There is a Ramban on last week’s Parsha, (Korach - 16:4), that speaks about Aaron’s silent reaction to Korach’s challenge of Moshe’s leadership. He states that Aaron did not protest one word during the entire event. He instead just allowed Korach to continue in his self aggrandizement. Aaron held his peace and deferred to Moshe.
Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch in his Sefer on Chumash uses this Ramban as a metaphor to show that there are times to protest and times not to. Protest is not always the answer. Protest for its own sake can and will often be counter-productive.
Rabbi Sternbuch is one of the leaders of the Edah HaCharedis. They have called for massive protests against the scheduled homosexual parade in Jerusalem that will ‘shake the foundations’ of Jerusalem. In light of his interpretation of the Ramban, I think it is a bit incongruous of him to be supportive of that. Of course one could answer that even if there is a right and wrong time to protest… this is the right time. But is it? Obviously, as stated here before, the Gerrer Rebbe doesn’t think so.
But now it seems the Sefardi leadership, and rabbinic leaders in the world of Yeshivos don’t think so either. I guess they must have read my blog on this issue.
The reasons given are a bit different than mine. The claim is that they do not want to expose their students to this lifestyle at all and massively protesting it would surely do so. But I wonder if that is the sole reason? It isn’t as if a Yeshiva student doesn’t know that such behavior exists. It is after all mentioned in the Torah. And one would have to be blind, deaf , deaf and dumb not to know what is going on in the world. Yeshivos have in fact had incidences of homosexual behavior taking place amongst its students right on their premises. And what about homosexual abuse stories that keep popping up in Yeshivos like Torah Temimah?
I can’t help but believe that there are other compelling reasons along the lines I have stated: That massive protests will be counter productive and could lead to violence. Innocent people could get hurt. Over-zealous protesters may commit violent crimes in the name of Kavod Shem Shamyim, in the name of God, and thereby creating an even bigger Chilul HaShem than the one they are protesting! On top of that they would be taking away valuable time from Torah learning.
Whatever the reasons are, I salute and support this decision to avoid the protests by these rabbinic leaders… and wonder where Rabbi Sternbuch is?
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Tznius... Yes, Chumros... No
Rabbi Gil Student has a post today about Tznius that asks a very important question:
“I've always wondered what in the world these women are thinking when they buy their clothes. Presumably they look into a mirror. Do they have even the slightest doubt that it is unacceptable to dress like that?”
By “like that” he obviously means dressing in a provocative manner.
I’ve addressed the issue of Tznius in women’s clothing in the past. It was in the context of a formal ban in Charedi society that I felt was excessive, ineffective, and even harmful. But that doesn’t mean I don’t think there should be standards.
As Torah Jews we are indeed obligated to be modest in our manner of dress. For women this means not dressing in a sexually provocative manner. But how does one dress in a manner that is neither provocative on the one hand and yet not dowdy and unattractive on the other? What is the happy medium? Before one can answer this question, one must understand some basic human psychology.
There is a major difference between how men and women see each other sexually. Chazal recognized this very basic fact about the human condition as a basic biological fact. A Man will look at a woman and see something entirely different than will another woman looking at her. Men are aroused by what they see. They might have Hirhurim. (Hirhurim is the Hebrew word for thoughts. It is often used as shorthand for Hihurim Assurim, forbidden… or more accurately lustful thoughts in men.)
The reaction is completely physical. Women generally do not operate that way. Their sexuality is far more subltle and abstract. It is not as sight oriented. And this innate difference affects their perception of themselves.
Of course this does not mean that a woman who dresses provocatively won’t realize that she is doing so. But that is more a function of the culture than it is her innate psyche. Women understand how men react because they learn it experientially. They see it played out in the culture. And while many women understand it intellectually, it does not always translate well into action. That’s because they are not exactly sure how it works for lack of personally experiencing how a man’s sexuality works.
What happens in some cases therefore is that a woman will not realize that her manner of dress is all that provocative, especially if she is basically dresses modestly by secular standards. So how attractively may a woman dress before she starts to cause Hirhurim?
An objective answer is almost impossible to find. A lot depends on the culture and could be anywhere from walking around topless in some of the more primitive cultures to the requirement to wear a Burkha in some of the more rigid Islamist cultures. For Jews it is Torah law as expounded by the sages that guides us. Those laws are fairly well spelled out in Halacha and are desined for the most part to prevent lustful thoughts in men.
But there is a problem in execution of Halachic guidelines. Many Jewish women, even amognst the most religious, violate at least the spirit of the law if not the letter by the manner in which they dress. I believe that is in part due to in part to ignorance truly understanding male sexuality. Many of these women will look at the secular culture and by comparison they are indeed dressed very Tznius. And they are right, comparatively speaking.
It is quite true that the Tznius standards of non Jewish religious people in western civilization is very different and far more lax than they are for religious Jews. And in fact for many religious non Jews their manner of dress is modest and non arousing to their men. How can that be?
Well, it’s what they’ve become used to. Provocative clothing in the end is very relative to the culture. As I said, what is not provocative in one society may be extremely provocative in another. A Muslim may have lustful thoughts at the mere thought of seeing the face of a woman. And a man whose primitive culture has women going around topless is not provoked at all by what he encounters everyday in public. In western society the culture is very lax, to say the least.
There is another problem, to which Rabbi Student alludes. That of a woman trying to be attractive to her husband while remaining loyal to the standards of Tznius. And this is one of the truly big problems of our day.
One must also ask why a woman wants to dress a certain way. Is it because she wants to get attention for herself? Is it to get envious stares from other women? Is it to subconsciously flirt with other men? And what about husbands? They sometimes want their wives to dress attractively so as to show them off. No man wants to be seen as married to an unattractive woman.
This is further compounded by the often typical environment in workplace. Men will see women all day long in all manner of immodest dress. That is quite the norm and acceptable in modern society. Are they to be bombarded all day with in many cases very attractive women in the work place only to come home to a dowdy wife who must keep her hair covered, and wear loose fitting, unattractive clothing? This atmosphere ahs been shown to cause significant Sholom Bayis issues in some families.
One solution is seen offered is that wives should dress up for their husbands at home in private. This way a husband can look forward to their own wives without being distracted in the workplace by other women. But that is very unrealistic.
First of all the children are always there. It’s not a good idea for a woman to look provocative for her husband when her children are around. Second of all looking attractive takes a lot of time and effort. To expect married women to take the time and effort to do this at the end of a hard day with the children is not being realistic in the extreme. I doubt very much that any woman ever does this, let alone on a regular basis.
Yet, it has been postulated that many divorces have occurred because of scenarios like this. Men are around beautiful women in the workplace all day long. How does a wife compete with that?
We have two competing issues here: The requirement for Tznius and the requirement of Sholom Bayis.
To be sure men have to play their part and resist temptations in the workplace. And most religious men do. And there are also those who easily succumb to temptation no matter how many precautions one takes. But I believe there is a vast grey area that can cause great difficulties in a marriage when the circumstances are such as these arise.
There has to be a better way to implement standards of Tznius in the Torah world. A happy medium. Women should be allowed to look like women and dress fashionably without being provocative. And that means that for most people in our culture we cannot be overly Machmir on Tznius standards.
Tznius… Yes. Chumros… No.
“I've always wondered what in the world these women are thinking when they buy their clothes. Presumably they look into a mirror. Do they have even the slightest doubt that it is unacceptable to dress like that?”
By “like that” he obviously means dressing in a provocative manner.
I’ve addressed the issue of Tznius in women’s clothing in the past. It was in the context of a formal ban in Charedi society that I felt was excessive, ineffective, and even harmful. But that doesn’t mean I don’t think there should be standards.
As Torah Jews we are indeed obligated to be modest in our manner of dress. For women this means not dressing in a sexually provocative manner. But how does one dress in a manner that is neither provocative on the one hand and yet not dowdy and unattractive on the other? What is the happy medium? Before one can answer this question, one must understand some basic human psychology.
