The Future of Women as Rabbis in Orthodoxy

Rabba Rachel Khol Finegold (JWA)

In some ways I feel sorry for Rabba Rachel Kohl Finegold. Not that she wants or needs my sympathy. She might even object to it as paternalistic or condescending. It isn’t. I believe she is a victim of the cultural milieu of our time. That being said,  I am absolutely convinced that her motives are everything she says they are. She chose to serve our people in the capacity of a clergyman. Very likely believing that this was a calling.

I call her ‘Rabba’ because she decided to change it from her former title Maharat. She indicated that the term was quite a mouthful. Which few people understood. In choosing Rabba, she makes it a lot clearer what it is she is doing. Frankly if I were her, I would just go all the way. Why stop at Rabba? Why not Rabbi? 

Rabba was chosen by Rabbi Avi Weiss when he ordained Rabba Sara Hurwitz, the first Orthodox woman to do so. He said it was simply the female form of the word rabbi. But rabbi is really an English word and no longer has any gender connotation. It is almost sexist to dance around that title.

This of course does not mean I agree with any of it. I do not. Just recognizing what is really going on here.

So why do I feel sorry for her? I truly believe that this new phenomenon will eventually go the way of the Traditional movement. Which has a lot on common with the version of Orthodoxy of which Rabba Feingold is a part. A version that has embraces the idea of ordaining women as consistent with Halacha. 

What is interesting is that Rabba Feingold would never take a pulpit that does not have a Mechitza separating men from women. As she notes she would never do anything that is against  Halacha. 

That was exactly the same argument used by the Conservative movement when they took out the Mechitza in favor of family seating. The fact is that the Shulchan Aruch does not mention the requirement to separate the sexes. The basis of that is derived of the fact that men and women were eventually separated in the Beis HaMikdash. It became a tradition thousands of years ago that went unbroken and unchallenged.

Until the early 20^th century when the Conservative movement was founded. Their motives were pure, too. They saw the American Jew assimilating quickly in the melting pot environment of the time. Conservative leaders felt that if they didn’t ‘Americanize’ their pews, no one would attend. They saw it as a sort of Eis La’assos that in any case did not violate the letter of Jewish law - the Shulchan Aruch.

Now a century later we see where that has led. A movement that with the best of intentions attempting to accommodate the spirit of the times in order to conserve Judaism is now a movement in rapid decline. 

The Traditional movement who had the same intention when they removed the Mechitza was led by fully Orthodox Rabbis. But their demise was even quicker that the Conservative Movement.

One would have never predicted that back in the 60s. Traditional Shuls were mushrooming all over Chicago. Rabbis that took those pulpits were just as sincere in their motives as Rabba Finegold. 

Aside from removing the Mechitzos and using microphones that were turned on before Shabbos - they stayed true to Halacha in their personal lives and  in their synagogues. And they had the backing of a major Talmid Chacham, Rav Chaim Dovid Regensburg, who not only permitted them to take those Shuls, he actually encouraged it as a means of keeping them in the Orthodox fold while trying to influence their members to send their children to religious schools. At which they were pretty successful.  Nevertheless, those Shuls are for the most part gone – replaced by an explosion of fully Orthodox Shuls over the last decade or so.

The bottom line is that even if one concedes that there is nothing Halachicly wrong with a female rabbi (which is a questionable premise in any case) the fact that is that it as been widely rejected by all rabbinic authorities as a serious and unacceptable break from tradition. 

That there are a few outlier Shuls that are willing to accommodate a membership that is so  heavily influenced by the common culture does not mean it has any better future today than the Traditional Movement had in its day. Which is why it is so sad that an obviously intelligent and sincere woman has decided to dedicate her life to a lost cause. This is not the wave of the Orthodox future.

This is not to say that women should not be Jewishly educated comparable to their male counterparts. I have absolutely no problem with women studying anything they wish. Just as I have no problem with men studying anything they wish. 

The problem is not even in using that knowledge in ways that benefit the Jewish community. i am all for that. The problem is breaking with a centuries old tradition  by choosing to become a female clergyman equal to a male clergyman.  What this sincere woman is doing is in essence - what the sincere Traditional rabbis had done. And even what the early Conservative rabbis had done - many of whom were personally observant even by Orthodox standards.

I remain unconvinced that the general cultural influences of our time are not at least partly responsible for any sincere Orthodox woman choosing the rabbinate as a profession. The times we live in places the highest value on egalitarianism and personal fulfillment. True - serving God and the Jewish people is how they see themselves. But every time I read an article like this it’s hard not to see a cultural component by contrasting it to the overwhelming majority of Orthodox Jewish women who would never challenge the wisdom of our traditions recognized by virtually all recognized Poskim to be inviolate.

I’ve said before. More times that I can count. This has absolutely nothing to do with denying women opportunity. I fully support treating all people equally. The only thing that should matter is ability. Not race, religion or gender (Allowing for certain exceptions due to modesty concerns – which is beyond the scope of this post.) 

However, when it comes to serving God the way we believe He intends us to, we ought not to be seeking other ways to do it – even when we feel a calling. That is not the way Judaism works. Jewish history is filled with failed movements that were at the time thought to be the best way forward for Judaism. That is where I believe this current trend is headed.

Freedom to Follow Our Beliefs

Attorney Avi Schick, Partner - Troutman Sanders

In last night’s Democratic candidate debate, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg spoke about his party’s reticence to speak in religious terms. His explanation of that last night was noted in The Atlantic:

“Our party doesn’t talk about [religion] as much.” The reason for this, he said, is that Democrats are committed to the separation of Church and state, and that the party wants to stand for all people, regardless of their religion. 

I like Mayor Buttigieg. As a politically conservative leaning voter, I do not agree with him on many of the issues. I do think though that he is one of the more intelligent and well informed Democrats of all those running. However, I think his lofty explanation of why his party doesn’t talk about religion is not the real reason they don’t. All one has to do to is look at some of the current values of the general culture. Many of them are hardly religious. Some of them are anti religious.

That there has been an assault on religion is something that should be obvious even to the casual observer. In our day it seems that whenever there is a conflict between religious values and secular values, the cultural mindset is to discard the religious values. 

This was recently demonstrated when the Colorado Civil Rights Commission ruled that it was discriminatory for a baker to refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple because of his religious beliefs. That decision was affirmed by the state’s lower courts upon appeal. Fortunately the Supreme Court ruled that the baker’s first amendment’ religious right were ignored by  the Colorado Civil Rights Commission when they made that ruling.

While that case ended up with the right decision, it is more than clear that the current sense of ethics in our culture does not place much value on religion. As I have said many times before, religious values are increasingly seen as archaic. If not for the first amendment, God only knows what would happen to those of us that consider biblical values as our moral and ethical guide.

This is not the first time our religious values were challenged. Back in the 80s a friend of mine by the name Simcha Goldman who was a clinical psychologist became a commissioned officer in the US Air Force. As an Orthodox Jew he wore a Kipa. 

Long story short - that was against Air Force regulations. He was ordered to remove it. But instead he decided to fight it on first amendment grounds. The case was eventually heard by the Supreme Court. in a 5-4 decision they ruled against Goldman. Siding with the majority, the Chief Justice said that the first Amendment did not apply to the military the same way it did to the civilian population. Congress  apparently saw the injustice and changed the law. If I understand correctly there is now a Kipa available that is part of the standard military uniform for those who request one.

