Shidduch Fraud

Family. That is one of the most important and recognizable facets of the Jewish people. It is one reason so many Orthodox Jews marry so young.  And it is why we have something many people refer to as a Shidduch crisis. The idea being that not getting married is almost a fate worse than death.

While that term is usually applied to women, men feel it too. Depending on circumstances there are many instances of men who want to get married and are unsuccessful in doing so for a variety of reasons. Some legitimate and some not.

But the focus is definitely on women. It seems that they are in the majority of those who seek matrimony unsuccessfully.  While I believe there are a variety of reasons for the disparity between men and women in this regard, a lot of it has to do with age. There is a false notion that the ideal age range for a woman to get married is between 18  and 23. Men can wait a lot longer and still be considered the right age.If a young woman isn’t married by age 23 she and her parents might go into crisis mode. Once she hits 30, thoughts about spinsterhood enter into their minds

That is of course patently untrue. Women can and do get married beyond age 30, even in Orthodox circles. But that doesn’t stop the fear when after a few years of dating – nothing clicks.

I must admit that when my own children were in the Parsha (a euphemism for Shiduchim - dating for marriage purposes) I too was worried. Until they were all married, my wife and I were in ‘Shidduch Hell’!

I mention all of this as a preface to an article in Arutz Sheva entitled  The Shidduch Fraud by 5 Towns Jewish Times editor in chief, Larry Gordon. He tells us about his own  experience. One that is surely the result of the above mentioned kind of thinking.

The short version is that he was swindled out of about $2500 by a fellow named Yechiel Pearlstein. Pearlstein used the Shidduch crisis to his advantage by promising worried parents that his particular Segula wil guarantee their child getting married in very short order. He asks for some up front money and the larger balance to be paid by a check he will cash after the Segula is performed. But he ends up cashing the check immediately. When he is caught – he claims it was cashed by mistake promising to pay it back. But never does.

He has swindled a lot of people out of money with these promises. Unfortunately swindlers abound in the world. Including in our own. Preying on desperate people is the second oldest profession. It is all too easy to fool people into paying you money for promises to help you get out of a Jam.

This was probably not the first time people worrying about their children getting married were scammed. And it probably won’t be the last.

But scams are not limited to criminals like Pearlstein. A lot of charitable organizations do it too. They may actually do what they promise to do. But I have to wonder if their claims of success are any more realistic than Pearlstein’s claims. Reading their ads, which often include testimonials - make it seem like a sure thing. I know they need the money. And I’m sure it all goes for a good cause. But that practice is deceptive and ought not be used. Preying on vulnerable people is a disgusting tactic. The ends do not justify the means.

These organizations have been rebuked in the past to no avail. I keep seeing ads like this all the time.

I’m not here to say I can do anything about it. Desperate people seek desperate measures. As long as there is a Shidduch crises, the Pearlsteins of the world will continue to take advantage of it. As will these charitable organizations.

But I do have some suggestions that I know will help – even as I know they will likely fall on deaf ears as they always have in the past. But after reading this story, they are worth mentioning again.

The entire paradigm has to change. While using a Shadchan is a legitimate method of dating, it should not be limited to that. Recommendations by family members and friends are a legitimate way to date too. That does happen.

What does not happen is men and women that are serious about getting married -  meeting on their own. That is so frowned upon that if tried by someone, they are considered bad marriage material.

In the modern world where men and women get together frequently, there ought to be a way for them to meet on their own in Halachicly acceptable ways. Whether at a wedding or any other Simcha where men and women are in attendance. Mixed seating ought to not be disparaged. It ought to be encouraged between young men and women of marriageable age. But men and women sitting together at a wedding dinner is so frowned upon that it is avoided like the plague. In my view that exacerbates the problem by limiting opportunity.

Another way young people can meet is through their families. Families that have high school age children ought not fear inviting families to a Shabbos meal a family whose teenagers are of the opposite sex.

Once a young woman or man is in the ‘Parsha’ - socializing ought to be encouraged. Not discouraged. The way things stand now, it is so discouraged that anyone who tries is seen in a bad light!

The argument is that with a Shidduch system a lot of time is saved by the Shadchan allowing the parents to do the ‘dating’. Meaning that they do all of the research so that by the time the couple meet, half of the dating is done. The parents find out what might takes several dates or more for the couple to find out on their own - piecemeal as they date. But that is a double edged sword. Sometimes good marriage prospects are written off for the silliest of reasons.

One thing is certain, the current status quo has yielded some unintended consequences.  Some of which could be reversed if the paradigm changes along the lines I suggest.

That said, it is no secret that MO enclaves where dating is more casual and men and women  meet more freely (like the Upper West Side of Manhattan) has becomes a nightmare for those who want to get married.  But there are reasons for that not necessarily related to their more casual setting.

I have no doubt that the Shidduch crisis could be reduced if my ideas were implemented. And any collateral damage that such changes would entail must be measured against the very real damage the current situation now engenders. Isn't it worth a try? 

The Chasidic Education Crisis

Rav Y. Reuven Rubin

When Chasidism was founded by the Bal Shem Tov, it was considered by many mainstream rabbinic leaders of the time to be a form heresy.  No less than the pre-eminent Gadol of the last 3 centuries, the Vilna Gaon (the Gra), was absolutely convinced of it. He fought it tooth and nail until the end of his life. This is indisputable history.

Without getting into details things eventually smoothed over based on a combination of: Chasdism ridding itself of some of their more bizarre and questionable practices; a better understanding of what Chasidus was really about; and perhaps most importantly the fact that a newer, more dangerous ideology arose that need to be fought with everything we had, Reform Judaism.

Fast forward to today. Chasidism is considered as legitimate as those of the Lithuanian type Yeshiva Hashkafa whose progenitor was the Gra. (There are of course other streams in Orthodoxy such as Torah Im Derech Eretz  and my own Centrist Hashkafa - but they are irrelevant to this discussion.)

Even though both believe in the meticulous observance of Halacha, there is still a major divide in their worldviews. Aside from some obvious cosmetic differences (such as the manner of dress), there are substantive differences as well.

One of which is how they view secular education.  While both worlds would prefer offering only religious subjects to their students, the Yeshiva world, for the most part sees enough value in it to teach it to their students as a general policy. This is in part based on parental desire and in part on government requirements.  Instead of fighting it, they take it seriously. I recall R’ Eliya Svei saying that if they were going to offer a secular studies curriculum, there was no Mitzvah to waste your time. He insisted his Yeshiva have a fine secular studies program.  

Chasidim do not see enough value to offer it under any circumstances and will fight any effort to do so. Even if there are parents that would desire it for their children. This is why the current educational crisis in New York is almost exclusively about Chasidic Yeshivos. 

But this battle s not limited to the United States. It is going on in the UK too. With far more serious consequences.The UK subsidizes religious schools to some degree – provided they offer a secular studies curriculum. Which brings me to a somewhat enigmatic article by Rav Y. Reuven Rubin. From Matzav: 

No matter, this is an Eis Tzorah, a time of maximum challenge, larger than anything we have seen here in generations.