There is a major difference between how men and women see each other sexually. Chazal recognized this very basic fact about the human condition as a basic biological fact. A Man will look at a woman and see something entirely different than will another woman looking at her. Men are aroused by what they see. They might have Hirhurim. (Hirhurim is the Hebrew word for thoughts. It is often used as shorthand for Hihurim Assurim, forbidden… or more accurately lustful thoughts in men.)
The reaction is completely physical. Women generally do not operate that way. Their sexuality is far more subltle and abstract. It is not as sight oriented. And this innate difference affects their perception of themselves.
Of course this does not mean that a woman who dresses provocatively won’t realize that she is doing so. But that is more a function of the culture than it is her innate psyche. Women understand how men react because they learn it experientially. They see it played out in the culture. And while many women understand it intellectually, it does not always translate well into action. That’s because they are not exactly sure how it works for lack of personally experiencing how a man’s sexuality works.
What happens in some cases therefore is that a woman will not realize that her manner of dress is all that provocative, especially if she is basically dresses modestly by secular standards. So how attractively may a woman dress before she starts to cause Hirhurim?
An objective answer is almost impossible to find. A lot depends on the culture and could be anywhere from walking around topless in some of the more primitive cultures to the requirement to wear a Burkha in some of the more rigid Islamist cultures. For Jews it is Torah law as expounded by the sages that guides us. Those laws are fairly well spelled out in Halacha and are desined for the most part to prevent lustful thoughts in men.
But there is a problem in execution of Halachic guidelines. Many Jewish women, even amognst the most religious, violate at least the spirit of the law if not the letter by the manner in which they dress. I believe that is in part due to in part to ignorance truly understanding male sexuality. Many of these women will look at the secular culture and by comparison they are indeed dressed very Tznius. And they are right, comparatively speaking.
It is quite true that the Tznius standards of non Jewish religious people in western civilization is very different and far more lax than they are for religious Jews. And in fact for many religious non Jews their manner of dress is modest and non arousing to their men. How can that be?
Well, it’s what they’ve become used to. Provocative clothing in the end is very relative to the culture. As I said, what is not provocative in one society may be extremely provocative in another. A Muslim may have lustful thoughts at the mere thought of seeing the face of a woman. And a man whose primitive culture has women going around topless is not provoked at all by what he encounters everyday in public. In western society the culture is very lax, to say the least.
There is another problem, to which Rabbi Student alludes. That of a woman trying to be attractive to her husband while remaining loyal to the standards of Tznius. And this is one of the truly big problems of our day.
One must also ask why a woman wants to dress a certain way. Is it because she wants to get attention for herself? Is it to get envious stares from other women? Is it to subconsciously flirt with other men? And what about husbands? They sometimes want their wives to dress attractively so as to show them off. No man wants to be seen as married to an unattractive woman.
This is further compounded by the often typical environment in workplace. Men will see women all day long in all manner of immodest dress. That is quite the norm and acceptable in modern society. Are they to be bombarded all day with in many cases very attractive women in the work place only to come home to a dowdy wife who must keep her hair covered, and wear loose fitting, unattractive clothing? This atmosphere ahs been shown to cause significant Sholom Bayis issues in some families.
One solution is seen offered is that wives should dress up for their husbands at home in private. This way a husband can look forward to their own wives without being distracted in the workplace by other women. But that is very unrealistic.
First of all the children are always there. It’s not a good idea for a woman to look provocative for her husband when her children are around. Second of all looking attractive takes a lot of time and effort. To expect married women to take the time and effort to do this at the end of a hard day with the children is not being realistic in the extreme. I doubt very much that any woman ever does this, let alone on a regular basis.
Yet, it has been postulated that many divorces have occurred because of scenarios like this. Men are around beautiful women in the workplace all day long. How does a wife compete with that?
We have two competing issues here: The requirement for Tznius and the requirement of Sholom Bayis.
To be sure men have to play their part and resist temptations in the workplace. And most religious men do. And there are also those who easily succumb to temptation no matter how many precautions one takes. But I believe there is a vast grey area that can cause great difficulties in a marriage when the circumstances are such as these arise.
There has to be a better way to implement standards of Tznius in the Torah world. A happy medium. Women should be allowed to look like women and dress fashionably without being provocative. And that means that for most people in our culture we cannot be overly Machmir on Tznius standards.
Tznius… Yes. Chumros… No.
Monday, June 18, 2007
The Legacy of the Lubavitcher Rebbe
I was a bit taken aback by an article in the Jewish Press this weekend. Not by the actual substance of it, but by the focus.
This article in question was written by Rabbi Sholom B. Kalmanson, a Chabad spokesman from Cincinnati. His concern is that Chabad is not being given enough credit for founding Kiruv, religious outreach in America.
Let me amongst the first to re-assure him that Lubavitch was certainly in on the early goings of Kiruv. Were they the absolute first? Does that really matter? They are certainly the most successful in terms of sheer numbers of Baalei Teshuva. I doubt that any other group can claim anywhere near their number of successes. Of course there will always be some who claim this or that organization came first. And they take umbrage that Chabad makes the claim that it was first. But why is this of any concern to anyone, Lubavitch or otherwise?
That Lubavitch makes this an issue on this the eve of the 13th Yahrzeit of the Lubavitcher Rebbe shows just how clueless they seem to be about the real problems that affect them. Their problem is an existential one. The fact is that the Messianism which is so pervasive in Chabad threatens to destroy the entire movement. The “Who came first” issue truly pales in comparison to that.
When Chabad has a group of Messainists going around to bars, offering drinks to patrons with the goal of promoting the idea that the Messiah, in the person of the Rebbe is risen and will return in a second coming, I should think that "who was first" should remain somewhere near the province of the famous Abbot and Costello comedy routine in in terms of the relative importance to the movement.
Though this "bar hopping" group claims hundreds of Chabad Rabbis support them, Chabad Rabbi Menachem Brod, a leader and spokesman for Agudat Zeirei Chabad, their youth organization in Israel, has disowned the initiative. He and other officials say that such activity is inappropriate.
This kind of rejection has always been the problem ever since the Rebbe died. Even the most strident Lubavitch anti Messianists never deny the claims of the Messianists, only the methods. Their opposition is always very fierce and condemning. But they never include disavowals. Here is the way Rabbi Brod put it:
"the campaign was giving Chabad a bad name. "
"Not a single Chabad rabbi has stood up to take responsibility for the campaign," said Brod."
"Whoever is behind it has no right to use Chabad's name"
"Asked if he believed that Schneersohn was the Messiah, Brod answered, "We hope that when the Messiah comes the rebbe will come also."
"But was Schneersohn the Messiah? "Some things are better off being handled by God."
No denials. Only a song and dance.
And this kind of response is typical of their denials. I have yet to see even one Chabad official say anything like the following: "The Rebbe is NOT the Messiah." Just the way any other Orthodox leader would say it about a revered Gadol of theirs who passed away.
So when Chabad officials say that the majority of mainstream are anti Messianist, I do not believe them. Not because they are lying to us, but because they are lying to themselves. They actually think that by purging the movement of the overt believers that they will then be able to maintain their beliefs privately. And no one will be the wiser. But their responses to date should not fool anyone. As can be plainly discerned from the quotes I mentioned.
Besides, as I’ve pointed out before, the Messianists seem to be winning… at least on the public relations front, but probably numerically too. They are the ones who garner the most publicity. And they are the ones who spend huge amounts of money promoting their Messianism in ads and in public events.
If the anti Messianists want all of Orthodoxy to respect their movement, They have to do two things. They have to come out with an unequivocal statement that the Rebbe is not Moshiach. Period. No qualifications. No ifs and or buts. No “well in theory it’s possible”. And they need to get serious about rejecting all the Messianists, they have to dissociate themselves completely from them and from their ideas of the Rebbe’s Messiahship. They cannot tolerate them any longer as just being a fringe group with good intentions gone wrong.
