Legal - Does Not Always Mean Ethical

I’m told that it is apparently a fairly common practice in Lakewood for Avreichim, - married men who spend full time learning Torah in a Kollel - to use government welfare programs to help them make ends meet.
Government programs like food stamps or Medicaid generally have strict rules that must be followed in order to qualify. And like most government programs these rules are subject to abuse. Welfare fraud is widespread in this country. But abuse does not always mean fraud. One can actually legally qualify and still be unethical in taking government aid.

Programs like these are designed to help the truly indigent - those who are unable to help themselves. Most Avreichim are able bodied men who come from middle class backgrounds. Should they choose to join the workforce they would very likely find a job where they would earn enough money to be disqualified from these government programs. But for idealistic reasons having nothing to do with the intent of welfare they have chosen to not to join the workforce. They sacrifice that income so that they can spend their times in the Beis HaMedrash of the Yeshiva learning full time. The stipends given these young men by the Yeshiva are well below the poverty line. Hence they ‘game’ the system to supplement their income.

While technically not doing anything wrong, is this not causing a Chilul HaShem? Most of these Avreichim come from a middle class background - not an impoverished one. Most of them are bright and have good enough secular educations to get jobs that will put them over the poverty line. They would easily make enough money to disqualify them from using any of these welfare programs. Is it right to use the system to further a goal – no matter how noble – that was not intended to be used in that way? Even if abuse is widespread, does that mean we should be a party to it - even if technically legal?

I am told that Lakewood actually advises their Avreichim to do this as a means toward enabling them to stay in Kollel. Is it not a Chilul HaShem to have such widespread ethical - if not legal abuse of the system? I understand the need. I understand the motivation. But is gaming the system – even if by legal means is the right thing to do?

The welfare system is supposed to be a form of charity. That our ‘best and brightest’ are advised to see it as income is just plain wrong and contributes to the negative images anti-Semites always paint about Jews and money.

Denigrating Torah

Once again I am forced to confront a noxious comment from a man who I would otherwise venerate. His name is Rav Yisroel Eliyahu Weintraub (R’ Elya). Why would I venerate him? Because of his tremendous Torah knowledge. His brilliance and Hasmadah - diligence in Torah study - earned him the Steipler Gaon as a Chavrusa - a study partner. He has also made significant contributions to the world of Torah study.

His Hashkafic opinions are so well thought of in the Charedi world that he was often referred to by Rav Shach when asked what Daas Torah was on any given subject and told to follow whatever R' Elya said.

That is what makes what he said so difficult. I hate criticizing such people. But I have no choice but to speak out and let the world know that not all religious Jews think this way.

Rav Elya was recently asked to comment about a couple of events impacting on the Torah world. One of his opinions I actually agree with. Breifly there was a story going around about Rachel Emeinu ‘appearing’ 3 times during the recent war in Gaza and saving the lives of 3 different groups of soldiers. Although both Rav Ovadia Yosef and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu said it was definitely true, Rav Elya dismissed it as false. I agree - but not for the same reasons.

The more significant and greatly troubling comment was first reported by Rabbi Rafi Goldmeier in his blog Life in Israel and republished in Matzav .Com. It was in reference to a question about a Charedi program called ‘Adopt a Soldier’ whereby individual Charedim would pray for the safety individual soldiers fighting in Gaza. Here is what he had to say:

This is treif! ...Somebody who is tomim will respond saying, 'What is wrong with it? They are giving up their lives for us, so why not? What is wrong with this?'

"But what is wrong with it? .... Davening for a salvation is what we need to do... The problem is with the approach - that the yeshiva bochurim say, 'They are moser nefesh for us, so this is what we do for them." To make a partnership? To act as if there is a connection between our camp and the chiloni camp? That is treif! This type of a partnership means that the chareidi looks as if what he is doing is worth less than what the chiloni soldier is doing. And this denegrates the Torah.

"You can daven for their salvation. They are tinokos shenishbu and not evil, but to make a partnership? This is what is treif about 'Adopt a Soldier.'

He then goes on to explain that even though they are indeed putting their lives on the line for their country, they do not really do it for the Torah world. He demonstrates that by saying if a religious Jew to were to ask a Chiloni soldier for even the smallest donation for a Yeshiva they wouldn’t give it. He then makes a Kal V’Chomer. If they won’t even give 20 shekel to a Torah cause we can easily assume they wouldn’t give up their lives for Torah Jews.

I firmly believe that he is categorically wrong. Most Chiloni Israeli soldiers would give up their lives for a religious Jew. That he will not support giving money to Yeshivos and Kollelim is an entirely unrelated matter. That a man of R’ Elya’s great brilliance and accomplishment doesn’t realize that is truly amazing.

There is a difference between loving a fellow Jew and not approving of his lifestyle. Isn’t that in fact what we preach? Shouldn’t we embrace our fellow Jew even if we do not support his cause – especially if he is a Tinok She’Nishba? Would he say that a religious Jew would not risk up his life to save a Tinok SheNishbah Conservative Jew even though he would not give a penny to JTS?

And who says that a Charedi doing so implies a concession that the fighting soldier has a greater merit than learning Torah? There is no such concession in doing that. It is just a way to show that the Torah world cares and is willing to do their part in ways that they can. That the Chiloni world does not accept Torah learning or prayer to be on the same level as fighting in Gaza is certainly understandable from their point of view. But it is certainly not the position of any Charedi – implied or real.

What is worse is that even if you say he is entitled to his opinion - why is he saying things like this now? This is not going to make the Chiloni world any more Frum. It will only push them away further.

Can you imagine what a Chiloni mother would say after hearing that a respected Charedi Rav has called making a ‘partnership’ with their sons who are putting their lives on the line - Treif?! Does anyone believe that this is anything less than a complete insult – despite the disclaiming sentence of:

You can daven for their salvation. They are tinokos shenishbu and not evil.

Like that’s going to make them understand. Like that is going to console a bereaved mother of the loss of - or serious injury to her son.

Does R’ Elya really believe that his comments build up Torah?

How different is this from what R’ Chaim Shmulevitz said at a Seudas Hoda’ah when Mir Yeshiva was spared – nearly being hit by a rocket attack in 1967. It was right after the Six Day War (If I recall correctly). He graciously acknowledged the contributions of the Israeli Defense Forces. He too understood that learning Torah was important and said so. But he did not say anything about whose contributions were greater. He simply said that both contributed and he expressed his gratitude publicly to the Israeli army.

How great were those rabbinic leaders! Too bad they are not role models for some of our current ones.

Ribaldry and Lightheadedness

Ribaldry and lightheadedness. That was the reason stated for canceling last year's ‘The Big Event’ a concert featuring renowned Chassidic entertainer Lipa Schmeltzer.

Of course that had nothing to do with why the concert was banned. It was banned based on a lie. Misleading information had been given to the signers of the ban by a few zealots with an agenda of their own. 33 prominent rabbinic leaders bought into it without checking the veracity of their claims. That caused the cancellation of that concert at a tremendous loss to the charitable institutions that were to receive the proceeds and substantial financial losses to the concert promoters.

The fraud was later discovered. One of the more prominent rabbis who signed the ban had admitted his error and the botched way in which the entire matter was handled.

This year once again the very same concert is being promoted. They are calling it ‘The Event’. It seems to be largely the same type of concert as last year – although there may be some modifications in the program. There will be separate seating for men and women - just like last years concert was supposed to be. But this year – not a single word of protest. The words Ribaldry and lightheadedness have not been mentioned at all. In fact the concert has received rabbinic approval.

Why the approval this year? Are the attendees less ribald this year? What is so radically different? Could they not have just modified last year's concert to conform to the acceptable standards of this year?

