am for full and equal participation by both sexes in all areas where innate physical differences do not matter. I am however opposed to lowering physical standards of certain professions such as police or the military so as to allow more women to participate. This is not sexist. This is common sense.
But when it comes to religious values, one cannot just apply an external value arbitrarily. One must first try and understand God’s ultimate will and follow it as precisely as one can.
God’s will is not subject to our conceptions of fairness. If it were, I would have a lot more questions of Him about what I think is fair… for example the classic question of Tzadik V’Ra Lo… why bad things happen to good people. There is nothing that seems fair about that if human reason had anything to say about it. And there are plenty of other examples that beg the question of fairness.
Of course fairness is eminently a Godly value. But it isn’t always human reason that defines it. When there is no Godly mandate, we must apply fairness in the best way we understand it. Which is where feminism comes in. In the realm of economic equity mankind can and should apply its own understanding of fairness. Feminism has shown us that women should be paid equally for equal work and that there should be no economic discrimination based on gender. A man and a woman who apply for the same job should be judged on their ability to perform and then be paid according to their ability, not their gender. Leaving out concepts like Yichud and Tznius, this is the right approach.
But in religious ritual feminist concepts of equality of the sexes is at best a secondary consideration. When there are directives by God in how to proceed, we proceed along those lines and not along the lines of our own human reason. When doctrines of feminism contradict Halacha, Halacha wins.
The problem arises in trying to figure out ways to accommodate both Halacha and feminism. The results are often a strange hybrid of Halacha and feminism that resemble male practices. The best example of this is the women’s Tefilah groups (WTGs). They are not vested with any of the Kedusha that attaches to a Minyan of men. Mitzvos that a Minyan of men generates can in no way be generated by a ‘Minyan’ of women. At best one can only achieve a psychological boost in such an arrangement.
I’m not saying there is no benefit at all to WTGs. I’m sure that many women feel a raised sense of spirituality in a group of ten women praying together and reading out a Torah as a form of study. It may actually increase their Kavana (concentration and intent) during prayer. But that is not based on anything more than the psychology of the moment. It is no different than a women’s Tehilim group in that sense. Or any other contrivance that one might feel uplifted by. For example, some people might feel more inspired in their Davening if they are an environment that shows the majesty of God’s creation. Such as the Swiss Alps.
In my view the spiritual boost of a WTG is a psychological one based on the fact that they see men do it and understand all the spirituality that a Minyan generates for them. But that is a real spirituality. It has a special level of Kedusha, holiness vested by the Torah itself. There is Barach Hu, Keduasha, Brachos on the Torah or Kaddish. Those things are forbidden except in the raised level of holiness vested in a male Minyan. That holiness is generated by the Torah thru Chazal whose edicts were themselves vested with a Torah status by virtue of the commandment of Lo Sasur. A ‘Minyan’ of ten women does not generate that Kedusha. And one cannot say any of those things in a ‘Minyan’ of women. Does that seem fair to me? No. But that is the Halacha. It doesn’t matter what I think.
The test of the purity of one’s motive for WTGs is the following. Would any woman have chosen to pray together with ten other women or to read out a Sefer Torah as a value if there were no such practice by men? My answer to that is: absolutely not. Even though there is benefit derived, the entirety of this practice is based on the practice of men.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
A Public Apology to Rabbi Shmuel Hain
In the course of my last post I made reference to Rabbi Shmuel Hain with the following comment:
So it is a little troubling to see Rabbi Hain so enthusiastically support the idea of expanding leadership roles for his graduates. He may be within the bounds of Halacha, but what fruits will ultimately be produced by pro-activity in this regard?
This comment was based on the following from the JTA article:
Two venerable Orthodox synagogues in Manhattan have hired graduates of an advanced women's Talmud program at Yeshiva University to posts that afford them many of the public responsibilities traditionally reserved for rabbis.
The article also contained the following quote by Rabbi Hain: "This is something whose time has just come,"
Rabbi Hain had an opportuntiy to read my article and responded to me in a private e-mail. He clarified what his actual position is. Indeed I based my comment on the tone of the article and incorrectly assumed that Rabbi Hain’s views were in concert with it. I therefore erroneously ascribed to him ‘guilt by association. That led to my ‘troubling’ concern.
