Justice Tempered with Mercy

Although I wasn’t going to post anything today outside of wishing everyone a happy Pesach - I am compelled to do so. There is a move by various organizations to sign petitions on belhalf of Shalom Rubashkin.

Most people who read this - and many other Jewish blogs - know who Mr. Rubashkin is. He is the former CEO of Agriprocessors who was indicted for numerous violations of the law - and accused of some pretty heinous stuff taking place at his kosher meat processing plant in Postville, Iowa. Or at least turning a blind eye to some of it! I am not here to rehash old stories. Suffice it to say that I believe that he was responsible for a major Chilul HaShem - even if only some of those accusations were true.

My goal at the time I first wrote about it was to remove him from that business. That happened. But so did a lot more. He has been tried and convicted for bank fraud. Even though many people are crying foul - I am not going to second guess the verdict. However - there seems to be little doubt that this relatively high profile case was zealously pursued by the prosecution. Perhaps even over zealously!

Not having been at the trial and not familiar with the law… Not knowing all the evidence against him and not being a legal expert – I am not going to second guess the verdict. He has not yet been sentenced.

There does seem to be a fairly wide consensus by those more familiar with the details of the case that the sentencing recommendations are very harsh – much harsher than what is usually meted out in such cases. By far! Mr. Rubashkin faces a potential prison sentence of up to 20 years in prison – as I understand it - for a financial crime which broke banking laws but did no direct damage to anyone.

I am not excusing him. He broke the law and was convicted of the crime and should pay a price. But I must admit that the potential sentence he faces seems very excessive.

I know that there are many more pressing issues facing Klal Yisroel. But if Mr. Rubashkin has to pay a penalty of this magnitude – it will in my view be a miscarriage of justice. I do not believe he should lose 20 years of freedom for what he did.

Although there are greater injustices in Klal Yisroel now that need action – and although there is a tremendous lack of any progress on them – this injustice should not be ignored because of it. Ignoring a lesser injustice does not in any way help those with greater injustices. To the extent that any of us can help anyone at any time - we should help Mr. Rubashkin. I have signed the petition being circulated on the internet.

Here is the link. Not all petitions being circulated on his behalf are worthy and 0ne ought to be careful what they sign. Rabbi Yitzchak Adlerstein has done his homework and recommends this one. I trust his judgment.

I would urge everyone to sign it. No matter how you feel about Mr. Rubashkin, I truly believe mercy is warranted here. Do not let anger at what he did blind anyone to doing the right thing. The Jewish people are Rachamin Bnei Rachamim - a very merciful people. It is in our blood. Let us not close our hearts at this season of freedom to someone who made a mistake and in my view has already paid a very high price for it. Can anyone imagine what is going through his mind now?

I would however strongly caution against some of the truly offensive hyperbole on the part of some of the signers. They increase the Chilul Hashem many times over. I am literally appalled and almost skipped doing this post because of it. But my personal indignation and protest against this Chilul HaShem should not come at the expense of another. So even though I am reluctant to do it – it must be done. Justice and mercy demand it.

Happy Passover

Torah Thoughts for the Seder

As Pesach quickly approaches I offer 3 short Divrei Torah for the Seder.


Harei Zeh Meshubach

On the night of Pesach there is a Halachic requirement of Sipiur Yitzias Mitzrayim - the retelling of Exodus story. This is done via the Haggadah. At the very beginning of the Hagadah we are told ‘All that extend the Exodus story are praiseworthy’.

But the Shulchan Aruch tells us that we should speak about it all night – ‘until sleep overtakes us’ (OC 481:2)? This makes it a Chiuv - a requirement - and not simply praiseworthy?!

The Ksav Sofer answers with the following. The requirement of Sipur is only when Matzah and Maror lay before us. Although others say that the Mitzvah requirement of eating Matzah lasts throughout the night - Rabbi Elazar Ben Azarya holds Matzah is eaten only until midnight (Chatzos). As explained in the Gemarah in Pesachim (120b) - Matzah is compared to The Korban Pesach – the Paschal lamb. Since that may only be eaten until midnight so too - the Mitzvah of eating Matzah lasts only until midnight.

Once midnight has arrived the Mitzvah requirement of eating Matzah ends. By default the mitzvah requirement Sipur Yitzias Mitzrayim ends too. It then becomes praiseworthy rather than required.

The very next segment in the Haggadah is a story about Rabbi Elazar Ben Azarya and his colleagues relating the story of the Exodus all night indicating that the previous segment is in line with his views.


Pesach in Bnei Brak of Old

Rabbis Eliezer, Yehoshua, Alazar Ben Azarya, Akiva and Tarfon are mentioned in the context of Sipur. Why specificly is a story told about these individuals?

The answer is given by the Chida. Each of these individuals had a uniqueness about them. Their ancestors were either Kohanim, Levi’im and Gerim. R’ Yehoshua was a Levi. R’ Alazar ben Azarya and R’ Tarfon were Kohanim, and R’ Akiva was the son of Gerim. Their ancestors were not slaves. One might think they are exempt. But they are not. They must retell the Exodus story too.


Staying Up All Night

The Hagadah relates that these great Taanaim stayed up all night reciting the Exodus story they continued doing so untul their students interrupted them to tell them Zman Kriyas Shema had arrived. They had to Daven Shachris.

The question arises why did these Taanaim continue Sipur Yitzias Mitzrayim until Zman Kriyas Shema? The Mitzvah continues thought the night – which ends at Alos HaShachar, when the morning star arises? Zman Kritas Shema doesn’t begin until later at a time where daylight begins to appear over the horizon? That leaves a gap where they were not doing that Mitzvah at all. Under what context did they continue to do Sipur?

An answer is given by the Birsker Rav. He says that at the end of the night these rabbis started learning the laws of Pesach. He held that one can fulfill the Mitzvah of Sipur by doing this. Once the morning star appeared, they simply continued learning for its own sake until theiri students interrupted them with a reminder that Zman Kriyas Shema was here. And one interrupts learning to say Kriyas Shema as the Gemarah in Shabbos (11a) states.

Taken from Torah L’Daas

Links to other Divrei Torah for the Seder from my archives:

Amen

Invitations to Join the Seder

Women and the Hagadah

Starting with the Bad - Ending with the Good

Reclining at the Seder

The Wise Son and the Simple Son

One Might Have Thought

Blessed is the Promise Keeper

Pesach, Matzah, Maror

Saying Hallel at the Seder

Crossing the Red Sea

The Winds of Change

My fears about the Obama administration have proven true. Israel and the United States have had the biggest rift between them in decades. I only hope that the downward spiral ends here and changes course back to where it was. Will it? I don't know.

President Obama has taken a decidedly pointed turn away from Israel turning sharply toward the Palestinians. Not officially of course. US policy remains unchanged - for now.

In what has to be the biggest mistake since the current American administration took office - Israel announced it was adding 1600 new housing units in Ramat Shlomo. This Jerusalem neighborhood is an entirely Jewish one that is outside of the ‘Old City’ - but technically outside the pre 1967 border. This would have gone unnoticed had it not been announced in the middle of a Vice Presidential visit. The president seized on this opportunity to make his move.

In the Middle East ‘body language’ can mean more than policy. And the President’s ‘body language’ has become almost hostile to Israel. This was demonstrated last week during a meeting between the President and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Instead of the friendly atmosphere of past visits between an Israeli leader and an American President - Obama gave Netanyahu the cold shoulder. In fact it was more than just a cold shoulder. It was a ‘trip to the woodshed’. This was highlighted last week in a Washington Post article by Jackson Diehl who said as follows:

Obama has added more poison to a U.S.-Israeli relationship that already was at its lowest point in two decades. Tuesday night the White House refused to allow non-official photographers record the president’s meeting with Netanyahu; no statement was issued afterward. Netanyahu is being treated as if he were an unsavory Third World dictator, needed for strategic reasons but conspicuously held at arms length. That is something the rest of the world will be quick to notice and respond to. Just like the Palestinians, European governments cannot be more friendly to an Israeli leader than the United States.

Is this what our relationship has sunken to? I’m afraid that at the moment it would appear so.

Not that everything is negative. There are the positives. Obama has stuck to his guns about US support for Israel being unshakable. Nice words and hopeful. But sometimes body language can speak louder than policy and indeed can change policy.

A positive and upbeat meeting that was warm and friendly - yet noting differences - would have been more encouraging. Treating Netanyahu like a dictator is not – US policy notwithstanding. It only encourages more world animosity towards Israel and the Jewish people. As Diehl points out, this ‘body language’ will not go unnoticed by the Arabs and their European lapdogs. That – is discouraging.

