Failed Messiah and The Chofetz Chaim

I don’t know what happened to Shmarya Rosenberg that made him so bitter. But it must have been pretty bad.

Shmarya Rosenberg is the owner of Failed Messiah, a blog that focuses almost exclusively on the Torah world and does so in the most negative way. Not that he doesn’t often have a point about many of his issues.

It isn’t so much about what he writes. It’s about how he writes it. He sees things in the Torah world in the most negative possible terms. Most people who have commented on my blog about him characterize him as just about the worst Charedi basher there is

(Although many would say I’m gaining on him, I would beg to differ in that my criticisms are meant to be constructive - intended either for improvement or as a public protest of Chilul HaShem).

But Mr. Rosenberg's negativity is so strident; it really makes me wonder what happened!

According to a recent article in the Forward, he was a Lubavitcher Chasid for about 20 years of his life. And then he apparently became disillusioned. Now - not only has he left Lubavitch, he is no longer even religious – at least in an Orthodox sense.

Mr. Rosenberg says it was because of the publication of an unsigned draft of a letter from the Lubavitcher Rebbe which he had never received. That letter was a response to his asking the Rebbe to focus more on the plight of Ethiopean Jewry. The Rebbe told him he should focus more on Jews in his own community.

That, outraged him - and he left. But as bad as this sounds, I have to believe that there is more to the story. It is one thing to leave Lubavitch. Why drop observance of Mitzvos altogether after being observant for 20 years?!

It would be easy for people to characterize Shmarya as a Rasha – an evil person with a vendetta against religious Jews – especially Charedim and most specifically Lubavitch. But that would be unfair without knowing all of his circumstances.

The title of his blog - Failed Messiah - pretty much tells where he stands on Lubavitch. Indeed his biggest target is the Lubavitcher Rubashkin family. Aggriprocessors - the kosher meatpacking house is owned by them. His attacks are relentless and merciless.

But as I said - it still unfair to judge him. Those who do know nothing about his circumstances and why he feels so compelled to lash out. And in fairness his articles are not entirely unjustified.

One should remember that he was a Bal Teshuva. An idealistic Jewish activist who saw in Lubavitch - a sincerity that motivated him to become completely observant for 20 years. This is not the stuff of Reshaim. And is the case with all Jews, especially idealistic ones like Mr. Rosenberg, my hope is that he can be reached once again. This time by the right people.

Be that as it may, I cannot stand by and see him blame the Chofetz Chaim for the problem of child molestation in our time. Even if he does it is indirectly.

Some may find it odd that I am defending the Chofetz Chaim because they view my blog as violating his classic works on the laws of Lashon Hara – gossiping about others - all the time. I of course disagree that my blog does that – but that is beside the point. This is about standing up for the honor of one of the giants of the 20th century.

What Mr. Rosenberg says is that the Chofetz Chaim’s works on Lashon Hara are at least indirectly at fault for the way in which the Torah world covers up sex crimes. In a graphic article he describes what a Rebbe in a Yeshiva did to young boys for a period of 20 years and that it was covered up and allowed to continue. Why? Because of the Chofetz Chaim’s writings on that subject.

This cannot be even remotely true. It is a gross abuse of those laws that allowed that situation to continue. There is no way the Chofetz Chaim who is rightly described as saintly would have ever countenanced keeping such behavior swept under the rug at all - let alone for so long. Even at the expense even one victim, let alone so many. We are talking about a man who cared deeply in the most emotional way about the welfare of every single Jew. No one disputes that is part of his legacy. It is therefore wrong to link him in any way - even in the sense that his writings have been abused.

But the fact is that those who protected that Rebbe used the concept of Lashon Hara as part of their reason for not reporting his behavior. But the Chofetz Chaim did not invent the laws of Lashon Hara. They have been around at least since the days of Moses. The concept of Lashon Hara was improperly applied in that case and in all other cases where molesters were not reported to the police. It has nothing to do with the Chofetz Chaim.

Fortunately things are changing for the better now. There is more public awareness and those rabbis who in the past were so reticent to report cases of sex abuse to the police are now telling parents to do so – and saying that it is not Lashon Hara. The Orthodox community has a long way to go. I hope we have at least turned the corner on cover-ups and are taking steps in the right direction – even if they are baby steps. But please let us not drag down one of the most pre-eminent sages of the 20th century in the process while we are doing so.

Listening to Daas Torah

Perhaps the most important difference between Charedi and Centrist Hashkafos is the concept of Daas Torah, a term that was probably invented in the 20th century by Agudah, the flagship institution of American Charedism. Or at least Agudah types. If I recall correctly Rav Ahron Soloveichik said his parents never used that term. Nor did his grandparents.

Let us first define what Daas Torah means. Simply put it is a Charedi concept that Jews should seek the input of Gedolim not just on matters of Halacha but on Hashkafa and all important life matters. They are the possessors of the most Torah knowledge – the source of all truth - and hence are most likely to reflect the wisdom of the Torah on anything that matters.

Charedim will insist that this is not a new concept but an extension of an old one called Emunas Chachamim – believing in the wisdom of the our sages. But that is not how it is used today. Today it is used to refer to the views of a certain set of Gedolim. But saying Daas Torah is the same thing as Emunas Chachamim doesn’t make it so.

Just to be clear, there is no Orthodox doctrine or Rav - no matter how left wing - that will tell you that we need not listen to the Torah’s wisdom. Nor is there any Orthodox Rav that would deny the concept of Emunas Chachamim – the requirement to listen to the wisdom of our sages. That would be ridiculous. The Torah has something to say on every aspect of life. The only question is how we derive that knowledge.

Charedim would have you believe that one cannot trust their own mind in coming to major decisions in life. We must instead always rely on the others - who know much more than us. But that is an absurd proposition. God gave us minds and expects us to use them.

However there are caveats. We may only make those decisions based on Torah knowledge and intellectual honesty. And we must be certain that our conclusions are not sourced in our own personal biases or agendas. That is a pretty hard thing to do, if not impossible.

The way in which Centrists accomplish that is by learning substantial amounts of Torah and thinking in Torah terms. But that is not enough. We need to find unbiased corroboration to ascertain that we have not made the wrong decision because of a personal bias.

But the important thing is that - based on our own understanding - we use our minds and do not blindly follow one individual or sets of individuals. Even though they may know more Torah than we do - we are permitted in fact come to such decisions based on our own learning combined with corroboration of others whose Torah knowledge is greater than our own.

Those with Charedi Hashkafos do not see things that way. Doing so, they will say, is self serving and does not serve the Creator. But nothing could be further from the truth if one follows the above guidelines.

Charedi insistence that we only listen to a single individual or set of individuals is in essence forbidding us to think - to use our God given minds to make decisions. This assumes that our motivation is mostly based on personal bias or agendas. They see it as human nature - an evil that can only be subdued by abdicating one’s brain.

Think about that. Does God really expect us to check our brains - which He provided to us - at the door? I don’t think so. God does not expect us to be robots and not think. He did not make us a chosen people of robots. He gave us a brain. He gave us reason. And he gave us the ability to study and make decisions in the manner I described.

If one has been educated in Torah and has made a study of a specific issue it would be criminal in my view to abdicate one’s thought to that of another with whom he disagrees even if that individual is greater in Torah knowledge - provided his decisions are honest, Torah based, and are checked against the wisdom of others greater in Torah who agree.

The following comment made to me by a Charedi individual demonstrates the Charedi view of Centrist Hashkafa:

And thats the problem with your vision of our religion. You peice it together with whatever fancies you at the moment. You shop around for rabbanim (and) use them as a support for whatever YOU feel is right. You are in essence serving yourself, not Hashem.

This is the way Charedim think. The person who said this would say he is not Charedi. But if this is his view he is Charedi by definition, no matter how much he might protest to the contrary.

Those with Charedi Hashkafos will always view conclusions based on thoughtful processes about what the Torah says - as self serving. They see any rabbinic corroboration we find as shopping around. Our thoughtful analyses are seen by them as feelings. But they are not. It’s not about what we feel. It’s about what is right based on all the above criteria.

To me the most telling phrase of the need to rely on ‘Daas Torah’ is the Yiddish expression. Oif Meine Plaitzes?! – On my shoulders?! - when describing why one asks a Shaila about a major decision.