Please. Let’s come together and use the one true weapon that is our inheritance going back to our very roots in Avrohom Avinu, let us daven together.

One massive Yom Tefilah, in a huge venue, parents grandparents and yes most importantly children. We will hold nothing more than our tehillimlach in our hands, and turn to the One source of all hope and light.

We must do this now, whilst others who mean us harm read reports and conjur over their plans, we, children of Avrohom, Yitzchok, Yaakov must cry out to Hashem our Father that loves us. There must not be any division, all must gather together, all Torah Yiden, Chasidim, Yeshivish, Sfardisha, Baal Habatish, the titles don’t end but the one solid fact is that we are all one Klall Yisroel. 

Rav Rubin never clearly identifies exactly what is bothering him... what this ‘maximum challenge’ is. He speaks only in general terms about social engineering by the government which ‘has taken a decidedly negative view of our educational system’.  I can understand opposition to that. I too consider social engineering inappropriate government interference in religious matters – in a country that allows the freedom to practice religion as their citizens choose.

One can however glean from his article that what really concerns him is the desire to maintain their policy of a non existent secular curriculum. That is what got the attention of the UK’s education officials.

I recall reading an reading article not long ago where educators on the Lithuanian type Yeshivos in the UK  (mostly located Golder’s Green, if I understand correctly) were not really all that concerned about this since they offered a secular studies curriculum in addition to a their religious one. But educators on the Chasidic side (located in Stamford Hill) were in crisis mode. Which is how Rav Rubin describes the situation.

He wants all Orthodox Jews of good will to ‘cry to the heavens for this ‘Eis Tzara’. I’m sorry but I can’t join him. Because in my view what he is praying for is not the right to teach Judaism without government interference. That’s just his’pitch’. He is really asking for the right to continue a policy that hurts his community - no less than the similar policy by Chasidic communities in New York are hurting theirs.

If I am going to pray for anything, it will be that the Chasidic leaders in Stamford Hill (and New York) allow some common sense into their hearts and minds. I agree that they are in crisis. But not because of what they is fighting. But because they are fighting it!

Let them allow their children to be better educated and thereby better prepared to live in the real world; better prepared to support their large families;  and not rely so much on government welfare programs that are so easily abused.

The Best Interests of the Children

Chavie Weisberger lost and regained custody of her children (NYT)

Divorce is never a good option for children. But sometimes it is the best option of many bad ones. Children of divorce are traumatized. I see it all the time. But so too are they traumatized in a dysfunctional marriage. If that marriage is maintained, the trauma on the children continues and becomes a chronically negative factor in their mental state. One that will affect them for the rest of their lives. Although some learn how to deal with it and lead perfectly normal lives, some don’t. Divorce has that effect too. But it is a better option that living in a continually  dysfunctional family.

A story in the New York Times highlights this issue. Although it does not really tell us how the children in this particular divorce fare, the subtext is clear. There is not a doubt in my mind that these children are at best confused about who and what they are. And that can easily lead them to stop being observant.

Briefly this is a story about a Chasidic couple - both of whom were raised in the type of Chasidus that most mainstream Orthodox Jews might consider extreme. But that is really not the issue. They had 3 children and somewhere along the way, the mother started to come to terms with her homosexuality. Having stayed in the closet for a while, she now lives openly as a lesbian.

In the meantime she and her husband agreed to get divorced. A Get was given in a legitimate Beis Din. A Beis Din’s ruling is honored by the secular courts and is by law considered binding arbitration. (This is how Dayan once explained to me how Beis Din rulings are enforced.)

In this particular instance the mother got custody on condition she would raise the children according to the religious tenets she and her husband were raised upon. She agreed to this intending to keep her word. Still living a religious lifestyle at the time – even though she had already been dealing with her own sexuality. But then things started changing. The children eventually were allowed to do things that are expressly forbidden by the Torah, Like eating Treif.

Her ex- husband (who had remarried) took his ex-wife court and sought custody based on the fact that she violated the terms of the divorce agreement. The judge (who happens to be an observant Jew – but in my view is irrelevant) granted him custody on that basis. But she challenged the verdict on appeal, and the lower court judge’s decision was reversed: 

A New York State appellate court ruled that Justice Prus had erred in making religious observance the paramount factor when deciding custody. The court also said he had violated Ms. Weisberger’s constitutional rights by requiring her to pretend to be ultra-Orthodox around her children, even though she was no longer religious, in order to spend unsupervised time with them. 

That, in a nutshell is the story here. The question is, what is best for the children?

The easy answer for an Orthodox Jew might be that since their souls are at stake the father should get custody. I’m sure that is at the forefront of the custody battle from the father’s perspective (as well as the perspective of his community).  But I’m not so sure forcing the children to live with their father, his new wife and 5 additional children from that wife is the better option. Nor am I sure it will be the key to their salvation as religious Jews.

In my view, before we can speak about spiritual health of children, we must first assure their mental health. In cases like this, their mental health has already been compromised. And that is sometimes accompanied with a compromised spiritual health. Ripping children way from a loving and caring mother (assuming that’s the case here) -  even for spiritual reasons may have an opposite effect.

It will surely sour them on their religion when that is seen as the cause of losing a parent. Visitation rights will not help that much and may make things worse. They will be reminded each time they see their mother of the fact that they were forcibly torn away form their mother.

It doesn’t really matter if their stepmother is a wonderful woman that cares for them as much as she does her biological children. The step children will not see her in the same light they see their mother. They will see their father’s new life as separate and apart from what they saw living there with their mother as a family. Living with their mother now may not be ideal, but at least they won’t see any competition for love and attention.

What about their spiritual health? It cannot be denied that living with their mother will very likely lead the children to a non observant lifestyle. One that will be maintained long after they leave their nest.  As religious Jews, shouldn’t we be more concerned with that, than anything else? By allowing the children to stay with their mother, are we contributing to their almost certain downfall?

I don’t think that is even arguable. The mother has clearly abandoned observance and has allowed her children to have a taste of that too. So that even though in this case, the children will be attending the religious schools the mother has promised to send them to, that will very likely not matter that much. A parent is a far more important role model than a school.

In that regard claims made by the religious side are correct: 

“It is something that matters, be it kosher food, or the way the mother dresses,” he said. For example, he said, when “the mother has to take the child out to the bus stop in front of the house, and the whole block looks, it is something that might embarrass the kid.”

“It might look trivial for a person who doesn’t observe these things, but it’s not trivial for the friends and for the peers of the child,” he added. “You don’t want the child to be shunned in school. Children can sometimes be extremely vicious.” 

I don’t see that situation as an optimal one to further the childrens’ observance. That will just give fuel to rebellion away from it.

As I started out saying, divorce is never a great option for children. It is traumatic no matter how you slice it. Observance is at risk even when both couples remain observant, let alone when one of them no longer is.

The bottom line for me, is that I am simply not sure what the right course of action is. If both parents are decent loving parents, then the choice about who gets custody  needs the wisdom of Solomon. Their spiritual health is  at risk either way.