Which brings me to an op-ed by Avi Schick in the Wall Street Journal based on what is now happening in Canada: 

 (T)he National Assembly of Quebec passed a law barring public employees from wearing religious clothing or symbols at work...

The Quebec law comes at the end of a decade that has seen increasing demands across North America for religious freedom to give way when it conflicts with other rights. The new law goes a step further by demanding that religious liberty be sacrificed simply to avoid offending skeptical secularists. 

Avi makes the following very cogent observation: 

Those who understand how society is enriched by the full participation of religious adherents in public life must fight back. The law already has been challenged in court, but this is fundamentally a cultural battle that requires broader resistance. 

And then he offers a rhetorical challenge to all the liberal ‘champions’of liberty: 

Where are the celebrities announcing that they will refuse to perform in Quebec? What about corporate leaders and their threats not to do businesses with intolerant local governments? When will leaders from other provinces and elsewhere in North America announce a ban on traveling to Quebec for official business? Where are the hashtags expressing outrage at state-sponsored discrimination and solidarity with its victims? 

I think the answer is obvious. To the liberal left, religious rights are not worth their time and effort – even if they might agree that those rights are being denied in cases like this. I think  that is because they do not really value religious values at all even if they do pay lip service to it. 

I don’t know if Canada has constitutional protection of freedom of religion. If it does, I don’t know how Quebec could ever have passed such a law.

Thankfully the US does have such protection. It was founded on the principles of freedom ensconced in the first amendment. Unlike any other major country that has an official religion. The US has none. We respect the free exercise of religion - without any government interference. Unless the first amendment is repealed, I expect that the highest court in the land will continue to see to it that this is honored in full.

The first amendment is the definition of freedom. With respect to religious freedom it includes a ‘separation’ clause and ‘free exercise’ clause. If that is ever modified it will upend the very principles upon which this country was founded. Which would mean - the end of America as we know it. I therefore doubt this will ever happen. But it won’t be for a lack of trying by a left that increasingly sees religion as archaic. To put it the way Avi did: 

Ordinary Canadians and Americans also should make their voices heard. Religious liberty will wither if the bigoted assumptions behind Quebec’s actions aren’t challenged. Those who want religion stamped out of public life will be emboldened if the opposition is expressed exclusively on legal grounds. The moral basis for protecting religious rights must be front and center in this battle.

“Accommodation of religiously inspired conduct is a token of respect for, and a beacon of welcome to, those whose beliefs differ from the majority’s,” wrote Judge Frank Easterbrook of the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals almost 20 years ago. “Obeisance differs from respect; to demand the former in the name of the latter is self-defeating. It is difficult for us to see why a Jew may not wear his yarmulke in court, a Sikh his turban, a Muslim woman her chador, or a Moor his fez.”

There is a long history of American leaders standing up for religious freedom across the world. Now the abuse is occurring close to home. Some two dozen candidates are seeking the Democratic presidential nomination. Imagine if one of them had the courage to speak up in defense of the faithful across the border.

Is This Really Daas Torah?

Admitted (and convicted) sex offender Eliezer Berland (Ynet)

Unbelievable. That is about the only word that fits. Yeshiva World News reports about a Kol Koreh – a decree written and signed by numerous Charedi rabbinic leaders - often referred to as the Gedolim.

These are people that are seen by many as having the requisite piety and degree of Torah knowledge making them the most qualified people on earth to express Daas Torah – the wisdom of the Torah on any and every subject they choose to address. 

Added to this is ‘Lo Sasur’ - the Torah requirement (Vayikra 17:11) to not turn to the left or right when those representing the Torah express an opinion. Which Rashi tells us means that even when what they say is counter-intuitive, such as saying something is black when it is really white and vice versa, it doesn’t matter. We must listen to them. While ‘Lo Sasur’ is meant to apply to the ancient Jewish body of law known as the Sanhedrin, the Charedi world has extended that honor to their Gedolim.

I understand the logic. We have no Sanhedrin today, so we turn to the next best thing available in our day. Which is what makes what just happened in Israel so unbelievable. From YWN: 

A Beis Din comprised of three of the top Dayanim in Eretz Yisroel issued a Kol Koreh regarding both sides of the dispute between the Shuvu Bonim movement and those that dispute the leader of that movement R. Eliezer Berland. The Kol Koreh was issued by the three members of the Beis Din, and a letter of support was appended to the ruling of the Beis Din – expressing confidence in them. An addition was added by Rav Moshe Shternbuch that indicated the necessity to minimize Chillul Hashem.

That is followed by a translation of the actual words of the Kol Koreh (by Rabbi Yair Hoffman) that includes the following admonition: 

(I)n light of the fact that Rabbi Berland and his Kehillah have accepted upon themselves to adjudicate the issues before the Beis Din, therefore, the Beis Din is obligating all sides from this day onward to immediately cease all the hate, all the persecution, all the arguments, and all the slander.  They are not to speak nor publicize any negative matter one of the other, nor express any negative nickname, in any manner or form – neither in print or orally or through any medium printed or broadcasted.

Those who signed onto the decree are a virtual who’s who of Charedi rabbinic leadership in Israel.

Rabbi Natan Slifkin has expressed outrage at this admonition. And I pretty much agree with him. Here is his description of Berland:

One of the most sick, evil people to masquerade behind the title of "rabbi" is surely Eliezer Berland. It's almost impossible to grasp the extent of his crimes against humanity. He has sexually exploited God knows how many women and girls. He has had people beaten up and has tried to have them killed. He has declared himself a deity. He preys upon the weak to give him their life savings, and laughs about it. He's also utterly insane, happily being recorded on video talking about eating human fetuses on the black market in China. 

I can understand that this Beis Din wants to reach its own conclusion. I understand that when there are credible suspicions of sex abuse that they want to get to the bottom of things so that innocent people that are so accused are  not subjected to a lifetime of condemnation as a result of a false accusation. Whether a Beis Din like this is equipped to do a proper investigation is a separate subject.  But at least I get their motives. And understand their asking people not to gossip about it.

But this is not such a case. Eliezer Berland is an admitted sex abuser and rapist who at first fled Israel to avoid prosecution. He was captured, arrested, and extradited to Israel to face trial. He plead guilty; was convicted on two counts of indecent acts and one assault. And was sentenced to 18 months in prison.

There is no doubt about what he did. He even apologized for it and expressed remorse. This is public knowledge that has been publicized in virtually all Jewish media. And yet there has been a decree not to gossip about him as though he might be found innocent?! Is there any sane human being on earth that understands this?!

Well... shockingly, there are such people. Although I have to question their sanity. Berland still has followers to this day well after his conviction. He is apparently very charismatic. The institution he founded and leads, Yeshivat Shuvu Bonim is designed to bring Jews back to Judaism based on the teachings of Rebbe Nachman of Breslov. Until his dark side was discovered he was so successful that Shuvu Bonim grew into: 

…ten kollels, three yeshivot for young men, a Talmud Torah, an elementary school for girls, a range of preschools and kindergartens, youth groups, and evening lectures for women. 

That has generated many followers that simply cannot and do not believe any of this despite the fact that he admitted guilt and served time in prison. Prior to his release in 2017 thousands of them held a vigil at Ma’aras HaMachpela in 2016 – praying that he be released on the last night of Chol HaMoed Pesach. (see below)

That might be even more mind boggling than what this Beis Din is doing. But cults are like that. They can explain away anything negative about their leader. 

However, the rabbinic leaders that have issued or support this Kol Koreh in writing are not cult members. And yet they are pursuing possible innocence in the face of clear and unambiguous evidence that this man is as at least as guilty as he admitted he was. What do they think they will find that will exculpate him from his admitted sex crimes?!