That said Obama is no anti-Semite. I never thought he was and I have not changed my mind. He will not abandon Israel to the dogs. He will support Israel if push ever comes to shove. But at the moment it is the President doing all of the pushing and shoving. He is using the current ‘crisis’ to make his move.

He wants a peace deal. He thinks that pressuring Israel is the way to get it done and believes the US has the leverage to do it. This is after all the mantra of all the Arabists in world: Just push Israel into a peace deal – using US financial and military aid as a hammer - and all will be well. Apparently the President buys into this argument. So he is going to do what no President has ever done –impose his will. He views Israel as the obstacle to peace.

What I don’t understand is how he can ignore Israel's sworn enemies - what I would call the ‘new axis of evil’: Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran (and every other Muslim terrorist entity in the world). Doesn’t he realize that any peace deal will surely be thwarted in violent ways against Israel… and maybe even the US? Suicide missions and rocket attacks galore against Israel will be coming out of the woodwork! Doesn’t he realize that Iran supplies Hamas and Hezbollah with the weapons and the moral support to do the job?

Doesn’t the President realize that Islamist religious beliefs require Muslims to wipe Israel off the map? Has he not heard the Islamist Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad say that an endless number of times? …that Islamist clerics in Iran, Gaza, Lebanon - and all over the Arab/Muslim world preach Israel’s destruction as a Yehoreg Val Yaavor? Does he not see that the Arabs are a very religious people?

There is hardly a Muslim in the world who believes that Israel has a right to exist. The only difference between moderates and extremists is that moderates may accept a peace deal in spite of their beliefs while extremists will stop at nothing to destroy any possible compromise that goes against their beliefs. They are Moser Nefesh for that principle. Most suicide bombers do it for religious reasons.

Mr. Obama? Hello?

The President may actually have good intentions here. But his naiveté about Middle East realities is astounding!

To say I am disappointed is putting it mildly. I did not support his candidacy precisely because of the fear that something like this would happen. What makes it worse is that American public support for Israel can easily be eroded. The mainstream media spin has been tilted against Israel on this issue and that is what the public is being fed. No other administration has treated a sitting Prime Minister as a third world dictator before. And the media faults Israel for it.

Not good.

What does Israel need to do about this? They need to tread a very thin line here between outright thumbing their noses at the Obama administration and bowing to their every demand. I trust Netanyahu. He met with the President and he knows what is at stake. He also has intelligence reports that tell him how far he can go without compromising Israel’s security. This gives him an advantage over any of the rest of us who don’t. Netanyahu will not be bullied nor will he bite the hand that feeds him. It’s a delicate balance.

May God protect us all.

Another 'Win' for Rabbi Kalish

I’ve got to hand it to Rabbi Yehiel Kalish, Agudath Israel's national director of government affairs.

The Illinois State Senate has just passed a bill that will allow vouchers for children attending schools in my state. And I’m absolutely certain Rabbi Kalish was a major part of that.

It has not passed the Illinois house of representatives yet but it is a major step in that direction. I don’t know the details of the bill but in theory a voucher will be issued to students to be able to attend the school of their choice, instead of being forced by the state to attend the local public school.

In theory that choice will not be limited to other public schools but private and religious schools as well. I do not pretend to know how - or even whether - the constitutional ‘church-state’ problems were solved. But it is definitely a step in the right direction. Vouchers are currently operational in other states. And I understand they are very successful.

I also don’t know if these vouchers will cover entire tuition bills or only portions of them but they will definitely help in a major financial way. Schools will have a new source of income and parents will be relieved of the oppressive tuition bills they now pay - at least in substantial part. An article in VIN reports:

"The highest-quality research is clear on two points," said Collin Hitt, Director of Education Policy for the Illinois Policy Institute. "School vouchers improve education for students who use them, and the resulting competition improves the performance of surrounding public schools. This is bold policy, but it can change the course of education in Chicago. If the Illinois House passes this legislation, families will have a better choice of schools, public schools will compete for students and improve. This can all be accomplished at no additional cost to taxpayers or public education."

Indeed. As Mr. Hitt said - it can change the course of education in Chicago. What’s nice about this is that it has bi-partisan support. It is a win-win for everybody, the parents; the schools - both private and public –and the general public welfare since better educations will result in more productive citizens. And it won’t cost the taxpayer a dime - apparently.

If the voucher program is passed, and eventually extends to all children (as it should - why not allow school choice to all parents) Jewish families will finally get what every other American citizen has been getting since the advent of free mass public education - a free (or at least a greatly reduced in cost) education for their children.

Certainly parochial school parents who pay the same property taxes that public school parents do - deserve to choose the type of education for their children thats suits them best. They will be able to choose a Jewish one which will not break their backs financially. This will also encourage wavering parents who have resisted giving their children a formal Jewish education because they fear the cost – to send their children to Jewish day schools.

Like I said it's win-win. I see absolutely no downside here – except for schools that aren’t producing and teachers who aren’t really teaching. Those schools should not be open and those teachers should not be ‘teaching’.

It is not a reality yet. But maybe – just maybe - it is coming.

My hat is off to Rabbi Kalish. I don’t know exactly what part he had in this but I’m sure it was substantial. I know he works very hard lobbying the state legislature and has made many friends and allies there. He has also worked with Christian and Catholic lobbyists on common goals - like voucher programs - and has endeared himself to them.

He is one of the hardest working people I know and has had many successes benefiting the Jewish community – especially in easing the financial burden. Getting free bus service is one such example.

This is Agudah’s most important function. They are perhaps the most effective Orthodox advocacy organization in America. They know how to get things done. And Rabbi Yehiel Kalish is no small part of that.

How far he has come since the time I first met him as a member of the Hebrew Theological College Beis HaMedresh! He remains a loyal alumnus there and an adherent of their Hashkafos. Which are not necessarily identical with those of Agudah. It is to Agudah’s credit that they hired him anyway and I’m sure they’re not sorry. He started out as the executive director of Agudah of the Midwest and has risen to become a one of its national leaders working under Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zwiebel, its executive director.

Thank you Yehiel. I’m proud to say I know you.

Updated ( 3/27/10 9:18PM - CDT)

Hospitals, Graves, and Ethics

Hospitals and graves. That doesn’t really sound like an exciting subject. But it is the hottest issue in Israel right now. At least that is what one resident who lives there told me.

The issue centers on the construction of a hospital emergency room at Barzilai Hosptial in the city Ahskelon. Ashkelon is within range of Hamas rocket fire and has been hit in the past. Fortifed (against rocket attacks) emergency rooms are badly needed in this area. So a project was begun to construct such a facility in ways that make the most sense medically. and would facilitate saving the most lives. The site was found and two years ago construction began.

The problem is that some ancient gravesites were found during the initial excavation.

There is much discussion about in Jewish Law surrounding the desecration of Jewish graves . Although there are kabalistic issues with it too, it mainly centers on something called Nivul HaMes – desecrating a dead body.

Disinterment of human remains risks disturbing the body to the point of desecration. When dealing with an entire cemetery - especially one that is ancient - the risk of desecration multiplies exponentially. So unless there are compelling reason to do so, they are to be left alone when discovered. But this Halacha does not apply to the graves and bodies of idol worshippers. Those bodies may be transferred and buried elsewhere.

So what does one do when discovering a cemetery underneath the area of a needed emergency room? That answer came quickly from the Charedi rabbinic leadership. Do not touch them. Move the ER to another area.

The problem with that is that it will make that ER less efficient – which could cost lives. The planners determined that the original location would be the most ideal. This is besides the massive additional expense of waiting and relocating.

But let us leave expense out of this. The fact that changing the location might cost lives should certainly be a circumstance where carefully and respectfully disinterring and relocating those bodies is warranted. Additionally - except for the Charedi Poskim - the consensus seems to be that these are the graves of non Jewish idol worshippers. The Israeli Chief Rabbinate has already permitted these bodies to be exhumed and relocated.

But Rabbi Yaakov Litzman won’t allow it. He is the Charedi deputy health minister under Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government. His decision is being supported by the prime minister who decded to follow his predecessor Ehud Olmert who also supported the Charedi position here. Litzman has threatened to resign if the location is not changed.

Doctors involved with the situation are appalled. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The Health Ministry director resigned Monday and doctors are protesting. The decision is expected to delay construction by a year and cost about $10 million.

I can understand the politics of the situation. The Israeli Knesset which is a parliamentary system requires a ruling majority to stay in power. Since they rarely if ever get enough votes for their own party to be the majority -a coalition is put together via other parties who join with them.

Joining a coalition does not come cheap. Smaller parties invited to join are bought off with money (for their causes), positions in the cabinet, and in the case of the religious parties – additional promises about Halachic matters.

So if it takes delaying construction of a medical facility by relocating it to a medically less desirable location – well that’s a small price to pay for power. Besides - they can claim Halacha is on their side. After all Rabbi Litzman is Rav Elayshiv’s man in the Keneset. Who better to follow than that?!

