Hey! You Wanna Buy a Kidney?!

Consider the following. A young boy aged 10 has had kidney failure for quite some time. Dialysis is now no longer sufficient to keep him alive. He is now in desperate need of a kidney transplant. That will not only save his life, it will give him a normal and healthy life with a normal lifespan.

He is on the UNOS list. This is an organization that seeks donor organs for those in need of lifesaving transplants. They have an official and ethical protocol as to who gets them first. The problem is that a donor has not been found for this child. The kidneys that are available are incompatible and cannot be transplanted. His only hope is that of a private donor. Appeals to the public have thus far been unsuccessful.

The ratio of those in need far exceeds the available donors. It is probably relatively rare for people to donate kidneys to others. I know of only two people who have done so voluntarily. One was a daughter who donated a kidney to her mother. And the other is a truly altruistic young man who donated one of his kidneys to a recipient he didn’t even know.

Back to the story. This bright and upbeat 10 year old is well behaved with the kind of Midos that we all hope our own children develop. He is loved by his parents, extended family, teachers, and friends. He never gave anyone a moment’s trouble or anything other than pure Nahcas! And now he is about to die unless he finds a donor. But there is no donor. Doctors have given him at best 48 hours to live without one.

Across town there is a fellow is about to be evicted from his home. He has lost his job and is behind over a year in his mortgage payments. In this bad economy he cannot find another job. He has no income and no savings. He is desperate for the $25,000 the bank requires by the end of the month in order for him not to be evicted! He has a family. They need a roof over their head. He is desperate.

Along comes Levy Izhak Rosenbaum who happens to know both the dying young boy in need of a kidney and the poor fellow who is desperate for funds. So he makes a ‘Shiddach’. He suggests to this fellow that to save his family from being evicted into the streets - he sell one of his kidneys to the family whose son needs one in order to survive. It turns out the kidney is compatible with that child. They agree on a price of $40,000. Mr. Rosenbaum takes a 10% fee. The result is that the young boy’s life is saved. The fellow who was about to be evicted pays off his debt to the bank, keeps his home and has a few dollars to spare.

Is this a win/win for everyone? Is there anything wrong with this picture? Here is the other side of the coin.

Trafficking in human organs it would seem is one of the most reprehensible crimes one can commit. Profiteering by getting people to sell their organs conjures up all kind of nefarious motives on the part of black market brokers who do it. It conjures up unsanitary ‘back-alley’ operations to remove and transplant the kidney. It is in fact illegal. Organs cannot be bought and sold. The very idea of convincing someone to sell one of his easily elicits a reaction of disgust. Most people are revolted by it.

But let us analyze this as dispassionately as we can. As I see it - the problems with doing this are as follows. Surgery is required to remove a kidney. Surgery always involves a level of risk. Post operative complications like infection can ultimately kill you. Even though the risk is very small (I believe that only one in 4000 people have died as a result of it) the risk is still there. What if you are that one in 4000? No one requires that you save the life of another at risk of losing your own.

Secondly there is the fact that by donating one kidney you run the risk of your own kidney failure without ‘the spare’. True, one can live a perfectly normal and healthy life with just one kidney… should anything ever go wrong, you no longer have the spare kidney that God has given you to rely on.

There is also the circumstance of illegal operations taking place under the less than ideal conditions of a hospital.

And then there is the rich man- poor man aspect to this. If kidneys are bought and sold on the open market, it can easily end up being the case that only the rich will have access to these kidneys. In a free market where the demand is so great and the supply of kidneys so low, I can easily see the price of a kidney being out of reach for the average man.

And finally there is the mercenary aspect of it. Profiteering by trafficking in human organs just seems to be plain disgusting.

Given the above reasons it is quite understandable why it is illegal to buy and sell organs from living donors.

I have agonized about this for a while now and I’m simply not sure what the most ethical approach to this problem is. The above mentioned Mr. Rosenbaum has recently admitted in court that he brokered three illegal kidney transplants. When this news first broke during another unrelated scandal, I was appalled by the fact that anyone would do something like this.

But I have taken another look at it and now wonder if the three people who had those transplants would still be alive today if not for Mr. Rosenbaum. The three donors are very likely still alive too and I'm sure function quite well on one kidney. Their health will very likely be unaffected by what they did. Is it fair to look down at them for selling one of their kidneys? Leaving legal issues aside - is it fair to condemn Mr. Rosenbaum for making some money while saving three lives?

Is it unethical? What if it were me or you or a loved one who needed a kidney to live? Would we not do whatever it takes to live – if it did not harm others? Would money be an object when it comes to saving our own lives or those of our loved ones? I know what my answer would be. I would buy the kidney!

That begs the question, should we change the law about trafficking in kidneys? If so how do we prevent abuse or excessive profiteering? How do we make this ethical?

I think it can be done. It can be regulated by an ethics committee consisting of medical and religious leaders who can prevent or at least limit abuse. It will certainly take it away from the current black market and the back-alley operations.

I know it sounds a bit untoward to be buying and selling organs from living donors. It still troubles me just thinking about creating such a market. But when lives are at stake… maybe it should be considered.

Chasidic Violence - Strength in Numbers

Why is there so much violence among Chasidim? I am not talking about small mariginal sects. I'm talking about big mainstream ones. Whether it is Satmar, Skvere, Chabad, Ger, or Toldos Ahron… the way it seems that they ultimately achieve their goals or settle their internal disputes is through violence. But then again it isn’t only Chasidim. Some Religious Zionist zealots are guilty of violence too when things don’t go their way – as evidenced by the recent ‘price tag’ raids against innocent Arab villages.

What is it about these groups that lead them to violence? I think the answer is obvious. It is their religious zeal. They all believe they are modern day versions of Pinchas. They believe that their version of Judaism is the only true version and they will do whatever it takes to achieve it. They have no respect for the views of other Jews – no matter how religious they are. They want their standards and are going to implement them no matter what.

But I have to say that it seems to be far more prevalent in Chasidic circles than in Religious Zionist ones. It has been reported in Ha’aretz that a Chasid was violently attacked and severely beaten by a group of vigilante Ger Chasdim.

Yes I know all about the condemnation by rabbinic leaders of all of these groups. And I know that their community does not approve of these vigilantes. Ironically a counter protest against Ger (pictured above) by members of the local community that so often are themselves involved in violence is evidence of just how self centered these kinds of communties are about violence. If they do it, it's right and just. But if others do it to them - well that's just disgusting!

The problem is that even among those within each community that legitimately oppose violence of these extremists – or better terrorists! …is that the goals are desired. The only thing they oppose is the methods. If the terrorists accomplish their mission, the community does reap the benefits.

The fact that there was a major protest against what happened to that poor Chasid, does not diminish that fact that that many of them secretly appreciate the results of violence when it suits them. Does anyone really doubt for example that a successful outcome for the residents of Ramat Bet Shemesh-B in their dispute with their Dati neighbors would be appreciated even though it was achieved through the admittedly vile and disgusting methods employed by their zealots?

Why is this happening now? Why does there seem to be an increase in this type of thing? I think it is a result of their growth. These groups are now flexing their collective muscles to get what they want – even at the expense of inconveniencing others. Call it the tyranny of the majority if you will.

That’s why we are for example seeing more and more Mehadrin type buses in Israel. They are no longer content to sit on a mixed bus as they did in the past. Women sitting in the back of the bus is their norm. Those who don’t like it will just have to live with it. Their growth in numbers will no doubt increase their influence. It is not too much of a stretch to say that Mehadrin buses will increase along with it into neighborhoods other than their own – thus inconveniencing even more people.

The fact that this was even attempted by Chasidim in America also demonstrates my point about their growth and power even here. They assert their rights to live in a world of their own making. If that inconveniences a few people... tough!

It is exasperating and the source of a major Chilul HaShem to say the least. And I’m not sure what to do about it except to continue protesting it every time I see it.

Modified: 5:00pm CDT

Unity or Uniformity?

Last night I had the privilege of meeting Rabbi Berel Wein at a wedding where he officiated. I have been an admirer of his for a long time. Although we both attended and received Semicha from the same Yeshiva, we had never met. We were not there at the same time. Those who frequent this blog will know that I often reference him in my posts. In fact my strongly held view of what the Orthodoxy of the future will look like is based largely on his perception of how we are currently evolving – a perception that I share.

I call it the ‘New Centrism’ where moderate Charedim and right wing Modern Orthodox Jews live similar lifestyles in combined communities becoming one large social grouping. And this is not the only thing which we share a common outlook. I do not recall ever disagreeing with him.

An article by Rabbi Wein in Jewish World Review (sent to me by an alert reader) is once again virtually identical to my own way of thinking. It speaks of unity of the Jewish people underscoring that unity does not mean conformity. In fact it means the opposite. Unity means that we are diverse but united by the common bond of the Torah. Unity means that we respect each other’s views even if we don’t see exactly eye to eye on things; that we are a united and loving family; that we care for one another as Jews and as human beings; and that we strive to project a positive image to the world in the sense of being a ‘light unto the nations’.

Yesterday I wrote about Jewish unity. I feel very strongly about uniting as a people regardless of whatever denomination we identify with or our level of observance. But Orthodox Jews have an additional aspect of unity that unfortunately is not shared with the greater Jewish population – the commitment to observe all the Mitzvos of the Torah and a belief system that basically encompasses the ‘13 principles of faith’ as outlined by the Rambam.

Chazal point out that there are Shivim, Panim LaTorah… seventy facets to the Torah. That means that are many legitimate Hashkafos. That is what diversity among the Orthodox is all about. And yet there are those who only understand unity as conformity... sameness.