That says it all. They are so afraid that they abdicate their brains. They call it being Mevatel their Daas. They fear that they lack sufficient knowledge - and that they can never eliminate their own bias. And DaasTorah must always be to the same individual or set of individuals – to prove that they are not shopping.

So that’s the big difference. They think going to Daas Torah on every major decision means having greater Yiras Shamayim. But it’s not.

Barack Obama’s Kvitel

It takes real Chutzpa to do what this Yeshiva student did. After the Obama entourage left the Kotel Plaza, he snuck over to the Kotel and dug out Obama’s Kvitel selling or giving it to a news organization.

Last week during his public relations tour of the Middle East Barack Obama did what every other dignitary does when visiting the State of Israel. He put a Kvitel into the Kotel. For those who don’t know what a Kvitel is - it is a note usually given to a Chasidic Rebbe asking for blessings or specific prayers to God on an individual’s behalf. In this case the notes are written directly to God and tucked into the cracks of the Kotel. This is a custom that I believe originated with Chasidim and has gained wide acceptance by many non Chasidim, non religious Jews, and even non Jews.

Not that I think there is any value in writing a note to God and sticking it into the Kotel. In fact I am opposed to this practice since it tends to undermine it structurally when you have thousands of people stuffing things into its cracks. There are some Poskim - and if I understand correctly, Rav Ahron Soloveichik was among them - who feel that it is even forbidden to touch the wall or be anywhere near it. According to them people violate Halacha just by being there.

But even putting that aside, does anyone think that putting a piece of paper into a crack in a wall - no matter how holy that wall might be –is any better than direct prayer to God? It is said that the Shechina – God’s holy presence – has never left. But so what? Does God need all his requests in writing? … folded and placed into a wall?

Be that as it may - Barack Obama put a Kvitel into the Kotel. He took a sheet of stationary from the King David hotel and wrote a brief prayer asking God for forgiveness and guidance. I’m pretty sure this was more of a PR stunt than anything else. Last time I checked Kvittlach (plural for Kvitel) was not a Christian religious practice. But all politicians do it. Even the Pope did it. It makes for great TV.

When the Pope did it, it was immediately taken out and put into an Israeli Museum, if I recall correctly. I believe his message - written on official Papal stationery - was a wish for peace.

I doubt that the contents of Obama’s note was meant to be kept private. I actually heard a report on the radio saying that his campaign had always intended to make it public. And why wouldn’t they? It was a great note that showed Obama to be a man of religion, and deep humility.

The problem, however is not the motives of the Obama campaign. It is the audacity of a Yeshiva student to once again to do something that makes Orthodox Jews look bad.

I just don’t understand what motivates people like this. What do they think they accomplish? How do they think this looks to the world? Are they not concerned that Yeshiva students will be seen as petty thieves - or uncaring exploiters of opportunity? Would he have done that if the note were inserted by a Chasidic Rebbe, or any Frum Jew?

He called it a prank and apologized. Fine. I’m sure that very few Yeshiva students would have done something like this. They probably realize that there is Chilul HaShem involved.

But the story should not end there. We need to ask why he felt it is OK to do that to a non Jew and at the same time would never consider doing that to a religious Jew? Was it to embarrass Obama? To show that religious Jews don’t support him? What was he thinking?

And how many people feel this is OK even if they wouldn’t have dared to do it themselves? How many people smirked when they heard about it?

The Pervasiveness of Meshichism in Lubavitch

Last week I posted about a Lubavitch Songbook that was heavily Meshichst. Yet it was identified only as a Jewish Songbook. It seems that these songs are still in use as was indicated by a recently published bencher used at a Lubavitch wedding.

Rabbi Dr. David Berger has responded with a comment of his own. Dr. Berger is in the forefront of confronting this issue and has written a quitessentuial book reprinted in Hebrew and more recently in English in paperback form describing in great detail the Meshichsit problems inherent in Lubavitch - and lamenting the insufficient attention being paid to it by the larger Orthodox world.

Considering his important contribution to this issue I have decided to publish his comment as an independent post rather than having it get lost in a week old thread.

Dr. Berger’s words:

Note that the passage reading

"Redemption has arrived
That’s what the Rebbe prophesied
Moshiach has come
It’s already begun.

The Rebbe King Moshiach
Walking right into shul
Smiling at his kinderlach
Cheering on their song.

The world will gather passionately
To the Rebbe in 770
In the Bais Hamikdosh Hashlishi
We know it won’t be long.

Yet we believe in you with perfect faith…"

is quoted as part of a longer quotation in my Hebrew book (pp. 120-121) as well as in the new Introduction to the paperback of the English that appeared a few months ago (pp. xxxiii-xxxiv). I noted there that the poem appeared in a collection of "Rebbe Songs" in the Song Book distributed at a Shabbaton of Beis Rivkah High School at the Homowack Hotel in early 2002. That high school is of course quintessentially mainstream.

The desperate efforts of some of the commenters here to argue that these songs represent some peripheral position to be found in peripheral institutions are belied by this point. I am of course less than delighted that information that I provided in both books now appears as a great hiddush even to people who follow this issue carefully, but ultimately it is a good thing that the information has emerged.

Nothing will persuade diehard Lubavitch apologists, who are beyond reasoned discourse on this matter; still, other readers might come to recognize the pervasiveness of these beliefs

The Back of the Bus

Normalcy in the Torah world. That’s been one of my mantras for a long time. The only question is -what is normal? Who defines it?

If you are a Charedi living in Israel one way it is defined is by making certain that woman never sit anywhere on a bus except in the back. The reason is modesty. Apparently in certain segments of the Charedi world women are seen primarily as sex objects - Michsholim – obstacles that cause erotic thoughts in men. No matter where they are or how they dress.

To that extent - women are taught that they must do everything they can to avoid being seen in public. There are variations on this theme. But in its most Charedi incarnation it is pretty extreme. Examples abound. One of the most recent is an edict by a Chasidic Rebbe who forbids women who attend weddings from dressing up in their Shabbos finery in public. He suggested they wear some kind of over coat to hide their Shabbos clothing from a viewing public until they arrive at the women’s section of the wedding party.

Can anyone spell ‘Burkha’? I know one woman who can. She is now sitting in jail awaiting trial for abusing her children

A group of Charedi Rabbanim called the Rabbinical Transportation Committee has come out with a new edict. They have called on all women ‘to keep out of men’s eyesight whenever they travel by bus — by making their way to the back of the vehicle.’ This - in an effort to pressure the bus lines into giving them more segregated buses.

These two edicts from different sectors of Charedi world show a growing and abnormal trend in Judaism.

It didn’t start yesterday. A couple of years ago a Beis Din of Tznius was established in Charedi enclaves in Jerusalem in order to approve which kinds of clothing were modest enough by Charedi standards. They also give Hechshrim – rabbinic approval to various stores and encourage women to shop only at those stores.

And then there are all those Charedi delinquents who take matters into their own hands and commit violent acts in the name of those standards. Those criminals are of course condemned by their leaders. But their excuse for the violence comes from years of indoctrination about their extreme modesty standards being the only acceptable ones. This is normal for them.

But is there an objective standard for normalcy in Judaism? How far does the right of a community go in imposing their standards on the public?

In my view those rights stop at another persons door. No community has the right to impose their standards on others if they do not violate Halacha.

Some will argue that in certain communities those extreme standards are Halacha for them and loosening standards for others means violations of Halacha for them.

But I beg to differ. If one wants to impose their standards in a closed community like Kiryas Joel, they may have a right to do that. But they have absolutely no right to impose that standard across the board in an entire country even as a means of protest. By telling all women to go to the back of the bus they are in effect sending a message that this is normal behavior – that they are seen as nothing more than sex objects by even the most religious of men.

It is demeaning to a normal young woman to send her this kind of message. This is not how a moral and civilized society acts. Modestly dressed young seminary women are not automatically seen as sex objects. Edicts like this and the ones mentioned above are nothing more than a not so subtle attempt to Talibanize Judaism.

I believe that instilling such attitudes in young seminary women can easily cause relationship problems for them later on when they start dating. It will be terribly awkward for a young woman to see her date and think that when he looks at her - he sees only a sex object.