Here is my problem. What about the ethics? How in good conscience can a needed medical facility be toyed with like this? Yes, desecration of graves is a serious issue, but there is a medical necessity here. Pikucach Nefesh is involved. People who need it aren’t getting it. And relocating it will cost lives. That is the consensus of doctors. And all but the Charedi rabbinic leadership say that these graves aren’t even Jewish! From the Jerusalem Post:

State Control Committee chairman Yoel Hasson (Kadima) said in his committee session that the emergency department fortified against Gazan rockets must be built in the fastest and least expensive way possible. In addition, it must be ensured that the distance between it and the main building is not unnecessarily long. In any case, the solution must be decided by professionals, Hasson said.

For years, there was no money for the project, according to the Treasury, which eventually agreed to supplement a private donation from the US. But the discovery of the skeletons – pagan, according to the Antiquities Authority, and not Jewish, as Litzman claims – put the project on hold.

There is something terribly wrong when doing the right thing becomes subject to the politcs of power.

Jerusalem – Settlement or Capital?

I must say that I swelled with pride when I heard Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu say that Jerusalem is not a settlement. And that it is the capital of Israel.(See video below)

This fact is being almost completely ignored or at least discounted by both the media and the administration. The sad thing is that there are many Jews who do not see Jerusalem in that way. They see it as a disputed territory where many Palestinians live. Never mind that the Kotel and Har HaBayis are there. Jerusalem is both the religious and historic capital of Israel since the time David HaMelech conquered it. There can be no more Jewish place than that.

Thankfully the participants at AIPAC where Netanyahu made that statement do understand that fact and applauded him when he said it.

I must also admit that it really irks me when I hear an administration official talk about Jerusalem as disputed territory. It really drives home the way they think of Israel itself. They do not in any way see Israel as a biblical heritage for the Jewish people. They see it as a response to the Holocaust in a ‘Never Again!’ sense.

Ironically it was Rabbi Meir Kahane – if I understand correctly - who coined the term, ‘Never Again!’ Rabbi Kahane was never held in any kind of esteem by American or Israeli government officals. No one would be more opposed to the US administration policy on Israel than he was. And no one would be more opposed to current Israeli policy than he. While I never agreed with his inflammatory rhetoric or some of his tactics, I understood his passion. His heart was in the right place. He understood the true relevance of Jerusalem and the entire state of Israel.

He lived those values and ultimately paid a very high price for them. I both admired Meir Kahane and at the same time was very troubled by him. Rav Ahron Soloveichik was vigorously opposed to his tactics. I recall that he took out time from Shiur once to make that clear to us.

There are some people who question whether Netanyahu should have been making these kinds of remarks in light of the recent controversy. The announcement of 1600 new housing units during a visit by the Vice President has caused quite a flap. This was widely seen as a slap in the face to Israel’s strongest ally and biggest supporter. The ally who backs up its support with money and weapons. Weapons that are indespesible to Israel’s security. Indeed this may have been the biggest rift between the two countries since the Eisenhower era when in 1956 then President Eisenhower forced Israel to retreat for the Suez Canal.

But as much as I support Netanyahu’s comments - my position on settlements is well known to readers of this blog. Just to review, I am in favor of land for peace in theory. A true peace would be worth the price. But I do not see any realistic possibility of a true peace as long as there is a dangerous radical Islamist presence in the area. Hamas and Hezbollah provide that presence in spades - courtesy of Iran. So I am opposed to ‘land for peace’ as things stand now. Nonetheless as a practical matter I have been and still am strongly opposed to makeshifts settlements in sections of the West Bank that are densely populated by Palestinians.

This does not however diminish my admiration for the courage displayed by Benjamin Netanyahu for stating the truth to power. Jerusalem is Israel’s capital. Period. There should never be any doubt about that. It is not a settlement. Those Jews who so cavalierly treat it like one are either ignorant about their own heritage or don’t care about it.

That said - I have not changed my mind about the error made by the Israeli government in making an announcement about building new housing in Jerusalem during an official visit by the Vice President. He had came there to show solidarity with Israel. To make that announcement then - knowing the American position and attitude was wrong and even stupid. I therefore think that Israel ought to include Jerusalem in its moratorium on new housing. Even though we do not relinquish our rightful claim to our heritage it would be a nice gesture on the part of Israel to show good faith to the American administration on this issue. It can do no real harm. Israel’s position is clear. Netanyahu reiterated it. Putting a temporary halt to construction will in no way indicate abdication of our religious and historic rights there.

So to those who might think that Netanyahu comments were impolitic and could strain relations with the US, I say don’t worry about it. No one in the US administration will blame the Prime Minister of Israel for claiming Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Not anymore than they will blame the Palestinians for insisting that East Jerusalem is theirs. Why should we back off from our claims if they do not back off from theirs?

The right thing to do is to now quietly without any fanfare NOT proceed with any construction in Jerusalem until the end of Netanyahu’s declared moratorium.

If the so-called proximity (shuttle) talks commence and lead to direct talks – they will almost certainly end in failure – precisely because the positions on Jerusalem on both sides are irreconcilable. Not to mention the fact that Islamic radicals will never allow it! They will start killing Jews again to make certain of it. At that time when talks between Israel and the Palestinians break down – as they inevitably will, construction in Jerusalem can resume.

When Loyalty Trumps Wisdom Leadership Fails

Rabbi Natan Slifkin has written a post that reflects an unfortunate reality in the world of Charedi rabbinic leadership. I'm not sure it applies to all Charedi rabbinic leaders, but it certainly applies to some. And it has clearly contributed to some of the most grievous situations in the Torah world today. Examples abound.

The issue I am talking about here is signing on to the words of others by mere dint of who they are rather than what they said. The most recent example of this is apparently with no less a rabbinic personality than Rav Chaim Kanievsky.

I do not know him personally and have only spoken to him once. My impression of him is that he is a man of deep piety and complete dedication to the welfare of Klal Yisroel. And though I have not learned his Seforim, I have been been assured of his great brilliance in Torah which he demonstrated at a very early age in the Seforim he published. He also has some very impressive Yichus. His father was the Steipler Gaon. His father in law is Rav Elyashiv. Many consider R’ Chaim to be one of the great Gedolei HaDor.

And yet what he apparently did recently seems to counter the very idea of Gadlus as I understand it - at least as far as leadership is concerened. He signed onto a letter simply because others he respected signed onto it. In question was a letter that had been released asking the religious community to support Elior Chen (pictured). This fellow is a Charedi cult leader and described in a Ynet headline:

Elior Chen indicted for abuse -'Abusive rabbi' charged with ongoing abuse of eight children. Chen accused of beating children with hammer, burning organs with lighter, leaving one child in vegetative state.

I would not think there is any sane person who would defend this fellow. But… there are people who do. The claim was supposedly made in a letter signed by Charedi rabbinic leaders that Rabbi Chen was a Marbitz Torah and a Tzadik. He must therefore be considered innocent. The letter was an appeal for financial support.

The letter's authenticity and its signatures was later disputed and called a fraud. Was that the case? I’m not so sure. From his blog, Rationalist Judaism, here are Rabbi Slifkin’s words:

But then a neighbor of mine wrote to Rav Chaim Kanievsky, asking him why he signed it. He received the following reply (translated from the Hebrew by Rabbi Slifkin):

"On a letter that my rabbis are signed on to, I also sign."

It was apparently written in his own handwriting and is reproduced on Rabbi Slifkin’s blog. If this is true and not a fraud itself, it is mind boggling. And it is a revelation. If someone of Rav Kanievsky’s stature can sign a document proclaiming the innocence of this monster - only because his rabbis signed on, what does that say about him?

On the positive side one can simply say that the profound respect he has for his rabbis led him to completely trust their judgment - no matter what. It might seem admirable to some to have so much respect for one’s mentors that he will automatically sign on to anything they say. Indeed honoring one’s rabbis is quite an admirable thing to do and the extent to which one goes can increase the admiration. In a vacuum perhaps that is true.

But in this case I would have to strongly disagree. How can anyone simply sign onto the words of others without knowing or at least checking the facts in a situation like this? It appears that the evidence of Chen’s guilt is so massive that conviction of these horrible crimes is virtually guaranteed.

He amply demonstrated his own guilt by fleeing to Brazil to avoid prosecution. He was later captured and extradited to Israel. Is it admirable to blindly go along with his ‘rabbis’ in this case without doing some investigating on your own - simply because they are his rabbis?

This is of course not the first time something like this has happened in our day. Rabbi Slifkin’s own experience can testify to that. When his books were banned as heresy many rabbis who never read a word of them signed onto the ban simply because of the stature of Rav Elyashiv -who had issued the ban.