This is Daas Torah?!

I can only surmise that they must feel that an elderly man who looks like Berland; behaves with extreme piety in public wherever he goes; a man who was so successful in bringing so many Jews back to Judaism, a man with such a large following of people that believe in him, there might just be an explanation that will exonerate him.

They will not find one. The obvious fact is that Berland is a very sick man that forced himself on women for his own sexual gratification. And probably ruined their lives.

But… let us wait and see what this Beis Din will come up with. Perhaps they will ultimately put Berland into Cherem where he belongs. And publicize that decree in a Kol Koreh with the same fervor they published this one. I just hope they do it quickly.

God Wrapped in a Body?!

The Rebbe declares himself to be a Navi (RYGB)

Many years have passed since I last dealt with the issues I have with Lubavitch/Chabad. There are 2 reasons for that.

One reason is that I believed that I had fully articulated those issues. One of the more problematic of which is the belief that their late Rebbe was Moshiach. A belief that continues at various different levels to this day - about 25 years after his passing. (A belief that is sadly still vibrantly expressed at their world headquarters at 770.)

The other reason is that they do so much good in the world, I didn’t want in any way to contribute to harming that effort.

A short while ago, however, a letter by the Lubavitcher Rebbe was published at a Chabad website that at least implied that the Rebbe did not fully understand the R’ Samson Raphael Hirsch’s Hashkafa of Torah Im Derech Eretz (TIDE) in his explanation of why it should not be taught to the American youth of his (our) day.

I thought that view deserved a rebuttal by someone whose expertise on TIDE is unquestionable. So I asked Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer (who has familial ties to TIDE as well as Chabad  and Telshe) if he would be willing to do so. He agreed and submitted a critique of that letter which I posted. (with an original title that I regretted, apologized for, and changed as per Rabbi Bechhofer’s suggestion.) That post  was pounced upon by a leading Chabad figure in Chicago. (Which I responded to in a subsequent post.)

About two weeks have passed since those two posts were published here. That is a near eternity in terms of generating comments. Comments to my blog-posts are mostly offered on the day of publication and perhaps a day or two later. But the commentary has not ended. It is ongoing. If one returns to those posts they will see debate about the nature of Lubavitch between a Lubavitcher Chasid and Rabbi Bechhofer. The focus is mostly about how Lubavitch sees their late Rebbe. Some of it is eye opening even for someone like me who knows what all those issues are all about. At least so I thought. 

The conversation has also continued on Rabbi Bechhofer’s  Facebook page. What has been revealed there perplexes me even more. How can anyone seriously believe all that they do about their late Rebbe?  

Rabbi Bechhofer linked to the two above-mentioned posts on that Facebook page and says:  

It is worth slogging through and doing meleches borer on both the above-linked post on Reb Harry Maryles's blog and the follow up post. 

I of course welcome anyone to do that. But it is on that Facebook page that I saw some of the things that make me wonder just how much I don’t know about Chabad Chasidus that is so far off from normative Judaism. For example, how many people know that the late Rebbe declared himself to be the Navi Hador? This can be seen in print (in Hebrew) above.

His Chasidim believe that not only was their late Rebbe a Navi, a prophet who has direct communication from God, they also believe that he actually performed miracles. His Chasdim will cite many examples of that.

There are some other items which I already know about and have discussed in the past. But it is still jarring when I see other people mentioning them. Such as the idea that their late Rebbe could never make mistakes. (See the video at the top of that Facebook post.). 

Or that the Rebbe is greater than those that served on the Sanhedrin because he had a special ‘soul’ which they did not have. Hence they could make a mistake (which the Torah provides a Korban for) - but the Rebbe could not.) There is more but rather than paraphrasing let me excerpt one comment about Lubavitch that is perhaps the most problematic of all. It was made by Aishdas founder, R’ Micha Berger: 

There is much to Chabad chassidus that seems like a different planet the hashkafos I was taught well before the messianism.

High on the list are the notions of rebbe as yechidah kelalis, as memutza hamisqsher and of course, "A rebbe iz Atzmus uMahus vos hot zich areingeshtelt in a guf - a Rebbe is [Divine] Self and Essence which has clothed itself in a body."(emphasis mine)

And for those who find that last one too startling to be believed, see Liqutei Sichos vol II, pg 509.

Given that "Yiftach bedoro keShmuel bedoro... keMoshe bedoro" is added to "Hashem medaber mitoch gerono shel Moshe", how could this generation's "Moshe" possibly make a mistake? 

It gives me me no pleasure to say this - since I have so much respect and admiration for what they do – and the sacrifices they make to do it. But truth is important too. And it needs to be told.

America Needs You, Harry Truman

President Harry Truman (George Washington University) 

We need to have the clarity of one of the biggest mass murderers in American history, President Harry Truman. Truman, a Democrat, is a man revered by members of both political parties. Not so sure it was always moral clarity. But clarity it was.

It might seem odd that a mass murderer like that is admired to this day. And yet the more time passes, the more admired he gets.

Many might question my description of Truman as a mass murderer. But how can he NOT be? He murdered 100s of thousands of innocent people in Japan with 2 nuclear bombs, one dropped over Hiroshima and the other over Nagasaki. 

Imagine that! So many people murdered by order of the then Commander-in-Chief and no one sheds a tear. All he gets is praise for what he did.

One might answer that this act ended a war that might have dragged on for years and caused many American deaths at the hand of the enemy (Japan) whose soldiers were willing to die for their Emperor whom they believed was Divine. When it comes to religious fervor of an enemy as a motive, its hard to fight them with conventional warfare. 

Truman may have very well prevented the deaths of a many American soldiers in battle – perhaps even more than the number of innocent Japanese that were killed by those 2 nuclear bombs. Perhaps.

But that does not make Truman any less a mass murderer.  He ordered the certain deaths of innocent people based on the possibility that an equal number or more of Americans would die if he didn’t. He saved the potential deaths of American soldiers by ordering the certain death of innocent civilians.

I guess sometimes mass murder can be justified. At least as far as many American patriots on both sides of the political aisle are concerned.

Which brings me to Iran. Now before anyone jumps all over me by saying the two situations are very different, I agree that they are. I want to be clear. I am not advocating mass murder in Iran in any way, shape, or form. 

However, the question then becomes what will trigger the kind of response that will bring Iran to its knees the way Japan was which ended World War II? Iran is a country that continually shouts ‘Death to America’? They have sworn to wipe Israel - America’s closest ally in the Middle East - off the map. Killing millions of Jews in the process – if they ever get the chance. A chance they will surely have if they ever develop a nuclear weapon that could do that kind of damage in a literal flash!

Should we wait until they do that before we act? And what about Israel? Should they just sit around and wait?

There is little doubt in my mind that if Iran’s current fanatic religious leadership has the chance they will not hesitate. They consider it a religious obligation to rid the Middle East of the ‘infidel’ nation they believe is evil by definition. And like the Japanese emperor sending young Kamikaze pilots on suicide missions for their god, so too are the fanatic Islamists running Iran willing to send their own young on suicide missions for their God.  

That said (and as noted above) I do not advocate the kind of mass murder committed by Truman. Which we are currently more than capable of. There are plenty of innocent Iranians that would be killed. Among them Jewish Iranians. 

Which brings me to all this hand-wringing by the Left about how Trump has created this crisis by leaving the so-called nuclear deal with Iran. I strongly disagree. It is the deal itself that created this crisis. Had the US and Europe not made that deal Iran would have been much further along their decline than they are now. 