As a legal matter, I agree with the lower court judge. The terms of the divorce were violated. But is granting custody to the father in the best interests of the children - spiritually or mentally? I honestly don’t know.

These are Charedi Priorities?

R' Kanievsky and R' Edelman speaking to a Prison official (YWN)

I’ve told this story before. But it bears repeating in light of a story at YWN. (More about that later.) About 30 years ago when my parents lived in Bnei Brak, my father Davened in the Chasidic Shtiebel of the Bilitzer Rebbe - down the street from his house.  Both my father and the Rebbe were approximately the same age, of European background. Having immigrated to Israel from the US at about the same time - they struck up a friendship.

One day my father found out that one of the Bilitizer Rebbe’s Chasidim was caught selling drugs. When my father expressed his outrage, the Bilitzer rebbe said something along the lines of the following, ‘Nu, Reb Shimon, you have to understand. This fellow has a large family to feed… he has 10 children!’

My father left rather astounded by his friend’s response, went home and had a cow! 

How anyone could defend  a drug dealer  (made worse by the fact that a religious Jew was doing it thus causing a Chilul HaShem) was beyond disturbing to my father. Instead of expressing the outrage my father felt, the Bilitzer expressed his sympathy for his drug dealing Chasid!

This seems to be a pattern in the Charedi world. It is one thing to judge people favorably. But to do so at the expense of overlooking a serious crime is disgusting! And ignoring the  attendant Chilul HaShem seems to counter one of the most basic principles of the Torah. God commands us NOT to desecrate his name numerous times.  

YWN reported a story about Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Gershin Edelstein (whom many consider Gedolei HaDor) having been visited by a high ranking prison official. The purpose of that meeting was to make sure that Charedi prisoners be allowed to wear jackets and hats for Davening. Something these two Rabbonim were told was being denied to them.

As many people that have commented on this story have noted, this was a truly perplexing event for a variety of reasons. This is the ‘Hill they want to die on?!’ This is the issue that these great Rabbomim want to address? Allowing prisoners convicted of a variety of criminal activity to be allowed to wear a jacket and hat for davening?

This is not a Halachic requirement.  But it is a very strong Charedi requirement. Some shuls will not allow you to Daven for the Amud (as a Chazan) without it!  Even if you are in Avielus – the 12 month period of mourning for the death of a parent where one should be gathering Zechusim  (merit) for the deceased. Davening for the Amud is the traditional way of doing that – for those capable of doing so. They take precedence over others. This is called being ‘a Chiuv’.

And it is what happened to famed Orthodox criminal attorney, Ben Brafman when he was in Aveilus. He told this story at the mea culpa Agudah dinner of the Spinka Rebbe who apologized after he was caught in a tax evasion - money laundering scheme. Ben needed to catch a Minyan for Mincha and when the Gabbai asked if there was a Chiuv. (someone in Aveilus or a Yahrzeit) Ben raised his hand. The Gabbai ignored him and chose another fellow (who by coincidence was a former client of Ben’s). Why? Because he wasn’t wearing a hat or a gartel!

This shows exactly where the priorities are. The lack of a hat for davening is more significant than the crime one went to jail for. It is the hat that matters most.

One might argue that these great Rabbanim could do nothing about their incarceration. That… what’s – is done. They are paying for the crime. And all these Rabbonim wanted to do is help them out in any way that they could. Even in this small way. What’s so wrong with doing that?

But as was so eloquently noted by Rabbi Nosson Slifkin, criminal activity is plaguing Charedi Jewry. He cites many examples: 

One of the most senior charedi politicians in Beit Shemesh…, was just arrested for major fraud...

(W)e have one of the worst desecrations of God's Name in the country's history, the conviction of former Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger - a man who was widely suspected of very serious wrongdoings for decades…

Earlier this month, nine charedim were arrested for a huge, sophisticated fraud involving the creation of fictitious yeshivos in order to receive various government benefits. They printed thousands of fake identity cards and even purchased buses to quickly transport hundreds of cooperative students to the Yeshiva in case of a surprise inspection. The scam had been going on for years… It was the largest fraud ever uncovered in Israel's history.

This follows a similar case in Beit Shemesh last year, where police arrested twelve charedim for creating a fictitious yeshivah with 150 students in order to receive benefits.

A few years earlier, police raided three non-profit institutions in Beit Shemesh and Beitar which were likewise running fake yeshivos to collect benefits. And when the government started to audit how many students in charedi yeshivos really exist, various yeshivos voluntarily removed a total of ten thousand fictitious students! 

I am not picking on Charedim. As Rabbi Slifkin noted, we all have our share of bad apples. The problem is that these people aren’t treated like bad apples. Their misdeeds are practically ignored. That distinguished Rabbonim go out of their way to see that they are given the right to observe minute Charedi customs - sends  a message that what they did was not all that bad. The Charedi convicts can easily end up thinking that their only problem was getting caught.

This matches the reaction of the above-mentioned Bilitzer Rebbe and the Gabbai that refused to give the Amud to a Chiuv. The greater concern seems to be for the welfare of the criminal than the crimes committed and the attendant Chilul HaShem. 

It also seems to be of little concern - WHY these people resort to crime in the first place. I can’t speak to every single incarcerated Charedi. But it is clear that a lot of that crime was financial. In some cases it might be greed. But it is just as likely that they simply needed the money to feed their ‘10 children’ (…to put it the way the Bilitzer Rebbe did).

It’s true that a lot of progress has been made in the Charedi world in that department. Charedim now have options available that can train them for the workplace after they finish Kollel. As has been noted here many times - that is not enough. There are too many people that cannot support their families without outside help. And if they can’t get enough outside help, resorting to crime is an option for far too many of them. Which is why there are  enough Charedim in the prison system for 2 distinguished elderly Rabbonim to step in and help them… even in this small way.

It’s too bad that such care is not accompanied by the kind of outrage my father had at the crimes that put them there. And the rebuke they should have gotten instead of the right to wear a black hat in prison.

The Political Orthodoxy of the Left

Jonathan Rosenblum

Jonathan Rosenblum is a rare breed of Charedi writer. He is a highly intelligent intellectual who was educated in two top universities, the University of Chicago, and Yale Law School. And that often shows up in his writing, as it did in the latest issue of Mishpacha Magazine.  Few Charedi writers can communicate their ideas with his level of erudition.

In addition to being Charedi, his politics lean conservative. That is where my own politics lean. Which makes us kindred spirits in many ways. His Charedi perspective is moderate and that too overlaps my own Centrist perspective.

In his latest piece he takes leftist political orthodoxy to task. It is an orthodoxy that is unforgiving to those that dare to express a view that veers even slightly from that Orthodoxy. It demands adherence to its version of ethics and morality. There are no ethics; and there is no morality - outside of theirs. (Which is somewhat ironic if you think about the moral relativism that is the hallmark of their worldview.) 