They used a similar logic. If the man they considered to be the Gadol HaDor signed on - that was enough for them. I don’t blame Rabbi Slifkin for being sensitive to this since he was the victim of it. One might assume personal bias. But he happens to be right.

I should quickly add that Rav Chaim Kanievsky remains a Gadol in Torah and his stature has not been diminished in my eyes on that level. He may well be very wise man to ask for advice on various issues. But he cannot be considered a leader if this story is true. It is one thing to know Torah. It is an entirely different thing to be a Torah leader. No matter how great one’s knowledge of Torah is or even how dedicated to Klal Yisroel he is.

Redefining Centrism

I have to take issue with Dr. Norman Lamm.

Most people know that I am a big fan of his. Never having had any personal discussion with him on the subject – he is nonetheless - based on his writings - one of my philosophical mentors as described in my bio. He helped ‘flesh out’ my Hashkafa of Torah U’Mada by providing various models in Judaism that could be seen through that lens albeit with various reservations specific to each.

He is also the first to use – if not coin - the term Centrist Orthodoxy. This is a term that I use to describe a specific sociological grouping within Modern Orthodoxy. And it is to this grouping that I belong. But as pointed out in a recent interview published in the Yeshiva University student newspaper, The Commentator, he rejected that term almost as soon as he chose it. He explained as follows:

I quickly saw that it was totally misunderstood. “Centrist” does not mean that you have Conservative and Reform Judaism on one side and “Real Judaism” on the other and we are somewhere in the center. That is nonsense. Rather, it means that we are the center within the Orthodoxy community. I now try very much to discourage the use of the word “Centrist,” because it has been misunderstood…

I would agree that if the word Centrist alone is used outside the context of Orthodoxy, one might make such an error. At the same time I believe it is a valid sociological grouping within the context of Orthodoxy itself.

One cannot make the kind of error Dr. Lamm describes if one attaches the word Orthodoxy to the word Centrist.

Dr. Lamm further argues that although there are obviously differences between various Modern Orthodox Jews that does not justify separate philosophical groupings:

Some sociologists distinguish between “Modern” and “Centrist” Orthodoxy – which is narishkayt (foolishness). Of course there are varieties within Modern Orthodoxy, just as there are varieties within Charedi Judaism; none of us is monolithic. But there is absolutely no essential difference between these titles in terms of the group they describe.

The dichotomy is not between Modern Orthodox and Centrist Orthodox. It is between Centrist Orthodoxy and right and left wing Orthodoxy. So why bother at all with the term Modern Orthodox? Because I happen to believe that as a Hashkafa, Modern Orthodoxy is more proactive in asserting the legitimacy of a Centrist Hashkafa.

At this point I should explain what I mean by Centrism. Although I have done so before in other contexts it will be helpful for purposes of this essay to briefly explain it again in this conext.

Centrism as the word implies means middle - between two extremes. It is what the Rambam describes as the Mida HaEmtzais - the golden mean. He goes on to describe it in terms of human temperament and states that a balanced and non extreme temperament is the Torah ideal. I believe it can be applied to Hashkafos as well. I firmly believe that God does not want extreme interpretations of His Torah. The truth almost always lies somewhere in the middle. Hence the name Centrist.

Most Centrists might be considered Right Wing Modern Orthodox (RWMO). They are on the right side of Modern Orthodoxy, but they are definitely near the center of Orthodoxy itself - sans the word modern. Centrism can apply to virtually all Hashkafos. But I do believe that its philosophical home is Modern Orthodoxy. It is also true however that moderate Charedim can be also be found near the center of Orthodoxy.

Right Wing Modern Orthodox Jews and Moderate Charedim are very close. Even though they arrive in the center from different perspectives. As I’ve said many times - this is the basis for their ultimate melding into a single sociological grouping. They may not call themselves Centrists but that is where they live – right in the center of the two extremes of left and right. As I’ve said many times - both groupings will definitely end up melding into one sociological grouping to become the largest single identifiable segment within all of Orthodox Jewry. At least in America.

One might argue that Centrists are to be found only within Modern Orthodoxy because of their views about Torah and Mada (TuM). But I am no longer so sure about that. There are many who believe in Torah IM Derech Eretz(TIDE) that stem from the Charedi perspective. Although there are philosophical differences between the two camps about TuM versus TIDE – it cannot be argued that both groupings value Mada and participate in various aspects of western culture. I strongly believe that both camps can call themselves Centrist.

Getting back to Dr. Lamm’s point about the term Centrist Orthodoxy having no essential differences from Modern Orthodoxy – I would say that is not the correct dichotomy to be made. Centrism is not a Hashkafa in contradistinction to Modern Orthodoxy. It is rather a legitimate subdivision of it that is outgrowing its roots to include moderate Charedim.

I doubt that moderate Charedim would ever accept that term for themselves since it has been so closely identified with TuM – which they do not accept. But-the center is definitely where both RWMO and moderate Charedim can be found.

The bottom line is that Centrism is not only a legitimate description and name for those of us in the Hashkafic center that value the study of Mada and participate in the culture - I think it is the wave of the future for mainstream Orthodoxy. There will always be Hashkafic differences between people of faith. As Dr. Lamm notes:

Of course there are varieties within Modern Orthodoxy, just as there are varieties within Charedi Judaism; none of us is monolithic.

But those differences do not diminish the actuality of a vibrant and growing Centrism that includes members from both the modern Orthodox world and the Charedi world. They may not call themselves Centrist. But I can think of no better name for them.

Why Rav Ahron was a Gadol

Rav Aharon Soloveichik, zt"l, when asked his thoughts on homosexuality, replied, "It is terrible. It is almost as great a sin as cheating in business."

That was a quote from an article about homosexuality by Rabbis Michael J. Broyde and Solomo Brody in the Jewish Press. They say that they can’t verify the quote. But it sounds so much like something he would have said.

Their presentation of the issue coincides with my views on the subject. But homosexuality is not what I’m writing about here. It is about Rav Ahron.

This type of quote was one of the things that so endeared Rav Aharon to me and to all of his Talmidim. He spoke his mind and did not mince words. He spoke the truth to power and had no reservation addressing controversial issues. He never gave a thought about how what he said might effect his stature. He was far more interested in truth and justice.

He ended up paying a very high price for his high standard of ethics but it never deterred him. He took heat from both the left and the right for his positions but never wavered . His principled stand opposing Traditional Shuls cost him his job as Rosh HaYeshiva at HTC. Some say it cost him his health. But he always stood firm and went the extra mile in promoting and defending his beliefs.

In the example above Rav Ahron could have easily said that the sin of the homosexual act described in the Torah is a capital offence and cheating in business is not. But he believed that cheating in business is a far more serious problem because it is relatively easy to do and get away with and therefore probably more widespread.

He wanted to emphasize how serious the sin of cheating in business is so people do not treat it lightly. So he exaggerated in an off-hand casual remark to make the point. This was Rav Aharon. Just thought I’d mention it.

Daniel Yaakov Greenland

So – I became a grandfather again. My daughter Rivkie gave birth to a beautiful baby boy last Motzoei Shabbos. He is the little guy in the photo. The rest of the people are his siblings (L-R) Shimon, Meira, Mordechai, and Noam. The Bris is tomorrow - Sunday morning March 21st - and of course the baby will be named at that time. For the time being, we are calling him Earl. I will report back after the Bris when I find out his new name. Stay tuned.

Update (3/21/10 - 12:01 PM CDT)

Just got back from the Bris and my new grandson's name is Daniel Yaakov. He was named after two people spanning two millenia in time. The first is the great biblical figure Daniel Ish Chamudos about whom Chazal indicate has the personal quailties of Moshiach (Sanhedrin 98b). The other is Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky, famed Rosh HaYeshiva of Torah VoDaath and one of my personal heroes - which should not be a surprise to anyone who reads my blog regularly.

If emulating the qualities of two great Torah persoanlties was their goal my daughter and son in law could not have made a better choice than these two figures.

Daniel's great piety, his knowldge of the culture of his times, his survival in the lion's den, and intepretation of the 'handwriting on the wall' for Belshazzar (which led him to a position of Bablonian leadership - ranking 3rd highest from the king) are well known and need no embellishment from me.

Rav Yaakov is known not only for his vast knowledge of Torah and great piety, he is known for great character as well. His kind and respectful treatment of others regardless of their level of religiosity - or regardless of their relgion- is legendary. My Bracha to Daniel Yaakov is that he always look to these great Torah perosnalities as role models but even more importantly to his own parents who themselves live those values.

Religious but Primitive Savages

What are we supposed to do when we don’t like our new neighbors? The same thing we always do whenever something happens we don’t like. We react like animals.