So - I take issue with Mrs. Shira Leibowitz. She says:

“I see Haredi women who sit at the back as being the Israeli Rosa Parks,” said writer Shira Leibowitz Schmidt, one of the leading proponents of segregation. “We see it as a stand against the deterioration of standards in the public arena, and view the chance to sit at the back without men gazing at us as a form of empowerment.”

This is not a stand against the deterioration of standards in the public arena. As I said, this is the Talibanization of Judasim.

I agree that moral standards have been deteriorating in western cultures, and that a stand should be taken to counter that. But this isn’t it. Moving young modestly dressed American seminary students to the back of the bus is not the way to do it. What it does instead is turn normalcy on its head!

That said - in a democracy people have the right to petition their government to allow segregated buses for their own community - provided that it does not inconvenience the public at large. But not via a call to Talibanization.

So how does one define normalcy in the Torah world? I’m not sure. But at least I can define abnormalcy. It is following extremist edicts like these. In my view they ought to be totally ignored and I urge parents who visit a daughter attending seminary in Israel to take a bus ride together!

Can Charedim Save Israel?

It’s interesting to see how Jonathan Rosenblum seeks to rectify a problem that has emerged in general society in the State of Israel. He has written on similar themes in the past but this time it was kind of a reverse take. Instead of talking about Charedim surviving in Israel he talks about secular Israel surviving through Charedim.

Charedim - he says - need to be proactively involved in with their fellow secular citizens. In the process of making that case he espouses the same thing he has espoused in other themes – primarily the modification in attitudes toward secular Jews. And he points to lack of leadership as one reason for that not happening. Interestingly he gives only one example of such a leader in the past: Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch.

He does not bring Rabbi Hirsch in the context of Torah Im Derech Eretz of which he is personally an advocate. He is speaking in terms the kind of leadership that has a vision for an entire community. A Kehila – as it were. This is how I read Jonathan’s words and I agree.

I think one reason he brought no other names as an example is simply that there has been no one of Rav Hirsch’s caliber of leadership since the days of Rav Hirsch himself. No one has had the vision and the capacity of leadership that he had. That seems to be what Jonathan is saying and that’s quite a statement. It is almost an admission that there is no real Klal leadership in Israel today - and there hasn’t been since the days of Rav Hirsch.

I’m sure that Jonathan would vehemently deny he meant that. He would most certainly say that he was talking about a specific context and not in any way meant to slight our Gedolim. I’m sure that’s true.

But in fact his entire article testifies to exactly the lack of leadership that Charedim need to effect the required change. He is critical of the fact that so many Charedim are of the isolationist type who view their role in Israel as an oppressed minority with no influence on general society.

Although that may have been true in the past, it is by no means true today. But that false self perception is the reason that certain Charedim have no compunction about burning garbage cans, stoning cars, or assaulting women who sit in the front of the bus. Jonathan’s words not mine. These people do not see themselves as part of a society at all. They therefore do not consider the consequences of their actions or the impact it has on the secular Israeli. They don’t care. To use a Yeshivishe phrase - they aren’t Gores them.

Jonathan correctly points out that secular Israel is ripe for an attitude adjustment about religion. This has in essence been acknowledged many secular commentators in the Israeli media - who point to the lack of Jewish identity by the inreasing number of Israelis who see Israel in a post Zionist state. There has been a deterioration of a national will which he says can be traced to a lack of Jewish religious identity. Many secular Jews are searching for a national identity now.

The Charedi world - says Jonathan - is in the best position to do so. They are the ones pointed to even by secular writers as the bearers of tradition. They have a concrete identity as Jews that the secular world no longer has and is hungry to get.

The Charedi world isn’t totally isolationist. There are areas of positive Charedi contributions to the secular world. There are cable TV programs that offer Shiurim, outreach organizations, and service organizations, such as Yad Sarah that are widely used by secular Israelis. But on the whole there is no sense of personal responsibility to their fellow secular Jews. This is where he feels that a leader like Rav Hirsch would be effective.

There is one very large obstacle to influencing secular society that he mentions -the perception of Charedim as beggars.

In a great analogy, Jonathan points to the fact that no one would ever take advice from a Meshulach. People who knock on your door asking for handouts - no matter how wise they might appear - are not going to be asked for advice for anything.

The Charedi world is now looked upon that way. The secular Israeli sees the Charedi world with their hands constantly stretched out begging for charity. This is not a group whose wisdom will be sought. Or that can give them a national identity.

Though Jonathan says that things are changing - and more Charedim are entering the workforce that ever before, it is happening at an evolutionary pace not a revolutionary one. Evolutionary change is hardly ever noticed.

But all is not lost. Attention is now being paid to Charedim as those who have a clear Jewish identity - an identity that is lacking in the secular Jewish world now. Add to that the fact that there has been so much corruption in government, declining educational results, and loss of communal values and there has never been a time riper.

Now is the time for the Charedi world to do some soul searching. And come up with leadership – and a plan to be more involved in influencing their secular brethren.

It would also help a lot if Charedi leadership would call off the war it has declared on Religious Zionists and for Religious Zionists to understand today’s reality of Zionism even in its religious form - and adjust their views accordingly. Charedim could use their help. Just think of the possibilities of the Torah world joining forces and working together trying to create a ‘new world order’ in Israel. It boggles the mind.

Differences between Charedism and Modern Orthodoxy

What exactly does it mean to be Charedi? That may be as difficult to define as is what it means to be Modern Orthodox. Just as there are many divisions in Modern Orthodoxy so to are there in Charedism. But there are certain features that are distinctive to each.

As I often say, there is far more that unites us than divides us. But people tend to focus on divisions. Sometimes vehemently so. But many of those divisions are more about attitudes than they are about actual practices.

One would be hard pressed to see a difference between a right wing modern Orthodox Jew and a moderate Charedi Jew. They may both attend the same shul send their children to the same Yeshivos, work in similar fields and learn in the same Batei Midrashim, sometimes together B’Chavrusa. And they socialize quite nicely together.

But even though they lead the same lifestyles their attitudes may be entirely different. Attitudes about secular studies and participation with the culture are the two such areas. Even while participating in the culture, the Charedi Jew will see such activities in a more negative light while the Modern Ortbodox Jew will see them in a more positive light.

Differences in the extremes of Modern Orthodxy and Charedim are of course much more pronounced and the cause of much misunderstanding and - on occasion - even hatred between the two. Looking at the extremes of the other as definitional is an impediment of great significance that needs to be addressed. But that is not the subject of this essay.

It is equally important to focus on one of the more essential misunderstandings overall between the two and not just on the extremes - the question of the fallibility of Chazal - our sages of blessed memory.

Modern Orthodoxy has often been accused of believing that Chazal were fallible - that they made mistakes. They were human beings subject to the spirit of their time and that influenced how they created rabbinic law which we must follow.

This is simply not true. Modern Orthodoxy does not believe that. Faulting Chazal in this way is tantamount to heresy! Where we differ is in matters of science. Charedim believe that Chazal were infallible there too. Or more precisely scientific statements recorded in the Gemarah were passed on to them via Mesorah – just as were Halachic statements.

Contradictions between scientific statements in the Gemarah and the scientific knowledge we have today is simply thought of as either a misunderstanding of what Chazal said. Or those statements were meant as allegory. Or were statements about Kabalah - not science as they seem to be at first blush.

There are many Modern Orthodox Jews who believe that too. But there are many more who will rely on the various Rishonim who say that in matters of science Chazal were simply as scientifically knowledgeable as their era allowed. They were conversant with the best science of their day. That is what they recorded in the Gemarah. In our day, since we have better and more precise ways of studying nature, we have better knowledge of it.

This view - although promoted by accepted Rishonim - has recently been rejected by Charedi Poskim who say it is heretical to believe that in our day. Modern Orthodoxy does not consider that to be heretical at all. It is only the Halacha that is Masoretic and there fore infallible. Not the science.

It should be noted that Rav Ahron Soloveichik is of the view that Chazal were infallible in matters of science too. He takes the same view as do the Charedi Poskim. Rav Ahron often explained difficult passages in the Gemarah in the modern scientific terms of our day. For example, he explains the term ‘Mazikin’ in the Gemarah - a term usually translated as demons - as really referring to bacteria and uses innovative methods to come to that conclusion. But… he agreed that they made no error even in science. Saying so - he said - is repugnant.