One often hears certain segments of Orthodoxy speaking about unity. What they really mean is uniformity. They see only their own way of life as legitimate. What about Shivim Panim LaTorah? They will explain that it doesn’t apply to the differing Hashkafos of today. That Hashkafos like TIDE and TuM are illegitimate. The only true Derech for them is the one they belong to. TIDE they will say is B’Dieved and TuM is entirely illegitimate.

Their desire for uniformity is obvious. But their understanding of it is in my view questionable. Walk into any Beis HaMedrash and see how their students dress. That will give you a clue about how they see unity. It is not unity. It is uniformity And that is wrong. Diversity is our strength not our weakness. Uniformity is a form of tyranny and could lead to evil. Rabbi Wein makes this point based on this week’s Parsha:

The generation of Terach, the father of Abraham, was ruled by a tyrant, Nimrod. It was the dor haflagah, — the generation that ultimately divided itself into many different languages and cultures.

That generation, fearful of another disastrous flood that would destroy it, resolved that by unifying all in executing a grand and all-encompassing project — the building of the great tower — it would be able to prevent divine punishment from striking it. Unity of people was necessary to even begin work on such a project.

So the world's peoples spoke only one language and spoke only of one way and one goal. This unity, which at first glance always appears to be so desirable, soon sank into a cold, ruthless and murderous conformity. Big Brother Nimrod controlled everything and everybody and anyone who dared to express a dissenting opinion — such as Abraham — was immediately consigned to the furnace of destruction.

Nimrod and the dor haflagah, is representative of Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Soviet Union, Kim's North Korea, the mullahs of Iran, Mugabe's Zimbabwe and all of the other dictatorial regimes that plague our planet. The drab conformity of imposed purpose, the stifling of the human spirit and the exploitation of the millions for the fulfillment of a cockeyed impractical ideal always lead to death, destruction and tragedy. The world needs many Abrahams and far fewer Nimrods.

The Eternal Unity of the Jewish People

One of the most significant and divisive events in the modern era is the advent of Reform Judaism. It was the result of the enlightenment period which allowed Jews to pursue studies outside the walls of the ghetto. Exposure to these studies and the harsh conditions of the Jewish people led them to challenge traditional Jewish thought and to redefine Judaism – and what it entails.

This event that took hold largely in an enlightened Germany and eventually caused Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch to bolt from the Jewish establishment which had been controlled by the Reform. He called it Austritt. He believed that the Jewish people cannot be led by those who would redefine the eternal truths of the Torah based on convenience and influences foreign to Judaism. He therefore insisted on leaving that community and setting up his own.

This attitude was carried forward in our day by Rav Aharon Kotler who forbade any interaction at all with heterodox movements.

Since Rav Hirsch’s time many other non Orthodox movements have arisen that have challenged traditional Judaism. The most prominent – the Conservative Movement – made the claim that they are Halachic. And yet their Halachic ‘leniencies’ allowed actual Chilul Shabbos D’Oraisa. And they allow theological ideas that are deemed heretical by Orthodoxy.

Without getting into how they justify their claim to be Halachic - suffice it to say that the Conservative Movement is perhaps a greater danger to traditional Judaism than Reform is. In the past the average Jew saw it as Halachic (as advertised) and as centrist (standing in the middle between Reform on the left and Orthodoxy on the right). They chose it because they see it as far more compatible with contemporary culture and values.

Rav Kotler must have therefore felt that it was more important to draw this line in the sand than ever. He had a ‘take no prisoners’ approach. Even the slightest interaction with any heterodox leader was seen as tantamount to granting them legitimacy. Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik (the Rav) agreed with this assessment. Nonetheless he felt that on matters of public policy for the greater good of all Jewry, interaction was permitted - as long there was no theological discussions. I’m told by some of the Rav’s close Talmidim that Rav Kotler so disagreed with him on this issue that he virtually ostracized the Rav for it. This created a rift that the Talmidim of both carry forward to this day.

As a result we have become a people divided. Although heterodox leaders would love to interact with their Orthodox brethren in a spirit of unity - albeit with theological differences - Orthodoxy continues to insist on separation. At least at the Rav’s standard. (Although some in the extreme left wing of Modern Orthodoxy have broken ranks with their Rebbe and have had theological debates and even joint services with them! While their intentions are good, they have gone too far in ignoring the very thing that Rav Hirsch, Rav Kotler, and the Rav have feared: the legitimization of heterodox movements.)

However as far as the mainstream Orthodoxy is concerned - this separation has led to the Jewish divisiveness of our time. Which is very troubling to me. While I completely understand why we must continue to reject heterodoxy – at the same time I find it sad that we can’t somehow unite as Jews. There are many areas where we could work together in common purpose. Like support for Israel. Or for making life better for the Jewish people. Or even to make the world a better place in general – Tikun Olam. Or perhaps the most important area which we have in common - preserving Judaism.

A few years ago Rabbi Yosef Reinman, a Charedi Rav out of Lakewood Yeshiva tried. He had somehow befriended a Reform rabbi and they wrote a book together describing their irreconcilable differences and yet showing they could still be friends and work together in common goal to preserve the Jewish people… appealing to those who are unaffiliated or about to ‘jump ship’ and abandon their Judaism altogether. And there are a lot of Jews in that boat.

This was indeed one of the unintended consequences of the Reform and Conservative movements. By making Judaism easy to observe by either rejecting all ritual or virtually ignoring the importance of it - they essentially stripped it of all meaning – turning it into a social justice movement. Such movements need not be Jewish. Social justice is a common good for all of mankind. There is no need to be Jewish at all.

Rabbi Reinman was pressured by Charedi rabbinic leaders to withdraw his book and end his book tour with that Reform Rabbi. He submitted to their wishes. That ended any chance he had to improve his relationship with fellow Jews who were secualr. By his own admission he was reaching out and painting a more positive picture of Orthodox Jewry. And he was supported in this ‘Kiruv’ effort by his good friend the Reform rabbi who co-authored the book.

Why would a Reform rabbi support the Kiruv work of an Orthodox rabbi?

As I said - one of the things that heterodoxy has in common with Orthodoxy is that they want to preserve the Jewish people. They want to stop the attrition. That’s why the Reform movement has done a 180 and now embraces ritual.

And the Conservative movement now regrets its infamous ‘Psak’ permitting driving to Shul on Shabbos. They realize that by removing things that make Judaism Jewish they have in effect contributed to the attrition. In fact if I understand correctly their branch in Israel the Masorti are fairly observant. Except for some problematic theological differences – in practice I’ll bet one could hardly distinguish between a Masorti Jew and a Dati Jew.

Nonetheless it remains important to know exactly what Judaism is. Who defines it? That is where the devil is - in the details. Heterodox movements still want to define Judaism in ways that are completely unacceptable to Orthodoxy. So it is important to continue to reject their legitimacy.

How is it then possible to achieve any semblance of unity if we are divided about the very definition of what we want to unite around?

What is Judaism? This is a question asked by Marc Erlbaum in a Jewish Exponent op-ed. From the article:

I was fortunate to be one of 50 participants invited to a two-day retreat last month called "The Conversation." Sponsored by The Jewish Week, a New York weekly, the annual program is an opportunity for a diverse group of Jews from across the country to come together to discuss Jewish issues. There is no agenda other than communication and creating bonds between segments of the Jewish community that are rarely in contact or in concert.

Mr. Erlbaum did not say whether he was Orthodox but from his words I suspect that he is. If that’s true - was he right in attending? Or did he cross the line and in effect tacitly legitimize heterodoxy by his presence? I don’t know the answer to that. But I do think it is a positive step to have dialogue with your brethren. Not every contact should be seen as recognition. I believe Rav Soloveitchik was right. There are circumstances that would allow interaction. Interaction breeds understanding and acceptance. And that can ultimately save Jews for Judaism – a goal all denominations aspire to.

Infertility and the Jewish Woman

Infertility s a problem that frankly I am at a disadvantage in discussing since I am a man, My wife and I have children, and my children all have children. But an article in Ynet gives me some insight into the world of the infertile religious Jewish woman.

It is a revealing and poignant look from the perspective of several religious women that are going through this ordeal. And it is not a pretty picture.

What I found interesting is the common feature between her and others who do not quite fit in because of individual challenges in normal life cycle events. This part of the article seems like a universal experience irrespective of Judaism or any religion. While life goes on for the mainstream those with these challenges are left behind and experience a subtle air of discrimination from their friends. I’m sure it is unintentional but it is nonetheless hurtful.

Unfortunately this way of dealing with life cycle changes is normal. Although starting out on an equal footing as friends if one of them is impeded from going through a life cycle event - the disconnect is inevitable. When married friends start having children the conversation changes. Mothers discuss their babies and their new lives. A non parent will perforce be clueless. Not only is hearing about the joys of motherhood hurtful, so too is hearing complaints about the burden of motherhood. How much would an infertile woman give to change the diaper her own baby?!

And to make matters worse there is all that ‘advice’ about how to get pregnant. Advice unasked for and unwanted.

I believe that the infertile mother has much in common socially with her friends that are parents as do singles whose friends have married. Even when the relationship was very close singles will feel very left out of the picture when her married friend starts bonding with her husband and other married friends. They too will share a common language that their single friends are clueless about.

As I said the hurt and the pain is normal and quite understandable. For those who have made the transition from being single to being married or from being childless to having children... it is just a normal evolutionary process for them to move on with others in similar circumstances.

It is not that they ignore their old friends on purpose. It’s that the bonds of the old relationship give way to the bonds of a new one. One that is based on shared life experiences. Old things that used to matter to them no longer do. At least not as much as they used to. Tuition payments will eventually come to dominate their thinking while a non parent has no clue about that. The conversation becomes awkward and so too does the relationship. Even though it is a natural parting of ways it is still hurtful even if unintentionally so.