I think the answer is self evident. Rabbinic leaders are not going to repeat the mistakes of last year. The rabbi who publicly admitted to being misled said that he was told that this ban was the same as the one issued by Israeli rabbinic leaders. Since time was if the essence the signers of the ban did not properly research the veracity of that claim - which was not true. They just signed the ban. They did not want to differ with the Israeli rabbinic leaders.

They later learned of this deception but by that time the zealots has successfully used the 33 rabbinic signatures on the ban to pressure the lead attraction, Lipa Schmeltzer, to back out of the concert. Ultimately the promoter was forced to cancel it. The proceeds that were to have gone to charity were lost. And there was a tremendous financial loss to the promoters.

This year they are trying it again. They are promoting the same concert. I’m sure there have been some changes made. But are those changes so significant that they could not have been made last year without canceling the entire concert to great financial loss? And massive disappointment to fans? And the terrible repercussion to the credibility of those rabbinic leaders?

Yes we have Gedolim today. By definition and without getting into names the top living rabbis of our day are our Gedolim. I believe that the majority of them - many of whom signed the ban last year - are sincere and decent people who work tirelessly for the Jewish community. All of them are highly knowledgeable in Torah – light years ahead of me. But as I’ve said many times today’s Gedolim are not the same as yesterday’s Gedolim. There was never any question about the credibility of any of that last generation of rabbinic leaders. Can the same thing be said today?

Self Hating Jew or Innocent Victim of her Environment?

Last Sunday night CBS debuted a TV movie about Yibum. Yibum for those who don’t know is the levirate marriage. That is a biblical commandment for the widow a childless man to ‘marry’ her deceased husband’s brother or perform a Chalitzah – a kind of divorce procedure breaking the biblical bond between them. In our day the custom is to only do the Chalitzah.

But in this movie the couple decided to go ahead with Yibum. I will not bore you with the rest of this absurd storyline. I bring this story up because comedienne/actress Susie Essman portrayed the young widow’s very religious mother. While the storyline was pretty ridiculous I found her portrayal of a religious Jewish woman was not that far off.

Ms. Essman who is a secular Jew was on a program called The View that is on daytime television. It preceded the movie’s showing. She was there to plug it. For the record, I have never seen this show and I am thoroughly unimpressed with it now that I have seen the clip in question - available here.

When Ms. Essman was asked what she learned when researching the role she proceeded to answer it in what appeared to be a very condescending and derisive manner. Perhaps she thought she was being funny. But to some religious people she came off as a self hating anti Semitic Jew. At least that is how political commentator Debbie Schlussel saw it. I believe that Ms. Schlussel is a Modern Orthodox Jew. I can understand her anger and frustration over this. Here in part is how she described it:

On an edition of the anti-male hag-fest, "The View," Barbara Walters and her fellow co-hosts engaged in a vile, anti-Semitic discussion with actress/comedienne Susie Essman. The stuff they said about Chassidic Jews--calling the women ugly, saying they have bad taste in clothing, have "weird," "bizarre" customs--would never be tolerated if they substituted the word "Muslim" or "Black" for "Chassidic Jew."

Taken at face value the description of Ms. Essman’s remarks indeed seem to be vile. But after watching that approximately five minute interview in its entirety I did not see it in that way.

This is a totally secular woman who is naive about the modesty standards of religious Jewish women and the purposes of maintaining those standards. Her research proved a bit shocking to her liberal secular values and sensibilities.

One must understand that if you're not used to it - it can be a bit disconcerting to see how an entire segment of religious Jewish women dresses.

If you think about it - the entire purpose of dressing this way is precisely to be less attracting to men - the exact opposite of the western cultural value system. In western culture - the more 'exposed' women are are, the more acceptably dressed they are (up to a point - obviously). The religious view is the exact opposite. The more covered up you are the more acceptably dressed you are (up to a point - obviously).

Taking this a step further if one looks at how some of the more extreme segments of Jewry deal with female dress you might have a similar reaction. There you can find married women shaving their heads and covering them with a turban of some sort - wigs not being permitted or strongly discourged.

I did not detect any real hardcore meanness from this actress. Perhaps she was a bit callous but mostly she was - at worst - just guilty of a stereotypical view based on her apparent lack of any religious background. Her secularized upbringing and her cultural environment gave her a perspective vastly different from that of even the most modern of Orthodox Jews. She views religious women’s dress as taking modesty to an absurd level. In the end she is a Tinokes Shenishbah… an unwitting ‘captive’ victim of a her environment.

Aren’t we all a little guilty of this kind of attitude? Don't we all do that just a tiny little bit when looking at religious communities that are radically different from our own? That we are not used to seeing? - like the women of Meah Shearim who dress so differently from religious women of even very Charedi religious communities in the west? Be honest.

The PR War – Blaming the Settlers

Watch CBS Videos Online

Last night on the CBS program 60 Minutes there was what can only be described as an abomination. Reporter Bob Simon who Jewish and has lived in Israel did a hatchet job on the State of Israel. He basically blamed all of Israel’s problems on Jewish settlers. No context. No other issues were brought up that might be important factors impacting on the situation there. It was all about the settlers. It’s completely their fault.

The strong implication was that if not for them all would be just fine and dandy. We would now have a two state solution - Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and harmony. Not one word about Islamism, Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas and their uncompromising philosophy of total rejection of any Jewish State… or their determination to fight to the finish to see that happen …or the fact that the vast majority of even peaceful Palestinians are sympathetic with them.

The only problem according to Mr. Simon is the religious fanaticism of the settlers. Nothing about the fanaticism of religious Islamists who are far more dangerous to world peace and a far greater impediment to an Israeli Palestinian peace than even the most rabidly fanatic settler! You wouldn’t even know they existed watching this program!

There was an interview with Daniella Weiss the Mayor of a large settlement. This did not help matters. It just reinforced the view that fanatic Jewish settlers are the sole cause of the problem. The impression left was that if only Israel would do something about these people we would have ‘peace in our time’.

What made matters worse was an irrelevant portion of this program that showed Israeli soldiers commandeering the homes of innocent Palestinian families on the West Bank for practically no reason. The Arabs were made to look like victims of a brutal army doing it to intimidate and torture them. Again - no context. No explanation was even attempted. As if Israel didn’t have any valid reason to do that. It evoked comparisons to the Holocaust - with the Palestinians playing the victimized Jew and Israeli soldiers as the Nazi tormentor.

This is the face of Evil. It is also the face of a naïve leftist Jew who thinks that if only we give up the West Bank the Arabs will stop hating us. It is as though this man has absolutely no Jewish soul despite the fact that he was born Jewish. Does he think that if the settlers just leave their West Bank settlements that the Islamists will beat their rockets into plowshares? That Israel will finally flourish as never before because the Palestinians will now have their own state.

Has he not learned anything from Gaza? That was supposed to be the prototype of the Palestinian State. These were the hopes then. We hoped that giving them some land would enable them to show their peaceful intentions and sincerity in building a State.

What was their response? Plowshares? No. It was Rockets, Rockets, and more Rockets. It was kidnapping and suicide bombing attempts - most of which were foiled by Israel. They have put all their resources into killing as many Jews as they could. The welfare of any fledgling State they could have built fell by the wayside. And Israel’s security needs exacerbated their situation. Of course they blamed it all on Israel. And the world community completely bought into that right along with the Bob Simons of the world. To these people it is all about Israel. Peace will come if Israel gives up the West Bank. Right. And Hamas won’t take that over like they did Gaza. And I have a bridge to sell you.

But I do not give settlers like Daniella Weiss a pass here either. Just because settlers like her are being completely blamed for all the problems in the Middle East does not mean that they aren’t a problem. The philosophy of the settler movement is not about security. It is about Yishuv Ha’aretz -settling Eretz Yisroel. That is an important Mitzvah. But it is not the only Mitzvah. There are other considerations like Pikuach Nefesh. The Torah values the saving of lives more than any other Mitzvah in the Torah. There are only three Mitzvos worthy of sacrificing one’s life. Building settlements is not one of them.