This is a legitimate difference. My Rebbe, Rav Ahron, not withstanding - many if not most educated Modern Orthodox Jews would disagree with him relying on Rishonim who said the same thing.

But in another matter there is no disagreement. And that needs to be clearly pointed out.

In our day there have been many challenges to Chazal’s methodology by disciplines developed over time – such as critical or literary analyses of the text of the Torah. Using these techniques many have raised difficult theological questions. Some of these questions have caused people to question the very basis of their belief.

The question must be asked, in light of these new methods of Torah study, is there any legitimacy to them? Just because we have our own traditional ways of studying Torah does that mean we reject out of hand ‘outside’ methods of Torah study?

This question was answered quite brilliantly by Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik -the Rav. It can be found in yet another brilliant essay by Chana in her blog, The Curious Jew. The answer might surprise people. That’s because the Rav rejects out of hand any study methods outside of the traditional ones.

The words of the Rav are very strong:

Kabalas ol malchus shamayim -- which is an identical act with talmud torah -- requires of us to revere and to love and to admire the words of the chachmei hamesorah, be they tannaim, be they amoraim, be they rishonim. This is our prime duty. They are the final authorities, and an irresponsible statement about chazal borders on, I don't like to use the word but according to Maimonides, the heretic.

And

Why did he add v'hamach'chish magideha --whoever denies the authority of the scholars, the chachmei hamesorah? Apparently the Rambam says that under the category of kofrim batorah [16]are classified not only those who deny for instance that nisuch hamayim[17] or avodas beis hamikdash [18] is required, or those who deny the torah she b'al peh -- there is no doubt about it in those cases.

But moreover, even those who admit the truthfulness of the torah she b'al peh but who are critical of chachmei chazal as personalities, who find fault with chachmei chazal, fault in their character, their behavior, or their conduct, who say that chachmei chazal were prejudiced, which actually has no impact upon the halachah; nevertheless, he is to be considered as a kofer.

This is the correct attitude. Why this is the case can be found in Chana’s beautiful and well presented essay. It is a must read.

Obama, McCain, and Israel

The more I see him the more I like him. But I still cannot vote for him. I like him because he is so young yet so polished. He exudes confidence. His image is unlike anything we’ve seen since the days of John F. Kennedy. He is the closest thing to JFK since… well… JFK. The smile, the youthful family, the tall good looks, the intelligence… It’s all there. Add to that that he will be the first black President - and it’s just about a foregone conclusion. The latest poll seems to indicate that too.

There is an excitement about him I haven’t seen since JFK's time. It’s magical. Contrast that with the lackluster campaign of John McCain. That’s why I think the man from Chicago with the funny name -Barack Obama - is going to be the next President of the United States.

How can he not be with the media fawning all over him? They treat him as though he was already President. And so does just about everyone else - including most foreign leaders. Media attention to presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain can be summed up in two words: John who…?!

In order not to be accused of the obvious bias they have, the media has begrudgingly given McCain some attention albeit not as fawning. Yesterday in counterpoint to the media circus surrounding Obama, McCain was asked how his views about Israel differed from those of Obama. He had a very brief answer that spoke to his underlying attitude. ‘I will never allow a second holocaust to take place.’

I will say this about Obama. I do not think he is as bad for Israel as I originally feared. Nor do I believe that people in his life who have spoken hateful rhetoric against the State of Israel or that have a nefarious past have influenced him in any significant way. Nor will his past relationships with them influence the potential voter.

Yesterday, Barack Obama was in Israel and met with many Israeli leaders. And he was treated practically like royalty. In the TV news coverage I saw, Obama said all the right things. He hit all the right notes in all the right places.

For example in Sederot - the city near Gaza that Hamas has terrorized with daily rocket fire since Israel withdrew - Obama said that if he lived in Sederot and his daughter’s bedrooms were in danger of being hit with a deadly rocket he would do what ever it took to stop it.

Many similar statements were made along those lines in many different locations. He was given the ‘royal’ helicopter tour given to all national leaders when they visit Israel to show how vulnerable their narrow borders are to attack from their hostile neighbors. All the famous Israeli politicians met with him. Olmert, Barak, Livni, Peres, Netanayahu - they were all there and were all ‘back-slapping’ friendly.

But what I also saw was body language. Sometimes that will tell you more than words. During all his expressions of support, his face was dour. He sounded pro forma - almost formulaic in his statements. Never any passion. Never a smile. Just an expressionless face mouthing the same platitudes any politician running for office would make when courting the Jewish vote.

If I could judge him by his words alone I could almost see myself voting for him against the lackluster John McCain. They have said virtually the same things. But at this point in time they are only words.

I am now fairly convinced that Obama will not put the kind of pressure on Israel to make concessions as I first thought. But I am equally convinced that his commitment is not of the same type as John McCain’s. McCain comes across - at least to me – as more emotionally involved in Israel’s welfare.

Anyone who sees Israel’s survival in terms of the holocaust has a commitment that transcends the cold calculations of geopolitics - or even the politics of one’s own country. McCain’s support is more from the gut. It is instinctive. Obama’s is more rational.He sees first what is best for his own country. Which is I suppose the most important thing for a President to consider.

I don’t think John McCain is any less devoted to the welfare of his own country. If he were, he shouldn’t be President. Of course he would put America’s welfare first. But when it comes to Israel I am going to vote for the man who will be less likely to sacrifice Israel’s needs, when push comes to shove. I want a man that sees Iran as a mortal threat to Israel and will do whatever it takes to prevent that 2nd holocaust. Not that Obama wouldn’t do the same thing. But his calculations would be different.

Most Jews are not single issue voters. Most of us will vote the same way our Christian neighbors will – on issues that affect the United States such as jobs, the economy, or the environment. Or they will vote their values. Israel is a factor too but that is not necessarily on the top of the typical Jewish-American voter’s mind - anymore that Ireland is on top of the typical Irish-American voter’s mind.

But to me the Jewish people come first. Israel - the land deeded to us in the Torah by God - is where they live now in large and growing numbers. And they are constantly being threatened by Islamists like Iran’s Ahmadinejad - and Jihadist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. The holocaust is deeply burned into my mind. As it seems to be evidently burned into the mind of John McCain.

This is the man I want for President.

Concealing Information about a Child Molester

Back on November of last year I wrote a post expressing my disgust that anyone would try and help alleged child molester Avreimal Mondrowitz avoid extradition and prosecution. Therein I quoted an excerpt from a JTA news article which referenced Michael Lesher - the attorney for six of Mondrowitz’s victims. That post generated 82 comments.

One of them was an attack against Mr. Lesher. He came across those comments and responded in a comment of his own today. Since he is directly involved with the case I feel that it is an important comment that should not be buried in the comment section of a post from last November. So I present it here in its entirety.

Michael Lasher’s words:

I just came across the slanderous post by "Chareidi" accusing me, of all people, of concealing information relevant to Avrohom Mondrowitz's flight from justice.

I think my record as a writer and activist, and as a pro bono attorney for six of Mondrowitz's victims, speaks for itself. I am proud to say that my efforts contributed to Mondrowitz's arrest in November 2007.

The claim that I concealed information is patently false. The names of the members of Charles Hynes former Jewish Advisory Council are a matter of record. It has already been reported that two of them -- Shea Hecht and Herbert Bomzer (both Orthodox rabbis) -- said that Brooklyn's Orthodox Jewish community did not want Mondrowitz prosecuted. I simply confirmed to JTA that I am well aware of that story.

Incidentally, Bomzer said almost the same thing publicly -- once to the Forward and once on ABC's Nightline (October 11, 2006).

I know nothing about how Mondrowitz was helped out of Brooklyn. It is interesting that the poster seems to know more than is contained in all the police reports -- e.g., that Mondrowitz drove to Canada before flying to Israel. Perhaps he knows something about the Mondrowitz coverup he should be sharing with the rest of us.

His claim that Mondrowitz was "reviled" before he left Brooklyn (in 1984, by the way, not the late 70s, as the poster insists) is demonstrably false. I challenge him to support it; the contrary claim can be easily documented.

The Official Jewish Songbook?