I want to publicly apologize to him and with permission post his response:
As you know, I cannot control a story written by the JTA and who they choose to group us with. What I can do is tell you what we are doing:
We are training women to be educators and role models for the orthodox Jewish Community. We are not pushing any envelope or advocating that women be Poskot,Yoatzot, Rabbis, etc. Rather, we are providing women with the opportunity to learn and teach Torah She'Beal Peh on an advanced level.
Some of our recent graduates have indeed found their niche in paid Adult Education positions in Synagogoues. Many others teach on the day school, high school and seminary/college levels. All of these positions entail a leadership/role model component, and we are trying our best to equip these women for these roles. Moreover, our program is run under the auspices, and with the imprimatur, of Yeshiva University and RIETS.
The real question for your blog is: if we educate talented, smart, passionate women who want to teach adults, what should we encourage them to do? Volunteer to give shiurim in their spare time at shuls while they pursue a PHD or law degree and raise a family? Not go into learning in the first place?
What we are doing is acting as a facilitatator for schools/shuls and these talented, learned women to find each other for valuable educational positions. For that, I am proud.
Kol Tuv,
Shmuel Hain
So it is a little troubling to see Rabbi Hain so enthusiastically support the idea of expanding leadership roles for his graduates. He may be within the bounds of Halacha, but what fruits will ultimately be produced by pro-activity in this regard?
This comment was based on the following from the JTA article:
Two venerable Orthodox synagogues in Manhattan have hired graduates of an advanced women's Talmud program at Yeshiva University to posts that afford them many of the public responsibilities traditionally reserved for rabbis.
The article also contained the following quote by Rabbi Hain: "This is something whose time has just come,"
Rabbi Hain had an opportuntiy to read my article and responded to me in a private e-mail. He clarified what his actual position is. Indeed I based my comment on the tone of the article and incorrectly assumed that Rabbi Hain’s views were in concert with it. I therefore erroneously ascribed to him ‘guilt by association. That led to my ‘troubling’ concern.
I want to publicly apologize to him and with permission post his response:
As you know, I cannot control a story written by the JTA and who they choose to group us with. What I can do is tell you what we are doing:
We are training women to be educators and role models for the orthodox Jewish Community. We are not pushing any envelope or advocating that women be Poskot,Yoatzot, Rabbis, etc. Rather, we are providing women with the opportunity to learn and teach Torah She'Beal Peh on an advanced level.
Some of our recent graduates have indeed found their niche in paid Adult Education positions in Synagogoues. Many others teach on the day school, high school and seminary/college levels. All of these positions entail a leadership/role model component, and we are trying our best to equip these women for these roles. Moreover, our program is run under the auspices, and with the imprimatur, of Yeshiva University and RIETS.
The real question for your blog is: if we educate talented, smart, passionate women who want to teach adults, what should we encourage them to do? Volunteer to give shiurim in their spare time at shuls while they pursue a PHD or law degree and raise a family? Not go into learning in the first place?
What we are doing is acting as a facilitatator for schools/shuls and these talented, learned women to find each other for valuable educational positions. For that, I am proud.
Kol Tuv,
Shmuel Hain
Orthodoxy and Female Rabbis
I find myself in the uncomfortable position of seeming to argue with one of my own posts. But the truth is I am not which hopefully will become clear as one reads on.
There is a new role for women that seem to be taking hold in certain segments of Orthodox Jewry. It is in the form of a titled religious position of leadership in synagogues. It isn’t being called a rabbinic position. But for all intents and purposes that’s what it is.
The difference between an actual rabbi and what these women do is technical. These women do not have an official ordination. Nor do they undergo exactly the same training that does a rabbinical student. But they are highly educated in religious law. Far more than the average Orthodox male and in some cases more knowledgeable than some Yeshiva students.
Yeshiva University has long had a very liberal approach to teaching women Torah. The Rav held it was entirely Mutar to do so. Stern College for Women has a program headed by Rabbi Shmuel Hain called ‘The Graduate Program for Women in Advanced Talmudic Studies at Yeshiva University’. That program enables women to study Gemarah seriously.
If I understand correctly the Rav held there was nothing wrong that. He instead held that it is eminently right to teach women Gemarah. This is counter to the generally accepted approach by much of mainstream Orthodoxy. Gemarah programs for women are virtually non existent. The reason for this is based on a Mishnah (Sotah 20A) which considers teaching women Torah is tantemount to teaching them something it calls ‘Tiflus’. The most common understanding of that term is that it refers to some sort of illicit eroticism. And that would be immoral. I suppose the Gemarah says that because it is replete with sexual topics and by teaching this to women it can lead to improper behavior.