It is true that most Palestinians hate us anyway. But do we have to taunt them? Is settling the West Bank worth the increased enmity? Do we have to pour gasoline on a fire? Is it OK to keep settling Eretz Yisroel if it increases the anger of the Arabs and incites them to increase atrocities against us?

Settlers like Daniella are not in a position to dictate terms to the world. But they think God is on their side. So they go about building settlements and taunting indigenous Arabs.

One may ask, how can I be so upset at Bob Simon’s treatment of the settlers and at the same time fault them for what they are doing? If we can’t give Palestinians the West Bank, why shouldn’t we settle it?

Settlement theology when put into action generates tremendous hatred from the Arabs. They have the same fervor for the land as we do. The more religious they are, the more devoted they are to the cause – to the point of Mesiras Nefesh. They will give up their lives for their cause of an Islamist Land of Palestine. The settler will do that too. But the Islamists have the additional ‘advantage’ of valuing death more than we value life.

Let me make one thing clear. We should not be giving any land to the Palestinians now. But we should not be allowing settlers to taunt Palestinians with their presence either. Except for major developments on border areas like Beitar an Kiryat Sefer, settlements should be replaced by military bases that should be made permanent - as long as there is any possibility of Arab terror in any form against anyone in any part of Israel.

We need to stop giving the world an issue. The most important thing Israel needs to do right now is to provide security for its people. It is counter-productive to settle West Bank for theological reasons.

Like it or not - short of the coming of the Messiah - a real peace in the Middle East will very likely involve some sort of Palestinian State. That will happen if there is ever a complete cessation of violence on their part. Whether that is possible remains to be seen. I have my doubts. But we have to show the world we are serious about it and stop giving them an issue. The sooner we all realize that the better off we will be.

Whose Ox is This Anyway?

It is a matter of great importance to me to be critical of those whose actions I see as harming Judaism. It does not matter to me who they are or what their station. If I see a wrong I will and point it out and explain why I think it is wrong. My hope is that in doing so - that in some way I have contributed in generating public pressure that will change or correct things. Or at least prevent them from ever happening again.

Sometimes it is a Charedi wrong and other times it is a Modern Orthodox wrong. It doesn’t matter to me. I call them as I see them. Some cases are worse then others. There is no black and white. Nor is there an evil villain in most cases.

I do not see the vast majority of religious leaders as evil at all. They try and do the right thing. But sometimes they mess up. Sometimes they even admit it. Other times a rabbinic leader appears to mess up but upon further review or special context or clear explanation of circumstances there was no mess up at all. In fact it turns out to be quite the opposite. What seemed like a Chilul HaShem may end up being a Kiddush HaShem under the right circumstances.

Sometimes I even call them wrong. And when I am convinced of that, I apologize.

What is interesting as well as very predictable is the way some individuals react to my critical posts. I will get a great number of negative comments. Some of them are quite harsh but most of them are approved. Some of my critics are so angry and venomous that it shocking to see what can come out of the mouth of a Jew who thinks of himself as the most religious of our people. Those are deleted.

The fact is that the truly venomous comments come from both sides of the religious aisle. The language is similar – usually something like: ‘How dare you criticize a Talmid Chacham of this caliber’ or ‘Who do you think you are?!’ Whether the critics are Charedi or Modern Orthodox depends on whose ox is being gored.

What is lost on my most of my venomous critics on either side of the aisle is that neither in the case of Charedi leaders or in the case of Modern Orthodox leaders do I in any way denigrate their character or their leadership - except in the most egregious cases such as those having to do with child sexual molestation. My respect for the vast majority of rabbinic leaders remains very high. One can question a leader without losing respect for them. That is the way I try to do things.

My last post on Rabbi Lookstein is a case in post. I have tremendous respect for Rabbi Lookstein. I know he is a dedicated Rav to his Shul; principal to his school; and leader in Klal Yisroel. He has an over fifty year history of such dedication. I am 100% convinced that that he is very Medakdek B’Mitzvos- careful in his religious observance. I am also 100% convinced that what he did last Wednesday was done L’Shem Shamayim. There is no doubt in my mind about that.

To suggest that I have belittled a Talmid Chacham in making a public protest of this one incident - any more than the RCA has belittled him- is a gross misrepresentation of what I did. I merely echoed their view – which I believe is the correct one.

This is the case with Charedi leaders too. Never in my most critical mode did I ever say or think that Rav Elyashiv, for example, is anything but a Gadol and 100% L’Shma even when I questioned what he did. Never did I denigrate him. The same thing is true here with Rabbi Lookstein. But in both cases there are those who see even the slightest criticism as a major attack against them justifying their vilification of me.

As for Rabbi Lookstein - he may yet vindicate his actions and that will be just fine with me. I note that he sent a letter to his colleagues at the Rabbinical Council of America explaining and perhaps even justifying his actions. My instinct would be to side with him for precisely the reasons he said. But my instinct seems to be contradicted by Halacha. I could be wrong and this may indeed be an exception. That remains to be seen and should be determined by people far more learned than I am. Nothing would make me happier than to find out that both the RCA and I were wrong and that he was right.

But getting back to the point of this post - whether I protest a Charedi leader’s act or a Modern Orthodox leader’s act – I do it because I believe lines were crossed that are in some way harmful to Klal Yisroel. That - in my view - requires a public Macha’ah – a protest - whether the ‘wrong’ is an interfaith service, a concert ban, or book ban.

I may be wrong and those who think so are free to present their views and explain why. No one has to agree with me. But please do not misread my criticisms as biased. I do not look at your ox any differently than the other fellow’s.

Rabbi Lookstein’s Interfaith Moment

I don’t know him at all. I never even met him. But I have certainly heard of him. Rabbi Haskel Lookstein is one of the most distinguished Modern Orthodox rabbis on the American scene. He is the long term rabbi (50 years) of Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun and has been Principal of the Ramaz School for over 40 years. He is also an instructor in homiletics at Yeshiva University. His reputation runs far and wide in American Orthodoxy. The associate Rabbi at his Shul is Rav Ahron Soloveichik’s grandson, Rabbi Meir Soloveichik.

It is not my intention to bash Rabbi Lookstein. But sadly I must question what he did last Wednesday. After a similar invitation was declined by Rabbi Hersh Weinreb of the OU, Rabbi Lookstein was asked to participate at an interfaith service at an Episcopalian Church – The National Cathedral - in their main sanctuary.

He accepted and recited a non denominational prayer along with various members of other religions. This is prohibited under Jewish Law. Rabbi Gil Student has a post on this subject where he tries mightily to give Rabbi Lookstein the benefit of the doubt - a Limud Zechus - but ultimately disagrees with him too.

I understand why Rabbi Lookstien did it. I sympathize with his reasons. If it were me I would have had an almost irresistible temptation to accept. But I doubt that I would have in the end. The idea of going into a church and saying a prayer with Christian and Muslim clergy is anathema to me. The issues involved here supercede his rationale for doing it.

Rabbi Lookstein probably looked at it in a sort of Eis La’asos way of ingratiating the Jewish people with the new administration through his participation. That is a very laudable goal. Turning it down he felt would have been counter to the interests of the Jewish community. Had he backed out after accepting it would have made him – and us - look very bad.

It should be made clear that Rabbi Lookstein is no Darren Kleinberg. Rabbi Kleinberg is a graduate of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah -where I'm told this is the hottest topic of discussion right now. Rabbi Kleinberg actively seeks such venues and happily participates in them if it suits his overarching goal of pluralism. YCT has actually repudiated him for some of his actions. Rabbi Lookstein would never do the kind of thing Rabbi Kleinberg has done. Not once did he do so in his illustrious 50 year career as a respected Orthodox Rav - until now. His intention here is pure. That is clear. His reasons seem to be based on the fact that a Chilul HaShem might result if he didn’t participate.