That seems to be the motto of the Meah Shearim community. No, not the motto of their hooligans. But the motto of the ‘good guys’. The supposed vast majority of Meah Shearim types who their defenders say do not participate or approve of the violence.

This is the claim constantly being made by those who refuse to criticize anyone with a beard and Peyos. They say that anyone who criticizes them is anti Charedi. It is just a few hooligans who are responsible - hooligans with time on their hands. I have no doubt that hooligans participate in the violence. But they are not alone nor are they the instigators – and I doubt there is any significant disapproval.

You cannot say that the several hundred people who participated in the latest round of rioting are just a few hooligans. As reported in YWN they were called on to do so by community Askanim (organizers) who broadcast on loudspeakers throughout Meah Shearim urging everyone to riot.

The issue they were rioting about seems to be about their new neighbors. They are renting apartments there. The residents do not approve and are protesting the landlords. But the issue is irrelevant. It is the response that is relevant.

Once and for all it should be clear to all that the people of Meah Shearim are little more than religious but primitive savages. Their worldview is limited to their own little four cubit square – their own Daled Amos. They see only themselves as being Torah true. To them purity means living only among like minded people. Their attention to details of ritual is the only thing that is important to them. The outside world does not exist for them. It is all one big Tumah.

Chilul HaShem doesn’t mean anything to them either - outside their own Daled Amos. It doesn’t even exist. There is no such thing as a Tinok Shenishbu. Goyim are seen as props - to be used as needed (hopefully not at all). And any injury to a bystander - even to one of their own - in the cause of righteousness is worthy. Anyone who inadvertently gets injured during a riot should wear that injury like a badge of pride.

This kind of thinking is so primitive and ignorant, it’s a wonder that these people have survived into the 21st century. But not only have they survived - they are growing by leaps and bounds. So much so that many of them have been forced to find housing outside the Daled Amos of Meah Shearim.

But that’s OK. They have managed to create a new ‘Daled Amos’ elsewhere. Like Ramat Bet Shemesh B. And they bring their primitive values right along with them. It is a complete and total intact transplant of Meah Shearim to the suburbs. So there too, when they see something they don’t like they react violently. Like rough-housing a grandmother holding a grandchild because she entered a Mehadrin bus through the men’s entrance. Or beating up a Religious Zionist teenage girl one Friday night as she was passing through their neighborhood.

Is there any real question about the fundamentalist and extreme nature of these people? Is there any real difference between their methods of dealing with religious problems and those Islamic extremists? Different religions - to be sure but both primitive. Islam is just more religious about it and goes even further in their violent ways. But the only real difference is in degree - not in method. Methods that hearken back to the dark ages.

Once again let me be clear. These are not hooligans. These are the solid citizens of Meah Shearim – who have the ‘courage’ to do something about any ‘problem’ that arises. And they are spreading out.

I don’t know what it will take to change their savage ways. Obviously they do not understand what civilized behavior means. They don’t want to understand it. To them civilized means modern. A Modern Jew may as well be Jack the Ripper to them.

I can’t believe that Charedi rabbinic leaders in Israel can continue to just sit back, shrug their shoulders, and say “There is nothing we can do about it!” “They just won’t listen to us.” “All we can do is to say their behavior is wrong.”

But there is something they can do. They can Shrei Gevalt – scream bloody murder! They can ostracize. They can put the entire community outside the pale of Judaism! They can say that anyone who does these things is not considered Orthodox. They can call for boycotts of Meah Shearim. Boycott their businesses. Boycott their products. Boycott their Seforim. Boycott their Poskim.

Yes, there are things they can do. It may or may not be effective. But at least they will be on the right side of the issue with the passion it deserves instead making tepid responses and shrugging their shoulders.

I sometimes wonder if they pull their punches because they have sympathy for their causes - though disapproval of their means.

Perhaps it’s because they see the Meah Shearim rioters as people who look like themselves. I really believe that there is something to that. This can be seen from the fact that they so quickly and strongly condemn a modern Orthodox or Dati innovation they don’t like.

For example they have a far bigger problem with Yoatzot Halacha – women who are taught Hilchos Niddah to the point where they can advise other women on those issues - than they do with beating up a grandmother who sat in the unofficial men’s section of a Non Mehadrin bus.

Of course they disapprove of the beating. But I do not hear the outrage. The punches are pulled for the bearded men with Peyos who beat her up. They were wrong but they are Charedi and their intentions were good. The outrage is reserved for Yoatzot. They are outside the pale of Judaism! Yoatzot do not look Charedi.

I really do think that there is a lot of this kind of thinking going on. And therein lies both the problem and the solution.

Update (12:56 PM CDT): The video originally accompanying this post has been removed. It was misleading in the sense that it did not show the violence described in the original article at YWN. It looked rather meek. Here are some excerpts from YWN that describe the situation more accurately:

Rioting is taking place at this time in the Batei Warsaw in Yerushalayim. The violence began early Thursday afternoon. The loudspeakers called on people to come and take part and within a short time, several hundred people were on hand, some taking part in the violence and other observing. The scene is literally one of chaos and vandalism, random destruction of property.

Some of the shouts include “murderer” and the sounds of what appears to be breaking windows can be heard. A number of MDA ambulances seem to have evacuated injured from the scene...

Yerushalayim askan Yossel Kroizer, a well know personality in the area was injured in the violence at Batei Warsaw, apparently in need of hospitalization but he has refused transport. He is remaining on the scene with his head bandaged. Large rocks have been thrown at one particular apartment, and violence is not abating.

At least five people have been injured in the mayhem, apparently from rocks thrown in the area. The area is shut down and all public transportation has been halted.

When Positive Change Brings Negative Results

Reform Judaism has changed. In fact it has done almost a 180 degree turn in terms of the attitude towards Mitzvos. It has gone from a movement of rejecting all ritual observance to one of endorsing – if not requiring them.

It is impossible to over-state the significance of this relatively new turnabout. I recall growing up in Toledo of the late 50s - walking to Shul with my father on Shabbos. When we passed by the Collingwood Avenue Temple - my father informed me that if we were to walk into that Temple the rabbi would require us to remove our Yarmulkees.

Today many Reform rabbis can be seen wearing them in the street. One will often even see a Sukkah on the property of a Reform temple. There are many more such ritual innovations that would make the founding fathers of Reform Judaism turn over in their graves.

Although there are still diehard Reform leaders that are fighting this trend toward tradition - I think it’s a losing battle for them. Those who have seen the handwriting on the wall now realize that Judaism sanitized of all ritual is a prescription for extinction. So even though they still consider Halacha to be non binding, it is a welcome change to see them turn in the direction of ritual observance.

But this development is not all roses. The return to ritual has taken some interesting turns that are not so welcome. In some cases their acceptance and practice of a ritual is somewhat corrupted. One can overlook that I suppose in the overall view of things. Positive trends will often take a not so positive detour before getting back on track. This happens when those trends become disruptive.

A case in point is the advent of the Women of the Wall. This is a group led by Anat Hoffman - a Reform leader. They come every Rosh Chodesh to the Kotel with their Talis and Teffilin to Daven and Lein.

In one sense this is a positive development. Her predecessors a generation or two ago would hardly even know what a Talis and Teffilin were - let alone use them for prayer. Today one can go into a Reform Temple and find mostly men and some women wearing these religious items as they Daven. Truly amazing!

Ms. Hoffman has taken this new sense of devotion to God to another level. She has inserted herself and her group into the Kotel Plaza area on the women’s side of the Mechitza. This is an area that is frequented mostly by Charedim. It is also under the control of Charedi authorities. This behavior was very disruptive. Especially when the ‘Chazanit’ started leining in a loud voice. That has resulted in a violent response from some Charedi opponents.

It is ironic that the by inserting more spirituality into their lives they have become so disruptive that it has caused a violent reaction by those whose own values are supposed to be entirely spiritual. On the one hand I applaud their return to observance by the Reform Movement. But I am troubled by those who express it in ways that are so disruptive of others.

A while back a compromise solution was found where a different section of the Kotel was made available to them. A section called Robinson’s Arch. But for some reason Ms. Hoffman decided to go back to the Kotel Plaza and stir up controversy. My guess is that her reasons for doing that were less than spiritual. They probably have more to do with asserting ‘rights’ than they do with expressing spirituality. I suspect that this is mostly about feminist politics and challenging the status quo control of the Kotel by Charedim.

What she is doing is wrong. By asserting her rights she is trampling on the rights of those who have religious problems with her behavior at the Kotel. The behavior lacks respect for the sensitivity of others. Especially in light of the fact that she has been given another section of the Kotel to use in any manner of prayer service she chooses. Rabbi Avi Shafran makes a very eloquent argument of this point in a cordial interview conducted by a Reform rabbi on his cable TV show.