But what ever the reason, the great Halachic commenters have debated exactly what women can or cannot be taught so as to avoid ‘Tiflus’. And the consensus seems to be that Gemarah is off the table.
I’m not sure how the Rav deals with this issue but he endorsed women learning all forms of Torah as high service to God. What can be more important than learning about the word of God?
But no matter how much a woman knows, it is still unacceptable for her to become a Rav. Orthodox Shuls, no matter how left wing, do not have female rabbis. There are Halachic obstacles to that. Chief amog them is that women may not be part of a Minyan in a Shul. Their presence among men in a Shul invalidates the Minyan.
The logistics of a female rabbi under those conditions are difficult for me to imagine. Of course there are positions that do not violate the strict letter of the law available to women.. They may be teachers, advisors, and leaders of extra-synogogue activities and groups. And many mainstream groups offer such positions, usually on a volunteer basis.
But what is acceptable in most Orthodox Shuls is evolving into questionable positions in other Orthodox Shuls.
In the current psycho-social atmosphere that is America, total equality between the sexes has become the clarion call of enlightened man. Many modern Othodox men and women have been indoctrinated with this ongoing Zeitgeist. They are now trying to integrate the two worlds: Equality of the sexes and Torah. And as such tradional Judasim has seen some pretty unusual scenarios develop.
Halacha is always of primary importance to Orthodoxy, no matter how left wing. As such ways are sought to implement the tenets of one world without compromising the tenets of the other. That is how Women’s Tefilah Groups developed.
As I have stated in the past, I am opposed to them Hashkafically (though not Halachicly). Anything that is sourced in a philosophy that is alien to Torah is a bad idea. If I understand correctly my attitude is similar to that of the Rav’s. He was opposed on Hashkafic grounds but made exceptions in certain cases as long as Halacha was not violated.
Part of the reason I am opposed is the ‘slippery slope’ effect. Once you have motives that are based on a non Torah Hashkafa, the alien Hashkafa does not go away if it is only partially satisfied. It continues to exert pressure for more change and innovation. Halacha is never compromised, but it inches ever closer to it with every new innovation. Is this really what God prefers from us?
Several years ago if I remember correctly Rabbi Avi Weiss innovated something called the rabbinic intern program in his Shul. It now seems to have progressed further along the path of egalitarianism. Today his Shul has a paid position called the Madricha Ruchanit, or spiritual mentor. From an artilce in JTA:
(Sara) Hurwitz, the madricha ruchanit, or spiritual mentor, at the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale in the Bronx, already considers herself to function in much the same role as a rabbi. She delivers sermons on Shabbat, provides counseling and guidance in matters of Jewish law, and has co-officiated at a wedding with a male counterpart.
How far off is this innovation to the next step of giving her the title of rabbi? While ordaining women may be technically permitted (see Tosefos in Bava Kama 15A) is that really a wise course to pursue?
I have called for a ‘hands off’ policy by modern Orthodox institutions like NCYI with respect to these issues. And I feel the same way about Rabbi Weiss’s innovation. Whatever the source motivations are, his Shul members need it and we shouldn’t tamper with it.
But should that be a goal for Orthodoxy? I don’t think so. Judaism is not about equality of the sexes. It is about fulfilling the will of God. We must ask what is it that God truly wants of us. And we must seek honestly an answer to that question. The source for that answer should be the Torah and our Mesorah. Not feminism. So it is a little troubling to see Rabbi Hain so enthusiastically support the idea of expanding leadership roles for his graduates. He may be within the bounds of Halacha, but what fruits will utimately be produced by pro-activity in this regard?
For a slightly different perspective on this issue… one which I also agree with, see what Rav Hershel Shachter wrote.
There is a new role for women that seem to be taking hold in certain segments of Orthodox Jewry. It is in the form of a titled religious position of leadership in synagogues. It isn’t being called a rabbinic position. But for all intents and purposes that’s what it is.
The difference between an actual rabbi and what these women do is technical. These women do not have an official ordination. Nor do they undergo exactly the same training that does a rabbinical student. But they are highly educated in religious law. Far more than the average Orthodox male and in some cases more knowledgeable than some Yeshiva students.