But which is the greater Chilul HaShem? I cannot conceive of participating in any way in an interfaith service with Christians in a church - no matter how benign the words! So while I sympathize with Rabbi Lookstein – and while I understand that he generally does not endorse interfaith services - he has nevertheless done so here and crossed a line in my view.

The Rosh Yeshiva of his Alma mater, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik was very clear about such participation. He said that one may not participate interfaith dialog - let alone an interfaith service.

I am not alone in my views. The Rabbinical Council of America has clearly dissociated themselves from it. In a statement to JTA they said:

“The long-standing policy of the Rabbinical Council of America, in accordance with Jewish law, is that participation in a prayer service held in the sanctuary of a church is prohibited"

What this has done is legitimize the act. When a prestigious religious figure crosses a line it gives cover to a Darren Kleinberg for doing the same thing - but not for the same reasons. Even though I’m sure that Rabbi Lookstein had no intention of doing that - it doesn’t matter. Rabbi Kleinberg will now forever be able to point to a precedent. The special circumstances here will make no difference to him.

It seems President Obama wanted the participation of an Orthodox Rabbi. That is to his credit. He values our support. But the President is not a Posek. A respectful no would have been difficult - but the right thing to do. That is what Rabbi Weinreb did. I wish Rabbi Lookstein had done the same.

Marriage Satisfaction Survey

How satisfied are you in your marriage? The OU wants to know. They are conducting an online survey. Here is how it was described to me:

The survey aims to identify issues within Jewish Orthodox Marriages so that they may create programming and infrastructure to address them. The other organization is called Aleinu Family Resource Center, a program of Jewish Family Service of Los Angeles, and the Rabbinical Council of California.

Questions on the survey are pretty straight forward and what you would expect on a survey of this kind, the kicker being “would you marry the same person all over again”, or something to that extent. Expectations are unknown, which is one of the reasons for the survey and we hope to get a sample size in the thousands.

I took it and it is really quite painless. I have been asked to help publicize it and am happy to do so. Here is the link to the survey.

Thank You Rofeh Cholim Cancer Society

I am currently visiting my daughter Tovi and her family in St. Louis . Tovi is Reuven’s mother. Reuven and his father Rabbi Neil Kirshner have just returned (yesterday) from a trip to New York to attend a fundraising banquet. It was for an organization that helps people with serious illnesses deal with the attendant financial problems.

Cancer treatment is not cheap. And sometimes even good health insurance does not cover everything. That, among other things is where this organization comes in.

Last Tuesday night Reuven and his father were in attendance at their banquet which featured among other rabbinic leaders Rav Matisyahu Salomon and Rabbi Yaakov Perlow. At one point in the gathering one of their leaders got up and spoke specifically about Reuven while an in house video camera focused on him projecting his image onto a big screen. He suggested that every one get up and say Tehilim for Reuven at that moment. There were perhaps a thousand people there.

After that my son in law thanked everyone for saying Tehilim - and so did Reuven. It is all in a video located at Matzav.com – along with a more detailed account of the event.

When my daughter called me and told me about this just before I left for St. Louis - it brought tears to my eyes. Apparently it affected everyone at that dinner the same way.

I wish to also thank Matzav.com and Vos Iz Neias for their articles on this event.

Reuven is about the happiest and most well adjusted 5 year old I have ever seen. You would never know he has cancer. He is not symptomatic. I hope and pray that he has a long and fulfilling life of just such happiness.

That will require heavenly intervention from the true Rofeh Cholim to accomplish.

So far doctors have been unable to eradicate the cancer form his system. Although our family profusely thank them for all their continuing efforts - as well the many tens of thousands of people who are praying and saying Tehilim for him - they are still needed more than ever. Please do not stop. We need to keep doing our Hishtadlus – both physically and spiritually.

Thankfully his cancer has not spread beyond his lungs. But two difficult chemotherapies and one clinical trial later those tumors have kept coming back. He is scheduled to undergo another series of chemotherapy treatments in couple of weeks. Only God knows what lies ahead for Reuven - or for any of us!

I again want to thank everyone for their prayers and good wishes. The last words of the Bracha of Asher Yatzar are: Baruch Atah HaShem Rofeh Kol Basar U’Mafleh La’asos. Blessed are You O God, healer of all flesh - and doer of wonders. Please keep Reuven in mind.

Mistreating the Baal Teshuva

There is an important article in Arutz Sheva that deserves everyone’s attention. It deals with the Baal Teshuva Movement - a movement that has been described by some as a revolution. Rabbi Francis Nataf shares his insights on the movement which are based on his own 30 year experience - at first as a Baal Teshuva and then as active member of ‘the revolution’.

If Rabbi Nataf’s description is accurate, then there is an aspect of it this movement that is less than flattering. Far less!

I have written about my admiration of Baalei Teshuva before. I stand in awe of them. Unfortunately not everyone feels that way. In Many cases it is just ignorance. But when rabbis directly involved in outreach are the ones short-changing them it is particularly grievous. I am sure these rabbis are altruistic. I realize that the vast majority of them are sincere about bringing Jews back to Judaism. But at another level they are very condescending and that is plain wrong.

According to Rabbi Nataf - Baalei Teshuva are often recruited to become involved in outreach themselves. But this description from an article in Arutz Sheva of how they are treated is very troubling:

Of course, on a technical level, ba’alei teshuva were trained and sent out to be outreach workers. At the same time, the framers of that revolution were too scared to really let these people loose. Instead, these ba’alei teshuva were trained in the ways of thought of the Orthodox community. They were told that they didn’t know enough to develop their own vision of Judaism: “We, who know more than you, will tell you what Judaism is all about; we are not interested in your opinion.” Thus, the leaders chose to use the cultural language and professional abilities of their ba’al teshuva protégés, but not their intellectual creativity and personal essence. In short, they were told to just translate, not to create. “And there was the rub” and perhaps the tragedy.

And it gets worse:

Both within and without the ba’al teshuva institution where I taught, some charismatic and otherwise inspiring teachers were telling my students things that stretched their credibility to the point that if they were ever to present some of these things to their non-Orthodox friends and families back home, they would be considered lunatics. The point here is that they were told things that certainly did not fit in with these students’ ways of thinking, and the result was that this furthered the student’s feeling that they could not trust their own intellects or their intuitions.

I can’t imagine the confusion and hurt that these kinds of things must generate. The condescension is palpable. The mind control is blatant. I’m surprised that anyone stays with it.

They are molded like clay. The message is that no matter how learned Baalei Teshuva become they nonetheless have no Mesorah. They do not have any religious laws and principles transmitted via their parents or grandparents. As Rabbi Nataf points out:

Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz (a Baal Teshuva himself) has been disqualified as a leader by some, due to his lack of Mesorah.

So what is the goal for these Kiruv rabbis?

Though the hope was perhaps to create the Maharal’s golem, who would serve his master’s ends, it must have occurred to more than one rabbi that the golem could in fact turn out to be Dr. Frankenstein’s monster, who would eventually turn on his master. Apparently, a third choice - of creating someone who would ultimately become benignly independent - was not seriously considered.

As a result, and certainly leshem shamayim, there was a need to control the movement and make sure that it would not turn into a negative force...

Of course that can happen and there does need to be guidance to the newly observant. But that does not mean that there has to be condescension and control that stifles creativity, weakens enthusiasm, and dampens the spirit. This ultimately does a disservice to individuals who deserve much better - individuals we should all stand in awe of.

I do not believe this approach is universal in Kiruv. NCSY does not treat its newly religious that way at all. They are always encouraged to find their way in the branch of Orthodoxy they find most meaningful.

But in the movement Rabbi Nataf describes - it seems to be all about control. And it is succeeding:

As one of the ba’alei teshuva who refused to go with the flow, I remember more antagonism from my peers than from my rebbeim - which was an indication that the control mechanisms had worked and that the movement would go, and continues to go, the way of the compliant majority...