The only thing that deal did was slow down the inevitable. In the meantime Iran was able to rebuild itself by virtue of the elimination of those crippling sanctions. They could sell their oil to an oil thirsty Europe and enrich themselves in the process. Using that money to spread terror all over the world (albeit primarily in Middle Eastern Countries). As well as arm Israel’s neighbors with enough rockets to destroy the Jewish state many times over. Which they would do in a heartbeat if they thought they could get away with it. Not that that has stopped Hamas leaders in Gaza from sending hundreds of those rockets indiscriminately into Israel. (Which they in fact do get away with.)

Nevertheless, the pressure on Iran by the US reinstating its sanctions has made them desperate enough to respond with aggression against the commercial tankers of our allies and our own military drones. 

The President has decided that a military response to that would be ‘asymmetrical’. Meaning that the kind of military action that was about to be approved would have killed about 150 Iranians. And since not one American has died as a result of the above-mentioned aggression, he decided that for humanitarian reasons he wouldn’t do it. (Let us just say that Trump is no Harry Truman.) 

The President has instead decided to increase sanctions. Iran has responded by scoffing at them. Meanwhile our allies are so afraid of their economies tanking if their oil flow from Iran is disrupted, and commerce with Iran prevented - they will never re-establish their own sanctions. Just like America’s left flank they too blame Trump for all of this.

I wonder how they will feel about 7 years from now when that deal will more or less expire anyway and Iran restarts their nuclear program? All while continuing to spread terror with religious fervor all over the world during those seven years.

President Trump did the prudent thing here by not responding militarily. Based on the current European dependence on Iran for the well being of their economies they would have been more upset at us than they already are. But being prudent is not necessarily the same thing as being right.

I’m not sure what the next step should be. But I sure wish we had a man like Truman in the White House. So I will offer a little ‘prayer’:

America needs you
Harry Truman
Harry could you please come home
Things are looking bad

I know you would be mad
To see what kind of men
Prevail upon the land you love

America's wondering
How we got here
Harry all we get is lies
We're gettin' safer cars
Rocket ships to mars
From men who'd sell us out
To get themselves a piece of power

We'd love to hear you speak your mind
In plain and simple ways
Call a spade a spade
Like you did back in the day
You would play piano
Each morning walk a mile
Speak of what was going down
Each honesty and style

America's calling
Harry Truman
Harry you know what to do
The world is turnin' round and losin' lots of ground
Oh Harry is there something we can do to save the land we love
Oh woah… 

Like many prayers of our own that were set to music by popular entertainers, so to was this ‘prayer’ performed by Chicago. It  can be heard here.

The Amoral Abyss of Political Correctness

King David High School (Wikimedia Commons via JTA)

Sometimes I just want to scream. But I suppose this is what you get when social polices are based the politics of political correctness. Policies championed by the Left. Where the ideals of egalitarianism supersede all else. Including religious ideals - or even common sense. Apparently England is in the forefront of such nonsense. From JTA:

The British government declared a top-performing Jewish school to be “inadequate” because it teaches girls and boys separately.

King David High School in the Manchester area was downgraded this year by Ofsted, the British government’s regulatory authority for education, the Manchester Evening News reported last week.

It had been rated by Ofsted  as “outstanding” in keeping with its being one of the top-rated and best-performing high schools in the country but was found to be practicing “unlawful segregation” of pupils “on the grounds of faith and belief and sex.” 

What will it take for these dunderheads to realize that you don’t mess with success? These are private schools. Parents pay big money to send their children to schools like this. They do so voluntarily – even eagerly - I assume because of the very reputation as a top school cited in this article. 

And they are threatened to be eventually shut down because of a stupid egalitarian rule that not a single person cares about except for the most die hard feminist? What is the matter with these people?!

I could understand their concern if the students of one sex were being deprived of the same standard of education as the other sex. Or if the concern of Ofsted was that the school was not offering the core curriculum required of all their schools. Because that would be a deprivation of education. But to consider inadequate the separation of boys and girls into separate schools even though their academics don’t suffer is to spit in the face of their obvious success. How can they even say that with a straight face?

But they did. And their faces were apparently straight. The claim is that… Pupils affected by this segregation suffer detriment. No explanation. Just a statement.

OK. it might be true that there is some ‘detriment’ in the sense that developing certain social skills might suffer. But that is more than made up for by the excellent education they receive. I would go a step further and say that separating the sexes in high school is not only NOT harmful… it is beneficial to the students in that it prevents the obvious social distractions that are inevitable under a coed high school environment.

I’m not saying it is impossible to learn under coed conditions. Plenty of students can and do. But I believe that overall the lack of those distractions are far more beneficial to one’s education than are the social skill learned under a coed setting. 

But don’t tell Ofsted that. They do not want to be confused with the obvious. They are too married to the political correctness of the Left to care about such minor things as religious priorities or a school environment more conducive to study.

What about those social skills? Aren’t they important too? Sure they are. But it isn’t as though those kids never see each other outside the classroom. These are Modern Orthodox kids and they probably do a lot of socializing outside of school.

Like the rest of Europe the UK no longer values religious belief despite their supposed support for the ideals of religious tolerance. They might pay lip service to it. But actions speak a lot louder than words. Their views about morality are no longer based on scripture but on political correctness. In this case to the point of rejecting common sense in favor of an egalitarian ‘ideal’. 

I have long ago concluded that the entire European continent is sinking into a cesspool of amoral ideas. Ideas increasingly based on the socialism of the benighted Left that places religious values (and even common sense in this case) in the same category as dinosaurs. 

Thankfully this is not happening in the US. I do not see anyone challenging the rights of any educational institution to separate the sexes. Many private schools here - both secular and religious (of the 3 major faiths) have sex segregated schools that are very successful academically. For both sexes. 

The issues here are the actual education of the students. Not some contrived version of political correctness. At least as long as socialist candidates for high political office are not elected. God help us if they ever are.  

Meanwhile my advice to the Jews of Europe is to get out of that God forsaken continent (all of it including the UK) and emigrate to the US or Israel . Where for the moment, religious rights and common sense still mean something.

Herman Wouk - A Great American; A Great Jew

Herman Wouk-  circa 1955 (Wikipedia)

Marjorie Mornignstar, The Caine Mutiny, Youngblood Hawke, Winds of War, War and Remembrance… What do these titles have in common? They were all major motion pictures or major television mini-series.  They were based on novels written by Pulitzer Prize winning author (for The Caine Mutiny), Herman Wouk, who passed away last month (May 17^th) at the age of 103.

I first discovered this author as a young teenager through a lesser known work entitled This is My God (published in 1959). It was a best seller (Number 2 on the New York Times Best Seller List) despite its subject matter: a defense of Orthodox Judaism.  Apparently a lot of non Jews read that book!

In what is perhaps the best column ever written by Eitan Kobre in Mishpacha Magazine he describes some details about Professor Wouk about which I had no idea. I knew he was a professor at Yeshiva University. That is because back in the 1980s when Rav Hershel Schachter was a scholar in residence at my alma mater, HTC, he quoted his professor, Herman Wouk, at the concluding event - a Melave Malka which I chaired. But I had no idea that Professor Wouk also attended Shiurim by Rav Moshe Feinstein in Tifferes Yerushalayim and became pretty close with him.