There is no discussion. No dissent. Only a lot of people nodding in agreement with leftist dogma. They will not hear any argument - no matter how rational - that contradicts the political Orthodoxy. It is a dogma insists that a better tomorrow will only come about through actively implementing their ideals.  But as Jonathan notes such idealism does not end with the utopia they envision. It usually ends with a dystopia.

And yet those that dare to veer from that orthodoxy are silenced and even ostracized. Even, as Jonathan notes, those that are card carrying leftists. When they do, they are quickly ostracized. That is what happened to Eric Weinstein - a leftist intellectual (who voted for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries). He and others like him have found a space to discuss their ‘politcally incorrect’ ideas in the center-right. He has as labeled it ‘the Intellectual Dark Web’.

What this means is that values that were once considered the cornerstone of a civilized society are sneered at. Even considering it racist or sexist in some cases. Here is how Jonathan puts it: 

NOWHERE IS THAT DESIRE to create a better future by wishing it into being more evident than in the left’s thinking about gender, which Eric suggests is completely detached from any empirical research about actual human beings. Another is the left’s view, often codified in governmental regulations and court decisions, that differences in outcomes — for instance, rates of school discipline among blacks and whites — can only be explained by racism and oppression.

Amy Wax, a chaired professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and likely the most credentialed member of the faculty — Yale BS summa cum laude, Marshall Scholarship to Oxford; Harvard MD, Columbia JD, six years in the Solicitor General’s office — ran afoul of that orthodoxy last year, when she and Larry Alexander, a fellow law professor at another law school, wrote an op-ed arguing that all cultures are not equal and the “bourgeois values” that dominated American culture from the end of World War II through the end of the ’60s and ’70s are more likely to prepare people to be “productive citizens in a modern technological society.” 

What were those values? “Get married before you have children and strive to stay married for their sake. Get the education you need for gainful employment, work hard, and avoid idleness…. Be a patriot, ready to serve the country…. Avoid coarse language in public…. Eschew substance abuse and crime.” 

These are values that most Orthodox Jews subscribe to (and, I might add, by what used to be called the silent majority). And yet a value like getting married is hardly important to the politically orthodox left. That was made evident by reaction to Wax’s op-ed. It was immediately rejected  by half of her colleagues who in a letter made public - urged students to monitor her classes for signs of stereotyping and bias.

Jonathan ends with an important question:

IS THERE A CAUTIONARY TALE here for our own society? I’m not sure. But it does strike me that all tightly knit communities may be vulnerable to certain forms of internal terrorism in which name-calling takes the place of argumentation and in which too many “disconfirming” viewpoints and facts are excluded from the discussion.

A society in which empirical facts are suppressed and truth is no defense is one that will necessarily have a difficult time solving its internal problems and responding to new societal needs. Having observed the havoc wrought by the cultish behavior of the left elsewhere — not the least in its contempt for religious liberty — may we be wise enough to preserve the open discussion needed to address our most pressing challenges. 

I believe that he was hinting at a problem that exists across the spectrum of Orhtodoxy. There is dogma on both the right and left. Those who part with that some of that dogma even slightly are actually written out of that segment even if they identify with it generally. Someimes even ridiculed for expressing those views. 

More than once I have been accused by the of being a misogynist for my views about the role women in Judaism. And I can’t even count the times I have been accused of hating Charedim because of something I questioned based on their world view. 

How many times have I heard the phrase. “Nisht Fun Unzera’ - meaning not one of us. This is a comment one might hear about a fellow Orthodox Jew – no matter how observant - that might stray into their orbit but does not share their worldview or lifestyle .

As Orthodoxy continues to to grow. Is there a real danger that we could split apart as a people?

At the moment, I don’t see that being the case. As I have said many times. The vast mainstream of Orthodoxy consists of moderate Charedim and Modern Orthodox Jews of the right all living together and leading similar lifestyles. But I fear that unity might someday give way to more factionalism. 

It has been  my experience that growth means separation. The more we grow, the more people can be found coalescing around a narrower Hashkafa. And when a critical mass forms - there is a separation. And that separation makes us grow further apart as a people as time goes on.  And that is not good for the Jewish people.

The Eida HaCharedis and the Charedi Solider

The Eida HaCharedis view of Charedi soldiers in the IDF

Freedom of speech is a basic tenet of a democratic society. As such hate speech should in theory be permitted, as  repugnant as it may be.  That was the issue the ACLU fought for in 1977 on behalf of a group of neo-Nazis.  They were denied a permit by the village of Skokie, a heavily Jewish suburb of Chicago filled with Holocaust survivors. The matter was taken up by the Supreme Court and they came down on the side of Free Speech. (Survivors be damned! - Sometimes, it seems,  a democratic principle does not work in just ways.)

I was reminded of this by an event that happened recently in Jerusalem. From Arutz Sheva: 

Israel Police are investigating a street show organized by an anti-Zionist haredi organization earlier this month which denigrated IDF soldiers and encouraged members of the haredi community to harass religious servicemen.

On the Lag Baomer festival earlier this month, the Edah Haharedit organization – an umbrella group of anti-Zionist haredi movements – put on a show for children in the Meah Shearim neighborhood which included an actor dressed as a haredi soldier

During the show, the soldier, who told the audience he was there to protect them, was taunted, called a “hardak” (a Hebrew slang mixing the word haredi with the Hebrew word meaning germ), and later pelted with fruit.

The actors who participated in the show encouraged local children to confront religious soldiers, and denounced the “Zionist state”.

After Israeli television publicized the story, police launched an investigation into claims the performance constituted incitement against IDF soldiers, Kikar Hashabbat reported. 

Well, I guess this too qualifies as free speech. The police investigating it might have a point. Did this performance did constitute  yelling ‘Fire’ in a crowded theater (when there is no actual fire)?  Perhaps incitement against the IDF is equivalent to that. Not really sure.

But the plain truth is that these people didn’t need any provocation. They have been doing it all along and will continue doing it. They see it as their mission. That little performance only highlights it to the world. They probably realized it would get media attention.  So now it reverts to being a simple matter of free speech.

Which in a democracy ought to be permitted no matter how repugnant (ala the Supreme Court decision forcing Skokie to grant Nazis the right to march in Skokie.)

But that does not make this performance any less repugnant. What it does - is make clear that Eida HaCharedis  actually approves  of attacking Charedi soldiers. No longer can anyone say they don’t. And that it is just the renegade young hoodlums among them. 

The truth is that it was not just young hoodlums acting in extremely inappropriate ways on a principle the community believed in. No. They are not misguided at all. The Eida not only preach that hatred, but applaud those who acted on it. They do not reject them at all. They celebrate them.

In my view the Eida has done a great service in presenting this performance to the world. We now know the truth. They are the delinquents here.

No more apologetics. No more excuses saying it isn’t the Eida but the few hoodlums in their midst. It IS the Eida!

My message to them is, ‘Thank You!’ Thank you for telling us who you really are. Thank you for telling us how much you approve and even celebrate these repugnant acts!

And they set themselves up as the most religious Jews in the world? Really?! Not in my book. Not with unholy behavior like that. Free as they may be in a democracy to express it!