I know it’s hard. Most of the Messianists are good people. They are amongst the most dedicated and fervent Jews Lubavitch has. Sincere as cold be. They are the ones most likely to do the kinds of difficult projects that Chabad has become known for over the decades, like setting up a Chabad House in the middle of nowhere, just so they can do outreach. It’s hard to part with such otherwise valuable assets. They are Dan L’Kaf Zechus…the Messianists are judged favorably.
But they have to do this if they want to have the kind of respectability they deserve. And they do deserve it. They have contributed so much to the Jewish people. But without dissociating themselves completely from Messianism they will continue to get events like this bar hopping initiative. And all that great Kiruv becomes tainted.
So... were they the first to do Kiruv? Who cares?!
This article in question was written by Rabbi Sholom B. Kalmanson, a Chabad spokesman from Cincinnati. His concern is that Chabad is not being given enough credit for founding Kiruv, religious outreach in America.
Let me amongst the first to re-assure him that Lubavitch was certainly in on the early goings of Kiruv. Were they the absolute first? Does that really matter? They are certainly the most successful in terms of sheer numbers of Baalei Teshuva. I doubt that any other group can claim anywhere near their number of successes. Of course there will always be some who claim this or that organization came first. And they take umbrage that Chabad makes the claim that it was first. But why is this of any concern to anyone, Lubavitch or otherwise?
That Lubavitch makes this an issue on this the eve of the 13th Yahrzeit of the Lubavitcher Rebbe shows just how clueless they seem to be about the real problems that affect them. Their problem is an existential one. The fact is that the Messianism which is so pervasive in Chabad threatens to destroy the entire movement. The “Who came first” issue truly pales in comparison to that.
When Chabad has a group of Messainists going around to bars, offering drinks to patrons with the goal of promoting the idea that the Messiah, in the person of the Rebbe is risen and will return in a second coming, I should think that "who was first" should remain somewhere near the province of the famous Abbot and Costello comedy routine in in terms of the relative importance to the movement.
Though this "bar hopping" group claims hundreds of Chabad Rabbis support them, Chabad Rabbi Menachem Brod, a leader and spokesman for Agudat Zeirei Chabad, their youth organization in Israel, has disowned the initiative. He and other officials say that such activity is inappropriate.
This kind of rejection has always been the problem ever since the Rebbe died. Even the most strident Lubavitch anti Messianists never deny the claims of the Messianists, only the methods. Their opposition is always very fierce and condemning. But they never include disavowals. Here is the way Rabbi Brod put it:
"the campaign was giving Chabad a bad name. "
"Not a single Chabad rabbi has stood up to take responsibility for the campaign," said Brod."
"Whoever is behind it has no right to use Chabad's name"
"Asked if he believed that Schneersohn was the Messiah, Brod answered, "We hope that when the Messiah comes the rebbe will come also."
"But was Schneersohn the Messiah? "Some things are better off being handled by God."
No denials. Only a song and dance.
And this kind of response is typical of their denials. I have yet to see even one Chabad official say anything like the following: "The Rebbe is NOT the Messiah." Just the way any other Orthodox leader would say it about a revered Gadol of theirs who passed away.
So when Chabad officials say that the majority of mainstream are anti Messianist, I do not believe them. Not because they are lying to us, but because they are lying to themselves. They actually think that by purging the movement of the overt believers that they will then be able to maintain their beliefs privately. And no one will be the wiser. But their responses to date should not fool anyone. As can be plainly discerned from the quotes I mentioned.
Besides, as I’ve pointed out before, the Messianists seem to be winning… at least on the public relations front, but probably numerically too. They are the ones who garner the most publicity. And they are the ones who spend huge amounts of money promoting their Messianism in ads and in public events.
If the anti Messianists want all of Orthodoxy to respect their movement, They have to do two things. They have to come out with an unequivocal statement that the Rebbe is not Moshiach. Period. No qualifications. No ifs and or buts. No “well in theory it’s possible”. And they need to get serious about rejecting all the Messianists, they have to dissociate themselves completely from them and from their ideas of the Rebbe’s Messiahship. They cannot tolerate them any longer as just being a fringe group with good intentions gone wrong.
I know it’s hard. Most of the Messianists are good people. They are amongst the most dedicated and fervent Jews Lubavitch has. Sincere as cold be. They are the ones most likely to do the kinds of difficult projects that Chabad has become known for over the decades, like setting up a Chabad House in the middle of nowhere, just so they can do outreach. It’s hard to part with such otherwise valuable assets. They are Dan L’Kaf Zechus…the Messianists are judged favorably.
But they have to do this if they want to have the kind of respectability they deserve. And they do deserve it. They have contributed so much to the Jewish people. But without dissociating themselves completely from Messianism they will continue to get events like this bar hopping initiative. And all that great Kiruv becomes tainted.
So... were they the first to do Kiruv? Who cares?!
Sunday, June 17, 2007
A Bigger Bang for the Buck
What is going on with the funding of the Charedi school system in Israel? Is there an actual high school in Israel that has a basic secular core curriculum That seems to go against the very essence of what they have been preaching: that at best they are a waste of time and at worst anathematic to Torah. But here is what I just read:
"Due to the political clout of two ultra-Orthodox Knesset factions - Shas and Agudat Israel, however, their ultra-Orthodox school networks (Maayan Hachinuch Hatorani and the Independent Education Center), which agreed to teach the full core curriculum, receive the samebudgets as state schools."
"Thus equal budgeting was made contingent on equal curriculum content at the schools. The problem is, however, that the budgeting was provided but the core curriculum is apparently not being taught."
I was not aware that they had any schools like this. But what is more troubling is, that if they do they seem to be a sham. The curriculum is not being taught. If this is the case it is very loathsome to me. For a school to receive money from the government based on a promise to fulfill a condition which they do not fulfill is nothing short of Geneva. The problems I have with Israeli Charedi school system never included suspicions that they set up a school system with a sham secular curriculum in order get government funding. There must be more to the story.
Be that as it may I have a problem generally with the government funding of the Charedi schools. They are currently equally funded with the secular and Daati Leumi (Religious Zionist) schools.
The funding is the result of political compromise. Charedi votes on issues important to the political party in power are traded in exchange for the funding of Charedi institutions. I understand the world of politics. And on the surface I have no real problem with a political compromise that gives one the most favorable result one can get for their constituents. But as a concerned Jew who is interested in the welfare of all of Klal Yisroel, I am very troubled by the results of funding a system that produces so little in the way of economic benefit for its constituents.
What troubles me even more is the rhetoric I often hear from the Charedi political leadership when it doesn’t get the funding it thinks it deserves. They claim that they are being treated like second class citizens because they are refused equal funding.
They blame it on the anti Torah attitudes of the secular government. But this is disingenuous. They are now crying ‘wolf’ far too often. Their complaints are no longer legitimate. The Israeli government may be secular but it is not really anti-Torah anymore, at least when it comes to funding Charedi education. If it was truly anti Torah the religious Zionist schools wouldn't be getting any money either.
The problem that the secular governemt has with the Charedi schools is that that do not teach a basic core curriculum for secular studies in high school. We are not talking about teaching heresy, mind you. We are talking fundamentals of eduation: Courses like English, math, science and history. These courses do not exist at any level at all in the Charedi high school system.
I understand why Charedi leaders take umbrage at not getting equal funding for their schools. They feel that their schools should be given at least the same level of respect that the secular schools do. After all they are teaching Torah. They are teaching Judiasm. They are in fact the true purveyors of Judaism in a state that insists on maintaining its Jewish character. And they feel they are doing so in its most pure and pristine form... unfettered by any distractions. All Judiasm.. all the time! And their communities sacrifice materially in maintaining the high religious standards they learn in those schools.
Indeed their constituents are generally amongst the most ethical, kind and caring of all the Jewish people. And they are the ones having the most children and thereby contributing to the desired Jewish demographic. And, finally it is their belief that they are the ones holding up the world with their Torah learning. What better contributions to society can there be?