Rabbi Nataf has found his way out of what he calls ‘authoritarian structure’ - where Baalei teshuva are indoctrinated not to trust their own intuitions or feelings. He has joined the ranks of Modern Orthodoxy and received his rabbinic ordination from Yeshiva University.

Not that this is the only way out. For those who are not so compliant there are other options some of which mean leaving observance altogether. In other cases Chasidus is found or mainstream Charedi Yeshivos. It is too bad that dedicated people are so determined to control the minds of the people they reach out to. Because this seriously taints a very noble cause.

A Day to Remember

My 11 year old Charedi grandson in Israel is listening to the radio today. This is very unusual since my son does not normally even have a radio in his house. He is listening to a truly a special moment in American history.

As an American and as an Orthodox Jew I must say that I am really proud. Today, Barrack Hussein Obama becomes the 44th President of the United States of America. Anyone watching the inauguration, whether live or via broadcast television will be witnessing a seminal moment in American history. An African American is about to become the leader of the free world. One cannot overestimate the significance of that.

In recent days the media has been going berserk in their coverage. I do not recall anything like it in any of the past inaugurations. I can remember them going all the way back to President Kennedy. You would think that the Messiah has arrived and is about to be anointed. That is pretty much the attitude expressed by the media. Until today I thought it overkill in the extreme and it kind of upset me. But watching the crowds and the pre-inauguration events it hit me why it is being treated that way.

As an American I need not go back too far in history to remember how black people were treated in this country even after slavery was abolished. They were treated as second class citizens at best even as late as the the sixties. Many still are in a sort of a quiet prejudice. At least in some circles.

But one cannot deny the fact that the majority of Americans are not like that today. Certainly not those who voted for him nor most of those - like myself - who voted for his opponent. That says a lot about who we Americans are as a people today. A nation of immigrants who sees not the color of a person's skin at all but the content of his character. Martin Luther King longed for this day and it has arrived. It took a while and - as he semi-prophesied - he did not get there with us. But we did get here.

As an Orthodox Jew, I can easily understand and appreciate the greatness of this country - this Medina Shel Chesed – this nation of loving kindness. No matter who is elected and no matter how different our political ideologies are the one thing that remains constant is the fundemental fairness that is the fabric of this country as expressed in the Declaration of Independence and in the constitution – specifically the Bill of Rights. Freedom and equality are principles that have never been questioned if not always properly practiced. And today we see the highest expression of these principles as a black man takes the highest office in the land because that is what the people voted for.

The transition is as smooth and friendly as can be despite the wide ideological differences. President Bush lives up to his reputation of being a gentle and gracious man who wishes the new President well. You can see it in his face – as well as that of the First lady Laura Bush. Two people cannot be more gracious than the outgoing President and First Lady. And you can also see the graciousness and spirit of gratitude on the new President and First Lady’s faces. You would think that these people were the closest of friends and not the bitter enemies that some of the campaign rhetoric led one to believe.


This country is about justice and doing the right thing. It is about the inalienable rights of man. It is about the individual freedom to pursue ones goals whether religious or secular in complete freedom as long as the rights of others are respected and protected. It is not about theology or race or nationalism. It is a country where differences are respected and even appreciated. And it is country where almost anyone can become the President.

My ideological differences with the new President still exist. I still have questions about his foreign policy and how that will affect Israel. I also worry about how his liberal social agenda will affect Supreme Court appointments. And how it will affect the social mores in this country. I am also worried how he will handle an economy that is in the worst shape since the Great Depression.

But today is not the day to worry about any of that. By all accounts President Obama is personally a good and decent man who deserves not only our support - but our respect and admiration as well. He has truly accomplished a remarkable achievement. The significance of this day cannot be over stated. It should be savored by all who benefit from the principles of freedom and democracy upon which this country is based.

The Religious Soldier

It’s still true. The most dedicated soldiers are the religious ones. The pride I have in that does not come cheap. Four of the ten soldiers killed in the Gaza War were religious Zionist Jews. They are still the ones who volunteer the most for dangerous combat duty. And they are still the ones most willing to sacrifice their lives for their people.

I hope the secular Israeli still realizes that.

Serving their country and their willingness to die for it does not minimize their dedication to Torah. That priority is not sacrificed. What is not a well known fact about Hesder boys is that they are not eligible to be officers because their Hesder learning schedule does not provide enough service time to allow officer eligibility. And yet they do not give up learning Torah .

There are indications that this will change. But in the meantime - if this is not L’Shma’ - if this is not what being a committed Jew is all about - then I don’t know what is.

I hope the Charedi world realizes that.

Update:

Due to a gross misreading of the Jerusalem Post article upon which this essay is based I have deleted the rest of this post which turned out to be inaccurate. I apologize for the error. Sometimes I rush to publish a bit too quickly. This was the case here.

I only want to add that every soldier who has served his country deserves equal praise, whether religious or not. The only point I was making is that the proportion of Religious Zionist Hesder boys - and now apparently non Hesder Religious Zionist boys as well - who sacrifice for their country far surpasses their proportion in the general population. And they deserve recognition for that.

Modified: 1/19/09 7:33 PM CST

Handling the Truth

An event took place at Bnei Yeshurun in Teaneck on March 5th, 2006 that was widely reported and commented upon at the time, including by yours truly. A video of a portion of this event has recently been made available and is up at the Hamercaz.com Media Center website. A shorter version can be viewed above.

This event was widely heralded as a first step in trying to reconcile the two worlds of Charedi and Modern Orthodox Judaism. Three Charedi Leaders were invited to address a Modern Orthodox community on various issues facing Jewry today.

The reverse has yet to happen. We have yet to see a Modern Orthodox rabbinic leader address the Charedi community on any issue. So as far as I am concerned nothing was accomplished except to present the Charedi viewpoint to the Modern Orthodox world.

One of the biggest issues of that day – an issue that has yet to resolved - was that of reconciling Torah with science. There are scientific discoveries that contradict simple readings of the Torah narrative. One of the most famous of these contradictions is the age of the universe. And one of the most controversial figures addressing that issue is Rabbi Natan Slifkin.

Not that he is the only one. There are many that address this issue in similar ways. But Rabbi Slifkin is certainly the most controversial. His books attempting to do so were banned - at first by rabbinic leaders in Israel and then later by American rabbinic leaders. Rabbi Slifkin’s books at first had approbations by some very Charedi rabbinic leaders. Most of them withdrew their approbations when the Israeli leaders deemed Rabbi Sifkin’s books to be heresy.

To the vast majority reading these words, this is not news. It is just a review of some very unfortunate recent history. This event as most people now know has been the source of tremendous enmity between the Modern and Charedi segments of Jewry. I believe that the divide is greater now than ever – perhaps even insurmountable. What used to be a deferential attitude from much of Modern Orthodox Jewry toward Charedi leaders has turned into virtual scorn against them by some. Instead of advancing the cause of belief in God and His Torah it has driven some people away from it.

The video clip provided by Hamercaz has only added to that. Rabbi Aaron Schechter - in what can only be termed a harangue - goes out of his way to avoid the issue entirely and instead bashes anyone for even trying to deal with it. He basically says that the age of the universe is none of our business and that we should instead concentrate on learning Torah and doing Mitzvos.

Without mentioning his name he blasts Rabbi Slifkin for reinterpreting the words of the Torah - saying he has no right to do that. The problem is that it was not what Rabbi Slifkin did. He brought proofs from Chazal and Rishonim that his views are well within legitimate Jewish thought. This is a view that was accepted as a legitimate approach by some of the most Charedi of Rabbaim - until the ban and its explanation by some of the rabbinic signers of that ban.