The Ultimate Summer Vacation

A Glatt vacation in Switzerland (Totally Jewish Travel)

Glatt Lemehadrin, Gormet Cuisine, Best Locations, Exceptional Excursions – Switzerland at the Villars Palace Hotel…

This is the gist of an ad I saw in Mishpacha Magazine last week. It is typical of the many ads one finds in magazines like this.  

It sure is fun being rich!

That comment made to me many decades ago has stuck with me to this day. It was made by a Hispanic fellow when we both worked at my brothers’ dental laboratory. He was responding to the brand new car another employee had just bought that had all the ‘bells and whistles’ available in that day.

I always think of this comment when I see the numerous ads like the one above. It amazes me how much wealth there must be among Charedi Orthodox Jews that are targeted by these ads.

The problem is that it isn’t only the wealthy that read these magazines. They entice us all wealthy or not. Perhaps even more-so those of us that are not wealthy. Who wouldn’t want a vacation like that? The thinking among some is where there is a will there is a way. They will find the money somehow.

I can understand the need to get away from the daily grind. A luxury vacation in the Switzerland like the one advertised is a very appealing and ‘kosher’ way to do that. But how ‘kosher’ is it really? Not the food. That is surely kosher enough. But is the actual vacation kosher? Ads like this one appear in great abundance prior to Pesach. But those ads talk mostly about spas and golf courses. Not so much about the actual event Pesach celebrates. 

But that isn’t even the problem I’m address here. It is the fact that people that can’t afford it are somehow enticed into doing it anyway. That may work out well for the organizers and vendors. They make a bundle. (Which they are entitled to do). And it surely works out well for the rich. But for the average individual with a large family to feed and tuition bills to pay, it may not work out so well.

This is in part what causes people to go into debt. Which is not so great for more important vendors in their lives, like the credit giving grocer, or the religious schools that their children attend. Already on scholarships, I suspect that a lot of people can’t even meet their reduced financial obligations. Because they have become victim to the Frum’ version of ‘Madison Avenue’ with ads that are clearly made to entice us all into buying what we can’t afford

Please do not misunderstand. This is not to deprive the wealthy from enjoying their wealth. I have no problem advertising to them. God bless them. But for the rest of us it creates a desire to pursue a materialism that we can’t afford. And worse - it sometimes causes the kind of debt which in some cases ends up in the inability to pay at all - those should be first in line to be paid. All because of a materialism fueled it part by those ads. 

So yes, it’s fun being rich. But that should not cause us to pretend that we are - when we’re not. There is absolutely no Mitzvah to keep up with the Katzes and Cohens.

I’m not sure what to do about those ads.  People can advertise a product they sell. Nothing unethical there. And magazines are entitled to sell ads to anyone they want. Nothing unethical there either. They are in the business of making money. Of which selling ads is the primary means of doing that.

In the meantime the problem is still there. It is human nature to respond to luxury ads with a desire to have what they offer. But I think its important to know what we can - and can’t afford. And not to try and figure out ways to somehow get those things anyway.

What to do about it.

In some ways the line ‘It sure is fun being rich’ speaks to that. It is the realization that indeed it is fun, but it is also true that we are not rich enough to afford it. One can dream – and hope that someday they will be able to - but to otherwise realize that we should appreciate what we do have and what we can afford. The sages say it best (Avos 4:1): Ezeh Hu Asher? HaSameach B’Chelko. Who is the rich man? The one that is happy with his portion.

Postscript
Although this post speaks about a Charedi Magazine and its target audience, it is not meant specifically as a criticism of Charedim. I just that happened to see this ad in Mishpacha. The fact is that there are no decent MO weekly magazines. I therefore comment on what I read.  But the thoughts expressed here apply to people of all Hashkafos. 

Are They Rabbis or Not?

Navit Tzadik (L) and Amira Ra'anan - Rabbis?  (Jewish Press)

I have always supported the idea of recognizing in some official capacity great achievement in Torah study. For men there are many ways to be recognized that way. One of which is being ordained as a rabbi.  But what about women?

As most people know by now, despite a few renegade institutions under the banner of ‘Open Orthodoxy’ or Liberal Orthodoxy’ the ordination of women as Orthodox rabbis is prohibited. This is the view of virtually all of Orthodoxy, from the Charedi Agudah; to the Centrist OU and RCA; to the European Rabbinate; to the Israeli Rabbinate.

While this may not seem fair to the egalitarian eye, it is nevertheless a fact.  However, despite that fact a few women do get some sort of ordination every year. In some cases have been hired by OU member synagogues for rabbinic positions. That of course did not sit well with the OU leadership.

After these hires became public some OU member rabbis protested with a threat to break away from the OU if that was not corrected - by either ejecting the violators or getting them to fire those rabbis.

Ever treading a fine line - the OU came up with a compromise that forbade any Shul from hiring a female rabbi;  no Shul that had a woman in that position could become a member of the OU;  those OU member Shuls that had already hired women had 3 years to correct that situation by complying with guidelines delineated by OU Poskim – on pain of expulsion if at the end of that period they did were not in compliance

Happily that ‘compromise’ seemed to satisfy both sides.

The question is - what exactly does compliance mean? In order to understand that we need to know exactly what role a woman may have in an Orthodox Shul.  That was described in great detail in a lengthy statement issued by OU Poskim which included an explanation of how they arrived at their conclusions.

The short version is that women may serve in a variety of capacities but not as clergy in any way.  They may for example serve as teachers, scholars in residence, executive directors, programming directors, professional counselors, communal spiritual advisers and even Halachic advisors such as Yoatzot Halacha (women that can advise other women on matters of Taharas Hamishpcha).

The question remains, how can we recognize achievement in any of these areas without giving them a title implying some version of being a rabbi? I’m not sure how to answer that question. But I do think that any person, man or woman, who achieves a certain level of expertise in any field, has a right to be recognized. No different than a PhD or Masters Degree is recognition of expertise in a particular field. How to apply that to women without breaking the taboo of calling them a rabbi is beyond my pay grade.

One thing is certain. There is no Halacha stopping any Jew – man or women - from studying Torah to their hearts content and achieving a high degree of expertise in Torah knowledge. It is the title ‘rabbi’ and its implication that is the problem.

I should note that the greatest Torah scholars of our time were not necessarily ordained as rabbis. Famously, the Chafetz Chaim was recognized as a Gadol HaDor (if not THE Gadol HaDor) for his Torah scholarship long before he was ordained. Out of his great sense of humility, he did not need nor care about that title. He was ordained late in life out of necessity (for a technical reason that I no longer recall). Having the title ‘rabbi’  does not mean all that much in terms of recognizing achievement in Torah study.

Perhaps those women that want to be ordained for purposes of being recognized for their achievement can look to the Chafetz Chaim as a role model.

Most Yeshiva students on the right don’t ever bother getting it, unless they need it for a job. In fact there are plenty of ‘rabbis’ that were never ordained and yet use the title in their jobs.  It may very well be the most abused title in Judaism these days.