Kobre quoted HTC’s current dean, Rabbi Zev Eleff’s 2018 monograph about Wouk wherein he demonstrates that one cannot overstate the significance of This Is My God. It was a ‘watershed moment for Orthodox Jewry in the United States’. Which until about that time was considered to be a dying relic. To be replaced by the then far more vibrant movements of heterodoxy. 

Not only were predictions of Orthodoxy’s demise ‘premature’ the exact opposite happened. It is heterodoxy that is in the throes of death. Orthodoxy is on the rise! Professor Wouk is in large part responsible for putting Orthodox Jewry on the map.

For the most part that book was lauded by impartial critics. But not everyone loved it, for obvious reasons which will become evident shortly.

Kobre notes that Wouk’s labeled heterodox rabbis as ‘dissenters’ ‘departures’ and ‘shock absorbers of the enlightenment’. It is therefore unsurprising that the book was panned by their leaders. One prominent Reform leader excoriated Wouk for his ‘flippant parody of Reform’. 

Professor Wouk was unrelenting. He once said that a typical heterodox sermon was ‘a digest from the past week’s liberal newspapers and magazines with a few references to the bible’.

Herman Wouk was living proof of how a Jew could thrive in the modern world without sacrificing his principles.  A Jew could live the American dream, achieve the pinnacle of success and remain completely devout. He was in fact a role model of Torah u’Mada or Torah Im Derech Eretz.

I believe he could best be described as a Centrist. He was a man  who not only lived those ideals but made it almost cool to be an observant Jew. He was fearless in his legitimate criticism of Jewish movements that surrendered to the Zeitgeist with compromises. Even though I am nowhere close to his level of achievement, I nevertheless believe that we are kindred spirits in that sense.

Professor Wouk’s contributions to authentic Judaism have long ago been all but forgotten. I believe that is largely due to the ascendancy of a right wing that no longer values success in the modern world. Other than what it can do for them financially.  

That mindset was articulated  by BMG (Lakewood) Rosh HaYeshiva, R’ Malkiel Kotler in his remarks about the passing of Bernard Lander. Lander created the Touro University System that actually caters to those on the right seeking higher education for purposes of getting into careers that will better provide for their families. While R’ Kotler had some faint praise for him, he nevertheless called him a second class Jew (or something very similar). I doubt that Herman Wouk even registered a blip on the radar screen of any right wing Rosh Yeshiva today. They probably do not even know who he was!

I must therefore give credit to Eitan Kobre for giving Professor Wouk a proper eulogy. The sad thing is that now that Professor Wouk is gone, I don’t see anyone on the horizon like him. Below is a brief interview of Herman Wouk - broadcast on CBS in 2017.

War is Hell! But…

Iran's Revolutionary Guard chief, General Hossein Salami (Times of Israel)

I am the last one to advocate putting our troops in harm’s way. For me this means avoiding war at almost all costs. Wars should only be a last resort after everything else has failed. I believe that this has been the American credo with respect to its mighty armed services. American blood is not cheap. This is why we have a Secretary of Defense and not a Secretary of War.

I say this because of the increasing possibility that we may be on the precipice of such a conflict with Iran. There is little doubt in the minds of anyone familiar with that rogue nation that such a war would be so bloody, that it would make the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a walk in the park by comparison. 

The one thing we need to do is proceed along that track with extreme caution. I do not ever want to see another mother, wife, or child of a fallen soldier cry bitter tears over their lost loved one killed in battle. A war with Iran would surely produce a lot of those. God forbid. I am a lover of peace and as noted - seek it at almost all costs. 

The key word there is ‘almost’.

Iran cannot be allowed to attack American interests with impunity. The downing of an American surveillance drone yesterday was an unambiguous attack against the United States. General Hossein Salami, the head of Iran’s infamous ‘Revolutionary Guard’ bragged that they did it because it violated their airspace. US intelligence agencies have proof that it didn’t. That drone was flying over international waters when it was shot down. 

This follows recent  Iranian attacks against huge commercial tankers of our allies navigating international waters near Iran.  By denying they had anything to do with that, it is obvious they are sending a message that they can harm our interests and those of our allies at will with impunity and plausible deniability. And yet when they choose to - brag about it.

The reason Iran is doing this is because they are being choked to death by America’s reactivation of its sanctions against them. Sanctions that were in place before the US signed the so-called ‘nuclear deal’ with them.

Our decision to exit that deal was because it did absolutely nothing to them other than delay their production of nuclear weapons. It did not address the fact that they are responsible for spreading terror all over the region. They continue to do that with religious fervor and impunity. All while prospering because those crippling sanctions were removed as a part of that terrible deal.  Trump decided to trash that deal and snap our sanctions back in place. Their economy is once again being trashed. This despite our allies still honoring their end of that deal.

Iran is currently choking. They blame us. And are retaliating by attacking us. And by attacking our allies to convince them to influence us to re-enter that deal.

We are not going to do that. What we ought to do instead is convince our allies to leave that deal too. I know they need Iran’s oil and commerce for their own economic welfare. But sometimes principle Trumps economic security. Especially when lives are at stake via the spread of terror that results from tolerating it.

That being said, one can debate whether leaving that deal was a good idea or not. As noted, I firmly believe it was the right thing to do. The left on the other hand believes leaving that deal was a mistake and responsible for Iran’s current belligerency. That may be true. But the fact is that they were spreading terror all the while we were in that deal. With an improving economy for them to do it.

Why was that anymore acceptable than the belligerency they show now?

Meanwhle. there should be no doubt about what should follow. Iran cannot be allowed to bully the world with impunity. Despite their mighty revolutionary guard, they are nothing compared to US military might. 

We cannot have a situation where the mightiest nation in the world refuses to react to aggression because of fear of eventual escalation into a hot war. There has to be a measured military response that will put fear into the hearts of Iranian leaders. To put it the way Senator Lindsay Graham did: 

“Here’s what Iran needs to get ready for: severe pain, inside their country,” said the Republican senator. “Their capabilities pale in comparison to ours. We’re not going to let them disrupt navigation of the seas, attack our allies and U.S. interests without paying a price. If they’re itching for a fight, they’re going to get one.” 

The time is more than ripe for that rogue Islamic regime to see our might in action. No longer should we be seen as a ‘paper tiger’ where we are afraid to use it even when attacked. I thought that Obama was weak for his refusal to follow up that way after Syria crossed his red lines with respect to chemical weapons. I am sorry to say, that the current President isn’t much better. After authorizing a measured response – he canceled it almost immediately. He actually said that he doesn’t believe that Iran shot down our drone on purpose. (I know the man lies all the time when its suits his purpose – but that comment is ridiculous!)

I understand Trump’s reluctance. He campaigned on getting us out of foreign wars. The last thing he wants to do is renege on that promise by getting us into a war that will make the last two wars look like a picnic. But as I said, sometimes you need to take a stand - and do the right thing.

At the end of the day, Iran does not want to go to war with us. They know they can’t win. They will be destroyed if they try. But they also believe that they can continue to attack us and our allies with impunity – with threats about the bloodshed that would follow if we dared to go to war with them. With that in mind they believe they can do just about anything they want. They believe the US does not have the stomach for war - even though we would obviously win such a war. That is surely the case if we do not retaliate after being attacked. 

They need to be disabused of that notion. And very quickly. We need to inflict pain on them in such a way that they will realize that any escalation would not be to their advantage. Doing so now would not involve shedding any American blood. We can for example bomb some of their missile launching sites by air with relative ease via our stealth bombers. We have to let them know that we are not afraid to fight tyranny wherever it shows up.  And pay a price for freedom. 