I recently had a phone conversation with a Lubavitcher Shaliach. It was quite a surprising one. It turns out that he is a devoted reader of this blog. What is even more surprising is that he not only believes that I am not a Lubavitch basher, he actually agrees with most of what I write including my essays about Lubavitch issues.

I am gratified to know that there are at least a few Lubavitchers that understand my motives and my views and agree with them. This Shaliach gave me Chizuk. More power to him and others like him. They are Gibborim – great people.

Unfortunaltley, the power is not yet theirs. This Shaliach, who shall remain anonymous for obvious reasons, has confirmed that the Meshichist problems are much larger than Lubavitchers are willing to admit – certainly in public. Especially in Israel where it is rampant.

Today I came across something called ‘The Official Jewish Songbook’. It is a work produced for Tzivos Hashem and is available online in pdf.

Tzivos HaShem is translated as the army of God. It is the name Lubavitch gives to various parts of their youth movement. Unless this book is a forgery or has been replaced since its initial publication in 1998, I have to assume this is what young people in Lubavitch are officially being fed.

Be that as it may, I was directed to a song via an e-mail from a friend. This song was printed in the back of a Lubavitcher Bencher that was published in 2006. It from this songbook. When I say that Lubavitch is obsessed with the Rebbe I mean lines like the following from a section entitled Rebbe Songs (pp 54-78):

Oy! But Rebbe I promise
Your holy words I shall uphold.
Nothing will stop me
From doing that which you have told.
Rebbe I'm your soldier
To you my life I dedicate.

So instead of God’s will - it is the Rebbe’s will. Instead of inculcating their children to serve God, they are taught to dedicate their lives to a deceased Rebbe. It is to the Rebbe that they seem to Daven to.

I’m sure that the response by many Lubavitchers who read this will be an angry one - claiming that I misunderstand or purposely distort the meaning of those words. I’m sure they will also say that these words are designed to give a Lubavitcher better focus on God by concentrating on the Rebbe.

But, I would retort that such an interpretation is a real stretch. Does one need an intermediary in order to better focus attention on God? Is there any other Chasidus that would pen the words contained in this song? Is there any other Orthodox group that would publish such a song in the back of a bencher about even the greatest Gadol or Chasidic Rebbe?

Here is more from page 63 from a song called ‘Redemption is Alive’:

Redemption has arrived
That’s what the Rebbe prophesied
Moshiach has come
It’s already begun.

The Rebbe King Moshiach
Walking right into shul
Smiling at his kinderlach
Cheering on their song.

The world will gather passionately
To the Rebbe in 770
In the Bais Hamikdosh Hashlishi
We know it won’t be long.

Yet we believe in you with perfect faith…

This song refers to the building at their current location in Brooklyn as the Beis HaMikdash. And the last line is the classic line from the Rambam’s 13 principles about the believing with perfect faith in the coming of Moshiach - as the Rebbe. Ani Maamin B’Emunah Shelaima…

The underlying theme of this songbook is that the Rebbe is at the very least - Moshiach.

I’m not sure what to think here. Is this indeed the official songbook? Are these songs sung at their youth gatherings – like summer camps? I hope not. I would love to hear an official denial from Lubavitch leaders. I would love someone there to say that this book is an outdated fraud from 1998. But at least one publisher doesn’t think it’s a fraud and deemed fit to publish a song from it in a currently distributed Bencher.

This means that there is a market. There is enough demand to make it an economically viable product. And there was at least one wedding where it was recently distributed.

As far as I know there has not a word of protest by anyone. - No effort to remove or ban its publication.

If Lubavitch ever wants to be taken seriously by the rest of the Torah world they need to counter this type of thing. Yes, they are very large and growing movement. Bigger than ever. They will say they don’t need our approval. But they are wrong. If they lose their validity then size will not matter. Because if it did - then we would all be Christians.

Lubavitch leadership has to do something radical to counter this kind of thing. They keep popping up and every time they do – as it did at a recent Lubavitch wedding - it does more damage to their great cause. And that gives me great sorrow.

Who Is a Jew?

As of now, the conversion situation remains unresolved. In what I believe to be a seminal moment in Jewish history, a Rosh Yeshiva, Talmid Chacham and a Yiras Shamyim was stripped of all respect and dignity by a Charedized Israeli Rabbinate.

This has outraged many people including distinguished Roshei Yeshiva like Rav Aaron Lichtenstein. All because he was trying to do what he believed to be the right thing in a matter crucial to the survival of Israel and the Jewish people.

Rabbi Avraham Sherman - who is a judge on the Israeli Chief Rabbinate - has ruled countless numbers of sincere conversions invalid. As a result these sincere converts have undergone untold suffering and emotional distress. And in that same moment the 75 year old Rosh HaYeshiva of Yeshivat Or Etzion - and head of Bnei Akiva and the Hesder Yeshivos - was villified.

Rabbi Chaim Druckman has been declared by Rabbi Sherman to be unfit as a Judge. All of his conversions since 1999 have been declared invalid.

Many people have come to the defense of Rabbi Sherman, claiming that his Halachic reasoning is sound. They say he raised very serious charges about Rabbi Druckman’s conversions. I have no quarrel with his views. What troubles me is the villification of a man without giving him his day in court. And the inability to be Dan L’Kaf Zechus allowing Rav Druckman’s reputation to remain intact and his past conversions to stand.

Many have countered that he was given an opportunity to defend himself but that he declined. They cite that as an indication of guilt - or lack of defense. I see it as Rabbi Druckman attempting to avoid a kangaroo court that has been stuffed with Charedi Rabbis.

Charedi supporters of Rabbi Sherman claim this ruling was made to preserve the Halachic purity of how a Jew is defined. I’m sure that’s true. But I am unconvinced that this is the sole reason. And it certainly does not mean they can so egregiously attack another Talmid Chacham who has a sound Halachic basis for what he did.

Here is a good explanation of it. Although I am not supportive of the individual who makes the argument - I find his reasoning in this instance to be a rational counter to Rabbi Sherman's ruling based on classic and accepted sources. It is on that basis that I pubilsh it. He begins by citing the key source of Rabbi Sherman’s ruling:

Rabbi Yitzhak Schmelkes penned a revolutionary responsum in 1876: “A person who converts and accepts the yoke of the mitzvot but does not intend in his heart to observe them – God desires the heart, and he is not a convert”. This approach has no precedent in 2,000 years of halakhic discussions about conversion. Indeed, Rabbi Schmelkes was aware that his ruling contradicts the well-known halachic principal that “devarim shebalev einam devarim” (things of the heart are not things).

The second source for the haredi position is a passage in Bekhorot 30b: “Our Sages taught: …if an idol worshipper came to accept (lekabel) the Torah except for one thing, we do not accept him. R. Yossi b”r Yehudah says: even if the exception be one of the minutiae of the Scribes (i.e. the Sages)”. The major medieval codes of Jewish law such as Maimonides, the Tur and the Shulhan Arukh ignored this passage. It was revived by 19th-20th century rabbis who wanted to reject most converts.

Thus, for example, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein repeatedly states in his response that a convert must accept all of the mitzvot: “… and without accepting mitzvot, even one detail, behold it is written in Bekhorot 30 that we do not accept him…”

The normative position, however, is found in another passage in the Talmud – Yevamot 47a-b. If a person comes to convert, you ask him if he knows that the Jewish people is “persecuted and oppressed. If he replies ‘I know and yet am unworthy’ he is accepted forthwith, and is given instruction in some of the minor and some of the major commandments - He is also told of the punishment for the transgression of the commandments... And… he is informed of the reward granted for their fulfillment… He is not, however, to be persuaded or dissuaded too much. Kibel (if he accepted/consented), he is circumcised forthwith… (Afterwards, when he is immersed) two learned men must stand by his side and instruct him in some of the minor commandments and in some of the major ones. When he comes up after his immersion, he is deemed to be an Israelite in all respects…”

This baraita, from the second century or earlier, was quoted or paraphrased by Maimonides, the Tur and the Shulhan Arukh.

The key phrase is “kibel” – if he accepted/consented. This obviously does not refer to acceptance of all the mitzvot because he has only been instructed in some of the minor and some of the major mitzvot! So what does it mean?