How does this challenge affect their Judaism?

Some of the woman in the article seem to also be having a crisis of faith. I don’t think they are necessarily going ‘Off the Derech’. But they have been soured on religion by their ordeal. For example here is what one childless parent dealing with infertility said:

Kalfa says that the most difficult halachic challenge during fertility treatments is practicing niddah (avoiding physical contact with one's husband during menstruation).

"Think about it," she says. "You have to go through injections, then follicle tracking (checking the development of eggs within the ovary from an immature state), then embryo transfer, then wait for two weeks, and at the end of this whole process – after you hope and pray – you get a negative answer followed by your damn period. And then you can't get a hug from your husband because you're in niddah.

"There's nothing more distressing. I remember that at a certain stage I despaired. I told myself I don't care about Halacha and hugged my husband."

"At first you comfort yourself by saying that 'the more haste the less speed' and that it may only be in your own favor," says Kalfa. "But then you hear about a mother who murdered her son or watch your neighbor neglect her children – and something is shattered. You realize there is no justice in this world, that someone is not necessarily running things as they should be run. It creates a real dissonance.

Obviously I am not supporting Halachic violations - but to be honest I completely empathize with what this woman is going through.

Ultimately it is the theodicy argument: Tzadik V’Ra Lo. Why the good are made to suffer is something I will never understand. But this is one of the things God seems to expect of us. We are told that God has His reasons for doing things like this and it is not ours to understand.

I realize that one cannot possibly understand this concept. One’s sense of fairness and justice would indicate that a just God would not allow the good to suffer. But I must admit that Tzadik V’Ra Lo - is one of the most difficult things to bear in Judaism and has left many people questioning their faith. Especially post Holocaust.

Racial Tolerance in Israel

One of the more pleasant experiences I had during my recent trip to Israel was to see a certain level of Achdus in a Ramat Bet Shemesh (A) Shul that I Davened in while I was there.

This Shul is very Charedi and centrally located. It is extremely well attended but not only by Charedim. On a typical morning you can find as many Daatim Davening there as Charedim in many of its multiple daily Minyanim.

Of particular interest to me was one fellow I saw from the Dati world. He wore a big Kipa Serugah and dressed in the typical jacketless fashion of the Religious Zionist world. I observed this fellow as he Davened and noticed just how much Kavanah he seemed to put into every word he said. He in fact stood out from the crowd.

But it was not only because he seemed so sincere in his Avodas HaShem (Teffilah) that made him stand out. It was also because of the color of his skin. He is black – probably an Ethiopian immigrant. And yet his presence there seemed to be as normal and integrated as could be.

Considering the grief that particular part of Israel has with its nearby neighbors the residents of Ramat Bet Shemesh (B) - it was quite a treat to see this level of tolerance in a Charedi Shul.

Tolerance like this is hard to come by in Israel. Israel is a land of extremes. Anyone who does not see this – is simply not looking. It will not take anyone too long to come across an article reflecting those extremes. Whether it is the religious fanatic zealots of RBS (B) trying to force their ways on Dati residents in the bordering Sheinfeild neighborhood - or Religious Zionist fanatics doing ‘price tag’ raids in Palestinian neighborhoods on the West Bank.

It should be understandable why Israel attracts extremists. It is the nature of the beast. The people most likely to live in the holy land are those who are the most idealistic. They are the ones who will be the most dedicated to the ideals they bring with them. When they see circumstances that contradict those values they cannot stand idly by. So some of them act to protect those ideals -often in ways that are anathematic to the Torah – all the while believing that they are defending it.

I would go so far as to say that the animosity that Charedim have toward the Religious Zionist Israeli is greater than they have toward the Chiloni (secular) Israeli. So seeing the circumstance I witnessed in that Charedi Shul made me very happy. As I observed that I wondered if this trend is something new or is it just one community being polite to another while quietly still harboring ill feelings. I hope it is the former. The tolerance I saw for a fellow Jew of Ethiopian descent gave me hope for the future.

It is a rather well known and yet sad fact that racial and ethnic tolerance is a major problem in Israel. Sephardim – much less Ethiopians - are treated like second class citizens by much of Israeli society. This is an across the board phenomenon that includes Jews of Ashkenazi descent – secular or religious.

That the secular establishment does this is a problem. But they do not claim to act the ways of the Torah. But when the religious world does it, it is a different story and a Chilul HaShem. The religious schools have been so bad about accepting Sephardi children in their schools that the high court in Israel had to force them to do it!

And yet the discrimination is so ingrained – it seems - that they find ways to get around the dictates of the court by finding other ways to keep Sephardi children out as was the case with a Chasidic school in the town of Emanuel last year. The school’s requirements for acceptance essentially stripped Sephardim of the heritage and turned them into Chasidim.

For reason that are not entirely clear to me Sepahrdim see the Ashkenazi schools a being superior to their own. So they were willing to allow their own children to give up their heritage. Thus the school in Emmanuel has a significant number of Sephardi students who for all intents and purposes are becoming Ahskenazim with a Chasidic bent! This is not tolerance. It is version of genteel but forced ‘conversion’!

I don’t know what school that Ethiopian Jew I saw Davening in that RBS-A Shul sends his children to. But I hope his children are not being forced to abandon their heritage. I hope that what I witnessed in that Charedi Shul was not just surface or cosmetic tolerance but a genuine love of one fellow Jew for another regardless of their Hashkafos or their heritage. This would be a new reality in Israel. A reality where religious Jews sees every Jew as truly equal - all while respecting their differences And a big step forward for Achdus.

Travel Day

Today is a travel day. I am coming off a terrific holiday vacation spent with my son and his family. I wouldn’t have traded that with anything in the world. There is nothing like Yom Tov in the holy land. Because I am preoccupied with packing and traveling - I’m not sure if I will have time to post anything other than this today. Back to my usual schedule tomorrow.

No Child Left Behind and the Frumkeit Factor

“There is no excuse not to allow every child into school.” This is a direct quote by Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky from an article in Ami Magazine. This is a problem that comes up every year about this time when the school year begins. And no matter how many times the rabbinic leadership complains about it this very sad situation - it seems to be of no avail. Instead of improving, the situation seems to be getting worse as desperate parents will find that there is no room for their child in a particular school.

The reason for this terrible situation is in fact a result at least in part of the major successes of Jewish education since the Holocaust. In his wildest dreams Reb Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz could not have imagined just how successful the day school movement is. The parents of today are the products of those day schools and wouldn’t dream of sending their children to anything but a religious school. (Although economic realities may be changing that somewhat. But that is a different discussion.) Because of that the most basic law of economics comes into play: The law of supply and demand.

As it applies to high schools there is competition among some schools to accept only the best and brightest of students. We have more Yeshiva high schools than ever and yet we have even more applicants to those schools than ever. That means that schools can afford to discriminate as to who they will or will not accept. And because of the fierce competition between schools to be the ‘Harvard’ of high schools - they seek only the brightest students… and feature the most demanding curricula.

This means a lot of children do not get in to the schools of their choice. Imagine the anguish of those parents. Not only do their children not have a school to go to, they are in effect being sent a message that their children are stupid by Yeshiva standards.

These schools obviously feel they can get away with that. They simply say something like ‘there are other schools’ …and feel they are absolved of all responsibility.

To that rabbinic leaders say “No!” No child should be left behind. Schools should not cater only to the best and the brightest.

One might say that this is not fair to the best and brightest. Why should standards be lowered for them just so less talented students will be able to attend and keep up?

The answer is that the standards don’t have to be lowered for the truly bright kids. They can be challenged in other ways. They can be given special tracks and incentives to excel in on a voluntary basis so that the rest of the class doesn’t feel they are second class citizens if they don’t compete at that level.

I can understand that type of competition post high school. By that time a student will know his capabilities and will hopefully choose a school best suited to his talents. But on the high school level - the playing should be exactly that – level. All schools should be open to all children. All children should be accepted no matter what their capabilities are.

On top of that the principle of Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko should be the motto for every single school. Children should be evaluated and taught according to their capabilities. Too many schools teach only to the brightest students in the class. Those who can’t keep up are at great risk of falling through the cracks and going ‘Off the Derech’ to one degree or another. There is nothing more frustrating to a student than to sit in class clueless about what his Rebbe is teaching. And pushy parents who see all their children as geniuses don’t help matters. But as important as that too is a different discussion.

The point here is to endorse what Rav Shmuel says. No child should be left behind. This was the policy of the schools I attended. This was the policy of my Rebbe, Rav Ahron. He never refused a child entry unless he was incorrigible. And it was rare for any child to be seen that way in Brisk.

This leads me to the Talmudical Yeshiva of Philadelphia (Philly) – a Yeshiva high school of which Rav Shmuel is the Rosh HaYeshiva. I understand that the entrance standards are pretty high. I would ask the esteemed Rosh HaYeshiva why he does not heed his own advice and open up the doors to his Yeshiva to every student who applies. He should set the tone - No child should be left behind! Not enough room for every applicant? First come first served.

There is another problem that I call the Frumkeit standard. It is alluded to in the Ami article. Rav Shmuel complains that the Frumkeit standard is harming our children.

First let me say that I support the idea that parents should find a school where the Hashkafos match their own. No parent should send their child to a school where the Hashkafos are different than those of their home. That only creates confusion and conflict between what is taught in the home and what is taught in the school.

That said, I don’t like the divisiveness that this causes. I would prefer going back to the days when was in day schools were fighting for students. That forced them to be open to all Hashkafos. Those schools did not have religious standards for the parents. There were in fact plenty of non Shomer Shabbos parents in those schools. And yet the vast majority of those students today are Shomer Torah U’Mitzvos. Some even turned out to be some of the big names in the Torah world.