That is what America did at Normandy over 70 years ago against another rouge nation. The message should be that if Iran tries anything like that again, we will not hesitate to react in even stronger ways. In the meantime we should increase the sanctions and hope it foments an ultimate overthrow of that terrorist regime by their own people. 

Their Islamist citizens overthrew a powerful western style government 40 years ago. This time their freedom loving citizens should do it again. And instead of hearing chants like ‘Death to America’ we will hopefully here shouts of ‘Long live America’. I truly believe that most freedom loving Iranians would actually love to end that terrorist regime. May God let it happen. 

And Now, for Something Completely Different…

Is this the way to win a Nobel Prize? (Jerusalem Post)

I suppose that as an observant Jew who places great value on the study of Gemarah, I should be flattered. And I kind of am.

I came across a JTA article from last January that informed me about an unexpected phenomenon taking place in South Korea. It is rather well known that Asians place a high value on education. Apparently South Koreans have discovered that studying Gemarah the way Yeshivos do is the key to achieving great success in that area. 

Which has resulted in an explosion of Chavrusa type study in that country. Chavrusa study is where students study in pairs, out loud, often in heated debate; without a teacher present. South Koreans believe that Chavrusa study is the means by which to achieve the best educational results. Here is how they arrived at that conclusion:   

“Jews account for just 0.2 percent of the world’s population, but 23 percent of Nobel Prize winners have been Jewish,” Seoul-based student Choi Jae-young related. “And despite all the time and money we spend on education, only one Korean has ever won a Nobel award. That irks many Koreans. It makes us want to learn Jews’ secrets.”

Some South Koreans think the key to unlocking such “secrets” can be found in Jewish approaches to education.

In an effort to see ‘How we do it’  Korean Academics learned about Yeshivos and visited some of Israel’s largest - to see what Jewish learning was all about. One can only imagine what their reaction was to a Yeshiva full of students studying out loud in pairs (B'Chavrusa) – to the din of everyone else in the Beis HaMedrash (hundreds) doing the same thing. 

To say they were inspired by what they saw would be an understatement. So impressed were they that they brought this idea back to South Korea and emulated it. They believed that they found the secret to our success. Not only did they bring back this style of education, in some cases they even decided to study Gemarah.

This phenomenon is apparently beyond the stage of just being a passing fad – that dies out just as quickly as it is born. It has gained momentum and is now ‘moving from private academies into conventional public classrooms.’

Like I said, as an Orthodox Jew who has gone through the Yeshiva system I am flattered. But the fact that the Jewish people have produced Nobel Prize winners via the Yeshiva system is a mistake. The plain fact is that of the 23% of Jews that have been Nobel Prize winners - the vast majority never went to a yeshiva; do not know much about Talmud study or about studying B'Chavrusa. Probably a lot less than Koreans do now. 

This is not to say that the Yeshiva system isn’t what it’s cracked up to be. It certainly does work successfully as a means of education. And I agree that this method can be useful and transferred to other disciplines. But sometimes what you see is not what you get. The wrong conclusion can often be drawn from a superficial look at something. (Something I am occasionally guilty of myself.)

For example, if someone came down from Mars and saw that most of the people drinking diet pop (soda - for you easterners) are overweight, they would likely conclude that drinking diet pop makes you gain weight.

Why there are so many Jewish Nobel Prize winners – way out of proportion to their percentage of the population - probably has nothing to do with studying in a Yeshiva. It does however have to do with the Jewish emphasis on education in general, which stems from our requirement to study Torah. A subject so complex and so broad that one could spend a lifetime studying it and still not know it all. 

This is how the importance of being educated has been perpetuated.  There are unfortunately many Jews that do not study Talmud - or any Torah at all.  Having been raised in fully assimilated families. But the idea of education stayed with us all regardless of how observant we were.

That being said, it does not really address why South Koreans did not have our successes in Nobel Prizes. It is well known that Asians too have a very strong study ethic. Having had one well before they discovered the successful Yeshiva method of study. 

Perhaps the difference is the long history of emphasis on education combined with the kind of historic dedication to it that only the religious fervor behind it can produce - and project into the future. Something Asians do not have.

Judaism and Misappropriating Holocaust Imagery

Congresswoman, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC)

As a child of the Holocaust, (defined as having parents who survived it) I am second to no one (other than survivors themselves) when it comes to understanding the enormity of that tragedy.

But even if one is not a survivor or the child of one, the horrors of the Holocaust are well documented. And by now, well known to anyone paying the slightest bit of attention. 6 million Jews were slaughtered just for being Jews and for no other reason.

Those that survived went through virtual hell. Whether in Nazi controlled ghettos, concentration camps, death camps, forced labor, starvation, disease, torturous medical experiments or in hiding with a constant fear of being discovered. Many of them lost entire families. In fact I did not know my own grandparents. As is the case with most children of the Holocaust. Most of those grandparents being part of the 6 million!

That only scratches the surface of those horrors. Ask any survivor about their story and you will hear more. A lot more! Each with their own unique horror story. My own parents’ stories are harrowing!

It therefore angers me when the Holocaust is in any way used for other agendas. Which just happened. Again. this time it was by the current darling of the mainstream media, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC). She compared the Trump administration's practice of holding migrants seeking asylum to concentration camps. That shows a complete ignorance of what the Holocaust was all about. While those detention camps are certainly not luxury hotels, they are nowhere near concentration camps. Not even remotely close!

She deserved to be called out for that by fellow Congresswoman Liz Cheney who said: 

6 million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust. You demean their memory and disgrace yourself with comments like this. 

AOC’s retort to that was equally ignorant: 

For the shrieking Republicans who don’t know the difference: concentration camps are not the same as death camps," Ocasio-Cortez wrote on Twitter. "Concentration camps are considered by experts as 'the mass detention of civilians without trial.' And that’s exactly what this administration is doing." 

Her ignorance about Nazi concentration camps is astonishing. Instead of doing even the most minimal research she doubles down on that comparison. But what do you expect from the left? They are all about their agendas. Even if it means distorting the truth through ignorance (willful or otherwise) by making inappropriate analogies. It’s so sad that she has such a high profile which gives her the platform to spout her nonsense.

All that being said, however, it reminded me about something that has bothered me for some time now. The idea that in far too many cases the Holocaust has become the virtual definition of Judaism. This is not to minimize the terrible loss of 6 million Jews or the suffering of survivors. Those that were murdered are holy regardless of whether they were observant or not. That is why they are called Kedoshim. When someone dies because they are a Jew, it becomes a Kiddush HaShem. That makes them holy.

As for the survivors - the  pain they suffered is unfathomable. Their stories should certainly be told. Those that remained faithful believers and observant despite what they had gone through are heroes – living legends! 

But even those that lost their faith may NOT be questioned. Although I have my issues with the Satmar Rebbe, R’ Yoel Teitelbaum, I agree with him about one thing.  Which is that anyone that survived the horrors of Holocaust will surely have a place in Olam Haba - the world to come. Whether they remained religious or not.

But that does not mean that the Holocaust defines Judaism. It most certainly does not! It so sad when I see so many elderly survivors whose only connection to Judaism that remains with them is their Holocaust experience. Not that I have a right to criticize them. But I do have a right to reject the notion that the Holocaust defines who I am as a Jew. It most certainly does not. Nor should it define anyone’s  Judaism.