But, while much of this is basically true, as has been pointed out here so often they do their constituents a great disservice in not giving them a decent secular education so that can better compete in the job market when the time comes. That has produced the largest single poverty class in Israel (next to the Arabs). Charedim therefore place a greater strain on the economy because of their use of the welfare system.
The obvious answer to this problem is for Charedi leadership to re-adjust their thinking about how to educate the Charedi masses. They need to return to an era when learning fulltime was reserved for the elite in society, those who have the potential to become the Yechidei Segula… Gedolim.
I have suggested many times, the need to restructure the system to include secular studies to go along with religious studies. Certainly during the high school years. After that they can continue to learn full time for two or three years and at some point combine their Torah study with post high school secular study, whether it be college, trade, or professional school, so that when they are done with learning full time they can get decent jobs. They can in the meantime get married and have families. When the secular studies are completed they can continue learning in a Kollel if they wish but should not be there more than two or three of years. Of course the truly best and brightest who are so motivated should continue learning full time in their quest for greatness in Torah.
The Charedi leadrship not only doesn’t do that, they condemn and boycott any high school that offers any secular studies at all... and they disparage any post high school student for even considering studying for a career part time.
What does government funding have to do with this? The Israeli government has essentially tried to set up as a condition for funding that it implement at least a minimal secular curriculum in their high schools. It never in any way mandated study which would be deemed Assur. Their entire purpose is to have minimum standards which will help produce the most productive kind of citizen. As I indicated this is an Idea I’ve long advocated. And this why I am so troubled when Charedi leadership react so strongly against implementing such standards and cry foul in the process.
I know the song and dance: "We can’t have anti Torah people telling us what to teach!" Well, that was fine in Volozhin when the Czar had an ulterior motive and was helped along by influential Reform Jews who had the same agenda. They were indeed insidious. The plan was to at first introduce innocuous studies. And then to slowly wean Jews away from Torah and Mitzvos, and eventually assimilating and integrating them into secular society.
That may have been the goal of the early pioneers of Zionism too. But that is far from the case anymore today. Such claims are no longer legitimate… especially since the Israeli government has been funding Religious Zionist schools since day one. Whatever one says about those schools, no one ever accused them of teaching material that is anti Torah.
Minimum Standards. That is not only not too much to ask, it is an important change that Charedi leaders themselves should be implementing. The government wants to see a bigger bang for their buck and I don’t blame them one bit! Right now the bang is a negative one on the economy, and on the welfare of their own community.
If anyone ever hears a Charedi political leader complaining about inequality in funding between secular schools and Charedi schools and blame it on the anti Torah agenda of the secular Zionist government, they ought to think about it and not automatically condemn the government. They ought to instead consider the consequences of those demands and that they actually help perpetuate Charedi poverty. When I hear such complaints now, they fall on deaf ears.
"Due to the political clout of two ultra-Orthodox Knesset factions - Shas and Agudat Israel, however, their ultra-Orthodox school networks (Maayan Hachinuch Hatorani and the Independent Education Center), which agreed to teach the full core curriculum, receive the samebudgets as state schools."
"Thus equal budgeting was made contingent on equal curriculum content at the schools. The problem is, however, that the budgeting was provided but the core curriculum is apparently not being taught."
I was not aware that they had any schools like this. But what is more troubling is, that if they do they seem to be a sham. The curriculum is not being taught. If this is the case it is very loathsome to me. For a school to receive money from the government based on a promise to fulfill a condition which they do not fulfill is nothing short of Geneva. The problems I have with Israeli Charedi school system never included suspicions that they set up a school system with a sham secular curriculum in order get government funding. There must be more to the story.
Be that as it may I have a problem generally with the government funding of the Charedi schools. They are currently equally funded with the secular and Daati Leumi (Religious Zionist) schools.
The funding is the result of political compromise. Charedi votes on issues important to the political party in power are traded in exchange for the funding of Charedi institutions. I understand the world of politics. And on the surface I have no real problem with a political compromise that gives one the most favorable result one can get for their constituents. But as a concerned Jew who is interested in the welfare of all of Klal Yisroel, I am very troubled by the results of funding a system that produces so little in the way of economic benefit for its constituents.
What troubles me even more is the rhetoric I often hear from the Charedi political leadership when it doesn’t get the funding it thinks it deserves. They claim that they are being treated like second class citizens because they are refused equal funding.
They blame it on the anti Torah attitudes of the secular government. But this is disingenuous. They are now crying ‘wolf’ far too often. Their complaints are no longer legitimate. The Israeli government may be secular but it is not really anti-Torah anymore, at least when it comes to funding Charedi education. If it was truly anti Torah the religious Zionist schools wouldn't be getting any money either.
The problem that the secular governemt has with the Charedi schools is that that do not teach a basic core curriculum for secular studies in high school. We are not talking about teaching heresy, mind you. We are talking fundamentals of eduation: Courses like English, math, science and history. These courses do not exist at any level at all in the Charedi high school system.
I understand why Charedi leaders take umbrage at not getting equal funding for their schools. They feel that their schools should be given at least the same level of respect that the secular schools do. After all they are teaching Torah. They are teaching Judiasm. They are in fact the true purveyors of Judaism in a state that insists on maintaining its Jewish character. And they feel they are doing so in its most pure and pristine form... unfettered by any distractions. All Judiasm.. all the time! And their communities sacrifice materially in maintaining the high religious standards they learn in those schools.
Indeed their constituents are generally amongst the most ethical, kind and caring of all the Jewish people. And they are the ones having the most children and thereby contributing to the desired Jewish demographic. And, finally it is their belief that they are the ones holding up the world with their Torah learning. What better contributions to society can there be?
But, while much of this is basically true, as has been pointed out here so often they do their constituents a great disservice in not giving them a decent secular education so that can better compete in the job market when the time comes. That has produced the largest single poverty class in Israel (next to the Arabs). Charedim therefore place a greater strain on the economy because of their use of the welfare system.
The obvious answer to this problem is for Charedi leadership to re-adjust their thinking about how to educate the Charedi masses. They need to return to an era when learning fulltime was reserved for the elite in society, those who have the potential to become the Yechidei Segula… Gedolim.
I have suggested many times, the need to restructure the system to include secular studies to go along with religious studies. Certainly during the high school years. After that they can continue to learn full time for two or three years and at some point combine their Torah study with post high school secular study, whether it be college, trade, or professional school, so that when they are done with learning full time they can get decent jobs. They can in the meantime get married and have families. When the secular studies are completed they can continue learning in a Kollel if they wish but should not be there more than two or three of years. Of course the truly best and brightest who are so motivated should continue learning full time in their quest for greatness in Torah.
The Charedi leadrship not only doesn’t do that, they condemn and boycott any high school that offers any secular studies at all... and they disparage any post high school student for even considering studying for a career part time.
What does government funding have to do with this? The Israeli government has essentially tried to set up as a condition for funding that it implement at least a minimal secular curriculum in their high schools. It never in any way mandated study which would be deemed Assur. Their entire purpose is to have minimum standards which will help produce the most productive kind of citizen. As I indicated this is an Idea I’ve long advocated. And this why I am so troubled when Charedi leadership react so strongly against implementing such standards and cry foul in the process.
I know the song and dance: "We can’t have anti Torah people telling us what to teach!" Well, that was fine in Volozhin when the Czar had an ulterior motive and was helped along by influential Reform Jews who had the same agenda. They were indeed insidious. The plan was to at first introduce innocuous studies. And then to slowly wean Jews away from Torah and Mitzvos, and eventually assimilating and integrating them into secular society.
That may have been the goal of the early pioneers of Zionism too. But that is far from the case anymore today. Such claims are no longer legitimate… especially since the Israeli government has been funding Religious Zionist schools since day one. Whatever one says about those schools, no one ever accused them of teaching material that is anti Torah.
Minimum Standards. That is not only not too much to ask, it is an important change that Charedi leaders themselves should be implementing. The government wants to see a bigger bang for their buck and I don’t blame them one bit! Right now the bang is a negative one on the economy, and on the welfare of their own community.