An ancient universe was conceded to by great rabbinic figures of the past – much greater than any of those alive today. But that was dismissed as heresy anyway. An explanation for this was offered. It was not heresy for them. It is just heresy for us. In other words, starting from now it is heresy to believe in an ancient universe (or that Chazal were infallible in matters of science). Before the ban these views were just fine. As evidenced by the approbations on Rabbi Slifkin’s books.

To answer a question about reconciling Torah with science by saying its none of our business is to entirely ignore a legitimate question. Rabbi Schechter’s response to that…? ‘Too bad.’ – ‘Don’t think about it.’ ‘I don’t’. Rabbi Schechter implies that anyone who attempts to reconcile it is at best stupid. The smart approach? Deny your mind!

What bothered me the most was the intensity and near anger in his voice. He was practically screaming his answer. As if the louder and angrier he sounded the truer his answer would be. But questions are not answered any better by the degree of shouting accompanying them. Bullying people into belief does not work – except to the already converted.

That Rabbi Schechter is member of the Agudah Moetzes does not impress me. Nor does the fact that he is the Rosh HaYeshiva of Yeshivas Rabbenu Chaim Berlin. The only thing that would impress me is how he deals with the truth. In my view he did not handle that very well at here.

That he is sincere is not a question. I believe he is. But to me it is that he is so angry that is the problem. Yes - his passion is sincere and reflected in that anger. But his angry passion has as much to with his inability or unwillingness to answer the question as it does with anything ese.

The fact that a man who preaches denial has such a loyal following is depressing. That people are willing to ignore or deny their own minds betrays the intellectual honesty that is the hallmark of Jewish thinking.

We Jews are logical thinkers by our nature. The Talmud is replete with just such thinking. Logic is the underpinning of the Gemarah. The rules of explaining Torah law are based on the direct communication by God through his Torah, the masoretic transmission of Oral law, and the use of logic and reason. If logic and reason dictate a question, then denying or ignoring the question as though it doesn’t exist is a lie. The Gemarah never tells us to not ask. While it does often leave questions unresolved, it never puts down the question. It never says don’t ask.

My first encounter with Rav Schechter was when he read the Kesubah at my son’s wedding. During the dance portion of the wedding Rabbi Schechter had a continuous smile that was virtually frozen upon his face. It never left him. He danced so beautifully with my son it was truly a sight to behold. And my son was not even his Talmid. They had never met before that day – or since.

I was truly impressed by this rabbinic figure who I knew only as a member of the Agudah Moetzes and Rosh HaYeshiva. But in every subsequent encounter with him whether personal or virtual I have been left disappointed. And I’m sorry to say the same thing holds true here.

Misguided Commitment - Frumkeit versus Being Frum

If someone has the Minhag not to eat Gebrokts on Pesach should he violate it so as not to embarrass a fellow human being? This and other interesting Bein Adam L’Chavero issues were discussed in a comment by Zevi Ashkanazy in an unrelated thread. It was made deep into comments section so I am posting it here as a guest post. It is too important to be glossed over.

Guest Post by Zevi Ashkanazy

This was taken from The Chicago Center for Torah and Chessed Achdus bulletin and is a synopsis of a shiur given by Rabbi Yakov Zev Smith.Rabbi Yaakov Zev Smith, presented Frumkeit versus Being Frum-What Are YOUR Priorities at the Simcha Davis Legal Holiday Program on Jan 1st.

Rav Smith discussed the great dangers sometimes posed by Chumros and Hidurim for Mitzvos Bain Adam L'Chavero and gave numerous examples of Gedolim who would forego precious Minhagim and Hiddurim for the Kavod and well-being of another Yid.

♦ Rav Yisroel Salanter said the most important Hiddur when baking matzos for Pesach is not to scream at the Almanos who are doing the baking.

♦ The Chofetz Chaim paskened that if you have guests the first night of Sukkos, don't wait until Chatzos to eat indoors if it’s raining.

♦The Manchester Rosh Yeshiva admonished a young man not to leave his negel vasser by his bed but outside the room, to avoid waking his wife.

♦The Belzer Rebbe ate soup on Pesach into which his mother had inexplicably put matzo, making it Gebrokst, because Mitzvas Kibud Av V'Em supersedes Minhag.

Rav Smith discussed how Rachmana Letzlan, machlokes often erupts as a result of overzealous and totally misguided commitment, and how in every situation we must ask: Is this Retzon Hashem? Am I causing distress to another Yid? What does Mishkal HaChassidus say about this?

Vote for Rivkie

I don’t usually do this but… it’s my daughter. So I am making an exception because I love her.

Intel is having a contest called "What's Inside You" for people that do creative work using intel processors . She entered. She is a very talented graphic artist and deserves to win - in my humble opinion. So… I ask everyone to drop what their doing and click immediately on the link below and vote for her. It shouldn’t take more than an hour. Just kidding. It’ll take a couple of seconds - if your slow. All you have to do is click on the link and vote. Click here to vote.

Of Lists and Awkward Dates

One of the most frequently addressed topics in Orthodoxy is the what has come to be called the Shiddach crisis. Whether there is an actual crisis or not is a matter of some debate. But for those who are in the ‘parsha’ – those who are actively seeking their mate and having difficulty, it may very well be a crisis for them.

Be that as it may getting married these days is not easy for a variety of reasons. The issues are different among the various sectors of Orthodoxy although there is some overlap among all of them. Modern Orthodoxy has its own specific problems – mostly having to do with commitment issues of men over thirty. I am not as familiar with the Chasidic community although I believe they have their own problems having to do with intimacy issues early in a marriage.

The non Chasidic Charedi community has its own set of problems. I would add that these problems are quickly becoming a problem for Modern Orthodox Jews - many of whom have adopted Charedi values about learning. This is one of the results of ‘the move to the right’. I’m not being judgmental here - just identifying a fact.

If one grows up in an environment that places a high value on learning Torah, that becomes the standard by which both men and women are judged.

In the world of Charedim a man must commit to learning full time if he is to be considered top grade material for marriage. Rare is the young woman raised in such an environment that sees a Frum - non learning full time - working man in that light. This is true in both Charedi world and to a lesser extent in the right wing Modern Orthodox world.

Perhaps that might explain the phenomenon of ‘lists’. Young men who begin dating compile lists of girls who are suggested to them by friends, family and matchmakers. Lists generally do not exist for young women.

The reason for this is the very nature of Charedi Judaism (and to a lesser extent Modern Orthodoxy) Boys only want to date ‘good’ girls and girls only want to date ‘good boys’. The problem is that there are a lot more good girls than there are good boys. A Charedi good boy and a Charedi good girl are two entirely different animals.

Obviously everyone wants to see good Midos – character development - in their potential spouses. That is a given and is equal in both genders. And good looks are an important factor for both men and women of every stripe – although it is far more important to men than it is to woman.

The one thing that is not the same is learning Torah. In the Charedi world a young man is worthy only if he is serious about his learning. He has to be bright, serious, and diligent about his Torah study. He has to put in the time, Tons of it! Charedi women do not have to do that. They need not put any time at all into learning Torah. All that is required of her (aside from the things I mentioned above) is that she values a young man who will fill that bill. That is a lot easier to accomplish. Hence there are a lot more girls than boys. The result is lists for boys - and not girls.

It may not be fair. It may even be sexist. But it is the reality of the Charedi world and - increasingly - the right wing Modern Orthodox world.

The ratio of good boys to good girls is a huge part of the problem. How one deals with the problem is – as I said – subject of debate in Orthodoxy. I do not have any quick fixes. Nor do I know the ultimate solutions although I think I know what direction to take. But I do think there are some immediate steps that can be taken – one of which is generated in a column by Jonathan Rosenblum. He has written a very insightful one on this subject. One line caught my attention:

What is forgotten is that a young woman who may have had little experience talking to a male other than her father and brothers is not likely to sparkle in early conversation, especially if this is one of her first shidduchim.