Rabbi Ouziel (1880-1953), first Sephardic Chief Rabbi of the State of Israel, explained as follows: “It is clear from (Yevamot 47a-b) that we do not demand of him to observe the mitzvot and it is also not necessary that the Bet Din know that he will observe them, for if not, no converts will be accepted in Israel, for who will guarantee that this gentile will be loyal to all the mitzvot in the Torah! Rather, they instruct him in some of the mitzvot so that if he wants he should go away and so that he cannot say later ‘if I had known I would not have converted’. And this is before the fact, but after the fact - if they did not instruct him, it is not indispensable… (It) is permissible and a mitzvah to accept converts even though we know that they will not observe all the mitzvot because in the end they will observe them...”

Other prominent Orthodox rabbis who have taken lenient approaches towards kabbalat mitzvot include Chief Rabbi Unterman and Rabbis Kluger, Mashash, Moshe Hacohen, Berkowitz and Angel.

Thus the entire “house of cards” built by Rabbi Sherman rests on just one card: that all poskim agree that all converts must accept all mitzvot. Indeed, this is the position of most Ashkenazic Haredi rabbis since the year 1876. But it is not normative Jewish law. Normative Jewish law for 2,000 years has followed Yevamot that a convert accepts the halakhic system and its rewards and punishments, not all of the mitzvot which he has yet to learn.

One can disagree. One can say that they want to accept a higher standard for the future. But to disqualify those who have already been converted using the aforementioned reasoning and besmirching a Zaken and Talmid Chacham - a man who has devoted his life to Klal Yisroel - is a Chilul HaShem.

The Jewish Bloggers Conference

I wish I could go. I’d love to meet some of my fellow bloggers - especially the anonymous ones.

But I can’t.

Many readers may notice the banner ad that appears above my posts. It is hosted by WebAds. They and Nefesh B’Nefesh, an Alyiah organization, are sponsoring a Jewish bloggers conference in Jerusalem on August 20th that will feature many prominent bloggers.

I am honored to say that early on I too was invited to attend - with the enticement of flight expenses paid. But because of a scheduling conflict I had to turn it down. Too bad. It sounds really exciting. Wish I could be there. We bloggers can learn a lot about each other - and from each other.

And I would have loved to spend a trip with a Nefesh B’Nefesh family. What a post that would have made! Oh well… maybe next time. For those who can attend… Lucky you!

Doing the Right Thing

June 26, 2006. That’s the day Gilad Shalit was taken captive by the Islamic terrorist group Hamas. He was 19 years old, serving his country, and protecting our people.

Hamas is in my view the front line of terror in the state of Israel. They represent the worst in Islam. They consider giving up one’s life in a suicide bombing to be a religious obligation - the highest level of holiness a Muslim can achieve that will realize for him the ultimate reward in the world to come. They also do not believe in compromise. And it is they and others like them who are driving events in the Middle East. Until they are wiped out, there is no hope for a peaceful solution between Arabs and Jews in Israel. There is no talking to them.

This is why dealing with them at any level is wrong. It is against the interests of the State and the welfare of its people. The recent deal with another Islamic terrorist group – Hezbollah - is correctly seen as ultimately bringing more kidnappings and deaths. Any victory they achieve no matter how small will be trumpeted as a major victory of Islam over Israel.

This is how Islamic funementlists like Hezbollah view it. Israel gave them several prisoners in return for the dead bodies of two Israeli soldiers that they murdered and held onto for 2 years. One of those Israel released to freedom whom they welcomed as a national hero – a knight in shining armor – was Samir Kuntar, a brutal Lebanese terrorist responsible for the kidnapping of an Israeli family and murder of three people – including a 31 year old father and his four year old daughter!

There is very little in recent memory that has caused my stomach to turn more than this event. And yet, I understand why it had to be done. It is all too easy for me to be disgusted at the expense of parents and family members of Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser the two soldiers whose bodies were exchanged for him and the others.

We now have word that another deal may be in the works. This time for Gilad Shalit. It is believed that he is still alive. The deal it seems is one for 300 - 300 Islamic terrorists among them Marwan Barghouti. He was convicted of five counts of murder in May of 2004.

My advice to Israel: Do the deal.

Again. It turns my stomach. I cannot fathom the pain the relatives of the victims who no doubt still mourn the loss of their loved ones at the hands of Barghouti and the others. Freeing 300 criminals - one of them a mass murder like Barghouti - will no doubt be seen by Hamas as a victory, too. A victory by a group that ought to be treated like Amalek.

And yet there is one more life at stake here – that of Gilad Shalit. By all counts he is still alive and healthy. I can think of no more important matter right now that to gain his freedom. He deserves no less. The government of Israel thinks so too. No one knows better the danger to the nation of granting yet another perceived victory to our mortal enemies than Israel’s political leaders do. Very few leaders have been more villified than the current Prime Minister. Perhaps with justification.

No doubt this exchange will add to that. But Prime Minister Olmert will do the right thing and that is to get Gilad Shalit back. In one piece. He tried doing it with military might and failed. I do not criticize him for trying. Only for failing. No matter who was most directly responsible for the botched war in Lebanon two years ago - the buck stops with him. But now he will succeed without firing a shot - but at great cost.

I am not a big fan of reciting Psalms - saying Tehilim. But I say it every day for Gilad Shalit’s release - as I did for Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser ever since their capture. I have been saying it every day at the end of every Teffilah B’Tzibur along with all the other Mispallelim at Yeshivas Brisk where I Daven Mincha and Maariv.

I pray that - very soon - our Tehilim on behalf of his release will come to a happy conclusion for him, for his family and for all of Klal Yisroel.

May Hamas and all of their fundamentalist murdering cohorts be permanently wiped off the face of the earth. They want to be martyrs?! Let them all commit suicide in Gaza.

Second Class Citizens

There are two kinds of people that I universally look up to in observant Judaism. One is the sincere Ger – the convert to Judaism. The other is the sincere Baal Teshuva (BT). I cannot stand in their shoes- or even in their shadow. My admiration for what they have done and the enthusiasm and commitment by which they do it is something I only wish I could have.

The reason I admire them so much is a common feature they both have. They came to authentic Judaism on their own. They were not born into it. They forsook a life of relative ease in favor of a life of relatively severe restrictions. It is a life of rules upon rules that in most cases they have not fully learned but strive mightily to both learn and follow.

Those of us who were born into observant homes have a tremendous head start. No matter in which segment of Orthodoxy we have been raised - we have all been indoctrinated from the earliest age to both believe and practice. It is second nature to us. Most of us wouldn’t dream of living another way… even knowing full well the attractions of the non Torah lifestyle.

But a BT or a Ger do not start from that place. They were for the most part raised in a culture of personal freedom to do whatever their heart desired as long as it didn’t hurt others. In most cases there were very few other restrictions. Judaism by contrast is not a life of personal freedom. It is a life of obligations. Personal freedom comes only if religious prohibitions are not violated and our obligations are fulfilled.

And yet, The Ger and the BT choose a life of observant Judaism with all its restrictions and constraints on personal freedom. They do so whole heartedly. To a Ger or a BT, there is nothing rote about their behavior. Everything they do is done consciously with intent.

There are many reasons why someone would want to join the community of believers known as Orthodox Jewry. But for most - in the end - it is all L’Shma. They do so because they feel it is the right thing to do – the right way to live.

Judaism does not seek converts. So they are a special and much rarer breed. BT’s on the other hand are sought out by various outreach groups. Chabad, Aish HaTorah, and NCSY among many others are dedicated to bringing Jews closer to God. They have - to their credit - been very successful. I don’t know what the numbers of BTs are but my guess is the numbers are in the tens of thousands at least. And the Torah world is of course very happy about that - and richer for it. Those of us who are raised religious - commonly referred to as ‘Frum From Birth’ (FFB) want Jews to return to their heritage and be observant.

But is the BT or Ger truly accepted? Is the acceptance and praise real? …or is it only empty words? I’m afraid that in most cases it is the latter.

Most BTs and converts obviously want to be part of the community they have been involved with in their trek towards observance. They are usually mentored by one or more individuals from specific groups with customs and stringencies all their own. The BT will not necessarily be taught the differences between – Halacha and Minhag or group custom and universal custom. The BT or Ger will see those stringencies as inviolable Halacha. I think they probably follow every stingency for two reasons.