If anyone ever hears a Charedi political leader complaining about inequality in funding between secular schools and Charedi schools and blame it on the anti Torah agenda of the secular Zionist government, they ought to think about it and not automatically condemn the government. They ought to instead consider the consequences of those demands and that they actually help perpetuate Charedi poverty. When I hear such complaints now, they fall on deaf ears.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Torah True Jews
My good friend Rabbi Shael Siegel has written an excellent essay on the subject of Torah True Judaism. While I do not agree with it in its entirety, I do agree that the term Torah True Judaism is elitistist and exclusionary.
I’ve always had a problem with that term. This term is the one often used by ultra-Orthodox Jews in describing themselves. And its frame of reference is almost always used in a Mussar context. It is a Hashkafic statement. They use it to communicate something special about themselves, that makes them separate and apart form the rest of Orthodox Jewry. Separatism requires a uniformity of difference so as to be able to distinguish themselves both visually and behaviorally from the rest of Klal Yisroel.
Being a Torah Jew just doesn’t seem to be enough, I guess. One has to have that extra word ‘true’ attached to it. It is as if to say the only Torah way is our Torah way. Only that is Torah true. But that is very strange indeed for a movement that claims it is pure Torah… and objects to all the “ands” in other Hashkafos: Torah and Mada, Torah and Derech Eretz, Torah and Chasidus. The fact is they now have a type of “and” too. One must now add the word true in order to be identified as a legitimate adherent of the Torah. But is the Torah any truer by adding that word? Is being a Torah Jew less Jewish than a Torah ‘true’ Jew?
The fact is that the term “Torah true” has no has any internal meaning. Saying Torah true adds nothing to Torah. Torah is by definition truth itself. So what is the point? Why identify by that term? What does it really mean?
I think the answer is clear. Its meaning is nothing more than a code word for a specific Hashkafa, one that makes the adherents of their very specific Hashkafa distinct from other Torah Jews. By calling oneself Torah true, one immediately identifies themselves as a member of their elite group… which is to them truer to Torah than anyone or anything else.
And with insularity as one of its primary features, it extricates them from the rest of the Torah world. It is as if they are telling us: Only our ways are the true Torah ways and every other observant Hashkafa is not quite as true as ours. Other Orthodox Hashkafos are “Krum” …not straight… but follow a somewhat deviant path to one degree or another. As Shael puts it: there is no Elu VElu… No Shivim Panim.
Being Torah true has an attitude that goes along with it. It is “The my way or the highway” attitude: “If you are not a member of our group… you may be a fine Jew… but you are not Torah true, and ‘Nisht Fun Unzera’ …not one of us! And we therefore separate ourselves from you so as to keep our ways pristine and pure. You… the rest of observant Jewry… mix your Judaism with ideas foreign to Torah.”
It galls me when I think about it. By this definition, I, who am observant of the Mitzvos of the Torah… am not a Torah true Jew. Nor is anyone on the RCA or in Yeshiva University. Or anyone who does not completely tow the ultra-Orthodox party line.
That’s too bad, really. Because cutting oneself off so completely from the rest of the Orthodox Jewry, let alone non-Orthodox Jewry is anathematic to Torah itself. By Torah mandate every Jew is responsible for the spiritual welfare of every other. And the insularity that is a virtual trademark of ultra-Orthodoxy makes this almost impossible to accomplish to any segment of Jewry other than their own.
Another important mandate of Torah Judaism they miss out on is that of being a light unto the nations. If they are so insulated from the rest of the world, how much of a light can they be? Shielding themselves from the outside world also shields their light from shining out. They will of course deny that. They will say that their pure and pristine ways will be noted somehow by the world at large and that will enlighten the world. But they are mistaken. Insularity is a two way street. By insulating themselves from the rest of the world they their light has a hard time shining through.
But that said I would not go so far as my friend Shael does. He wants to define Torah Judaism as an attitude. But that is an inaccurate definition of Torah Judaism in my view. Living according to some of the ideals in the Torah does not make a non-observant Jew a Torah Jew any more than it does when a Christian lives by those ideals. The Torah is not only about the ethical values of the Torah. To call oneself a Torah Jew one must do more than adhere to some of the values espoused by the Torah. One must not only pay attention to the Mitzvos Bein Adam L’Chavero... man and his fellow man. One must pay just as much attention to the Mitzvos Bein Adam L’Makom, those ritual laws designed specifically to serve God.
Reform Jews focus is on the ethics of Judaism, that is, those laws pertaining to ethical human interaction. But they leave as optional those laws pertaining to direct service to God. They therefore are not committed to observing all the Mitzvos of the Torah. Halacha, which is the expression of Torah observance… the ‘how to’ …is not binding according to the tenets of Reform Judaism.
And even though Conservative Jews have always claimed to follow Halacha, that… is no longer so clear. There are theologians amongst them who now dispute that. And certainly Reconstructionists whose views about God are heretical cannot be considered Torah Jews. It is not as my friend Shael says, about how serious one is about Torah. One must also be serious about following all of its commandments.
Just to be clear, I do not God forbid write any Jews out of Judaism. Every Jewish soul is just as authentic as mine or even as the biggest Gadol. No matter how much or how little of the Torah he or she observes. But to call them Torah Jews would not be a correct description of their status. In my view, for that, one has to be committed to full observance.
I’ve always had a problem with that term. This term is the one often used by ultra-Orthodox Jews in describing themselves. And its frame of reference is almost always used in a Mussar context. It is a Hashkafic statement. They use it to communicate something special about themselves, that makes them separate and apart form the rest of Orthodox Jewry. Separatism requires a uniformity of difference so as to be able to distinguish themselves both visually and behaviorally from the rest of Klal Yisroel.
Being a Torah Jew just doesn’t seem to be enough, I guess. One has to have that extra word ‘true’ attached to it. It is as if to say the only Torah way is our Torah way. Only that is Torah true. But that is very strange indeed for a movement that claims it is pure Torah… and objects to all the “ands” in other Hashkafos: Torah and Mada, Torah and Derech Eretz, Torah and Chasidus. The fact is they now have a type of “and” too. One must now add the word true in order to be identified as a legitimate adherent of the Torah. But is the Torah any truer by adding that word? Is being a Torah Jew less Jewish than a Torah ‘true’ Jew?
The fact is that the term “Torah true” has no has any internal meaning. Saying Torah true adds nothing to Torah. Torah is by definition truth itself. So what is the point? Why identify by that term? What does it really mean?
I think the answer is clear. Its meaning is nothing more than a code word for a specific Hashkafa, one that makes the adherents of their very specific Hashkafa distinct from other Torah Jews. By calling oneself Torah true, one immediately identifies themselves as a member of their elite group… which is to them truer to Torah than anyone or anything else.
And with insularity as one of its primary features, it extricates them from the rest of the Torah world. It is as if they are telling us: Only our ways are the true Torah ways and every other observant Hashkafa is not quite as true as ours. Other Orthodox Hashkafos are “Krum” …not straight… but follow a somewhat deviant path to one degree or another. As Shael puts it: there is no Elu VElu… No Shivim Panim.
Being Torah true has an attitude that goes along with it. It is “The my way or the highway” attitude: “If you are not a member of our group… you may be a fine Jew… but you are not Torah true, and ‘Nisht Fun Unzera’ …not one of us! And we therefore separate ourselves from you so as to keep our ways pristine and pure. You… the rest of observant Jewry… mix your Judaism with ideas foreign to Torah.”
It galls me when I think about it. By this definition, I, who am observant of the Mitzvos of the Torah… am not a Torah true Jew. Nor is anyone on the RCA or in Yeshiva University. Or anyone who does not completely tow the ultra-Orthodox party line.
That’s too bad, really. Because cutting oneself off so completely from the rest of the Orthodox Jewry, let alone non-Orthodox Jewry is anathematic to Torah itself. By Torah mandate every Jew is responsible for the spiritual welfare of every other. And the insularity that is a virtual trademark of ultra-Orthodoxy makes this almost impossible to accomplish to any segment of Jewry other than their own.