Is this a not so subtle reprimand at the lack of social interaction in the Charedi world? Is Jonathan a closet Centrist? I doubt it. But this comment is laden with implications.

I have made this observation before and it bears repeating. The separation of the sexes in Charedi Judaism is too great. The over-emphasis on separating the sexes is creating an unnecessary impediment to the Shiddach process. Especially as it affects young women. A young man can afford to be a bit awkward on the first date. If it doesn’t work out, he just checks that girl off the list and chalks it up as a learning experience. Next...

Not so a young woman. To a young woman who has no list - an awkward date can be a devastating experience. This is totally unnecessary from my point of view. Awkwardness between the sexes can be considerably reduced with just a little bit of appropriate socially interactive experiences.

As I have always said there has to be a happy medium where there is both separation - and interaction. There is an appropriate time and place for both. I think I know which situations are appropriate and which are not. I’ve discussed that in the past - and there is room to disagree about where to draw lines.

But one thing I am pretty sure of is the more right wing one is the more severe the separation. And that is unnecessary to the goals of modesty and protection from Arayos - illicit sex – for which separating the sexes is intended. And certainly they are counter-productive to the Shiddach problems we face. I truly think that rabbinic leaders ought to re-think their approach. Reassessing this ‘absolutely no interaction’ policy may not solve the Shiddach problem. But it would definitely be a step in the right direction.

Staying the Course

It’s really hard to focus on anything other than the war in Gaza right now as Jewish soldiers are putting their lives on the line for our people. So my eyes turn eastward.

There is currently a debate going on within the Israeli government about whether to have a cease fire or to continue to the end. Many people - including me -who are in favor of continuing the fight until victory is achieved, point to the 2006 fiasco in Lebanon. We cannot afford to let that happen this time. But was it the fiasco everyone seems to think it is?

One of the little noticed facts arising out of the current conflict is the reluctance of Hezbollah to get involved in the fighting. I thought of that when I heard the news about a couple of rockets finally being fired from Lebabnon into Israel this morning. The rhetoric coming out of Hezbollah has been unrelenting. Islamists have declared a Jihad against Israel (as if they hadn’t already done that). But these are all words. Why haven’t they done more to help their brothers in Gaza?

The one thing that almost every analyst seems to agree upon is that Israel lost the 2006 war in Lebanon. There seems to be an across the board consensus about that, whether one is pro Israel or anti Israel.

There is of course much reason to say so. Hezbollah proclaimed victory. They were not stopped at all in their ability to fire rockets into Northern Israel at will. And the consensus among almost all analysts is that the only things a terrorist organization needs to declare victory is to survive.

Hezbollah has certainly survived – and even prospered. They are now a more powerful force in Lebanon than ever. The general populace had always blamed Israel for their devastation. It was after all Israel who dropped all those bombs killing thousands of their people and destroying their infra structure.

But I think reality has set in. Those in Lebanon who are not Islamists are finally beginning to realize that the source of their problems is Hezbollah. Hezbollah knows this. They are not going to provoke another war with Israel. They know what the results of that will be. And the Lebanese people are not going to support them if they provoke Israel now.

The fact that Hezbollah has done very little to help the cause of Gaza kind of proves that. Gaza is one of their most trumpeted causes. Israel is their mortal enemy. It would only stand to reason that they would join the fight and attack Israel’s northern front. They haven’t. They fear a repeat of the devastation of 2006. They were hammered. Their infratstructure was destroyed. They have barely begun to climb out of that devastation over two years after the cease fire. They cannot afford that kind of ‘win’ again.

So Israel did not exactly lose that war. Sure… they didn’t exactly win it either. That would have required Hezbollah to surrender and dismantle. The opposite happened. But Israel gained something too. They have shown that they will not sit back if provoked. And they are showing it again in Gaza.

The lack of any real support for Hamas by anyone including Hezbollah should not go unnoticed.

And yet the debate in Israel goes on. The current government there now is debating the issue: Should they continue? …or should they stop as the world wishes them to?

To me it is a no brainer. They are winning this time both symbolic terms and real terms. Hamas is already crying ‘uncle’. It seems they have agreed to the terms of an Egyptian cease fire plan - sort of. If I were Israel I would ignore that and destroy every last vestige of Hamas. As the writer of this article in the Jerusalem Post says, they have to finish the job.

What about the casualties? The more the merrier when it comes to Hamas terrorists. And I have little sympathy for Palestinians who voted for Hamas and are sympathetic to their goals of destroying Israel. Most of those who are suffering hate the Jewish people and wish us harm. Their children are taught the same. I have a difficult time having sympathy for those ‘innocent’ victims. But to the extent that are actual innocent victims, and I’m sure there are some, my heart goes out to them. They truly are innocent victims.

On the Israeli side, I have nothing but sympathy for those who have died, have been injured, or lost loved ones in this fight. The losses have thus far been minimal but one dead Israeli soldier who died for his country is one too many. I cannot bear the thought of how that must affect his family.

But what alternative is there but to fight? Thank God we have people in Israel who are willing to do that. Those that are killed are Kedoshim. It doesn’t matter whether they are religious or not. All who are in the army now are among the true heroes of the Jewish people in our time. May God spare them and grant the Jewish people a complete and quick victory.

Are All Ideals Worth the Price?

Several years ago I had a conversation with a very successful outreach - or Kiruv professional who confided that his father, a renowned Rosh HaYeshiva had repeatedly turned down his invitation to address his organization. The reason he gave was Taruvos – the intermingling of the sexes that took place among the young people involved.

His son explained that if these young people were asked to come to events that were separated by sex, his Kiruv organization would shut down. American youth simply do not know or understand the Halachic requirements of the interaction between the sexes. And they certainly do not understand many of the Chumros – the religious stringencies many people have that are the result of these Halachic requirements.

That did not move his father. He passed away never having addressed his son’s Kiruv organization.

In the world of Yeshivos, these Halachos and Chumros are a matter of common knowledge and practice. But Chumros are often taken by students as Halacha because there is rarely any distinction made. The Roshei Yeshiva and Rebbeim are so focused on keeping the sexes apart, that they will rarely point out what is Halacha and what is Chumra. Young students rarely end up finding out those distinctions by themselves.

I understand the concern of the Roshei Yeshiva. I also understand their insistence on separating the sexes during adolescence – a practice I generally agree with in the classroom. But in my view they do a disservice to the truth by hiding distinctions between Halacha and Chumra.

This very strict way of dealing with the intermingling of the sexes is so strong that at times it becomes counterproductive. I believe this was the case with that Rosh HaYeshiva who refused to address his son’s Kiruv group. These were mostly young kids from non religious backgrounds. They were all there eager to find out what Orthodox Judaism was all about. They spend every organizational event being inspired to Orthodox Judaism and treated to all forms of it. Being denied the Yeshiva perspective denies them a very critical and important part of Orthodoxy.

Thank God that not all Roshei Yeshiva feel this way. NCSY of the Midwest currently has many events where Roshei Yeshiva of all stripes participate including representatives from the right. These mixed groups are addressed by Roshei Kollel of Lakewood and Roshei Yeshiva from Telshe - and many other Klei Kodesh including Agudah Poskim and even various Chasidic Rebbes. They understand that just because they do not approve of mixed sex event - that does not make it forbidden to address such a group. It is only Halacha that dictates that.

As a result, these NCSYers are treated to a wide array of Hashkafos. And the result is that the many who are motivated to become observant are drawn to the Hashkafa that is most appealing to them. Without such diversity, there would be a lot less people opting for an observant lifestyle.

This morning I was made aware of a Rosh HaYeshiva that refused a recent invitation to address a co-ed religious high school. I’m not exactly sure why he did that and cannot imagine what he hoped to accomplish.