How wonderful t was for the Charedi kids of that era to be friends and interact with the modern Orthodox kids. That’s how it used to be.

Today the divisiveness is so strong that I sometimes see hatred of people with different Hashkafos. This would not happen if there was no Frumkeit factor.

My advice to parents who insist of Frumkeit standards is to look into the past and see how well schools did when they didn’t have these standards – and compare it to what we have today. Are we really any better off?

Chag Sameach Gilad!

Exactly two years ago there was talk in the air about a deal with Hamas to release hundreds of terrorist Palestinians in Israeli prisons in exchange for kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit. I was in favor of that deal. Even though it meant an increased level of danger for Jews all over the world, especially in Israel.

Yesterday almost exactly two years later that deal (or a version of it) was finally made. And I thank God for it. Gilad Schalit is a free man, home with his parents in time for Simchas Torah. Just as I can’t imagine the pain and anguish felt by his parents over these past five years so too I cannot imagine the Simcha his family must feel at this moment. It almost brings a tear of joy to my eye.

The question being asked by many – especially in the Dati community is: was it worth the price. As I understand it, they do not think so. In fact I believe some religious Zionist rabbis actually ‘Paskined’ against it! Fortunately Shas was in favor of it as was the entire Israeli cabinet! And if I am not mistaken the Charedi rabbinic leadership was in favor of it too.

I completely understand where the Dati community is coming from. They are concerned that these terrorists will ‘do it again’. They fear that more Israelis will be killed by these murderers. They consider it a virtual certainty. So they feel one life in exchange for the many is certainly not warranted. They will cite statistics showing released terrorists in the past were responsible for many additional murders of Jews. And they see only the likelihood that it will happen again. This is certainly a legitimate fear. I too have this fear. Indeed no Jew in the world is safe as long as these proven murderers now roam free. So afraid are they of this that some of them actually tried to petition the Israeli high court to stop the deal! Fortunately for Gilad Schalit and his family they did not get their way.

I have to ask: Do Palestinian terrorists really lack the means or motivation to strike at will?And have we no faith anymore in Israeli security forces who have apporved the deal?

To these who say that this should not have happened I must ask the question. Why should Gilad Schalit have to pay the price for your safety? Is it because he was guarding his country in uniform when he was kidnapped? Or is it just an attitude of ‘tough’! We cannot put the rest of Israel at risk just because he happened to get caught.

No one has a right to ask for that kind of sacrifice of another just because it increases the level of danger. The only right anyone has along these lines is to offer himself or one of his children in exchange for Schalit as a hostage. Short of that it is the height of selfishness to deny the conditions for his release from captivity if it does not involve killing anyone. That would of course be a different story. But they did not ask us to do that.

They wanted an exchange of prisoners. And lopsided though it may have been – it is worth the price! There seemed to be no other option for Israel to get him out! And the only thing that kept Shcahlit alive is the fact that he had ransom value to them. The minute they would have realized that Israel would never negotiate for Schalit… well as I said two years ago – think Daniel Pearl!

As for those terorrists – the one’s responsible for even s single death ought to be hunted down by the Israel Mossad and ‘liquidated’. But that is a separate issue. The main thing is that Gilad Schalit is a free man now – unharmed by his captors. At least physically – although he looked great in all the media photos of him just after his release.

So even though the threat of terror has increased for the Jewish people today, I say Hodu LaShem Ki Tov’. Thank God for His goodness in allowing the leaders of Israel to have wisdom to finally do the right thing! And may God protect us from evil!

Good Yom Tov.

Rabbis Who Destroy Lives

The extent of incompetency in the Charedi rabbinate - whether in America or in Israel - seems to be at epidemic proportion. To wit - a couple of years ago I posted a letter from a victim of abuse which in my view puts this into stark relief. A young man from a Charedi family whose father was in Chinuch was sexually abused by a member of his community. Time passed and he eventually went ‘Off the Derech’ because of the way sex abuse was treated in those days (ala the book Hush).

Long story short after a going off the Derech his father finally agreed to see a respected Charedi Rav to try and get some justice for his son. After the victim told this Rav what happened to him he basically got spat upon. The Rav told him that since he was no longer religious, he no longer had any Ne’emanus. His testimony about being abused cannot therefore be believed and the abuser was to be considered an innocent man.

Although there has been some improvement in how these things are handled in the Charedi establishment, there are plenty of enclaves of incompetence along the lines of the rabbi in the above story. In those cases there are Charedi rabbis who are looked up to for advice on serious matters and yet give advice without the slightest bit of training. And in the process they abuse innocent people by ‘Paskening’ incorrectly.

Over 20 years ago I heard Rabbi Moshe Tendler making the same point. He was a scholar in residence at an HTC weekend. At the Melave Malke he spoke about his father-in law, Rav Moshe Feinstein’s method of Psak versus that of many lesser but still respected Poskim. Rav Moshe never Paskined without investigating the matter in question with experts in the field.

By contrast many lesser Poskim just shot from the hip. They knew Halacha. But they had virtually no expertise in the field in which they were Paskening. They simply assumed they knew ...and Paskined accordingly. They therefore often made grievous errors based on their ignorance and their arrogance. They did not bother to do the research on the subject that would have given them the knowledge necessary to Paskin correctly. This is arrogance of the highest order.

Now 20 years later in this week’s Ami Magazine Rav Hershel Shachter makes a similar observation. This time it is about rabbis on rabbinical courts – Battei Din. To put it mildly – he had nothing good to say about them.

One case in point mentioned by Rav Schachter is the following. In their infinite stupidity on matters pertaining to family dysfunction they will almost always side with a husband in cases of divorce as soon as he mentions the words ‘Shalom Bayis’ – family peace. When he says those magic words followed by ‘I don’t want the divorce, she does’ …game over. The wife is seen as a Moredes – a rebellious wife who only seeks to break up the family.

After all - they foolishly reason - divorce is never a good option. The person seeking the divorce is seen as the obstacle and blamed for breaking up the family. So they will try and convince the woman to stop seeking the divorce and reconcile with her husband. It almost doesn’t matter what her reasons are. She is asked to forgive and forget. Even in cases of mental or physical abuse. Even when there has been sex abuse of children.

Instead of their seeing the situation as one of Pikuach Nefesh for both the wife and the children these ignorant and arrogant ‘Dayanim’ think such a marriage can be saved.

In my view these rabbis are not only incompetent, they are Reshaim. And yet with their Charedi gestalt (e.g. Kapotes, beards and Peyos) and reputations as Poskim they have the stature and the power to destroy families - especially children.

They wield tremendous power and enjoy the respect of their community. After all they do know Halacha. They do know how to Paskin when a pot is Treif and explain how to Kasher it. They give Shiurim.

Yes, they are men of respect and stature. But they are also ignoramuses whose know-it-all arrogance causes great pain and suffering. They will Paskin poorly yet think they have done great things.

I have no answer to this problem other than to spread the word about them. After reading the interview of Rav Shachter in Ami Magazine and the horrible state of rabbinical courts I felt the need to add my own Amen to it. These corrupt courts and their incompetant rabbis ought to cease operation. All pressure must be brought to bear on them. Because if they don’t, innocent Jewish lives will continue to be destroyed.

Modified: 10/25/11

A Gadol In Name Only?

A recent post (based on an essay by Rabbi Dovid Landesman) discussed how the Moetzes of Agudah was founded and what their parameters were then - and are now - for membership. It was noted that the greatest rabbinic figures were not necessarily on it at it's founding nor are they on it now. The question arises - what constitutes being a Gadol?

Many people use that term to refer to prominent rabbinic figures who are in positions of leadership – whether as a Rosh Yeshiva, Posek, Chasidic Rebbe or simply a member of the Agudah Moetzes.

But how does one get there? How does one become a Gadol? What are his attributes? Do all Gedolim posses the same attributes? …or at least share a common set of attributes like: intelligence, knowledge, wisdom, leadership ability, or Chesed???

The answer is not necessarily. But they do tend to excel greatly at least at one of these if not more. There is no vote. It is more of a process. In the past if someone had the stuff of greatness - people eventually recognized it. And he became a Gadol in the eyes of the public.

This can be illustrated by the great Gedolim of the last generation.

Rav Moshe Feinstein was once asked by a reporter from Time Magazine how one becomes a Gadol. He answered that it was nothing official but rather an evolutionary process of public acceptance.

It isn't that there is a vote taken. It is not just a popularity contest. And of course there has to be substance. In Rav Moshe’s case it is easy to see what made him a Gadol. It was his encyclopedic knowledge of Torah which included all of Shas and Rishonim. That knowledge combined with his great wisdom resulted in the voluminous responsa known as the Igros Moshe. That is today perhaps the most widely quoted source of Halacha L’Maasa - applicable Jewish law. Adding to his stature were his Midos – the good character to go along with his wisdom. He was also a Rosh HaYeshiva. But that was not his claim to greatness.

That title belongs to Rav Aharon Kotler in his day. Rav Ahron was not really a Posek. I'm told by people who knew him that when people asked him a Shaila he referred them to Rav Moshe. That – of course helped enhance Rav Moshe’s reputation too.

Rav Aharon's genius in Torah study and his founding Lakewood or more precisely transplanting the classic unadulterated European Yeshiva to American soil was Rav Ahron Kotler’s greatest achievement. In the eyes of many that not only made him a Gadol, it made him the Gadol Hador! In the Yeshiva world he was the greatest living Rabbinic leader of his day. The Lakewood Yeshiva model inspired many others like it. But Lakewood was and still is the most prestigious post high school Yeshiva in America if not the world.