The problem once again is that there are ‘religious’ Jews who think they can take matters into their own hands. And by doing so they not only lose any possible public sympathy which undermines their own cause, the violence can easily cause physical harm to innocent by-standers. And of course there is the minor detail of the massive world-wide Chilul HaShem it causes!

As is evident from the photo above and the video below chairs were thrown by these misogynist ignoramuses indiscriminately over the Mechitza at the women on the other side – as a form of protest against the Women of the Wall! They were soon arrested and questioned.

As I have said many times -no one approves of their violent actions. Not even their leaders - at least publicly. But no one does anything about it. So whenever the opportunity for violent response comes up – there they go again!

Tepid statements of disapproval from their leadership are more of a wink and a nod of approval than it is any serious condemnation. The lack of seriousness about it is evident from the fact that those arrested will very likely be released by the police. With absolutely no consequences to their actions.

I do not support the Women of the Wall. But I do not call for protest. I am completely against it. My attitude is let them have Robinson’s Arch and they can do their thing there. It should not be of any concern to the rest of us.

The problem with the leadership of the community from which those protesters come - is not that they oppose the Women of the Wall. It is in how strongly they oppose it. The stridency of their opposition is not lost on those who have escalated the violence here. I’m convinced that next month that escalation will continue.

The only way to stop it is hard jail time. Those involved in violent protest of any kind in any place or any time should pay a heavy price for it. They currently pay no price at all. And that is the fault of their leadership.

I would also suggest that their mentors, rabbis, and teachers tone down the rhetoric against anything or any group to which they are opposed. It’s one thing to – even strongly - oppose what they disagree with. It is another to oppose it in ways that inspire violence.

Unfortunately - though I constantly protest this type of violence - offering what I believe might be effective measures to curb it… I am probably talking to the wall.

Upon Further Review…

After watching the video of Rabbi Hurwitz commenting on the controversy over her ordination to the Rabbinate, I feel compelled to once again comment.

Rabbi Hurwitz is about as sincere and committed to Orthodox Judaism as anyone could be. But much of her speech seemed to be addressing the feminist concerns of her audience at JOFA – the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance. She seemed to be saying that by her achievement - women have finally arrived! In other words another barrier to women has been toppled.

To her credit she agreed that now is not the time to insist on the title rabbi (or rabba). Nor should the term ordination be used for what she was granted. She settled for ‘Maharat’ and ‘conferring’ in place of those terms. But she was also disappointed by it. Nonetheless she realizes that there is no benefit in fighting a battle that could undermine her real accomplishment of becoming the first female spiritual leader in Orthodoxy and adding for the first time a female voice to the Rabbinate. Perhaps someday - she speculated - female rabbis will get the appropriate title. But not now. The thrust of her speech seemed to be all about what women breaking barriers to better serve the Jewish people.

But is precisely the breaking of this barrier that is being condemned by opponents like Agudah and the Rabbinical Council of America. I don’t really think it is the title they object to. It is the concept itself. Let’s call a spade a spade. Maharat – Rabbi – Rabba… it’s all the same thing. Rabbi Weiss tried to give her a title which indicated she was a female rabbi. He was rebuffed by his own rabbinic fraternity in a compromise that allowed him to retain membership while continuing his program of conferring spiritual leadership status upon women who complete a Semicha program.

I understand and appreciate Rabbi Hurwitz’s sincerity. I even applaud it. It speaks of her own high spiritual goals. But there is no question in my mind that she was in part influenced by feminist notions of egalitarianism. If men can be rabbis - why not women?! That seemed clear to me in her speech to JOFA. I don’t see how anyone can avoid noting that.

I don’t really have any issues with her personally. She is a sincere young lady seeking to serve the Jewish people in a non-traditional way. She has received an education virtually identical to that of her male counterparts. And although she is limited in her ability to fully serve Judaism as a Rabbi by the very Orthodoxy she is so committed to - she has nevertheless achieved her goal of becoming the first female rabbi and can now minister to her constituents in Halachicly permissible ways.

But the controversy is not about Halacha. It is about breaking tradition. It is not about whether women are capable of doing what men do. Of course they are. It is about whether breaking tradition for this purpose is a laudable goal worthy it.

Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zweibel put it well in a response on behalf of Agudah to an editorial in the Jerusalem Post criticizing Agudah for ‘excommunicating’ Shuls that hire female rabbis. He correctly posited that it was decidedly not an excommunication but the break from Orthodox tradition that was at issue:

...a refusal to jettison any part of the Jewish religious tradition is precisely what defines Orthodoxy. Yes, changes can occur, and have occurred, in normative Orthodox practice. But such changes are rare, and they are instituted only after the deepest deliberations of the greatest Torah leaders of a generation, not as fiats motivated by the Zeitgeist.

And so there should be nothing shocking about recognized rabbinic leaders rejecting a proposed radical change in Jewish tradition.

That is the real question here. Is this radical change warranted now? After listening to Rabbi Hurwitz, I remain unconvinced.

The contributions of Jewishly educated women are indeed already an important part of Orthodoxy which spans almost all of its streams to one extent or another -from left to right. It should not be minimized. It should in fact be formally be recognized with a carefully crafted degree program. As I have said many times in the past - I completely support programs that educate women Jewishly in any area of their choosing.

If they want to become experts in Halacha – they should be encouraged to do so, provided the opportunity and given recognition for their achievement. But ordaining women goes well beyond that. Aside from the impracticality of a woman functioning as a Shul rabbi – the primary area of rabbinic service - it breaks tradition for no real purpose other than to advance the cause of feminism. Women can do the kinds of things that a female rabbi would do without being ordained – as they already are.

Feminist goals may be worthy goals in many cases. But is a feminist goal valid enough make such a radical break from tradition? Those kinds of changes should be reserved for existential purposes. The lack of female rabbis is not a threat to Orthodoxy. Tradition should not be so easy to change. Radical change if done for less than existential reasons can destroy rather than preserve Judaism - turning it into something unrecognizable.

An Analysis of Animosity

There seems to be a common denominator among adherents of Torah Im Derech Eretz (TIDE). It is the idea that Torah U’Madda (TuM) is in no way similar to it. They insist that the difference between the two Hashkafos is so great that they are anathematic to each other. Whenever it is suggested that the two Hashkafos are not that far apart - there is an almost ferocious denial by adherents of TIDE.

I’m not sure why there is so much animus but I am going to try and analyze it.

I maintain that the two are not that far apart. Even after the many denials and explanations of the differences by TIDE adherents. There are differences. But to separate the two almost as if one was Treif/Passul and the other Kadosh is unfair and untrue.

I think one of the reasons for the strident opposition is the very similarity if the two. They do not want to be tainted by a philosophy that has been painted as Treif. That TuM is seen that way by them is in my view based on a complete misunderstanding of TuM. There is in fact no real hard definition of it. But it is still seen as Treif because is synonymous with Yeshiva University which they at best see as an aberration of TIDE.

YU is indeed the institution of Torah U’Mada. That was the logo of the institution for many decades. But YU is not exclusively definitive of it.

It was YU’s former president and current chancellor, Dr. Norman Lamm, who initiated the Torah U’Madda Project. He felt that Torah U’Mada had to be more than just a logo for his Yeshiva and asked members of his faculty for input into exactly what TuM is. He got widely differing opinions about it. Ranging from that of Rav Hershel Schachter who said that it means nothing more than learning Torah and Mada in the same building - to that of Rav Aharon Soloveichik and his 5 perspectives into which he incorporated Hirschean TIDE.

Dr. Lamm gave his own perspectives in his groundbreaking book Torah U’Madda. He starts with the idea that there are two towers of wisdom - one of Torah and the other of worldly knowledge or Mada - Torah being the primary of the two. He proceeds to examine various models within Orthodoxy which may exemplify this philosophy. One of those models - though not his personal favorite – is TIDE. He includes in his analyses the commonalities and difficulties with each model.

Although Dr. Lamm chooses one model that he feels most closely fits with the philosophy of Torah U’Madda he concedes that it is not perfect. There was no final definition of TuM made in that book. I believe he only meant that book as a starting point for discussion. And that is in fact where it lies today.

I prefer to think of TuM as a more broad based Hashkafa that actually includes TIDE but is not exclusively limited to it. This where where the strident TIDE opponents of TuM get it wrong. They are fighting phantoms.

In my view the commonality and primary aspect of both TIDE and TuM is that they both place a very high value on the study of Mada beyond that of Parnassa needs. I don’t see the adherents of either to be that different. Both Hashkafos encourage the study of Mada. In any given discipline - a TIDE adherent with a PhD and a TuM adherent with a PhD have acquired exactly the same degree of knowledge. In theory at least.