All of which brings me to Rabbi Shlomo Riskin. The Jewish Press recently reported that he conferred titles of ‘spiritual leaders’ and’ teachers of Halacha’ upon 3 women who passed his rigorous exam. (Participating in the ceremony was Rabbi David Stav and Rabbi Kennneth Brander.)  On the surface it seems like he has violated the near universal prohibition against ordaining women. And yet he denies it: 

It should be noted that, despite a misleading headline in Srugim, “On the eve of the giving of the Torah, two more women were ordained as Rabbis,” the title that was awarded the three women stops short of a rabbinic ordination, recognizing them instead as spiritual leaders and teachers of halacha – after they had completed the first and unique program of training women as authorized to rule on halachic issues and to become spiritual leaders. 

But after denying it he goes about explaining why today’s Semicha (ordination) is not real Semicha anyway. Real Semicha actually ended in the 4^th or 5^th century. As such he proclaims that today’s Semicha is nothing more than a degree recognizing their accomplishment. Which seems to contradict his denial. Why bother explaining that title if that is not what has been given? Furthermore, calling them Rabbaniot hardly a makes his denial persuasive.

It is also not entirely true that there is no connection to the real Semicha. That was noted  by the Poskim of the OU: 

Consideration of the ordination of women also raises questions regarding the nature of semikhah. While contemporary semikhah differs from classic semikhah (as described in the Talmud) in many regards, it must, nevertheless, be viewed as an extension of the original institution of semikhah (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 242:5-6). 

It appears to me that Rabbi Riskin’s intent is to have his cake and eat it too. He seems to want to comply with the prohibition against giving women Semicha and at the same time granting 3 woman a version of it. While I completely understand his motives and explanations – which I believe he bases on his sense of equity and understanding of Halacha, I have to question his execution of them. At the end of the day, his clarifications are anything but clear. And denials notwithstanding he appears to have given a form of Semicha to these women.

Supporting a Family when Kollel Life Ends

A Jewish Wedding (Jozef Israëls,1903) - Wikipedia

I had an opportunity yesterday to speak to a young Charedi couple (probably in their late 30s or early 40s. For me, that is still a young couple). The wife was educated in the Beis Yaakov system and her husband went to a Charedi Yeshiva high school. The conversation turned to Shidduchim (dating for purposes of marriage). Their daughter is in - what is called ‘the Prasha’ - a euphemism for that kind of dating.

They both expressed concern about how their daughter would be supported once her husband left Kollel.  Did his ‘ Shidduch resume’ include a ‘plan’ for a livelihood in the future? And what was it?

They are concerned about a familiar response which they feel is vague and unrealistic. Something like ‘I’ll just go into business’. Unless he had relatives that promised to ‘take him in’ and train him, that kind of response shows how clueless they are to the reality of making a decent living. And yet this seems to be the general attitude among young Charedi men these days as they are  prepared for and directed into a life of full time Torah study.

Supporting one’s family is virtually ignored it seems. This kind of response raises concerns like the one expressed by this couple.  I assume that they are worried that their daughter was going to be misled by such promises.

I have always maintained that at least in America, young men get a basic secular studies education. And therefore they have an advantage over their Israeli counterparts that get absolutely no secular education at all. That might still be true. But it seems that the American attitude about it is not all that different than the Israeli attitude. The only difference being that in America they are ‘forced’ to take those courses – but not seen as in any way relevant to their lives now – or in the future. And if they had it in their power they would eliminate them entirely. Considering them a complete waste of time better spent in Torah study.

This is not about whether there is any intrinsic value in secular studies. It seems that they do not even see any practical value in them!  It seems that they are taught to completely devalue secular studies as much as their Israel counterparts do – and may even be jealous of them since they don’t have to put up with it at all.

This not how it was in my day. We all understood that we needed to support our future families. And that the best way to achieve that was by taking our secular studies seriously and going on to college. Which would enable us to get decent jobs. Back in those days, it was common for those of us in a post high school Yeshiva program to attend college at night towards getting a degree.

A good friend of mine who is about my age and attended Yeshivas Chaim Berlin told me that  80% of the students there did that then. Another friend just a bit younger who also attended Yeshivas Chaim Berlin told  me that Rav Hutner used to advise his students which courses take based on their personal strengths. But that was then. This is now.

The process of change began not long after my time in school. The value of secular studies has deteriorated immensely since then. The idea of learning full time has become the new standard to the exclusion of anything else. Including preparation to support a family someday. I have no real issue with being taught the importance of Torah study. I can even understand being influenced to continue studying Torah for a while after marriage. What I do not understand at all is the complete abandonment of any kind of preparation for a future livelihood… leaving it to fate.

Which brings me to another revealing comment made by the wife.  She offhandedly told me about her own experience along these lines when she announced her engagement just over 20 years ago. One of her  friends retorted along the following lines, ‘What?!’ ‘Your getting engaged to someone in medical school?!’  ‘I NEVER thought YOU would do that!’

What she of course meant is that her values had somehow been compromised. Having attended Beis Yaakov schools all of her life and a seminary of similar Hashkafa in Israel, she was surprised that she ‘settled’ for someone not learning full time.  

I asked her why that was considered ‘second class’? She could only answer that they were taught to that the ideal type of man to seek as a husband was someone studying Torah full time. If they weren’t, they were considered less than ideal – and at best second tier. It seems that marrying someone like that excluded you from that lofty community. In essence putting you outside the Charedi camp to a certain extent.

It didn’t matter that her Chasan was Charedi, and Talmid Chacham. Nor did it even matter he that had actually published a Sefer.  What mattered it seems was that by opting to go to med school instead of a Kollel, he was not first tier marriage material. And this was already the case over 20 years ago!

That they are concerned with this very issue now that their daughter is involved with Shiduchim is a good thing. But I wonder just how many are like that now?  Has the tide turned? Do Charedi parents think along these lines? Or are most Charedi parents on on the same page as their children, hoping their children will be living a life of full time Torah study and not all that concerned with the material welfare of their future families? 

Are parents these days able to do what parents of 20 years ago did? Support their children in Kollel? Or has the money run out? Are there are second mortgages still to be had - or not? Are parents still selling life insurance  polices to support their children? Are parents still willing to work until the day of their death to support their children? And do they even make enough to do that - especially if they have a lot of children? And even if they do make enough, is it right for a child to even accept help under these conditions? Do young couples feel good about being supported that way? I sure wouldn’t.

A Momentous Occasion of Pure Achdus*

Invitation to a very special wedding

We are on the eve of a momentous occasion. The world has for weeks been counting down to this regal event. Tomorrow it will have finally arrived to the great joy of the entire world. Meghan Markle will be getting married to Prince Harry. (Not me. A different Prince Harry.)

It was the lead story this morning on the CBS Morning News and has been among the top stories every evening for weeks now - on just about every major mainstream media outlet. 

I wish I could say I’m surprised that the 6^th person in line to the throne of the British Empire gets more attention than the meeting between the the President of the United States and the Communist dictator of North Korea to discuss the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. But that didn’t quite make it to the top. Nope – the marriage of 2 of the most insignificant people in the world did.