The great Rosh HaYeshiva of Torah Vodaath, Reb Shraga Feivel Mendelowitz, was a Gadol but not for the same reasons that Rav Moshe and Rav Ahron were. He was a Gadol because he is responsible for the Yeshiva world as we know it today. He spread Torah throughout the land sending out his best students to establish day schools all over America. It is the students that attended those day schools that populate the ‘Lakewoods’ of today.

A later Torah VoDaath Rosh HaYeshiva, Rav Yaakov Kaminestky was a Gadol too. Not because he was a Posek. He wasn’t. Nor was it only because of his immense Torah knowledge which he had - or the fact that he was a Rosh HaYeshiva. It was his character and his wisdom; his sense of right and wrong; his moral values and his leadership capabilities that did. When he spoke – people listened. In the same vein was his successor at Torah VoDaath, Rav Avraham Pam.

The Satmar Rebbe did for Chasidus what Rav Ahron Kotler did for the Yeshiva world. He built - practically from scratch - an empire of Chasidim 2nd to none. He was not only a brilliant Talmid Chacham and lifelong Masmid he was a world class Posek rivaling Rav Moshe. And he was a leader with few peers building up Satmar as one of the largest – if not the largest - Chasidic sect in the world.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe did the same for his Chasidim that the Satmar Rebbe did for his. He not only created a dynasty of Lubavitch Chasidim, his movement was - and probably still is - the most successful outreach organization in all of Jewry. I think it is safe to say that there are more people who have become observant through Lubavitch than any other entity. Although he too had many of the same characteristics as others - his greatness was in his leadership ability and the ability to inspire outreach in unprecedented ways.

My own personal view is that Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik had no peers when it came to greatness. Not only was his brilliance in Torah and his encyclopedic knowledge of it was acknowledged even by his biggest detractors - he had one attribute that few if any other Gedolim had. He was an expert in the Limudei Chol of philosophy. As a world class philosopher he is today studied in universities all over the world. He also had great wisdom - giving advice to the most disparate of students each according to his own needs. Those who encountered him in their lives saw his genius through their own prism and may not even have been aware of his genius in other areas. He was the Gadol for the modern world in which we all live.

There are of course many Gedolim I have left out. But I wanted to give a sampling of those I feel were great by virtue of their specific contributions but were certainly not clones with identical attributes. But they did have one thing they all shared. They all had a tremendous amount of Torah knowledge and wisdom.

However I would be remiss if I didn’t see Yichus - genealogy - as a factor in some cases. Could it be true that even when it comes to recognition in the Torah world - it is as much who you know (or are related to) as it is what you know?

In Chasidus Yichus is virtually mandatory. It is almost always the case that a son succeeds the father as Rebbe.

Surprisingly Yichus seems to play a very significant role among non Chasidim too. Of the above mentioned people some were sons of Gedolim themselves… or at least sons in law. And there are some today who are sons of Gedolim from previous generations. Is it fair to ask whether Gedolim who did have famous fathers - but in fact may be ven greater then those who are today recoginzed as such - but may not have had the opportunity to be recognized without those last names? I do not mean to cast any aspersions on anyone. Just because one has Yichus it certainly doesn’t disqualify them from becoming a Gadol. In some cases the son even surpasses the father.

I still have to wonder just what part Yichus plays in who is and isn’t considered a Gadol today - since a lot of it is determijend by public acceptance. And the name value of any rabbinic figure certainly must play a part.

On the 10 th Yahrzeit of My Rebbe

Those who read my bio at the top of this blog will note that Rav Ahron Soloveichik was my primary mentor. While I am not a Brisker per se, Rav Ahron (as we – his Talmidim lovingly called him) was my Posek during his life and I follow some of his Minhagim. While it is true that I have had other influences that have helped shape my life not the least of which are my parents, the great figures I mentioned in the bio, and some I haven’t mentioned, my Hashkafos are based to a large degree on those of Rav Aharon.

Today, the 18th of Tishrei is Rav Aharon Soloveichik’s 10th Yahrzeit. In honor of that Ami Magazine has published an interview with my former classmate, Rav Moshe Soloveichik, Rav Ahron’s oldest son. I strongly reccomend reading it.

R’ Moshe, his two immediate younger brothers (Rav Eliyahu and Rav Yosef) and I were in the same Shiur for four years. The first year he gave us a Shiur in Talmud and the following 3 years a Semicha Shiur. Rav Moshe and I therefore experienced similar perspectives on the events of that era and how his father reacted to them. Obviously R’ Moshe knows his father infinitely better than I do. But much of the Ami article could have been written by me. In fact if one goes through my archives, one will find some of the same things mentioned in this article – mentioned by me. Particularly in my series on Skokie Yeshiva (HTC).

Rav Moshe was the right person to ask about his father, Rav Ahron. In my view he is the family historian. I believe he really does know more than anyone on that subject.

The article - written by Amis publisher, Rabbi Yitzchok Frankfurter - paints an honest portrait of one of the truly great rabbinic figures of the 20th century – a true Gadol in every sense of the word.

Rav Ahron was a man that was not afraid to speak his mind when Emes was at stake. He cared very little about the consequences to himself. He couldn’t care less what others thought about his views. If he believed something was Emes, he uncompromisingly advocated it – even when if went against the conventional Rabbinic wisdom. Even if he knew that it could hurt him personally to take unpopular positions.

He was a lifelong supporter of Religious Zionism (Mizrachi) – even though he was not a member – even saying Hallel on Yom Ha’atzmaut. He in fact davened in their Shul on the ‘Mizrach Vant’ as a sort of unofficial head! This was counter to the nearly universal view of the Charedi establishment. It reduced his stature in their eyes. But he didn’t care about that. He only cared that it was Emes.

And yet when the Religious Zionists of Chicago sold their building to a group of missionaries he fought them vigorously. As a student in his Shiur along with my fellow classmates and most of the Yeshiva I attended a demonstration at the building’s site that he organized. We were joined by Bachurim from Telshe whose Yeshiva was nearby.

When he lost that battle he never failed to condemn Chicago’s Religious Zionists - all the while supporting the ideals upon which Religious Zionism were based. Again standing for Emes in the face of tremendous opposition.

He fought the Traditional Movement whose lay leadership and many of the movement’s rabbis comprised the board of directors of the Yeshiva that employed him. Although there were other issues that contributed to his demise at Skokie I am convinced – as is R’ Moshe - it was because of his uncompromising high degree of integrity on these two issues that he was eventually fired.

His concern for Emes was matched only by his Chesed. He cared about his fellow Jew… and his fellow man. He opposed the war in Viet Nam early calling it an immoral war despite the support for the war that many mainstream Rabbanim had for it.

I was also a beneficiary of his Chesed. I’ve told the following story before.

He was a renowned expert on Hilchos Shabbos. He was also known as being a Machmir on that Mitzvah. I had once asked him to Paskin a Shaila dealing with Shabbos for my father. He refused to Paskin saying that he wasn’t too clear on the issue and told me to ask someone else. I said OK and did exactly that – receiving a Kula – a leniancy for my father. It later dawned on me that Rav Ahron most certainly did know how to Paskin in that circumstance. But he would have been Machmir. He also knew my father and realized that it would have caused my father a lot of anguish.

So instead of telling me a Chumra – or even just saying he didn’t want to Paskin (for fear that I would insist) he just said he didn’t know and sent me to a mainstream Posek that he knew would Paskin favorably for my father. His concern for my father’s predicament made him willing to put aside his Kavod and say “I don’t know’ rather than burden him.

I miss my Rebbe and am grateful to see an article about him on the occasion of his 10th Yahrzeit in an internationally distributed magazine. I have my disagreements with its publisher, Rabbi Frankfurter. I debated him on broadcast radio on one issue and have criticized him on others. But he has done a masterful job in choosing the right person to interview and then recounting the story of a truly great man. And for that I thank him.

Sukkos in Israel

It’s Erev Sukkos today. There is nothing like celebrating a holiday like Sukkos in the holy land. In a Jewish State, Sukkos is celebrated by everyone - Charedi, Dati, and even Chiloni. This is especially true in a city like Ramat Bet Shemesh where I am located. Virtually the entire town observant.

Sukkos is everywhere. Wishes of Chag Sameach can be seen and heard all over the place – in the street; from your local supermarket clerk; on the radio; in newspapers (secular and religious) ...I mean everywhere! It is literally in the air.

It is quite a sight to see the Daled Minim being sold in Shuls, in private homes, stores, Shopping center plazas, ...even in the streets.

Tonight and tomorrow the city will have a feel of Yom Tov - unlike that of even the most Jewishly populated cities anywhere else in the world. In so many religious enclaves like Ramat Bet Shemesh all over Israel there will be no cars or any type of motorized vehicles anywhere to be found in the streets. People dressed in their Shabbos finery – all walking to Shul – whether in black hats or Kipot Serugah everyone is on the same page. You really do feel like you are at home as a Jew when you are here.

My only caveat is Yom Tov Sheni. As a non resident I am observing 2 days of Yom Tov. I must confess that I hate it. I know there are Poskim who would permit me to observe only one day. But my Poskim don’t. It is truly annoying to watch virtually every other Frum Jew in town getting into their cars in Chol HaMoed mode - while I am in still Kodesh mode. And to make matters worse - this year Sukkos will be a three day Yom Tov. Twice.

I could of course eliminate Yom Tov Sheni from my life by making Aliyah… but that is a whole other discussion. Not for now.

That said - observing Yom Tov Sheni is a small price to pay for being here this time of year. It is well worth the price to be here and have the Yom Tov experience. I highly recommend it.