That each may see Mada in a different light is a minor point in my view. Does anyone really believe that Rav Hirsch would have rejected Rav Aharon Lichtenstein’s Hashkafa as invalid just because he viewed the study of Mada in a different light than he did? Does anyone really believe that the ‘Torah Only’ Hashkafa of Lakewood is closer to the Hirschean ideal than Rav Aharon Lichtenstein’s TuM? And yet many adherents of TIDE would say that indeed Torah Only is closer to TIDE than TuM!

For this attitude I blame the Charedization of the Hirschean Kehilla. TIDE has been redefined. It is no longer seen as a L’Chatchilla - the preffered approach of an Orthodox Jew. Rav Hirsch's philosophy has undergone revisionism and morphed into at best a B’Dieved of Torah U’Parnassah.

The new claim is that Rav Hirsch came up with TIDE as a form of Hora’as Shah meant only for his time and his place. The new claim is that he did not mean it as the primary route a Jew should take. The new claim is that the primary route is of course the Charedi one of Torah Only. TIDE in our day should not be adopted at all by Bnei Torah except as a last resort at best.

If I am not mistaken that belief is based on a Shaila – a Hashkafic query – asked of Rav Baruch Ber Leibowitz by Rav Shimon Schwab the leader of the Hirschean Kehilla for many years. Rav Leibowitz who was known as a zealous opponent of college convinced Rav Schwab of this revised and Charedized understanding of Rav Hirsch. And it became the standard definition of TIDE.

The new definition versus the old one was put into stark relief a while back during an event in the Breuer community celebrating Rav Hirsch’s bi-centennial. Breuers for those who don’t know is the tightly knit Kehilla – or community of Hirschean followers many of whom immigrated from Germany and settled in the Washington Heights section of Manhattan.

There were two speakers at that event. One was a new leader of that Kehilla and the other was Jonathan Rosenblum. After Jonathan spoke about the classic Hischean philosophy as a model for our time, that new leader said that only Hirsch himself could understand TIDE and that it would be impossible for anyone to practice it today. The exclusive pursuit of Torah knowledge is now everyone’s best bet.

This is the new TIDE. Most of the Breuers Kehilla can now be classified as Charedim with German Minhagim. While Mada is more accepted it there – it is at best now seen in terms of Parnassa. But classic Hirschean TIDE is not about Parnassa.

Bearing all this in mind it is not too difficult to understand why adherents of TIDE are so strongly opposed to TuM. Even by those who adhere to the classic definition of TIDE. They are part and parcel of the Charedi world that has rejected YU which they see as definitive of TuM. I don’t know that I - or anyone else - will ever disabuse them of that notion. But it is a false one filled with bias and misinformation.

A Stormy Eye

I have never met the man. But HaRav Aharon Lichtenstein keeps rising up in my eyes every time I read something new by him or about him. If anyone can be considered a Gadol in our day, it is him. Although I’m sure that in his great modesty he would vigorously deny it.

Here is what I know about hm. He attended Yeshivas Chaim Berlin and is a student of its Rosh HaYeshiva, Rav Yitzchak Hutner. He is also a student of his father in law Rav Soloveitchik and espouses the worldview of Centrist Orthodoxy.

He received Semicha from Yeshiva University and a PhD in English Literature from Harvard; is a Talmid Chacham with few peers and is also considered an expert in the works of 17th century poet John Milton. He is currently the Rosh HaYeshiva along with Rav Yehudah Amital at Yeshivat Har Etzion and maintains a position as Rosh Kollel at Gruss, the Yeshiva University Kollel in Israel.

To the best of my understanding Rav Lichtenstein’s worldview and my own are virtually identical. I do not recall ever reading anything by him with which I would disagree. And as would be the case with any Gadol, his integrity, honesty, and Ehrlichkiet are above reproach.

Rav Lichtenstein has recently published a review of ‘The Eye of the Storm’ a book by Rabbi Aharon Feldman.

Rabbi Aharon Feldman was educated in the United States and was a brilliant student of both Limudei Kodseh and Limudei Chol. He is a Major Talmid Chacham with few peers and has published many books in English. He is currently the Rosh HaYeshiva of Baltimore’s Ner Israel. In my view he had the potential to really rise above the crowd and become a Gadol himself. Ironically he was an early classmate of Rabbi Lichtenstein’s and they were good friends growing up. Although they parted ways after elementary school they actually attended the same Yeshiva – Chaim Berlin - later in life.

Much of what Rabbi Feldman has written in the past is to be admired – as pointed out by Rav Lichtenstein they include:

The Juggler and the King, which had served as a link to the Vilna Gaon’s machshavah, several of these earlier writings have been reprinted in the volume under review. These include: “Credo and Credence,” impressive for the candid quest for the certitude of faith; “Rabbinic Authority (Da’as Torah),” a blend of wise spiritual and pragmatic counsel, but shorn of excessive normative demands; and the widely circulated “Letter to a Homosexual Ba’al Teshuvah,” a balanced epistolary response which exudes sensitivity without conceding ideological or halachic ground. To these may be added, from this volume, the chapters on “Gedolim Books” and “The Chazon Ish,” which for those unfamiliar with the genre can provide a measure of perspective; and which, as regards the latter, brings us face to face with that towering magisterial exemplar of ironclad discipline, the fusion of intellect and will. In addition, the chapter on “The Steinsaltz English Talmud,” presents a fair and judicious account of a tool that has progressively serviced fresh adherents.

Too bad he didn’t stop there. Rav Lichtenstein’s review of Rabbi Feldman’s new book indicates that Rabbi Feldman has taken positions on some of the great issues of our time that are – at the very least - troubling. Those issues include: Zionism, feminism, Chabad and the so-called ‘Slifkin Affair’. All of these issues are of great import to the Torah world and ones I constantly deal with. They are among the defining issues of our day. The way they are looked at by the Torah world will determine the shape of Judaism in the future.

Rabbi Feldman’s polemic against Zionism is one of the primary focuses of Rav Lichtenstein’s review. That polemic is an angry one sided rant characterizing it as having no redeeming value. But what is worse his writing seems to be designed to stir hatred! From the review:

Emulating Rabbi Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, Rabbi Feldman asserts: “I, too, humbly submit that the criticisms in this book are directed towards those parts of the Jewish people which are not Jewish” (p. 4). In the interest of both accuracy and fairness, it should be added that the sequel reads, “My love for the Jewish people remains undiminished.” However, when we note that the source and precedent cited had not merely sought to justify criticism but to be stirred to hatred; that “the parts which are not Jewish” did not allude to unhalachically converted pseudo-Jews but to presumed ideological aberrants; and when we realize that these include a very significant segment of the Israeli yishuv, as well as its Diaspora supporters–many of us will, understandably, be shaken.

In essence Rabbi Feldman has dismissed what many Gedolei HaOlam of past generations have held calling those feeling unJewish! How much ‘love’ can Rabbi Feldman have for the Jewish people if he thinks my Rebbe Rav Ahron Soloveichik who said Hallel on Yom Ha’Atamaut and was a Gadol in his own right – is ideologically aberrant! How much love can he have if he so negatively characterizes the masses of religious Jews who live in Israel serve in the army. Some of whom have given their lives so that the masses of Torah Jewry who do not serve - can live in relative peace... with many of those thriving in Torah learning?

Has he no appreciation for the explosion of Torah Learning in Eretz Yisroel enabled by ‘the Zionist State’?

I have discussed my views about the correct approach to Zionism and the Jewish State many times. I am not surprised at all to read Rav Aharon Lichtenstein’s views are identical:

I share Rabbi Feldman’s vision and his priorities… At one end of the spectrum, is it indeed desirable– or even possible–to engage in a foray of utter denial of Jewish worth to what the Zionist enterprise, albeit regarded as a monolithic behemoth, hath wrought? Must we, may we, be so radically judgmental as we deplore certain lapses in religious motivation and result? Is the reclamation of Eretz Yisrael, accompanied by gradual progress towards rov yoshvehah alehah, Jewishly neutral?
Torah Jewry needs to strive creatively, and, if necessary, to fight vigorously, in order to restore our full commitment to our national heritage. Some recognition of Religious Zionist claims regarding Divine assistance would be far too much to expect, and for this purpose, not crucial. What I have suggested, substantively and not just tactically, would still be quite meaningful, however. I believe that this formulation approaches the views of the Ponevehzher Rav, as I knew him. I also recall that when a rosh yeshivah from a prominent anti-Zionist Torah family was taken to tour Yamit, he remarked, with intuitive admiration– and perhaps with flashes of memories of Eastern Europe–“Zay vos Yidden haben da oyfgeboyt!” (“Just see what Jews have accomplished here!”) And I hope that an analogous response could continue to fill a capacious Torah heart today.