For me, the wedding of a British Royal who is 6^th in line to a monarchy that has no more relevance than a bucket of warm spit (to paraphrase former Vice President John Nance Garner) – is a non event. And yet the world can’t get enough of it. And the media is all too willing to accommodate them with endless talk about who will walk Ms. Markle down the aisle; or what her gown will look like; or who will or won’t be invited. What a vacuous world we live in!

Not so the Jewish people. We too have been counting down the days to our own momentous event. It is a marriage of a different sort: Kabbolas HaTorah. Tomorrow night on the sixth of Sivan we begin Shavuos, the day God gave us the Torah at Sinai. Choosing us - His people Israel - over all other nations.

We too had anticipation. We united: VaYichen Shom Yisroel Neged HaHor. And Israel encamped opposite the mountain (Sinai). Rashi adds, K’Ish Echad B’Lev Echad. We were united as a people like one man with one heart - unlike any other time in history.

The Gemarah in Zevachim (116a) tells us that at that moment the nations of the world gathered in front of Ballam and asked him  a strange question. Was the world going to be destroyed again in a catastrophic flood? Ballam told them, no, this was not the case. HaShem Oz L’Amo Yitain - God was giving His people strength. They responded by saying HaShem Yevarech Es Amo BaShalom – May God bless His people with peace!

In order to understand the unique value of this kind of unity we need look no further than our own time where we often experience  a different kind of unity. A type of unity that unfortunately occurred many times in Jewish history. A unity based on tragedy.

When a tragedy strikes we often unite around it as a people. Let me illustrate by excerpting from a post I wrote on June 3rd 2015:

One year ago today, I6 Sivan 5774 on the Hebrew Calendar, Eyal Yifrach, Naftali Fraenkel, and Gilad Shaar, HY’D were kidnapped and murdered by Hamas terrorists. The entirety of world Jewry had united in solidarity with the parents of those three teenagers. It didn’t matter what Hashkafa one had.

There was a feeling of pure Achdus. Unity. We were not Charedi, Modern Orthodox (MO), Dati, Religious Zionist or secular. We were not Orthodox, Conservative or Reform. We were the Jewish people - feeling the pain of our brothers and sisters in Israel. It was a moment in time of pure magic. A time where our differences were forgotten or ignored as irrelevant.  

We can now understand why the nations of the world asked Ballam if a catastrophic flood was about to descend upon the world. The only unity they understood was the type where people unite under tragic conditions. So when they heard that the people of Israel were uniting as one with a single heart, they though that perhaps God had revealed that he was going to destroy the world again. Why else would they unite?

That, says Rav Meir Shapiro of Lublin, is not a true unity. It is a situational unity that quickly dissipates once the tragedy passes – it quickly becomes ‘business as usual’. Everyone returns to their own agenda.

This was Ballam’s wise message. The people of Israel were not united in tragedy. They were united because of the great gift they were about to be given. A gift to His people intending for us to be a ‘light unto the nations’ and build up  the world  with God’s kingdom. For one brief moment in time, the nations of the world appreciated that and blessed God’s people, Israel with peace. Because unlike the fleeting kind of unity based on tragedy the unity experienced by the people of Israel on that momentous occasion was the ultimate unity.

Good Yom Tov

*Taken in part from Torah L’Daas by Rabbi Matis Blum.

Torah Based Careers and Sex Abuse

by Rabbi Dr. Binyamin Zev Telsner* - Guest Contributor

Convicted sex abuser, Eliezer Berland - a Torah based career

I am pleased to present the words of Rabbi Dr. Binyamin Zev Telsner* about what might be one of the most serious issues of our time. It was sent in response to yesterday’s post about yet another prominent individual accused of sexual abuse. 

Rabbi Telsner* is a well known Rav who is trained in - and deals with these issues on a regular basis. I believe his words are true and represent authentic Torah thought. His words of wisdom are in some cases unfortunately lacking even among even among those who are seen as rabbinic of lay leaders. His thoughts follow.

The Torah community is not immune to the ravages of a physical drive that is not enclosed in proper boundaries. Allow me to copy and paste a halacha of the Rambam (Isurei Biah - laws of forbidden sexual relations 22:21)

וכן ינהוג להתרחק מן השחוק ומן השכרות ומדברי עגבים שאלו גורמין גדולים והם מעלות של עריות. ולא ישב בלא אשה שמנהג זה גורם לטהרה יתירה. גדולה מכל זאת אמרו יפנה עצמו ומחשבתו לדברי תורה וירחיב דעתו בחכמה שאין מחשבת עריות מתגברת אלא בלב פנוי מן החכמה. ובחכמה הוא אומר אילת אהבים ויעלת חן דדיה ירווך בכל עת באהבתה תשגה תמיד 

Free Translation (HM):

A person should distance himself from joking, drunkeness, and flirting, because they tend to lead to forbidden sexual relations.

A man should not live without a wife, for this (living with a wife) customarily leads to great spiritual purity. And greater than all this they (our sages) say - one should turn his thoughts to words of Torah, and broaden his wisdom, for the thoughts of forbidden relations grow strong solely in a heart empty of wisdom.

As (Shlomo HaMelech) in his wisdom says: "She is a beloved hind and a graceful doe - her breasts satisfy you at all times. You will always be obsessed with her love." (Mishlei  5:19)  

The implication of the Rambam is that the void of Torah true Torah allows for the foothold of these boundary violations. But the sticky part of this is that there is widespread belief that those whose positions are Torah based, including askanim who are עוסק בצרכי ציבור, (active in the community) are immune, having filled themselves with חכמה.

I postulate that this assumption is untrue, and that one can be a לב פנוי מן החכמה  (a heart empty of wisdom) even if one serves as a genius Rosh Yeshiva or any other position of Torah expertise. In fact, I take a further, riskier step in stating that being Torah True Torah, while is undeniably the goal, is not at a 100% correlation with academic achievement, or even the status of genius in Torah knowledge. 

What's the beef, you may ask?

We are guided that our learning must be לשמה, a concept that is still elusive in its complexity, and the subject of multiple definitions. I doubt that this can be summarized well enough to fit into a box here, but we can make a few statements that at least approach the target.

Bearing vast Torah knowledge, certainly as asset, is not the ultimate goal. A computer chip can contain huge amounts of data. Shrinking Torah to the level of simple data is tantamount to kefira. 

Approaching Matan Torah, as we are doing today, is not about formatting our internal drives so that Har Sinai serves a cable to download Dvar Hashem. This reductionist perspective is erroneous. Rather, Torah is a hefty portion of a life guide, with prescribed attitudes, ideas, and halachos (the Taryag mitzvos). 

Whichever way one cleaves unto Torah, one is the recipient of the greatest gift in existence. For one, it is the absorption of voluminous data, the ability to integrate these huge amounts of knowledge to produce chiddushim, shiurim, etc. For another, it is the following of one's heritage by way of halacha and minhag, etc. One of these paths is not better than the other, just as an oncologist is not better than a dermatologist, just different, but practicing the same field.