I will dispense with my usual practice of writing a Davar Torah on Erev Yom Tov because I simply have not had the time while here in Israel to do so. I am enjoying my son, daughter in law, and Israeli grandchildren immensely. They do take up a lot of my time.

I will however take this opportunity to wish everyone a Good Yom Tov. Enjoy your families.

TheTyranny of a Religious Minority?

How far should an airline go to accommodate its religious passengers? That question was recently put to the test by an Orthodox couple and their son while traveling from New York to Milwaukee.

They had a flight scheduled at about 11:30 AM. It was however delayed until 4:40 PM that day. They boarded the plane then and waited a half hour before the pilot announced that there would be yet another delay of about an hour. Worried that they might not make it back in time for Shabbos – they asked if they could be let off the plane. They were granted their request.

The plane returned to the gate, let off that family losing their place in line on the runway for take-off. This eventually caused that flight to be cancled.

Was the pilot right to have accommodated them? The question was asked of New York Times ethicist Ariel Kaminer.

He responded that the pilot was wrong and that he should not have done it. Here is how he puts it:

Passengers bought tickets in the belief that the airline’s primary goal was to get them to their destination as close to schedule as possible. Once they are buckled in and the doors are locked, it’s not ethical to announce that the rules have changed and that a personal (as opposed to medical) emergency — no matter how compelling — might take precedence.

That would be just as true if turning back to the gate had merely cost a few minutes rather than doomed the flight entirely, since on a plane even a slight delay can ripple outward, from the people in the cabin to the people who are meeting them to the passengers waiting to board the plane for the next leg of its journey and so on. It would also be true if the personal emergency were secular in nature — if someone suddenly realized she’d made a professional mistake that might cost her millions, and she had to race back to the office to fix it.

If a religious practice does nothing to harm others, then airlines should make a reasonable effort to accommodate it. But though that family has every right to observe the Sabbath, it has no right to enlist an airplane full of captive bystanders to help them do so. By boarding a flight on a Friday afternoon, the family knowingly risked running into trouble. The risk was theirs alone to bear.

I find it difficult to disagree with him.

I appreciate the freedom and guaranteed rights granted to religious people in America. It speaks volumes about this country and its people to see the lengths to which they go to honor that commitment. But I’m not sure accommodating the few at the expense of the many is what the first amendment is all about.

First, I’m not even sure what Halacha would be violated had they remained on the flight as Shabbos descended upon them in flight. Second this is exactly the kind of thing that turns people into anti-Semites. Or exacerbates latent anti Semitic feelings in those predisposed to them. Third, to board a plane so close to Shabbos puts the responsibility for any Chilul Shabbos squarely on the couple who took the chance on flying so close to Shabbos. They put themselves into a precarious situation and now they are asking everyone on the plane to pay for it by being tremendously inconvenienced.

Although the ethicist seemed to be a bit heavy handed - I tend to agree that the right ethical thing to have done would have been to tell that couple that the airline appreciated their rights to practice Judaism as they saw fit, but not at the expense of everyone else. And then taken off as planned.

Rosa Parkenstein

I think what happened Rachel Levin Weinstein best describes the deep divide between. Charedim and Datim in Israel. She called it her ‘Rosa Parkenstein moment’. You can probably guess what happened. But I’ll tell you anyway.

Rachel is an American Oleh. She made Aliya from Chicago because of her religious beliefs – believing that one can best fulfill their destiny as a Jew in Israel. I believe we had met a few times while she lived in Chicago but I do not really know her.

Her orientation is what I would call right wing modern Orthodox with a strong connection to religious Zionism. She is a Tzanua – meaning she dresses modestly in accordance with Halacha and – as a married woman - she covers her hair. In other words she is an idealist who does more than talk the talk. She walks the walk.

She settled in what she calls Beit Shemesh. Her description of it sounds more like Ramat Bet Shemesh whose population consists of both Datim and Charedim. But I digress.

Long story short, she and her husband unknowingly boarded a Mehadrin bus in Bet Shemesh and sat down in the front where there were empty seats. Mehadrin buses are sex segregated - men in the front – women in the back. A Charedi gentleman then approached her husband and told him that she must go to the back of the bus – since this was a Mehadrin bus. She refused. To her surprise a woman from the back of the bus came up to her moments later and started yelling at her – calling her the worst name a Charedi could think of - a Chiloni (a secular Jew)! Mrs. Weinstein stood her ground and stayed seated up front with her husband.

After she exited the bus she started crying from a feeling deep in her soul. She was terribly hurt by the experience.

There are many people who would argue and say that she should have given in out of respect… that this is the style in Israel. Most people are used to it – and she will eventually get used to it too. Some women actually prefer it. Had this been an ad hoc Mehadrin bus, Rachel may have had a point. But this bus was an officially designated Mehadrin bus. What right does a new Oleh have to start messing with the system – one that has already been established and for the most part accepted by every one? Some enthusiastically and some begrudgingly but accepted nonetheless.

OK. I hear the argument. But at the end of the day it is unfair to those who feel uncomfortable with this arrangement to be forced by circumstances into it.

One might argue that it is equally uncomfortable Charedim to ride on mixed buses. And if both communities can be accommodated by having both types of buses serving the public – why not do it? The answer is that both communities cannot be accommodated – unless one is willing to skip a bus they have been waiting for if it the’ wrong one’ - and continue to wait for the ‘right one’.

Most people just throw in the towel and take whichever bus shows up. But that doesn’t make it right. This is once again a case where the tyranny of the majority (if indeed, Charedim are the majority) has won the day. But being in the majority does not make their victory right. Certainly not when it causes so much pain to other religious Jews who do not buy into these Chumros.

The Israeli government has apparently ruled that all Mehadrin buses are illegal – across the board. Why they continue to exist is therefore a big question. The only way a bus can be legally segregated by sex is if the people on it at any given time agree to it.

What about the problems with crowded buses that will inadvertently cause contact with other passengers on the bus? For that we have to look to the Poskim and see not only what they Paskined, but what they did.

Rav Moshe Feinstein Paskined that such contact is not Assur. Did Rav Moshe ever get on a non sex segregated bus? I don’t know. But I do know that another Gadol of similar stature did. His name was Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach. Was he not worried about the lack of Tznius he might encounter there? Perhaps. But that did not stop him from taking the bus when he needed to. If a Tznius issue came up he dealt with it Halachicly B’Darkei Noam. In ways that are a Kiddush HaShem. I don’t think he ever asked the government to institute Mehadrin bus service in his own Charedi neighborhood.

The Mehadrin buses are a relatively recent innovation. They were created at the urging of extreme Charedim like those found in Meah Shearim. Not to be outdone in the Frumkeit department - other Charedi rabbinic leaders have endorsed them. But if they are going to cause religious Jews of high caliber like Rachel Weinstein grief, they are not worth a nickel! And worse it perpetuates the enmity among even religious groups.

Taking the Fun Out of Our Lives

Is it OK to have fun if you are Jewish? That may seem like a ridiculous question but in some Charedi crcles the answer may surprise you. Rafi Goldmeier recently posted a story on his blog that would seem to indicate that having any fun at all is forbidden by Jewish law.

He describes how a Charedi company outing for its employees was canceled because of some complaining employees:

A number of women , after the fact, went to the rav of the Mekraz HaTaasuka and complained that shocking things happened on the tiyul. The rav looked into it and decided nothing unusual happened. A year later the same women came and complained again, even though some of them no longer work in that office, and applied pressure to have the fun tour canceled. Caving in, the rav told the company not to take the employees on a jeep tour, rather they should go to Tsfat and tour the kivrei tzadikim. Employees complained about the change in the plans, to no avail.

Kivrei Tzadikim. The Charedi idea about having a good time is going to a cemetery. I agree with Rafi when he says: I just find it disheartening that according to some people there can be no such thing in the frum world as having fun and enjoyment. Everything must be a religious experience of sorts.

He bolsters this idea by what happened to him when he was a freshman in high school. The Rosh HaYeshiva once gave a speech to his students and railed against the very idea of having fun.

I have to wonder however. Is that the bottom line? Did that Rosh HaYeshiva actually imply that fun is Assur?

I don’t think so. I think what he probably meant is that Judaism is not about ‘If it feels good – do it’. That was the mantra of my generation in the hedonistic sixties. On the other hand one is not required to make every single experience a religious significance either. I do not believe that his Rosh HaYeshiva meant that. I think that he meant that there must be at least some purposeful goal to having fun - such as relaxing and thereby renewing their energy for constructive activity.

He also was probably wary of the fact that some forms of 'fun' can sometimes be destructive and wasteful. One must have ethical behavior even when having fun. Fun cannot be at someone else's expense. It also may not have any sin attached to it - not Bein Adam L’Makom and not Bein Adam L’Chavero.

Much of what is called fun today is at the expense of others. One can for example pull practical jokes on people who do not appreciate it. Or one can riducule others just to make their friends laugh. It may be fun but its not right. In fact it is just plain disgusting to do - and Assur.

Having fun for fun’s sake is not a Jewish concept. Judaism is a religion of purpose and meaning. It is not a religion of time wasting. If one has fun for rehabilitative purposes it might even be a Mitzvah – or at least a Hechsher Mitzvah. Refreshing oneself for an hour by doing something relaxing and enjoyable can easily enhance one's learning or one's job. But overdoing fun can be destructive.

For example playing computer games is fun. If on the other hand one spends too much time on a leisure activity they may end up neglecting their responsibilities. One thing is certain. Fun should never be the primary goal of a person’s life. It should be seen as a means to a positive end.

Fun need not be limited to leisure time. Work can be fun. Certainly learning Torah can. Parenting can be fun too. In fact a truly good parent will enjoy spending quality time with their children. If one truly enjoys what they is doing –if it is fun.