I suppose he felt that it was inappropriate for a Right Wing Rosh HaYeshiva to be addressing a co-ed high school.. How will that look? What message will that send to his students? …or to the entire Yeshiva world when they find out? Will it be perceived as some sort of endorsement?

And there is the fact that the umbrella organization of many religious elementary and high schools, Torah U’Mesorah no longer allows new co-ed schools to be formed under its banner. Old schools are grand-fathered in. This high school is therefore still under the Torah U’Mesorah banner.

As an aside - I do not understand this new rule. There are religious parents who insist that their children attend only co-ed schools. And there are non religious parents that will not even consider sending a child to a non co-ed school. There is therefore still a great need for co-ed schools, even in today’s ever rightward moving religious environment.

This Rosh HaYeshiva’s refusal to address these students denies them an opportunity to see what his own world is really like. And if these students find out that he was invited and rejected them, that will certainly not serve the cause of Achdus or Orthodox Judaism. Does he not realize that there are students in that school that just might buy into his version of Orthodoxy – given the chance? Must he deny them that opportunity?

This is yet another missed opportunity for true Achdus. Even factoring the possible reasons I mentioned - I do not understand why he refused. Certainly there was no Halacha violation. What a tremendous Kiddush HaShem it would have been! Was it worth the price?

Building Bridges

The following statements were made about an event that involved a combined event that took place between Orthodox and Reform communities:

… if we refuse to speak with one another, we ultimately suffer from our own insulation. If Torah is truly not in the heavens, but rather in our mouths and hearts, then we find completion only in engaging the Torah found in the other.

And so we present this tale as an example of collaboration, in the spirit of the psalmist: Behold, how good and pleasant it is for brothers and sisters to come together in unity.

We look forward to continuing our effort to live up this lofty promise of achdut, a connected peoplehood.

Was this comment made by Rabbi Darren Kleinberg, the ‘renegade’ Musmach of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah? No. It was made by a Chabad Rabbi in San Fransisco as reported here.

This seems to be counter the oft expressed Orthodox position of not participating with any Heterodox movements. Events such as these are what many Charedi leaders of both past and present object to so strenuously – including Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik. There can be no unity with them.

When Rabbi Kleinberg held an event such as this he was heavily criticized for it. His Alma Mater, Yeshivat Chivevei Torah (YCT) defended him for facilitating such events. In fact YCT endorses them. It is in the spirit of what they call ‘Open Orthodoxy’. This is a philosophy that promotes the idea of interacting with them (even to the extent of discussing theology).

This is anathema not only to Charedi rabbinic leaders but even to Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik who mentored the founders of YCT. YCT leaders acknowledge this but add that - were Rav Soloveitchik alive today, he may have seen things differently and changed his mind. That is at best debatable. Most of Orthodoxy, including Centrist Orthodoxy are still opposed to it.

There was however an incident a few years ago where I think rabbinic leadership seemed to go too far. Rabbi Yosef Reinman was heavily criticized for collaborating on a book with a Reform rabbi and then going on a promotional tour. They said it was granting a Reform rabbi legitimacy. Rabbi Reinman was forced by Charedi rabbinic leaders to withdraw from the tour and disavow his book. He later publicly apologized for that book and tour saying that they were right. But he also lamented that it was an enormous missed Kiruv opportunity.

I felt – and still feel - that Charedi rabbinic leaders went too far in their interpretation of ‘granting a Reform Rabbi legitimacy’. Rabbi Reinman was right about that lost opportunity. What was gained? What was lost? Was Judaism better served by Rabbi Reniman’s withdrawal and disavowal?

How far should one go for Kiruv? Chabad seems to think one may go as far as necessary – as long as it doesn’t involve Halachic violations. That has been my observation in the past and I believe that was the operating principle in the above quote. Apparently the Lubavticher Rebbe had agreed to this idea too.

One may ask, are we allowed to teach Torah to Reform and Conservative Jewish leaders? My answer to that is why not? What can possibly be wrong with teaching another Jew Torah – even if he is a Conservative or Reform rabbi?

I believe that was the position of my own Rebbe, Rav Ahron Soloveichick. Rav Moshe, his oldest son used to do exactly that with his father’s blessing. He used to personally give a weekly Shiur to Conservative and Reform rabbis… basically providing them with their weekly sermons. I’m sure that Rav Ahron saw this as a matter of Kiruv.

Anyone who reads this blog regularly knows, I have my issues with Lubavitch and have written about them extensively. But on this issue they seem to be right. Their successes seem to argue in favor of their approach.

Which brings me back to the question of YCT’s ‘Open Orthodoxy’. Is what they do any different than what Lubavitch did here? And if so, how?

Projection - the Ultimate Defense Mechanism for Sex Abusers

Projection is a technical term in modern psychology. It is what is known as a defense mechanism. Those are ways in which people with various psychological deficiencies deal with their neuroses. Projection is the method whereby a person who has a specific negative character trait will ‘project’ that trait onto others. A sex addict calling another person a sex addict is an example of that. He will ‘see’ that part of himself on others instead of himself.

Just as there can be verbal manifestations of projection, there can be physical ones too. Projection can express itself violently - which has all too often been the case in places like Ramat Bet Shemesh, Beitar, and Meah Shearim. When these Kannaim are consumed with issues pertaining to sexual matters such as Tznius, it is very likely the case that they are themselves obsessed with it.

As such the following statement rings very true:

I am convinced that there is a direct link between violent kanoim, people who threaten and bully others, and abusers. Abuse 101 is that molestation is not as much about the immoral act but about control and bullying.

This is a direct quote from Rabbi Yakov Horowitz on his website. He was attacked in insulting ways much the same way I have been for expressing views on controversial topics. Here is just one example:

It is galling that he shamelessly piggybacks on the hard work of others in order to self promote… Shame is a well established Jewish trait. Rabbi Horowitz seems to lack this fundamental characteristic of a true Jew.

This morning Rabbi Yakov Horowitz responded to commenters who make comments like this. He did so deep in his own comments section. But I think it deserves a lot more exposure than that. So I am posting his comment in its entirety as a guest post.

Guest Post by Rabbi Yakov Horowitz

I just returned home from a whirlwind 3-day trip to Dallas which left me almost no time to read comments posted. Here are some random thoughts, very quickly typed:

1) This give and take re shabbos posting, which rov I ask my halcha sheilos re the internet to, which rov is about to silence me, et al, must be – and certainly is – the ultimate insult and poured salt on terrible wounds of long-suffering abuse victims who have not had the forum to discuss their pain in our community until now. To distract from the searing posts of sad mom and others with these non-issues is downright criminal. Even if a reader wanted to question or challenge me on these issues; I suggest that this thread was not the place for it.

2) The point that was raised about the posting of names of people accused of abuse was one I already addressed. And the posting of the name of a gadol who is the leader of thousands of Chassidim worldwide in the context of accusing him of aiding a molestor is absolutely wrong. Period. Exclamation point. And again I ask our readers to use the ‘Report This Post’ feature to delete any such comments

3) I will completely ignore the intimidation and not-so-veiled threats made against me. if any rov wants to contact me, my phone number is listed in the phone book. I do not think these threats should be deleted from the site because they shed some light into understanding how predators like mondrowitz were able to rape and sodomize our children (on shabbos and during the week) for decades – because we have allowed this type of intimidation by kanoim and askonim to continue. Much more on this later, as I am convinced that there is a direct link between violent kanoim, people who threaten and bully others, and abusers.

Abuse 101 is that molestation is not as much about the immoral act but about control and bullying. If you read the posts of the fellow who is threatening me, you will see the classic pattern of an abuser. This has little to do with the kavod of the gadol he is purportedly defending, as that could have been resolved with polite comments – or he could have simply ‘reported the post’. Rather, the one who is threatening me is obviously worried about my stand on abuse and wants to silence me. makes you wonder, doesn’t it …