There is a point of Torah dedication, in which one is fully involved, intellectually and emotionally, with the fulfillment of Ratzon Hashem (the will of God). This is 24/7, and contains no compromises. It sets limits on an individual that are as relevant and active when alone as when in presence of others. It means that all levels of morality are fully followed anytime and anywhere. 

In this state, people do not engage in violations. Someone (in) this space would not entertain even a passing thought of allowing desires to execute without restraint, and kal vachomer (certainly not) violate the safety and innocence of another. One could not tempt the boundaries of a marriage, and one could not stomach the very thought of being a baal taavoh. One could not refrain from committing issurim because of fear of getting caught.

Yes, the academic achievements of being a Torah scholar can co-exist with the basest of immorality. One just needs to "hide it from the kids". But this is a fictitious life. And we all know sheker to "have no feet". It explodes somewhere. 

I surmise this can explain many of the shocking revelations we have experienced over these last few decades, where persons of supposed religious accomplishment and stature were found to be responsible for some pretty awful offenses.

Torah knowledge should ideally be consistent with true spirituality. Sadly, this is not always true, and these media reports scream quite loudly when there is inconsistency. Can we make this year's Kabolas Hatorah an emotional experience, in which we rededicate ourselves to absorbing the values of Torah into our very being? I pledge to try.

*Not his real name. The writer chooses to remain anonymous for obvious reasons.

Why Do They Do It?

Jakob Daskal (New York Times)

We are way past ‘innocent until proven guilty’ when it comes to accusations of sexual abuse. This is not to say that this principle should not apply as a matter of law. Of course it should. But as a practical matter, false accusations are rare. Not so rare are denials by the accused and the community which has come to respect them.

This is the case with yet another Orthodox Jew so accused.  The New York Times reports the following:   

The influential leader of a Brooklyn safety patrol known as the shomrim had been sexually abusing a teenage girl, the police were told.

A day later, detectives arrested the man, Jacob Daskal, a leader of one faction of what has been, since the 1970s, a sort of auxiliary police force for the ultra-Orthodox Jews of Brooklyn’s Borough Park, Crown Heights, Flatbush and Williamsburg neighborhoods.

Mr. Daskal, 59, was charged with statutory rape, sexual abuse and other crimes. The authorities believe the abuse took place at Mr. Daskal’s home between August and November of last year, when the girl, who is now 16, was a year younger. But the inquiry is continuing, to determine if the alleged abuse occurred over a longer period of time or if there were additional victims. 

I wish I could say I am shocked. His community was. Unfortunately I am not. I have become conditioned to almost expect this kind of thing on a regular basis. Especially now ever since Harvey Weinstein was outed as a serial rapist/abuser. Which began the #MeToo movement exposing scores of additional prominent respected figures to have been involved in a variety of sexual misconduct.

I wish I could say ‘Well… sad as this may be – at least it isn’t about us, the Torah observant community.   Again - unfortunately I can’t say that either. It is as much about us as it is about ‘them’. The idea that our values are not the values of the street is irrelevant. There have been far too many ‘religious’ people who are inclined to preach that very thought – guilty of the very behavior they blame on street values.

I am not saying that the sexual mores of the general culture haven’t declined. They have in very significant ways. Our values are indeed not the values of the street.  They are the values of the Torah. But these values do not always determine our behavior. Even for those that are often seen as the most exemplary of those values. 

Leaders (rabbinic and lay), movers, and shakers. So many people that have made a difference in our lives – for the better have fallen. People that rose to prominence and gained our respect - becoming celebrities in a way. This seems to be the case with Daskal – just as it was for others outside of our circle. 

There is no difference. The only commonality between them is that they were prominent and thus had some power. One might say that this happens even with ordinary people too. It’s just that the prominent ones are the ones that are newsworthy. While I think that’s true to a certain extent, I don’t think that is the only reason. I think it is their very celebrity that exacerbates the situation for them. It gives them the opportunities they would otherwise not have.

What is the dynamic behind all of this? Allow me to speculate.

The sex drive is a very powerful force.  It needs to be fed no less than eating and sleeping. The difference being that the sex drive can be delayed or even sublimated into other activities.  But to deny it is to deny the human condition.  It can easily be aroused and acted upon inappropriately. Given the opportunity it takes a lot of will power to resist. Which is what we should all do when those feelings arise in inappropriate situations. 

Most of us don’t experience opportunities like that. But prominent people do. Especially if their prominence is due to great accomplishment. Which means that they are looked up to by a lot of people. Requiring them to work harder to resist any temptations arising form their celebrity.  Values often get put aside when the attraction is great enough and resistance is low. It is easy for most of us to say we would never be tempted, no matter the opportunity or the attraction. But for me there is little doubt that celebrity and opportunity are factors. It’s too easy for most of us to judge – having never been put into those situations.

This can result in two very different scenarios. One is becoming involved in a consensual but immoral relationship – such as cheating on a spouse. The other far more serious scenario of sexual abuse.

In these cases, the added ingredients extant are power and psychopathy. Their celebrity makes them feel entitled - compared to the rest of us.  When their sex drive is aroused, they take advantage of their celebrity and opportunities that present themselves with a feeling of invincibility that their sense of power gives them . 

The best example of that is Bill Cosby. He used all of the above ingredients to become a serial rapist over the many years of his career. His victims admired him and approached him. He took advantage of that. All while maintaining his image as a role model of propriety to the world. He did a lot of good. But he did a lot more bad with apparently no conscience! A true sociopath.

Daskal is no Cosby. He has no where near his prominence or celebrity But he apparently had enough within his own community to lead him in the same direction. His sex drive, and sense of power derived of his celebrity gave him a sense of invincibility, too. That no doubt enabled him to lure a defenseless 15 year old into having sex with him. All while maintaining his image as a defender of the defenseless. A sociopath just like Cosby.

Sociopaths have no conscience, but they act as though they do - fooling a lot of people because of the good they otherwise do. Only a sociopath would force themselves on others and never think about it. And then deny it when caught. Or blame the victim. This is unlike someone who is having an affair. They may be weak and morally corrupt. But they can and often do have a conscience that produces guilt. 

What I have discovered is that there are enormous amount of prominent people that are closet sociopaths. People that have abused others secretly while acting as icons publicly. It is very possible that many of these sociopaths would not have done it had they not had opportunity and and sense of invincibility their celebrity gave them – feeling immune to any kind of downfall. Celebrity creates a ‘power trip’ that is ultimately an irrational way of seeing oneself. When they get caught, no one is more surprised than they are. 

That is how I see it. Daskal is but the latest in a long chain of miscreants that have used their celebrity and opportunity to have their way. Sociopaths with no redeeming value – despite all the good they might otherwise do.

The question is, how many of us would have an affair - or worse - turn into a Daskal or Cosby given their circumstances? I think most of us would say, ‘Never!’ – and really mean it.  But I am beginning to think that a lot more of us would fall into one of those 2 traps than we would expect. I only hope and pray that I am wrong.