Another important mandate of Torah Judaism they miss out on is that of being a light unto the nations. If they are so insulated from the rest of the world, how much of a light can they be? Shielding themselves from the outside world also shields their light from shining out. They will of course deny that. They will say that their pure and pristine ways will be noted somehow by the world at large and that will enlighten the world. But they are mistaken. Insularity is a two way street. By insulating themselves from the rest of the world they their light has a hard time shining through.
But that said I would not go so far as my friend Shael does. He wants to define Torah Judaism as an attitude. But that is an inaccurate definition of Torah Judaism in my view. Living according to some of the ideals in the Torah does not make a non-observant Jew a Torah Jew any more than it does when a Christian lives by those ideals. The Torah is not only about the ethical values of the Torah. To call oneself a Torah Jew one must do more than adhere to some of the values espoused by the Torah. One must not only pay attention to the Mitzvos Bein Adam L’Chavero... man and his fellow man. One must pay just as much attention to the Mitzvos Bein Adam L’Makom, those ritual laws designed specifically to serve God.
Reform Jews focus is on the ethics of Judaism, that is, those laws pertaining to ethical human interaction. But they leave as optional those laws pertaining to direct service to God. They therefore are not committed to observing all the Mitzvos of the Torah. Halacha, which is the expression of Torah observance… the ‘how to’ …is not binding according to the tenets of Reform Judaism.
And even though Conservative Jews have always claimed to follow Halacha, that… is no longer so clear. There are theologians amongst them who now dispute that. And certainly Reconstructionists whose views about God are heretical cannot be considered Torah Jews. It is not as my friend Shael says, about how serious one is about Torah. One must also be serious about following all of its commandments.
Just to be clear, I do not God forbid write any Jews out of Judaism. Every Jewish soul is just as authentic as mine or even as the biggest Gadol. No matter how much or how little of the Torah he or she observes. But to call them Torah Jews would not be a correct description of their status. In my view, for that, one has to be committed to full observance.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Administrative Note
I’m sorry to report that a commenter from England formally using the name ‘The Beatles’ is trying to destroy my blog. He is spewing his venom using the names of various commenters including mine. I ask that he be ignored. His writing style is very distinct, and not to difficult to discern. Please ignore those comments. This fellow is a Rasha Gamur trying pass himself off as righteous Jew. I will continue to delete his comments as I see them. He has also been using a shotgun approach by commenting on all recent posts, victimizing all the commenters whose names he’s stolen. I will continue to delete his comments as I see them.
There is no Teshuva for someone who does not even realize he is sinning. That is the case with him. By trying to disrupt this blog he is stifling legitimate discussions on important issues and denigrating innocent Jews in the process. But he doesn’t care. Likethose in Neturei Karta who hugged and kissed Iran’s Ahmadinejad, he thinks he is doing it all L’Shem Shamyim. I truly feel sorry for his wife and children, and I apologize for the inconvenience.
If anyone in England knows this fellow, please prevail upon him to stop. He is unwanted here and does much harm to his cause by being a Shakran who is now guilty of Geneivas Daas too. And by besmirching God fearing Jews he is not only not helping his cause it is an Aveira Bein Adam L’Chaveiro that he will very likely be impossible to do Teshuva for. Any Jew that he is responsible for chasing away from Torah observance will be on his head. And he will never even know who they are so he cannot even ask them for Mechila. I hope he comes to his senses soon, tires of spewing his venom here, and tries to do something positive with his life.
There is no Teshuva for someone who does not even realize he is sinning. That is the case with him. By trying to disrupt this blog he is stifling legitimate discussions on important issues and denigrating innocent Jews in the process. But he doesn’t care. Likethose in Neturei Karta who hugged and kissed Iran’s Ahmadinejad, he thinks he is doing it all L’Shem Shamyim. I truly feel sorry for his wife and children, and I apologize for the inconvenience.
If anyone in England knows this fellow, please prevail upon him to stop. He is unwanted here and does much harm to his cause by being a Shakran who is now guilty of Geneivas Daas too. And by besmirching God fearing Jews he is not only not helping his cause it is an Aveira Bein Adam L’Chaveiro that he will very likely be impossible to do Teshuva for. Any Jew that he is responsible for chasing away from Torah observance will be on his head. And he will never even know who they are so he cannot even ask them for Mechila. I hope he comes to his senses soon, tires of spewing his venom here, and tries to do something positive with his life.
A Moment of Truth
Thanks to Steve Brizel for pointing out this very informative article to me and providing a link .
Rabbi Nosson Scherman was recently interviewed by Rabbi Shmuel Goldin, an instructor at both Isaac Breuer College and Yeshiva University who also currently serves on the executive committee of the Rabbinical Council of America.
This article, more so than the interview in the Jewish Press, gives us insight into the mindset of one of the most influential men in the Torah world. To better understand what kind of influences are being brought to bear upon much of the Orthodox reading public by his mega successful publishing house, Mesorah Publications, I think it is vital to know what and how he thinks.
There are things upon which we both agree and disagree. But our observations are not that divergent. What stands out for me is the following.
He seems to agree with my position that the right wing… or Charedi…educational system as it currently stands is somewhat counter-productive. Learning full time for life he says is an excellent idea for some and not for others. For them he even calls it a horrible idea.
Yet when asked about the possibility of changing the paradigm from one of exclusively promoting full time learning for everyone instead of making it one of several possible tracks, which is my own remedy in part of the problem… his response sounds almost apologetic.
He in fact agrees with Rabbi Goldin that there should be other options available in the world of Charedi education. And that that those who are not cut out for learning full time for life end up feeling like failures. He even admits that every yeshiva recognizes that problem. So why not give those options? The Roshei Yeshiva are afraid of a brain drain. The fear that the best and brightest will opt for those other options.
How sad it is that this mentality prevails in our time. This generation which is one of the weakest in Torah Gadlus, nevertheless has the largest in number of people learning full time in Jewish history. Doesn’t that tell the rabbinic leaders that instead of contributing to a solution toward greatness in Torah, it is instead, contributing to the problem?
I wonder if Rabbi Scherman privately feels the same way.
Rabbi Nosson Scherman was recently interviewed by Rabbi Shmuel Goldin, an instructor at both Isaac Breuer College and Yeshiva University who also currently serves on the executive committee of the Rabbinical Council of America.
This article, more so than the interview in the Jewish Press, gives us insight into the mindset of one of the most influential men in the Torah world. To better understand what kind of influences are being brought to bear upon much of the Orthodox reading public by his mega successful publishing house, Mesorah Publications, I think it is vital to know what and how he thinks.
There are things upon which we both agree and disagree. But our observations are not that divergent. What stands out for me is the following.
He seems to agree with my position that the right wing… or Charedi…educational system as it currently stands is somewhat counter-productive. Learning full time for life he says is an excellent idea for some and not for others. For them he even calls it a horrible idea.
Yet when asked about the possibility of changing the paradigm from one of exclusively promoting full time learning for everyone instead of making it one of several possible tracks, which is my own remedy in part of the problem… his response sounds almost apologetic.
He in fact agrees with Rabbi Goldin that there should be other options available in the world of Charedi education. And that that those who are not cut out for learning full time for life end up feeling like failures. He even admits that every yeshiva recognizes that problem. So why not give those options? The Roshei Yeshiva are afraid of a brain drain. The fear that the best and brightest will opt for those other options.
How sad it is that this mentality prevails in our time. This generation which is one of the weakest in Torah Gadlus, nevertheless has the largest in number of people learning full time in Jewish history. Doesn’t that tell the rabbinic leaders that instead of contributing to a solution toward greatness in Torah, it is instead, contributing to the problem?
I wonder if Rabbi Scherman privately feels the same way.