Judaism is only about one thing: Serving God by living our lives the way He wants us live them. Nothing more and nothing less. How one determines  that from the words of the Torah is what makes Judaism so complex and makes observant Jews so diverse. But there is not a doubt in my mind about the basic fact that Judaism is about serving God, whose word was revealed at Sinai.

A Secular Jewish State is an Oxymoron

Yisroel Beiteinu leader, Avigdor Lieberman (JOL)

Israel is not a theocracy. Much as I believe that a state that followed Jewish law would be a good thing for those of us that are observant I do not think it is possible at this point in time. 90% of the country is secular.

Although a huge proportion of Israelis (probably most) are traditional; have a strong sense of Jewish identity; and actually have a variety of Jewish practices (such as fasting on Yom Kippur and having a Seder on Pesach) - forcing them to be fully observant would be a prescription for disaster. 

As I often say, you can’t shove religion down peoples’s throats. You have to show them the beauty of observant Judaism and let them experience it for themselves. Trying to force someone to be fully observant by Orthodox standards will cause them to run the other way.

On the other hand, a Jewish state must have the basic elements of Judaism in order to be called Jewish.  Without that, there would not be anything Jewish about it.

Judaism at its core is Halachic. While it is also cultural, that is merely a by-product. For a nation to retain its enduring character, it must have enduring values that are not subject to change with the winds of time – as is the case with Jewish culture. The enduring values that have kept us a people for centuries is the Torah. By following its immutable laws over the centuries, we have persevered. That is how we perpetuated ourselves as a people.

Bearing these two disparate ideas in mind, what should Israel do? On the one hand they cannot be fully Halachic and expect everyone to toe that line. On the other hand if it is Halacha that defines Judaism, how can it NOT be Halachic?

As I have mentioned many times before, both the Chazon Ish who was considered the Gadol HaDor of his time by many Jews - and the state of Israel’s founder, David Ben Gurion who was decidedly secular recognized that conundrum and agreed to a compromise that has become known as the status quo agreement. Which meant that whatever conditions were in place in both religious and secular terms would define the Jewish state from that point forward.

Among other things that meant that Shabbos would be the official day of rest; Jewish holidays would be legal holidays; Kashrus would be observed in every government agency (including the military) and that full time Yeshiva students would be officially exempt from army service.

It is no secret that the last one is currently one of the biggest issues facing Israel right now. That agreement was intended for the select few that were full time Yeshiva students. Which if I understand correctly was about 400 students strong back then. 

Indeed that exemption paralleled a similar one in the United States where at the time students studying for the clergy were exempt (the famous 4D clergy exemption) from the draft. The idea being that a country needs spiritual leaders... that it was a calling which required full time dedication and training. I doubt that there was much if any opposition back then to such exemptions (with the possible exception of the few truly anti religious political leaders in Israel.)

Things are a bit different today. With well over 50,000 exemptions which is the vast majority of Charedi young people, it has become a real bone of contention between the religious parties and the secular ones.  

I – for one – agree that it is a grossly unjust system that exempts an entire class of people from the obligations every other class of people (with the exception of Arab Israelis) are subject to. While there is no official exemption of Charedim as a class, that is in effect how it all shakes out.

The problem is the status quo agreement. In theory it exempts all full time yeshiva students. Which in practice exempts them all. While that is slowly changing as the Israeli government tries to accommodate Charedi sensibilities in all Charedi army units, the fact is that the vast majority of young Charedim still do not serve.

Making matters worse is that army service is denigrated by much of the Charedi world with claims that they disabuse religious recruits from observance. Which has spawned some of the more extreme Charedim in places like Meah Shearim to verbally and even physically assault Charedi recruits when they spot them in their neighborhoods!

As an aside in my view a just solution to this problem would be to eliminate the draft and make an all volunteer army. But I do’t see that happening any time soon. In the alternative, the ideal would be to exempt only the most elite students among them. The rest should be subject to the same draft as everyone else. What proportion of students should get that  exemption is a good question. But clearly not all of them. Perhaps not even most of them. Especially now that the government is bending over backwards to accommodate them.

Meanwhile there are factions - or should I say individuals - in Israeli politics that have another agenda. I appreciate that as a secular Jew, Avigdor Lieberman has no interest in religion. But he is currently on a tear to eliminate religion from the state. It appears that he doesn’t care that much about his Jewish heritage. Nor does he apparently care about the Jewish state really. He only cares about himself.

It was not all that long ago where Lieberman got along nicely with the religious parties. But now he wants a state free of them. 

Lieberman is responsible for destroying what should have been a clear victory for a center-right ruling coalition government. This is how the population voted. Unfortunately it came by way of a number of parties, both large and small. From center–right to extreme right. 

Likud, the party with the most votes (and thereby the most Keneset seats) needed to cobble together a coalition with the smaller parties in order to form the majority (61 seats) needed form a ruling coalition. The Charedi parties agreed. Lieberman refused to join such a coalition unless his demands of eliminating all Charedi exemptions from the army were met.  

The Charedi parties were even willing to compromise on their own demands and allow for a quota of Charedim to be drafted. Lieberman refused. He now insists that he will not join in any coalition that includes the Charedi parties. Status quo? What status quo?! Without Lieberman, there are not enough seats to form a coalition. That means new elections. Here (from JOL) is what he wants to accomplish: 

‘We will force a government with the Likud and with Blue and White, which will be an emergency government, a national-liberal government. And we will do everything to block the ultra-Orthodox, who will not be allowed into the government,” he said. 

I have no love lost for the Charedi parties. I neither love them nor hate them. Sometimes I support them and sometimes I don’t. But this time they are not the villains. Lieberman is. If I were an Israeli voter that in the past supported Lieberman – I would drop that support like a lead balloon - and vote for Likud. Let Liberman’s party die by virtue of not meeting the minimum number of seats required by law to secure a place in the next Keneset. That would be poetic justice.

The Ties That Bind

Screenshot of Agudah's 12^th Daf Yomi Siyum at Metlife Stadium (Youtube)

What unites us as observant Jews is far greater than what divides us. In that spirit I have to say I’m pleased. I have been advocating for years that Agudah should give Yeshiva University’s Roshei Yeshiva the same degree of respect given to other Roshei Yeshiva or Chasidic Rebbes. The right venue to have done that was at the Daf Yomi Siyum HaShas held by Agudah every seven and ½ years. The reason for that is because they correctly advertise it as a non political event. This is why they invite everyone of every Hashkafa to attend. The idea being to celebrate Limud HaTorah (Torah study)… and to leave politics out of it.

As of yet, this has not happened. A short while ago I lamented that fact and once again challenged Agudah to rectify that situation by inviting YU (Yeshiva University) Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Hershel Schachter to address the upcoming 13^th Siyum in a few months. 

Short of that I recommended that YU should consider having their own Siyum that day and make it truly inclusive. (I have been told that there may have actually been some discussion about that in YU circles. But I don’t know how accurate that is.)

So what am I pleased about? It appears that Agudah has responded to the challenge. Last Friday I viewed a video ( available below) produced by them. It is called Yom HaShishi and is part of a series of videos presented online in their run-up to the next Siyum. Each video is related to the material being studied in close proximity to the day the video is released. The speaker on this video is Rav Mordechai Willig who is clearly identified as a Rosh Yeshiva at YU and the Rav a Shul in Riverdale.

That was a refreshing surprise for me and a huge step in the right direction. I am happy to see Agudah giving their long overdue recognition to Yeshiva University as a Makom Torah. I’m sure that they must have received some flack for this from their right flank – just as I know they did when they invited former Chief Rabbi of Israel, R’ Yisroel Meir Lau to speak at their last Siyum 7 and ½ years ago. (Politics always seems to get in the way of Yashrus - doing the right thing.).