Which brings me back to the cancellation of an annual company trip by a Charedi rabbi. As Rafi explained, there was nothing untoward that happened at past company trips. Certainly those trips had a positive end in that it boosted the morale of the employees which problay made them more productive. But it was canceled anyway. How does this benefit anyone?

Unfortunately this seems to be the trend among Israeli Charedim in general. There is no better place to see it happening than with young Charedi children. There is practically no area of fun left for them to enjoy during their leisure time. No movies. No TV. No internet. No I phones. No concerts. No radio. No amusement parks. No sports - participatory or spectator.

A child needs to have fun. He needs to blow off some steam. For boys especially with their long days and constant preoccupation with learning. And yet without it he could easily crack or go off the Derech. Aside from riding a bicycle (...girls are not even allowed to do that!) how is a young boy supposed to spend his leisure time? Visiting grave sites?! Hanging out on street corners?!

That is the story in Israel. Can American Charedim be far behind as they continue to move to the right? In fact most of the fun I listed is already forbidden.

I know Mitzvah observance is hard. I know how important learning Torah is. And I know how serious we should be about our Judaism. But taking the fun out of our lives is not what Judaism is all about.

If Not Now, When?

This is the thought we have as we go into Ne’ilah - the concluding service of the holiest day of the year, Yom Kippur. We realize that this is the last moment we have before the gates of Heaven revert to their year round status with respect to Teshuva.

We can of course always do Teshuva for any and all transgressions. But for the ten days beginning with Rosh Hashanna and culminating with Yom Kippur we are given a special opportunity to repent of our sins. God is more open (as it were) to Teshuva then. So we pray hard at this time of year so that our Teshuva is accepted. Yom Kippur is the last chance to rescind any Heavenly negative decrees on Rosh Hashanna. By the end of the day our fate is sealed.

May God grant all of Klal Yisroel a sweet year. A year of good health and happiness. No more pain! No more sickness - physical or mental.

So should it be written. So should it be sealed.

Have an easy and successful fast.

Labels - A Necessary Evil

There was an interesting article in the Jerusalem Post a couple of weeks ago by Rabbi Stewart Weiss that asks some challenging questions. What exactly does it mean to be Orthodox? And what does it take for someone to no longer be considered Orthodox? Indeed what value is there at all to being called Orthodox? The title of the article should tell you where he stands on the last question: “Don’t call me Orthodox”.

His premise is one that I have heard many times and one that I have addressed before. It is one that I wish could be applied universally. Labels are counter-productive and tend to divide. I agree. He illustrates this with a personal anecdote.

When he was a chaplain visiting the sick in Chicago, a patient asked him what kind of rabbi he was. He realized the purpose of the questioner. Whatever denomination they were, they wanted a rabbi of similar beliefs. They believed that only such a rabbi could properly minister to them. Not wanting to alienate the patient - he fudged an answer in an attempt to give the pastoral care the patient needed. He said: “I’m a Jewish rabbi!”

It would be nice if we could all just define ourselves as Jewish. No Conservative; no Reform; and no Orthodox. We are all just Jewish. The differences between us are personal – each of us having our own level of personal observance – no matter which Mitzvos we observe and which ones we don’t.

The Sephardi community is like that. There are no denominations among Sephardim. Their level of religious observance runs from meticulous observance of every single Mitzvah all the way to virtually non observance of even an important Mitzvah like Shabbos. They are all one big community and they see the rabbi as their religious authority whom they all honor - chief among them Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. There are no Conservative or Reform Sephardi theologies, rabbis or Jews. There are just Jews with differing levels of observance.

The result of this approach is far greater sense of Achdus -unity among them. Sephardi Jews interact with each other socially regardless of how observant they are. Sephardi Jews do not look for religious or theological rationalizations for their behavior.

I wish it was like that for Ashkenazi Jews. But it’s not. When the first denominational break-away happened, it forced labels upon us. It was the most divisive act ever done by a group of Jews since the days of the Mishna when the Sadducees broke away from the Pharisees. The Reform founding fathers created their own theology and rabbinate. There was no way to reconcile it with traditional Judaism. There was now an option for a Jew to justify his non observant behavior theologically and to completely dismiss the traditional rabbi as a source of belief and practice.

Once there was one split - there came others. Conservative and Reconstructionist Judaism are the most prominent - each with their own definition of what Judaism is. There is no way for a Jew to simply define himself as Jewish anymore. It isn’t only about the level of observance. It is about the theology. There can be no unity with heterodox theologies that Orthodoxy sees as heretical. We therefore cannot and do not recognize other denominations.

But they are there proclaiming themselves as legitimate alternatives to Orthodoxy. We therefore have no choice but to label ourselves. We otherwise risk being seen as tolerant of heresies. So much as I wish there were no denominations in Judaism –there are. And only by identifying ourselves can we have an intelligent discussion about who and what is legitimate or not.

Once we have labels it is important to know how to define them. These labels although borne of theological necessity have become sociological groupings that are now defined more by lifestyle than theology. So Rabbi Weiss’s rhetorical question about what it takes to no longer be seen as Orthodox remains. Here is how he puts it:

It began earlier this summer with the tragic death of Leiby Kletzky, the eightyear- old hassidic boy brutally murdered in Brooklyn’s Borough Park. The press reports screamed that his killer, Levi Aron, was an “Orthodox Jew.” Excuse me? An “Orthodox” Jew?! Can we really say that a monster who kidnaps, strangles and dismembers a young child – stuffing his body parts in a garbage dumpster and a freezer – is “Orthodox”?

Obviously kidnapping and murder are not Orthodox customs. But I would have to disagree with saying that it is impossible for an Orthodox Jew to commit murder or kidnapping. It is the old ‘No True Scotsman’ argument. You cannot define all deviancy out of your social tag. An Orthodox Jew is currently identified by several key factors – in particular keeping Shabbos and Kashrus. It is also defined by community. If one lives in an Orthodox neighborhood, goes to an Orthodox Shul, has mostly Orthodox friends, and (in the case of a man) wears a Kipa and Tziztzis then he is Orthodox. If he murders someone than an Orthodox Jew has murdered someone. The same thing is true about any crime he commits.

Rabbi Weiss would like to define out of Orthodoxy all miscreants who are Shomer Shabbos. Whether they cheat in business, their taxes, or murder someone. Personally I would like to write them out of Judaism and even humanity. But the fact is they are both human and Jewish. And they are Orthodox if they live an Orthodox lifestyle and self identify as such.

Rabbi Weiss argues that one should not judge a book by its cover. He quotes his mother as saying something to the effect of “Frum is a Galach - Ehrlich is a Yid”! (I believe Rav Aharon Soloveichik made the same comment although I never personally heard him say it). This is something I subscribe to. This statement is a rejection of Frumkeit in favor of Ehrlichkeit. We should avoid judging a Jew by his outer trappings:

Part of our problem, I suggest, is an almost obsessive fixation on the outer trappings of apparel and appearance. We judge others instantly by the clothes they don, the styles they employ, the costumes they wear. Clothes are indeed important guardians of modesty, but they do not necessarily connote religiosity.

I agree. Unfortunately this has nothing to do with whether a person is Orthodox or not.

Frum Week

What happens when a Reform Jew adopts Orthodoxy for a week? That question is answered in an article by Emily Langowitz - a Reform Jewish young woman who is a senior at Yale University. Being serious about her Judaism - she wanted to know what it was like to be completely observant.

Reform Judaism offers people tremendous personal autonomy. But she started wondering why she chose to do only certain Mitzvos and not others. My guess is that she probably also felt that given the freedom of choice she might be missing out on something. So for one full week she became completely observant. From keeping fully Kosher; to fully keeping Shabbos; to modesty in dress; to davening Shachris, Mincha, and Maariv (with a Minyan and behind a Mechitza). She called it Frum Week.

In the article she describes both the difficulty and exhilaration she felt in taking it upon herself. Here is an excerpt:

Frum week required much more diligence and mental exertion than I’d anticipated. I’d thought studying for Organic Chemistry exams was hard, but nothing gets those brain cells firing like trying to figure out how to eat without violating the rules of kashrut. A previously unknown state of hyper-consciousness was required before I could touch anything on my tray.

I found myself in Catch-22 situations daily: If I didn’t eat bread with my meal, I had to figure out four separate blessings before I could start; but if I did, I had to recite the motzi (blessing over bread) at the beginning and the long birkat hamazon at meal’s end. Did my quinoa with roasted peppers count as a grain or a vegetable? My roommate brought home cookies—were they hekshered (determined to be kosher)? If so, were they dairy? If dairy, when was the last time I had eaten meat? And how was I to categorize various soups?

I would stand in the lunch line, chatting with someone about how I had to say a b’rachah before I ate anything, and only then realize I’d been picking string beans off of my plate for a full minute without a second thought. I had never realized how mindless eating could be for me until I was suddenly forced to think about everything I put near my mouth.

It is so interesting to see just how difficult it is for someone to be Frum who isn’t used to it. For most of us, being Frum is almost second nature. The things Emily had to concentrate on hardly makes a dent in my thought processes throughout the day. All of the things she described are things that I barely think about until I do them. And when I complete them, I do not give them a second thought.

I never thought of it this way but being observant is hard if one is not used to it. There is so much to learn and so much to be considered at any given moment in order to be fully observant. And yet for those of us who are used to it – we tend to do all these calculations subconsciously.

My sense of her words is that it was an over-all very positive experience – albeit a difficult one. But at the same time it seemed to be a bit over-whelming for her in the end. And she expressed a bit of dismay at what she saw as a woman she simply did not counting!