One - they are not educated to understand communal differences. And two - because they want to be fully accepted by the segment of Judaism they are involved in. They want to be an integrated part of the community. And of course they have been led to believe that if they follow all the rules - this is exactly what will happen.

The problem is - it doesn’t happen. Acceptance only goes so far. In certain circles the BT and the Ger are treated like Martians. Or worse. Just read an important article that appears in Rabbi Yakov Horowitz’s website and you will see what I mean. They are practically shunned - no matter how much they try!

That becomes apparent when children are brought into one of their schools. In most cases it seems the children of BTs are not even accepted. And in the rare case that they are, the child of a BT is often tormented by his peers. And the principals do precious little about it – often having the same attitude about BTs as the rest of the community does. BTs and their children are considered bad influences. The FFB fears that old habits die hard and that somehow a child of a BT no matter how sincere will learn unJewish behavior, and be exposed to bad family influences from family members that are not Frum. And the BT children will somehow inflict these influences upon the FFB children.

The description of how BTs are treated by the FFBs in this article is atrocious. Even Chabad whose reason for being is Kiruv (although they don’t call it that) rejects them:

The ‘real’ true-blue Chabadniks send their boys to Ohalei Torah in Crown Heights. You won’t find too many children of ba’alei teshuva there.

Here is the mindset of the typical FFB in such communities:

Zippora Beit Levi, a teacher in the hareidi community’s Beit Ya’akov girls school system, agreed. The hareidi community has “enough troubles with its own young people without importing ‘trouble’ from outside

This seems to be a pervasive attitude in all segments of Judaism except Modern Orthodoxy. That is where one formerly Charedi BT family found refuge. I think the reason for that is obvious. Modern Orthodoxy is not worried about secular culture infiltrating their lives. Modern Orthodoxy does not see anything wrong in modernity as long as it does not violate Halacha.

In light of prevailing attitudes, that is something for any potential BT or Ger to think about when considering becoming observant.

Gitty

There is a very long article in New York Magazine about the plight of a 23 year old formerly religious young woman by the name of Gitty Grunwald - originally from the Satmar community of Kiryas Joel in the Catskills. The article paints a pretty sorry picture of life in Kiryas Joel. But to be honest, this story left me with a feeling that there is nothing to cheer about. I did not have the kind of guttural reaction I thought I might when I began reading the artilce. I was left with a kind of - blah!

This poor young woman had her daughter - a young child - snatched from her by members of the Satmar community, probably at the instigation of her husband. If I recall correctly custody issues are now being adjudicated by a religious court in Kiryas Joel whose adjudication in the matter will be recognized by the state as a matter of binding arbitration. In the meantime Gitty has very restricted access to her child.

The story goes on to tell us of Gitty’s life, her struggles with religion, her ‘emancipation’ from it, her Baal Teshuva parents who were once both Lubavitchers but are now divorced - with her father becoming a raving Meshichist now living in Israel and her mother becoming Satmar and remarrying to a Satmar Chasid. Quite a journey. Her mother was a secular Jew and a Hippie at one point in her life.

It also describes her secular grandparents - her mother’s parents - with whom she is very close and currently lives with.

While I can easily sympathize with her plight and her pain at losing her child to her husband in this nefarious - kidnapping way, I cannot sympathize with her life choices which include more than abandoning her religion. It also includes dabbling with drugs and the drug culture. Nor can I blame the father for feeling that - had he not had his daughter abducted she would almost certainly not remain Frum. But that goal has yet to be fulfilled.

The whole piece is sad. No one is a winner here. Just lots of losers. I am not happy for anyone in this story. Nor can I endorse anyone of the central characters’ way of life.

I can’t help wondering, though, if Gitty had not lived such an isolated life would she have made different choices. Perhaps she might have remained Frum. I’m sure, however, that all the factors I mentioned contributed to her state of mind and not just the religiously restrictive life she was forced to live. But still...

Divorce, a Meshichist father, a mother who went from being a Hippie to becoming a Lubavitcher, divorcing, and marrying a Satmar Chasid - thus dealing with a stepfather - grand parents who are secular… all these factors had to have a negative effect on her that led her to run away from her environment. This unusual mix can confuse anyone. There was no real stability in her life. She married too young to a 17 year old. All she saw, knew, and lived were the restrictions of the Satmar life combined with the pain of a family breakup and an early marriage.

So restricted was she - that she did not know even the most common elements of the secular world. Nor did she even know that there are people who live secular lives apparently. When she found out, she was so turned off by her own lifestyle that at the first opportunity she ran – taking her child, leaving her husband - escaping to the secular world and relieving herself of the burdens of Halacha in the process.

I don’t think one can lay blame here at the feet of anyone, - not Gitty, not her husband, parents or grandparents - and not the austere life she was forced to live.

I hope that Gitty returns to observance, and gets her child back in some sort of shared custody. But the way things stand now, that doesn’t look very good. A child separated from her mother is never a good experience. Not for the mother, and certainly not for the child. That can easily cause the child to go off the Derech herself someday. Especially if there is any shared custody at all that is unsupervised. That child will contrast her lifestyle in Kiryas Joel and her mothers in the secular world. Having both influences in her life, who knows what she will ultimately choose.

There are no winners here. And there may be yet another young victim lying in wait. No result here will be anything to cheer about - unless Gitty returns to observance.

They Are Just No Damn Good!

There are some religious Jews who look at the State of Israel and its founders as the epitome of evil – often using words like ‘Nazi-like’ to describe their actions. Of late some of the more right wing Religious Zionists have been using some of the same rhetoric as Charedi Jews. Mostly in instances where settlers in trailer homes in remote areas of the West Bank were evicted.

But it is the Charedi position that is the most troubling. There is currently such a dispute going on Areivim. It is a result of the discussion about the way violent protests stopped an autopsy not long ago. And I'm tired of it already. The more Charedi one is, the worse the rhetoric is. Violent protest - they say - is the only thing the Nazi-like government understands. They see every government act in the worst possible light. Any time a religious issue comes up, the government is accused of doing it because they are anti religious.

To prove their point they will often point to a time during the founding years of the State when Sephardi Jews – specifically from Yemen - were brought in from exile, children severed from parents, and placed in atheistic Kibbutzim.

Those children were then raised to be entirely secular and anti religious. Assuming that is true (which I am not entirely convinced of) who says that today’s government is anything like that of those founding fathers? Nonetheless it’s as if the same motives exist now. So when a religious issues like autopsies arises in Israel – the most strident among them see red! They see Peyos being cut off by godless Nazi-like Jews! And most other Charedim while not quite as strident, sympathize with this view if not quite to the same extent.

Those who have this attitude are completely blinded by their prejudices. They have been indoctrinated to believe that the Israeli government has a deep hatred for religious Jews. And they return that hatred in kind. And that blindness leads to another. It disallows them from seeing the obvious good that their government does in any way and certainly not for them. In so many ways. Those that have called the Israeli government actions Nazi like forget what Nazism is.

How is the State of Israel not like the Nazis? Do they have concentration camps? Are Jews being shot in groups into a mass grave? Are Jews being sent to gas chambers and their bodies cremated? Are medical experiments being performed on them by the state of Israel? Last time I checked, none of this was happening.

What has the government done for Jews? Let’s take a look. They have opened their doors to them all over the world. Never again will doors be closed to persecuted Jews. As long as there is a State of Israel, there will be an automatic haven for Jews.

And what a haven it is. A modern state that is far ahead of its neighbors technologically even though it is far it has far less money than them to do it with. A State where the standard of living is almost as high as the most advanced countries in the world. It is a State that has contributed much to the world of science, medicine and literature. It is country where citizens believe so strongly in what they are doing that they are willing to risk their lives and die for their country. Ask the parents of Eldad Regev, Ehud Goldwasser.

They risked and ultimately sacrificed their lives – as did so many others in so many wars – so that Bachurim in Bnei Brak’s Ponevezh Beis HaMedrash can continue learning without giving it a second thought.

This is a government that has not only given its blood for its people, it has given its money too. Much of it goes to the very people who so vociferously oppose to it – condemning it in the worst possible terms (Nazi-like!) at every opportunity. It’s as though they were still kidnapping children from Yemen, cutting off their Peyos, and sending to be educated in atheistic Kibbutizim.