But as noted, this was a first step. One that has a limited viewership. Especially form their right flank. While I salute them for the courage in asking a YU Rosh Yeshiva to give an online D’Var Torah in honor of the next Siyum, the next step that would really show the kind of Achdus they advertise  about that day would be to invite Rav Willig; or Rav Schachter; or any of the fine YU Roshei Yeshiva to address the Siyum. A Siyum that may very well be the largest gathering from the widest spectrum of Orthodox Jews in recent history.

But even that will not be enough. They ought to also invite rabbinic leaders from other Hashkafos to address the attendees that night if they really want to be inclusive. Including for example Lubavitch and Religious Zionists among others. If politics is to be left out of this as advertised, that is the right thing to do.

The Siyum will have lived up to its billing. It will take a lot of courage to take that next step. But it will be an important one that will show some real unity among Orthodox Jewry. The tie that binds us that evening will be the celebration of Torah study. Not only by Yeshiva students. But by laymen all over the world.

In that spirit those addressing the attendees that evening should refrain from speaking about their Hashkafos; political perspectives; or agendas. And speak only about what unites us all. That is what will be celebrated that night. If that happens it will be a seminal day for Achdus - unprecedented in our day. Will it?

An Angry Response

Cheder Lubavitch Hebrew Day School principal, Rabbi Yitzchok Wolf

I received the following comment to Rabbi Bechhofer’s post last Friday:

How does TIDE fit in with Reb Moshes Tshuva. It really doesn't Reb Moshe was totally against TIDE. Interesting that Rabbi Bechhofer dies not mentiin that Reb Aron Kotler, Reb Moshe Feinstein and all gedolei Yisriel were against the shita of TIDE fir a simole reason. Reb SRH addressed the needs if Germany in his day. Gedolei Poland and Gedilei Lita rejected it outright. Here comes Maryles who loves bashing Chabad with ridiculous headlines although he knows quite well that the shita of RSRH was eejected by all gedolei Hatorah in his generation. 

The comment  was made by Rabbi Yitzchok Wolf, a man I truly admire. Rabbi Wolf is one of Chicago’s  leading Lubavitch leaders here in Chicago. He is the principal of Cheder Lubavitch, one of the larger days schools on the Chiacgoland area. It is a school that actually has a secular studies curriculum. Which is a bit ironic considering the vehemence with which he rejects TIDE.

One of the reasons I admire him is that he was one of the first Lubavitch leaders to openly oppose the idea that the Lubavitcher Rebbe was Moshiach. After the Rebbe died, many Lubavitchers (known as Moshichists) continued to believe that he was Moshiach. Something  most of them believed was to be imminently announced by the Rebbe himself while he was still alive. The Moshichists still believed it posthumously.  And that he would reveal himself as such after being resurrected from the dead. (Some Moshichists  actually believed that he hadn’t really died at all - but instead was just hidden until the propitious moment in time when he felt it appropriate to return and reveal himself as Moshiach.) 

The controversy at the time of the Rebbe’s death was so great that Lubavitch was in danger of being rejected by virtually all of mainstream Orthodoxy. Rabbi David Berger actually wrote a book that tried to accomplish that by claiming such views to be at best Apikursus (heresy). If not worse. He had the support of Telzer Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Chaim Dov Keller in that regard. Rav Keller has been a frequent critic of Lubavitch.

Rabbi Wolf was in the forefront of fighting the Moshichists in Lubavitch. He understood the danger of allowing these views to hold sway. Today, about 25 years after the Rebbe’s death, these ideas have been mostly marginalized by Lubavitch – with the ironic exception of Lubavitcher headquarters (known as 770) in New York. Which, if I understand correctly is still controlled by Moshichists. 

(I have to wonder why Lubavitch, still tolerates them 25 years after the Rebbe’s passing. By now, those Moshichists should have been expelled from 770. But that issue is beyond the scope of this post.) 

Today, one rarely hears even a hint about the Rebbe being Moshiach.  Rabbi Wolf should be credited for his huge contributions in this regard. That being said, what most Lubavitchers actually believe in their hearts is hard to know. Based on multiple conversations I have had with many Lubavitchers, I believe that at some level they still believe in at least the possibility of the Rebbe returning as Moshiach.

With the exception of this problematic view - which my Rebbe, Rav Ahron Soloveichik considered foolishness, or as he put it a Shtus (but NOT Apikursus) - I have a largely favorable view of Lubavitch. A movement the late Lubavitcher Rebbe turned into a powerhouse of outreach and good deeds. I have discussed their accomplishments many times here. To say the Rebbe was a Gadol is an understatement, despite the fact that I disagreed with him on some things. One of which came up last Friday.

As I noted last Friday, the Lubavitcher Rebbe trashed the Hashkafa of TIDE (Torah Im Derech Ertz) founded by R’ Samson Raphael Hirsch. He did it in a letter written in 1962 which was recently featured on a chabad website. Rabbi Bechhofer wrote a refutation of the Rebbe’s views based on the fact that the reasons stated by the Rebbe in rejecting TIDE showed that he didn’t really know Hirsch’s actual philosophy as expressed by TIDE.

At this point I should add that I was remiss in my original titling of that post. Even though I did not intend it as a slight – but rather as evidence that even a Gadol can make mistakes – I was wrong. I made a mistake and should have realized that it pressed the hot buttons of a lot of people. I have since re-titled it to what Rabbi Bechhoffer suggested as a title. I apologize to those who saw that as some sort of slight. It was not intended that way.

Back to Rabbi Wolf. I saw him in Shul this morning where he verbally accosted me. And as he did in the above mentioned comment he accused me of being a Chabad basher - thus revealing my 'true' feelings about Lubavitch.  

He is wrong about that – just as he is wrong about the views of other Gedolim of the past. He claimed that TIDE was rejected by all those mentioned in his comment. Making TIDE sound almost like Apikursus! The fact is that there was no Gadol that considered it that way. At most they believed (incorrectly in the view of those that have studied TIDE) that Rav Hirsch intended TIDE as a Hora’as Shah – a B’deieved in order to stem the tide of rapid assimilation out of observant Judaism  taking place in the Germany of his day. They believed that TIDE should not be seen as a L’chatchila - the primary way to serve God. Not one Gadol said it was detrimental to American Jews as did the Lubavitcher Rebbe.

But that is not even the main issue Rabbi Bechhofer was addressing. It was the obvious fact that based on the Rebbe’s explanation of TIDE, he clearly did not understand what TIDE is. 

I got into a heated exchange with Rabbi Wolf this morning where he complained that I picked on the Rebbe instead of all the other Gedloim he said rejected TIDE. And he kept repeating the thoughts he expressed in the above comment. 

Rabbi Wolf refused to acknowledge that the Rebbe could be mistaken about anything, even while he paid lip-service to the fact that it is possible. He kept insisting that the Rebbe knew what TIDE was and rejected it for the right reasons. But the Rebbe’s  letter and Rabbi Bechhofer’s refutation could not be clearer.

It makes me sad that a man that I admire so much – and for good reason – becomes so unreasonable when it comes to his Rebbe. It would be far better if he acknowledged Rabbi Bechhofer’s argument and admitted that the Rebbe based his views on an incomplete understanding of TIDE. Or at the very least to try and show why he believed the Rebbe was right with his own reasoned refutation of Rabbi Bechhofer.