Yeshiva University has long had a very liberal approach to teaching women Torah. The Rav held it was entirely Mutar to do so. Stern College for Women has a program headed by Rabbi Shmuel Hain called ‘The Graduate Program for Women in Advanced Talmudic Studies at Yeshiva University’. That program enables women to study Gemarah seriously.
If I understand correctly the Rav held there was nothing wrong that. He instead held that it is eminently right to teach women Gemarah. This is counter to the generally accepted approach by much of mainstream Orthodoxy. Gemarah programs for women are virtually non existent. The reason for this is based on a Mishnah (Sotah 20A) which considers teaching women Torah is tantemount to teaching them something it calls ‘Tiflus’. The most common understanding of that term is that it refers to some sort of illicit eroticism. And that would be immoral. I suppose the Gemarah says that because it is replete with sexual topics and by teaching this to women it can lead to improper behavior.
But what ever the reason, the great Halachic commenters have debated exactly what women can or cannot be taught so as to avoid ‘Tiflus’. And the consensus seems to be that Gemarah is off the table.
I’m not sure how the Rav deals with this issue but he endorsed women learning all forms of Torah as high service to God. What can be more important than learning about the word of God?
But no matter how much a woman knows, it is still unacceptable for her to become a Rav. Orthodox Shuls, no matter how left wing, do not have female rabbis. There are Halachic obstacles to that. Chief amog them is that women may not be part of a Minyan in a Shul. Their presence among men in a Shul invalidates the Minyan.
The logistics of a female rabbi under those conditions are difficult for me to imagine. Of course there are positions that do not violate the strict letter of the law available to women.. They may be teachers, advisors, and leaders of extra-synogogue activities and groups. And many mainstream groups offer such positions, usually on a volunteer basis.
But what is acceptable in most Orthodox Shuls is evolving into questionable positions in other Orthodox Shuls.
In the current psycho-social atmosphere that is America, total equality between the sexes has become the clarion call of enlightened man. Many modern Othodox men and women have been indoctrinated with this ongoing Zeitgeist. They are now trying to integrate the two worlds: Equality of the sexes and Torah. And as such tradional Judasim has seen some pretty unusual scenarios develop.
Halacha is always of primary importance to Orthodoxy, no matter how left wing. As such ways are sought to implement the tenets of one world without compromising the tenets of the other. That is how Women’s Tefilah Groups developed.
As I have stated in the past, I am opposed to them Hashkafically (though not Halachicly). Anything that is sourced in a philosophy that is alien to Torah is a bad idea. If I understand correctly my attitude is similar to that of the Rav’s. He was opposed on Hashkafic grounds but made exceptions in certain cases as long as Halacha was not violated.
Part of the reason I am opposed is the ‘slippery slope’ effect. Once you have motives that are based on a non Torah Hashkafa, the alien Hashkafa does not go away if it is only partially satisfied. It continues to exert pressure for more change and innovation. Halacha is never compromised, but it inches ever closer to it with every new innovation. Is this really what God prefers from us?
Several years ago if I remember correctly Rabbi Avi Weiss innovated something called the rabbinic intern program in his Shul. It now seems to have progressed further along the path of egalitarianism. Today his Shul has a paid position called the Madricha Ruchanit, or spiritual mentor. From an artilce in JTA:
(Sara) Hurwitz, the madricha ruchanit, or spiritual mentor, at the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale in the Bronx, already considers herself to function in much the same role as a rabbi. She delivers sermons on Shabbat, provides counseling and guidance in matters of Jewish law, and has co-officiated at a wedding with a male counterpart.
How far off is this innovation to the next step of giving her the title of rabbi? While ordaining women may be technically permitted (see Tosefos in Bava Kama 15A) is that really a wise course to pursue?
I have called for a ‘hands off’ policy by modern Orthodox institutions like NCYI with respect to these issues. And I feel the same way about Rabbi Weiss’s innovation. Whatever the source motivations are, his Shul members need it and we shouldn’t tamper with it.
But should that be a goal for Orthodoxy? I don’t think so. Judaism is not about equality of the sexes. It is about fulfilling the will of God. We must ask what is it that God truly wants of us. And we must seek honestly an answer to that question. The source for that answer should be the Torah and our Mesorah. Not feminism. So it is a little troubling to see Rabbi Hain so enthusiastically support the idea of expanding leadership roles for his graduates. He may be within the bounds of Halacha, but what fruits will utimately be produced by pro-activity in this regard?
For a slightly different perspective on this issue… one which I also agree with, see what Rav Hershel Shachter wrote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)