But all this seems to pass right by them as though it didn’t exist or didn’t matter. An autopsy is performed by the ‘anti religious government’. Graves are dug up when they are discovered while building a road, because they are an ‘anti religious government’. Police use force to arrest protesting Charedi Jews who are setting fires in Jerusalem because they are an ‘anti religious government’.

Subsidies are cut to Yeshivos because they are an ‘anti religious government’. It truly is a black and white world to them. Charedim are all good and vilified by the anti religious media. The government is all bad and nothing they do is for the benefit the Torah world it is all for their own. All monies that Yeshivos etc. receive must be extorted from them.

Why can’t the Charedi world in Israel see the truth? Yes, there are some anti religious segments of the government who do have it in for religious Jews. But in most cases, they are not. In most cases, it is a mixed bag. There is both good and bad. Each event that happens that upsets the Charedi world should be looked at independently and not assumed to be automatically anti religious. That just increases the hatred - from both sides.

Sometimes the reasons have nothing to do with being anti religious. All this anti-Semitism against the government on the part of some of the more strident Charedim ought to stop. They ought to step back and analyze the situation for what it is and not always assume the worst.

Most importantly, it is time that the good that is the state of Israel be recognized - and that benefits that are received in the form of a strong defense force and financial aid be appreciated - in a public way. No matter how much of a shortfall they still have. If they would just open their eyes, they could easily see it.

Hakaras HaTov is long overdue. Expressing it in public ways would go a long way towards bringing Jews together instead of increasing the divide – secular, Religious Zionist, and Charedi. Wouldn’t that be nice? Nazi-like indeed!

Mental Illness in the Torah World

Mental health is an issue that affects all of us. It knows no religious boundaries. Every community has people that suffer form it in far greater numbers than most people are aware of. It’s the nature of mental illness that it is kept hidden, both by the individual suffering it and those family members that want to protect their family image. The stigma is enormous. And Shiduchim are definitely affected by it. This is wrong. Mental illness is a disease just like any other. It should be treated the same way. The community ought to be more open about it. That would go a long way to reducing the stigma and getting people more help sooner.

In that spirit, I present the following. It is a very thoughtful comment on an earlier post by an anonymous poster who has experienced these difficulties. It is descriptive of his own story and offers some good advice from the perspective of experience and hindsight.

It should serve as an impetus for people – especially clergy - who are aware of mental health issues that affect the Shalom Bayis of their friends or constituents - to get involved. Before it’s too late. Problems like these can not only cause divorce, but can cause dysfunction that can result in children going of the Derech.

By the number of comments this was obviously a very thought provoking post.

Being a relatively recently divorced middle aged male, and the divorce not initiated by me, I found it interesting the comments primarily focused on specific parts of the post, ignoring others. Unless I missed it, I saw no comments on the mental illness reference in the comments and how that impacts the divorce rate.

We have made great strides in the field of education diagnosing learning disabilities and children are being educated profoundly better today with a program of special ed. and helpful medication. There has also been huge progress in diagnosing and treating mental illnesses today.

Before you get married, become fully aware of your potential spouses mental health history. What medications has your intended ever used or is using now? What is their house of origin like? Absolutely go for pre-marital counseling.

My ex was unofficially diagnosed with bi-polar disorder by every mental health provider and my own doctor on the spot in the months before she filed for divorce. While she denied it, later it became known she was taking lithium when I met her and never disclosed it.

Should I have asked? Absolutely. Will I ask next time. You Bet! Mental health disorders can tear families apart from the inside out. It can destroy marriages and the relationships between parents and children. Bi-polar disorder is a major cause of divorce. Yes, I believe the growing acceptance of divorce as a viable and easy option is a contributing factor to the mindset of the partner who wants out.

It is neither, but even a sick person must feel "permission" from the community to move forward. I am not saying divorce should never be an option...there are many instances where it is 100% appropriate, but not all and I'd bet not most.
On another note, when this is the cause and the healthy spouse is committed to keeping the family together the community needs to be supportive. There are no boundaries anymore, there is no privacy. In this kind of situation Rabbonim cannot be afraid to interfere to save a family.

Friends of the spouse with the illness need to intervene and demand this person get help and not stop until the person is in the doctors office. With meds and proper support entire families can be saved from the heartbreak, destruction of relationships and the financial nightmare of divorce.

My experience was extremely disappointing as I witnessed the leadership of several communities within my community, leaders who have no issues telling us how to live Torah lives, become impotent and afraid to take a stand and save a family.

Now I have support and empathy from the same people because my ex is so difficult to deal with and sympathy for the loss of my relationship with my children. However when they could have helped they were too terrified to take a stand.

Orthodox Homosexuals

‘I am first of all an ultra-Orthodox woman and only after that a lesbian.’

So said ‘B’ who was interviewed in Ha’aretz where there is a fascinating article about Orthodox lesbians. One might ask, How can someone claim to be Orthodox and at the same time declare that living that lifestyle is not a sin? I wondered about that as I read this article.

First I should clarify that the Torah is not egalitarian on the issue. Men who want to participate in homosexual sex is are biblically forbidden from doing so. It is an act that can be punishable by a court mandated death penalty. Women who want to participate in homosexual sex are not biblically forbidden from doing so. They are perhaps only rabbinically forbidden. Their court mandated penalty is far from the death penalty. I do not know the reasons for this disparity.

So there is quite a difference between gay men and gay women, As I have said many times in the past - while both should be treated with dignity, respect, and compassion, there is difference by orders of magnitude between how Halacha sees the forbidden expression of their desires.

Be that as it may, there is no Posek that I am aware of who permits women to engage in homosexual sex. And yet there is an organization founded by Avigail Sperber that caters to Orthodox women who have come out of the closet called Bat Kol. And though the majority of the 150 members seem to be from Modern Orthodox or Religious Zionist backgrounds there are about 15 self identified Charedi women there too.

Avigail Sperber is the daughter of Rabbi Daniel Sperber:

Her father, Rabbi Daniel Sperber, is a professor of Talmud at Bar-Ilan University and a well-known figure among the religious public, who for many years headed the committee of Hemed, the state religious education system

Both he and his wife openly accept their daughter and her partner as members of their family:

The two are invited as a couple to every family event, and Rabbi Sperber has no doubt that the child who will have two mothers will fit in just fine among the other grandchildren.

I can well understand how a father will accept an errant child into bosom of the family. It is the right thing to do. It is called love and compassion. What I don’t understand is the need to make a cause out of it. Why the organization? Why the pride? There is nothing right about being proud of sinning. Unless they just live together platonicly. And if that’s the case it they wouldn’t need an organization to do it. There are plenty of people of the same sex sleeping in the same bedrooms platonicly - such as in overnight camps or dormitories.

I can even understand that those who are attracted to the same sex want to be accepted for who they are. I support that as well. But to create an organization that takes pride in that and thereby promotes it as a legitimate alternative lifestyle… well, how is that Orthodox?

Furthermore, there is the male side of the issue. In this egalitarian world of ours, homosexual men too want to be accepted. And just as is the case with women, they should be. As long as they do not promote a lifestyle that includes acting on their illicit desires. But in our day and in our culture, what’s good for the gander is supposed to be good for the goose too. What is to stop Orthodox homosexuals from forming a male version of Bat Kol – call it, Ben Kol – and promoting a lifestyle that is Halachicly punishable by the death penalty? Perhaps it even already exists, I don’t know.

Though I agree with the manner in which Rabbi Sperber and his wife treat their children, I question putting an imprimatur on an illicit lifestyle in any way. I would have been happier if he had put a qualifier on the acceptance of his daughter and her partner. In my view he should have said something like, ‘I love my daughter and her partner and am compassionate about their lifestyle but I do not condone their behavior as it is against Halacha’. Perhaps he has and the article just did not point that out.

In any case, I think it is important - once again - to highlight the fact there are some very fine and religious people from all Orthodox strata who are attracted to members of the same sex. They are sincere about their Judaism and committed to observance. And they should be treated as equals with dignity and respect. But it is equally important to once again point out that loving the sinner is not the same as loving the sin. And that any time there is a step in the direction of permitting the forbidden, we ought to protest it.