After her one ‘Frum Week’ she went back being a Reform Jew. I get a sense that she almost felt relieved that it was over. But I believe that being fully observant to the best of her ability had an over-all positive impact on her. In fact I am convinced that she is a spiritual person who may very well take another – less pressured look at full observance of the Mitzvos.

I note that she says that it was her Reform faith that gave her the strength to do what she did. I’m not exactly sure what she meant by that. But one thing I am sure of is that she has enhanced her Judaism by her adventures in Orthodoxy. And I am convinced that there is a place in Orthodoxy for Emily Langowitz and all other committed Jews of any denomination.

It will however take more than ‘do it yourself’ observance. It will take becoming better educated about what Orthodoxy truly has to offer. Orthodoxy is more than about just observing Mitzvos. It is about a way of life; it is about serving God according to His will. It will also take a better understanding of the role of a woman in Judaism - a role that makes a woman unique and yet equal to a man in the eyes of God. When she realizes just how valuable that role is she will come to know that indeed a woman does count!

Food for Thought

I have often been challenged on the notion that there can be unity in Orthodoxy. A recent post of mine came close to conceding the point. The far right and the far left seem to be making this dream more elusive than ever.

But I have not given up on it. I still maintain that not only is it possible – it’s already happening in America at least on a social level if not an ideological level. The new ‘Centrist’ (as I call what was originally described by Rabbi Berel Wein) is alive and well. He is in fact thriving. As more Charedim are becoming professionals and more modern Orthodox (that I refer to as RWMO) become more serious about observance and Torah knowledge the two worlds are meshing quite nicely – thank you.

Just to be clear, I never thought it was possible to include all extremes. There are some so-called observant Jews that are so outside the mainstream that they have virtually written themselves out of any possibility of Achdus. The Neturei Karta fanatics who support the destruction of the Jewish State are an example of that. There are others. No need to belabor the point.

But there is a disillusionment about Charedim among many in modern Orthdodx that has despaired them of any rapprochement between the two segments.

I believe that the cause of the disillusionment is traceable to the kind of decisions the Agudah Moetzes and other Charedi rabbinic leaders have made in recent year. Their approach to dealing with the internet, or reporting sex abuse; or their relative reticence to criticize those who are guilty of financial crimes; and the virtual obsession they have with matters of Tznius are just some of the examples that I believe has caused this problem.

First let me re-state the fact even though I am not Charedi, I do respect the members of the Moetzes. I do not ever want to be interpreted any other way. As I always say- I respect them for their tremendous knowledge of Torah; and both the time and effort they give to matters affecting Klal Yisroel - even when I disagree with them. But as a non Charedi who looks elsewhere for rabbinic leadership, I believe that I can be more objective about some of their decisions.

I have in the past asked the question as to whether there should even be an Agudah Moetzes… or any council of sages that represents all of Orthodoxy. In my view there should not be. There is no one rabbi much less a group of rabbis that can claim to speak for every single Hashkafa… noble a goal as that might be.

Is there any Charedi that thinks the Agudah Moetzes agrees with this?

It turns out there is. Although he does not say so in so many words, he strongly implies it. Rabbi Dovid Landesman is one of those people that actually makes a believer out of me with respect to Achdus. He is someone who has commented often on this blog and has even written a few guest posts. He has also not been reticent to disagree with me – even strongly.

Rabbi Dovid Landesman has hit another home run with his recently published book: Food for Thought – No Hachsher Required. I haven’t completed it yet but after reading a few of his essays I am convinced that we are pretty much on the same page on many issues.
Rabbi Landesman wrote a brief but very enlightening essay on the historical purpose of the Agudah Moetzes and how it operates. One of the reasons it was created was to be have an authoritative spokesman for all of Orthodoxy. By including representatives of all Orthodox segments speaking in a unified voice it was felt that any pronouncements would reflect the actual Daas of the Torah.

This was done to counter Zionism which they viewed as relegating to itself as spokesman for all of Jewry. The early Zionists did this in an attempt to once and for all deal with anti-Semitism in a unified manner. The Agudah mounted a serious challenge to that by creating a group of rabbis that would speak for Orthtodoxy

But as Rabbi Landesman notes that lofty goal never saw any real fruition since many great rabbinic figures were not included – either because they did not want to give up autonomy over their own Orthtodox Kehilos or because they weren’t even invited to join. Among those not included for those reasons at its earliest stages were the likes of R’ Chaim Soloveitchik, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, R’ Meir Simcha HaKohen, and the Rogotchover Gaon, Rav Meir Hildesheimer, the Netziv and many Chasidic Rebbes. How can any group that does not consider the views of some of the greatest minds of the era of even their own Hashkafos - be considered binding Daas Torah?

Charedi rabbinic leaders of the time had built up their own turf with their own set of rules each responding to its own set of conditions. There is no way for example that a Chasidic community would agree with the Yeshivishe one. And a Hirschean Hashkafa disagreed with them both on the need to study worldly matters. How did the founding fathers of the Agudah Moetzes ever think they would have a meeting of the minds that they could call Daas Torah on the issues that defined their Kehilos?

This is no less true today when the self selecting body of the Agudah Moetzes does not include people like Rav Hershel Shachter or Rav Ahron Lichtenstein. They have never been invited to join and never will be. And yet they make pronouncements they consider binding Daas Torah. Add to that that not all members of the Agudah Moetzes are considered equal where a dominant personality will hold sway over other members who defer to him even as they disagree.

And even among the actual members who see each other as equals - is it really Daas Torah when dissent is stifled in the name of unity? It certainly is not! And yet they fully admit to speaking with one voice even when there is dissent.

Then there is the fact that membership to the Agudah Moetzes is self selected. That means that some people will be selected and some won’t for reasons other than how great they are. There are great people who are not on the Moetzes, and not so great people that are. To the best of my knowledge there is no guide on how members are chosen.

I believe that this is Rabbi Landesman’s position. I hope that I am not misstating it.

It is true that Rabbi Landesman is not your typical Charedi. But it is also true that he strongly identifies with and considers himself to be one. I also believe that in their hearts, the vast majority of moderate Charedim agree with him. I do not believe that the vast majority of Charedim really grant the Agudah’s ‘Daas Torah’ as binding. Even though the Agudah Moetzes clearly would like it to be considered such.

If they do not have the support of the majority of their own constituents, what purpose is there then for their existence? Would it not be better for each member of the Moetzes to voice his own views instead of keeping dissent quiet? Wouldn’t that be closer to Emes than what they have now?

I think that Rabbi Landesman might just agree with me. But even if he doesn’t - with Charedim like this, how can there not be Achdus?

The New Kid on the Block

I just received a note from Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein asking me to announce Klal Perspectives. It is a new internet journal that he is part of. The mission statement is as follows:

Klal Perspectives’ goal is to provide the Torah community with a forum to address and debate the major issues confronting the community today. We envision a journal in which a diverse group of rabbinic and lay leaders will share their varying perspectives on a given topic in each issue, with an eye to not only describing problems but also pointing to possible solutions. Input from the broader community will be sought and published as well, in order to broaden the discussion and enlist as many talents as possible in developing strategies for the future.

A while back another journal made its debut in print form. It was called Dialogue. It contained articles dealing with the hot topics of the day presented from an unapologetic Charedi perspective. It’s mission statement was to basically replace the Jewish Observer, the now defunct magazine of Agudath Israel. Although it seemed to be doing exactly that - I believe its title is misleading. The only dialogue taking place in that magazine was among Charedim who pretty much all agree on those issues.

This new internet publication boasts a far broader spectrum of thought. The editorial board consists of the following individuals:

Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein, Moishe Bane, Rabbi Moshe Hauer, Rabbi Ahron Lopiansky and Rabbi Yonoson Rosenblum. The Managing Editor is Rabbi Dovid Goldman.

Of the above I know only know two. One is Jonathan Rosenblum - a moderate Charedi spokesman of sorts for Agudah. (Curiously he is given the title rabbi even though I distinctly recall him insisting that he is not). The other is Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein. He is someone I would call either a moderate Charedi or a right wing modern Orthodox Jew. In both cases I believe their perspectives are very similar to mine.

The first issue has articles written by both. It also includes articles by Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zweibel, executive director of Agudah; Rabbi Heshie Billet, Rabbi of the Young Israel of Woodmere; Rabbi Moshe Hauer, Rav of Congregation Bnai Jacob Shaarei Zion in Baltimore; and; Rabbi Gedaliah Weinberger, Chairman of the Board of Agudah; and Moishe Bane, Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Orthodox Union.

This journal has the potential to do some of the things I have been fighting for - create a sense of Achdus among Jews with differing Hashkafos. I have not had the opportunity to read the articles yet. But the fact that a group of people with diverse backgrounds writing in their first edition is a good sign.

That said. I would have liked to see a bit more diversity on the editorial board. For example, it would have been a major plus had they gotten someone of the stature of Rabbi Michael Broyde or Rav Aharon Lichtenstein to serve. Or Rabbi Gil Student – the most popular Orthodox Jewish blogger on the internet. This would certainly have broadened the scope of their mission. I will however reserve judgment until I read some of the articles and see what kind of contributors they feature in future editions. Wouldn’t it be nice to see Rabbi Zweibel and Rabbi Broyde writing in the same issue? I think so. That would truly show Achdus.

With these words I now depart for Israel. I will be spending Yom Kippur and Sukkos with my son and his family in Ramat Bet Shemesh. I will resume writing posts as soon as I arrive – which is tomorrow. I do not anticipate breaking my habit of writing a new post every day while I am there (excluding Yom Tov and Shabbos of course). But I will not be able to moderate the comments as frequently as I normally do. So I am opening up the commenting section to allow the free flow of conversation - and will ‘post moderate’ to eliminate comments that violate the commenting rules. So please behave yourselves.