Rabbi Feldman has somehow bought into the rejectionist rhetoric of the extreme right, walks in lockstep with them and chooses to promote those views with an anger and a rancor that inspires hatred – all while proclaiming his love of all Jews! With the publication of this book he is truly a disappointment.

Over Doing the Criticism of Israel

I am so sick of the so-called media pundits criticizing Israel. In two separate interview programs - mainstream media figures really bashed Israel hard for its announcement during a visit by Vice President Biden about 1600 new settlements in East Jerusalem.

I agree that Israel should not have said anything about settlements while Vice President Joe Biden was there. Especially since that is the most contentious issue between Israel and the US right now. I have always felt that Israel should try and accommodate US government policies as much as possible no matter what my own personal preferences would be.

There is of course much debate among Orthodox Jews about what the right thing is for Israel to do on this issue ranging anywhere from ‘not one inch’ for any reason - all the way to giving the Palestinians everything they want right now.

My views are somewhere in between those extremes but I am not going to go into those details here. My point here is that there seems to be a vilification by the mainstream media that is based on an ignorant and/or biased view of what the situation is.

In one case an interviewer on ABC’s ‘This Week” asked a couple of guests whether Israel’s settlement policies endangered American lives. What an inflammatory question! You could almost hear the venom in his voice as he asked that question. As though he was trying to coax an answer in the affirmative! It was almost an ‘Aha!’ moment for him.

And then NBC's Meet the Press interviewed New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman - a so-called expert on Israel and the Middle East. He wrote an opinion piece on the subject.

He has visited the region many times and studied it a lot. But his biases seem to have overtaken his perception of reality. He was livid about what Israel did. So much so that he felt the US response wasn’t strong enough. Here is what he said Biden should have done:

He should have snapped his notebook shut, gotten right back on Air Force Two, flown home and left the following scribbled note behind: “Message from America to the Israeli government: Friends don’t let friends drive drunk. And right now, you’re driving drunk. You think you can embarrass your only true ally in the world, to satisfy some domestic political need, with no consequences?

This is what passes for wisdom on the part of the New York Times these days. Friedman might think it’s wisdom but it is thinly disguised anger at Israel because they don’t see things his way. It takes a certain amount of arrogance for newspaper columnist to think he knows better for Israel than the vast majority of its citizens and its leadership does. Instead of stepping back and analyzing what happened fairly - he pounces on Israel with righteous indignation - thus exacerbating things.

Wrong though they might have been -Israel does not deserve that kind of criticism. Especially if one looks at one very important factor that everyone seems to be ignoring. The portion of East Jerusalem where those settlements are to be built is Ramat Shlomo. Ramat Sholmo has in theory already been conceded to Israel by the Palestinians themselves during the Clinton-Barak peace accords. It was Yassir Arafat himself that approved it. He sabotaged those talks anyway but he is on record approving Israel's retention of sovereignty over Ramat Shlomo.

Friedman conveniently overlooks that detail. To him there is only one perspective: His! He actually believes that if Israel would just give in on the settlements everything else would fall into place and that peace will be at hand. How naïve!

Has he forgotten about the ulimtate impervious barrier to peace - the status of Jerusalem? Both sides have sworn that they must have sovereignty over East Jerusalem or there cannot be peace.

Has he forgotten about Hezbollah’s sworn duty to obliterate the Jewish State? A promise that was backed up by rocket attacks?

Has hew forgotten about Hamas and their sworn dedication to the destruction of the Jewish state? And their barrage of rocket attacks into civilian population centers?

Has he forgotten about the Muslim religious obligations to free Palestine from its Jewish infidel oppresors?

Has he forgotten the Islamist goal of a Pan Islamic world guided by Sharia law …and the events of 911 which illustrated the level of commitment to that goal?

Has he forgotten about the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit and the ransom demands to empty Israeli prisons of terrorist murderers in exchange for him?

Has he forgotten about Hamas’s patron and supplier of arms, Iran, whose leader has sworn to wipe Israel off the map? …a country that is developing nuclear weapons and a missile delivery system that can reach Israel?

Has he forgotten the fact that the minute peace becomes even the remotest possibility - Jihadists start an intifada and start blowing themselves up on buses in Jerusalem?

Does Mr. Freidman think all this will disappear if only Israel stops its settlements?

In my view ‘experts’ like Friedman who cite only those facts which support their agendas while ignoring facts that undermine it - gives cover to those who want to pull the rug out from under America’s greatest ally in the Middle East. Those people - some of whom sit in congress while others are respected media figures - would not shed any real tears if Israel were to be destroyed – except for some crocodile tears. Maybe. In my view they are either ignorant fools or closet anti-Semites.

It’s one thing to speculate about the wisdom of what Israel did last week. I personally think they made a mistake. But to blow it up so way out of proportion is foolhardy and wrong. One needs to see what happened in light of all the facts - and not only from one perspective. By overemphasizing the supposed damage done - pundits like Freidman exacerbate the situation.

That could make things a lot worse for the Jewish state.

Even though the Obama administration has said that support for Israel is unshakable it may nonetheless very well take full advantage of this criticism to pressure Israel even harder for - God knows what kind of concessions. The Tom Friedmans of the world will be right there cheering the administration on. What better cover can there be for a President than to have a Jewish middle East expert like Friedman on board with him?!

Just to be clear, I don’t think Israel should in any way defy its closest ally - which the US still is. By far. Even under Obama. You should not bite the hand that feeds you. But the one thing Israel does not need is encouragement of pressure against it from so called ‘experts’. Thomas Friedman claims that all he really wants is to help Israel achieve peace. Well if that’s really true - he would do well to just shut up!

A Devil Gets His Due

I don’t know anything about Baruch Mordechai Lebovits (pictured) aside from what has been reported in the media.

Those reports have not been good. He is a Chasidic travel agent and brother of the Nikolsburg Rebbe. He is also a married man with 5 children and 20 grandchildren. And he has been convicted on 8 out of 10 counts of sexual molestation. It took jurors only three hour to reach that verdict.

The evidence must have been pretty damning. And yet the verdict was met by gasps and sobs from Lebovits’s supporters. What’s more the verdict does not even take into account suspicions that he was somehow involved with Motti Borger, the young Chasan who jumped to his death a couple of days after his wedding.

The pain and suffering of sex abuse victims has been discussed many times in the media. A pain that only a victim can know. But little has been said about a molester’s family. Especially one where there seems to have been no clue about his abuse. Leibovits has proclaimed his innocence throughout the trial and his family believes him. As does his community.

I cannot imagine what they must be going through. What does his wife think? Does she still believe he is innocent? How does a loving child deal with all this testimony from victims about their father’s molestations of them? What thoughts can possibly be going through their minds now? They must love him as a father. And yet - how can they?! He led a double life. He seemed to raise a decent family, and was a respected member of his community. These accusations - and now conviction - must have come as a real shock to everyone!

Mr. Lebovits has indeed been convicted. There little doubt about his guilt. He is a sick man and according experts who deal with these problems his sickness is an incurable one. His libido is ‘wired wrong’. I don’t think it can be unwired.

But I have no pity for him. His problem was not that he was ‘wired bad’ and had illicit sexual urges. It was that he acted to satisfy them in ways that were harmful to others. Devastatingly harmful. Many times!

Yet he denied it and did a pretty good job of hiding it. From his family and his from his friends. This makes him evil!

His loving family and friends still support him. I guess they just believe that all his victims were lying – and only he was telling the truth! That is how good his act was.

This is such a sad story. Nobody really wins here. The victims will still suffer the consequences of his actions. His family has no doubt been devastated. And his community is in denial.

There has been little good news for victims of sex abuse and molestation. As Michalel Orbach points out in his article in the Jewish Star:

An Israeli court refused to extradite Avrohom Mondrowitz, a Gerer chosid, who is thought to have abused dozens of Brooklyn boys in the 1980’s. Yehuda Kolko, an accused serial molester who worked as a rebbe in Yeshiva Torah Temimah was allowed to plead guilty to charges of child endangerment, a decision that was met with scorn by sexual abuse activists. They also suffered a setback when the Child Victims Rights Act, legislation that would have extended the statute of limitations for civil charges of sexual abuse, never made it to a vote of both houses of the New York Legislature.

But even though a lot of suffering has been caused by this man - at least justice has been served. Mr. Lebovits faces up to 30 years in prison. The verdict is in some ways a long awaited one in that it gives all victims of abuse at least a modicum of relief. They have felt ignored - or worse - rejected by their own community that seemed to just not care about them. But this verdict will help to change perception for them. At least this molester will pay a price.

What about all the other molesters that were guilty of sex abuse and got way with it? What about the Mondrowitz’s of the world who walk about freely? Someday their judgment will come. Either in this world or in the next.