The Lieberman Option
Islam is wining. That’s pretty much the long and the short of it. The Milchemes Mitzvah which they call Jihad is taking control of the Islamic word. They are getting new converts every day. And Islamism is what’s fueling the conflict in Lebanon. And Gaza. And Iraq. And it is clearly what’s driving Iran. And most importantly it is the primary reason for the hatred of Israel… and Jews… and Christians. We in the west have yet to feel the full consequences of the Jihad, although we had a taste of it on 9/11/01.
Why do I say Islam winning?... Let me count the ways.
Islamist Hezbollah, a surrogate of Iran, controls Lebanon.
The battle between Hamas and Fatah in Gaza is clearly being won by the Islamist Hamas…first by the ballot and now by the bullet. Hamas leaders and members are true and uncompromising believers in the tenet of world domination by Islam by any means necessary.
Iraq, while a mostly civil war type conflict can really be seen as more of a conflict between the more secular and the more religious Islamist. And the Islamists are winning there, because they have no fear. Dying for the cause is a prized achievement.
And the grand-daddy of them all is Iran. Thanks in large part to the grossly incompetent former President Jimmy Carter 27 years ago, Islamist adherents of Ayatollah Khomeini took over what used to be a very pro-western secular country. And it has remained in power raising an entire generation of Islamic fundamentalists. How sad it is when I recall how pro west it was prior to the Islamic revolution. It even had ambassadorial exchanges with Israel.
Iran is the real enemy here. They are the ones driving this entire conflict. They are the inspiration and the enablers of most of the terrorism taking place against the west. They invented the modern day Jihadist fighter…fighters that include car bombers and suicide bombers. They encourage it. They preach it as a virtue. They fund it. They train people in how to do it effectively. And now of course they are on the precipice of becoming a nuclear power.
Last Sunday, I watched an interview of Senator Joseph Lieberman. For the first time I finally heard a respected politician talk about a solution I’ve been advocating for a long time: Military action against Iran.
I’m not sure how the US would go about it. I am sure about the opposition to it by most of the rest of the world and even the US congress. But I am equally sure he is right about where the problem truly lies and he is at least beginning to address the real problem.
The real problem is Islam itself.
No matter how many so called peaceful Islamic types say that it Islam is a religion of peace… and that it is the fanatics who misinterpret and misrepresent Islam… and that it is they who are causing all the problems… and that they are but a small minority… it doesn’t matter. They can scream it all they want. The only Islam that matters is the one that is winning the Jihad.
So how do we win this war? Well first we have to understand that this is not a war against terrorism. Terror is just a tactic, not an enemy. The enemy is an idea: Islam.
How do you defeat an idea? This is one area that our political leaders have not faced realistically. They think that if we can establish a democratic bulwark in Iraq, everything will just fall into place. Iraq will become a shining example in the region of how wonderfully a democracy can work.
But that kind of thinking is why Iraq is in the mess that it’s in. You cannot win a war against an idea by killing, capturing, or even torturing a few of its adherents. You have to win a war of ideas by destroying the idea itself …which is truly impossible if you think about it.
So, what can we do if an idea cannot be destroyed? Well you don’t destroy it entirely. But depending on the idea, it can be dimished to the point where winning a war based on it becomes impossible. This is what happened in World War II. Nazi Germany was based on an idea too. It was the racist philosophy of Nazism. Their racial ideas were not entirely destroyed, but once they realized through the overwhelming force of the allied response that their ideas were not going to prevail in the battlefield, they surrendered. And Germany has now become an ally.
But that only works with rational people who value their own lives. Religious fervor adds a dimension that is virtually impossible to fight. The religious fanatic that is the Jihadist doesn’t care if he is losing, or that he will die. Death is a prize when warring for God. Innocent Islamic victims in a Jihad go straight to heaven. Innocent non-Islamic victims go straight to hell.
So how do we fight that? Well it helps if at least those fighting the war understand the enemy and their goals. And that is one reason the war in Iraq will never be won by conventional military means. The US army is the mightiest in the world by far, yet it has been impotent so far.
So long as the Islamist fighters have one man standing they will fight on and continually recruit more. And unless we are willing to commit genocide, a conventional war cannot destroy them. It is a logistical impossibility since they are invisible. We don’t know how many fanatic fighters there are or where they are, or even who they are. They hide in plain sight.
We do, however, know who the clerics are. We know who, what, and where they are. The only way we are going to win the war with Isalm is if we treat this entire word-wide conflict as a holy war. And the new generals in this war are the Islamist clerics. It has to be seen that way. World leaders, starting with the US have to stop tip-toeing around the political correctness of calling Islamist terrorists an aberration of Islam. They aren’t. They are an integral part of the belief system. Islamists are a faction that focuses on that element of Islam. They are almost Messianist in their approach. They view themselves as all powerful because they fear no one and nothing, least of all their own deaths.
So, Senator Lieberman’s suggestion is a good start. Iran, the spiritual guiding light for Islamism needs to be a prime focus. Iraq is at best a surrogate war. We are about four years late in looking at this war as a holy war, a Meilchemes Mitzvah, a Jihad. But late… does not mean too late.
It’s time for the world to buckle down and take care of business. A new strategy has to be developed to fight Islam… not terror. Once we do that, we will be on our way toward victory.
Why do I say Islam winning?... Let me count the ways.
Islamist Hezbollah, a surrogate of Iran, controls Lebanon.
The battle between Hamas and Fatah in Gaza is clearly being won by the Islamist Hamas…first by the ballot and now by the bullet. Hamas leaders and members are true and uncompromising believers in the tenet of world domination by Islam by any means necessary.
Iraq, while a mostly civil war type conflict can really be seen as more of a conflict between the more secular and the more religious Islamist. And the Islamists are winning there, because they have no fear. Dying for the cause is a prized achievement.
And the grand-daddy of them all is Iran. Thanks in large part to the grossly incompetent former President Jimmy Carter 27 years ago, Islamist adherents of Ayatollah Khomeini took over what used to be a very pro-western secular country. And it has remained in power raising an entire generation of Islamic fundamentalists. How sad it is when I recall how pro west it was prior to the Islamic revolution. It even had ambassadorial exchanges with Israel.
Iran is the real enemy here. They are the ones driving this entire conflict. They are the inspiration and the enablers of most of the terrorism taking place against the west. They invented the modern day Jihadist fighter…fighters that include car bombers and suicide bombers. They encourage it. They preach it as a virtue. They fund it. They train people in how to do it effectively. And now of course they are on the precipice of becoming a nuclear power.
Last Sunday, I watched an interview of Senator Joseph Lieberman. For the first time I finally heard a respected politician talk about a solution I’ve been advocating for a long time: Military action against Iran.
I’m not sure how the US would go about it. I am sure about the opposition to it by most of the rest of the world and even the US congress. But I am equally sure he is right about where the problem truly lies and he is at least beginning to address the real problem.
The real problem is Islam itself.
No matter how many so called peaceful Islamic types say that it Islam is a religion of peace… and that it is the fanatics who misinterpret and misrepresent Islam… and that it is they who are causing all the problems… and that they are but a small minority… it doesn’t matter. They can scream it all they want. The only Islam that matters is the one that is winning the Jihad.
So how do we win this war? Well first we have to understand that this is not a war against terrorism. Terror is just a tactic, not an enemy. The enemy is an idea: Islam.
How do you defeat an idea? This is one area that our political leaders have not faced realistically. They think that if we can establish a democratic bulwark in Iraq, everything will just fall into place. Iraq will become a shining example in the region of how wonderfully a democracy can work.
But that kind of thinking is why Iraq is in the mess that it’s in. You cannot win a war against an idea by killing, capturing, or even torturing a few of its adherents. You have to win a war of ideas by destroying the idea itself …which is truly impossible if you think about it.
So, what can we do if an idea cannot be destroyed? Well you don’t destroy it entirely. But depending on the idea, it can be dimished to the point where winning a war based on it becomes impossible. This is what happened in World War II. Nazi Germany was based on an idea too. It was the racist philosophy of Nazism. Their racial ideas were not entirely destroyed, but once they realized through the overwhelming force of the allied response that their ideas were not going to prevail in the battlefield, they surrendered. And Germany has now become an ally.
But that only works with rational people who value their own lives. Religious fervor adds a dimension that is virtually impossible to fight. The religious fanatic that is the Jihadist doesn’t care if he is losing, or that he will die. Death is a prize when warring for God. Innocent Islamic victims in a Jihad go straight to heaven. Innocent non-Islamic victims go straight to hell.
So how do we fight that? Well it helps if at least those fighting the war understand the enemy and their goals. And that is one reason the war in Iraq will never be won by conventional military means. The US army is the mightiest in the world by far, yet it has been impotent so far.
So long as the Islamist fighters have one man standing they will fight on and continually recruit more. And unless we are willing to commit genocide, a conventional war cannot destroy them. It is a logistical impossibility since they are invisible. We don’t know how many fanatic fighters there are or where they are, or even who they are. They hide in plain sight.
We do, however, know who the clerics are. We know who, what, and where they are. The only way we are going to win the war with Isalm is if we treat this entire word-wide conflict as a holy war. And the new generals in this war are the Islamist clerics. It has to be seen that way. World leaders, starting with the US have to stop tip-toeing around the political correctness of calling Islamist terrorists an aberration of Islam. They aren’t. They are an integral part of the belief system. Islamists are a faction that focuses on that element of Islam. They are almost Messianist in their approach. They view themselves as all powerful because they fear no one and nothing, least of all their own deaths.
So, Senator Lieberman’s suggestion is a good start. Iran, the spiritual guiding light for Islamism needs to be a prime focus. Iraq is at best a surrogate war. We are about four years late in looking at this war as a holy war, a Meilchemes Mitzvah, a Jihad. But late… does not mean too late.
It’s time for the world to buckle down and take care of business. A new strategy has to be developed to fight Islam… not terror. Once we do that, we will be on our way toward victory.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Daas Torah and Common Sense
How important is it to listen to the words of our Gedloim? This has been an issue here for a long time. I’ve discussed Daas Torah before. But I want to make note of a of the fact that when it comes to considering the views of those who are looked at as representing Daas Torah …The wisdom of the Torah… there is a very important principle which should not be over-looked: Common sense.
This week’s Parsha of Korach seems to argue the opposite. Korach claimed that common sense tells us a Halacha about Tzitizis. And he tried to appeal to the masses based on his common sense of this Halacha. His approach was indeed logical. But it was wrong. Halacha is not always contingent on common sense. Sometimes the opposite is true. Common sense tells you one thing and Halacha tells you the opposite.
But does this mean we may never apply common sense when trying to determine Halacha? Of course it doesn’t. Often it is exactly the right formula to determine Halacha.
So when we hear a Psak Halacha that does not make sense to us, we have an obligation to ask questions about it. We do not just assume that our individual brains are too feeble to understand the Halacha and thereby just follow it blindly. This of course doesn’t mean we automatically violate it either. But it does mean that we should not automatically believe in nonsense.
And that is something to think about whenever we hear pronouncements in the name of Gedolim that perplex us. We have an obligation to learn everything we can about it and make sure that it isn’t a misrepresentation or an exaggeration of what the Halacha really is. Too often, people take such pronouncements out of context... or a Psak can be issued on incomplete information, or may apply only in a specific situation. No one should fear knowledge. That is what learning is all about.
And no one makes this point better than does Rav Hershel Shachter.
This week’s Parsha of Korach seems to argue the opposite. Korach claimed that common sense tells us a Halacha about Tzitizis. And he tried to appeal to the masses based on his common sense of this Halacha. His approach was indeed logical. But it was wrong. Halacha is not always contingent on common sense. Sometimes the opposite is true. Common sense tells you one thing and Halacha tells you the opposite.
But does this mean we may never apply common sense when trying to determine Halacha? Of course it doesn’t. Often it is exactly the right formula to determine Halacha.
So when we hear a Psak Halacha that does not make sense to us, we have an obligation to ask questions about it. We do not just assume that our individual brains are too feeble to understand the Halacha and thereby just follow it blindly. This of course doesn’t mean we automatically violate it either. But it does mean that we should not automatically believe in nonsense.
And that is something to think about whenever we hear pronouncements in the name of Gedolim that perplex us. We have an obligation to learn everything we can about it and make sure that it isn’t a misrepresentation or an exaggeration of what the Halacha really is. Too often, people take such pronouncements out of context... or a Psak can be issued on incomplete information, or may apply only in a specific situation. No one should fear knowledge. That is what learning is all about.
And no one makes this point better than does Rav Hershel Shachter.
Hat’s Off to the Chazon Ish
Do those who support the protest rally called for by Rabbi Tuvia Weiss, head of the Edah HaCharedis, believe that this would be approved by the Chazon Ish, if he were alive today?
“THE CHAZON ISH was, in fact, uncompromising with respect to anything touching upon Torah values. Yet the extremism or kana’us that he exemplified bears little resemblance to what often passes for kana’us in our world today, and provides no support for our self-styled zealots.”
In fact the Edah HaCharedis could use a lesson in Kannaus here. Because their attitude is more along the lines of the “Jews from before Mattan Torah”. Apparently what the Chazon Ish meant by this phrase is that their zeal was not shaped by the ways of the Torah.
Of course I am not saying that the Edah views are not shaped by the Torah. Of course they are. But are they being Roeh Es HaNolad... Do they not see the potential folly? Advocating a rally of this magnitude and saying it will shake the foundations could easily deteriorate into violence and cause danger to life, limb, and property. And this will surely have an opposite effect of that which is intended.
No doubt, if the Chazon Ish were alive today, he would oppose it. And it makes me wonder about the view of the Chazan Ish’s Talmidim, his spiritual heirs of today who live and learn in Bnei Brak. Do they support the call by the Edah for a massive protest? Is the rest of the Yeshivishe Torah world in synch with this? Ponevezh? Mir? Brisk?
We know that Gererr Chasidim aren’t. But I doubt that one can divide the camps along Chasidic/ Misnagdic lines. One thing seems certain. Rabbi Jonathan Rosenblum, who is one of the most erudite and accomplished spokesman for Agudah, and runs Agudah’s “Am Echad” program, doesn’t seem to think the Chazan Ish would support it either. He has not come out specifically with a condemnation of the Edah’s approach. But he surely implies it. My proverbial hat is off to him for his timely article.
“THE CHAZON ISH was, in fact, uncompromising with respect to anything touching upon Torah values. Yet the extremism or kana’us that he exemplified bears little resemblance to what often passes for kana’us in our world today, and provides no support for our self-styled zealots.”
In fact the Edah HaCharedis could use a lesson in Kannaus here. Because their attitude is more along the lines of the “Jews from before Mattan Torah”. Apparently what the Chazon Ish meant by this phrase is that their zeal was not shaped by the ways of the Torah.
Of course I am not saying that the Edah views are not shaped by the Torah. Of course they are. But are they being Roeh Es HaNolad... Do they not see the potential folly? Advocating a rally of this magnitude and saying it will shake the foundations could easily deteriorate into violence and cause danger to life, limb, and property. And this will surely have an opposite effect of that which is intended.
No doubt, if the Chazon Ish were alive today, he would oppose it. And it makes me wonder about the view of the Chazan Ish’s Talmidim, his spiritual heirs of today who live and learn in Bnei Brak. Do they support the call by the Edah for a massive protest? Is the rest of the Yeshivishe Torah world in synch with this? Ponevezh? Mir? Brisk?
We know that Gererr Chasidim aren’t. But I doubt that one can divide the camps along Chasidic/ Misnagdic lines. One thing seems certain. Rabbi Jonathan Rosenblum, who is one of the most erudite and accomplished spokesman for Agudah, and runs Agudah’s “Am Echad” program, doesn’t seem to think the Chazan Ish would support it either. He has not come out specifically with a condemnation of the Edah’s approach. But he surely implies it. My proverbial hat is off to him for his timely article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)