Bringing Ridicule upon Us in the Name of God

Photo credit - Reddit

There was an interesting blurb in last week’s Mishpacha about a Psak (Halachic decision) by Rav Elyashiv.

When candidate Barack Obama visited Israel in 2008, he wanted to visit the Kotel and asked that he be given access in the early morning hours so as to avoid the crowds. The Kotel Rabbi, R’ Shumel Rabinowitz, felt that bringing a US Presidential candidate, his entourage, and the attendant crush of media people would be disruptive to those who daven K’Vosekin – praying at sunrise. So he asked R’ Elyashiv whether he should accommodate his request.

R’ Elyashiv said that candidate Obama should absolutely be allowed to visit the Kotel at his convenience. Since (then) Senator Obama represented the United States - a Malchus Shel Chesed (‘kingdom of kindness’) – he was deserving of the utmost respect.

Would that all of Jewry have this attitude. Unfortunately there are some of us who have a ‘slightly’ different approach. While the not really the same thing, I can’t help contrasting this with what has to be the latest example of ‘Judaism made to look stupid’… all in the name of Torah observance.

There is a picture of a Charedi looking individual in flight wrapped up in a plastic bag. This picture has gone viral… as has a video* of some young people ridiculing it on some sort of TV program.

What people like this fellow have accomplished over the years is to create an atmosphere whereby their  extremism in the cause of Chumra has brought ridicule upon us.  The ‘Chumra’ of this generation is Tznius. I need not go into how far some of these extremes have taken us into the area of ridicule. Just to mention one example – the time where the Charedi mayor of Beitar Illit was reprimanded because he forgot to photoshop his wife out a picture of a group of people surrounding a snowman they built!

The young pundits on this program thought he covered himself up in a plastic bag because he wanted to avoid contact with the women on the plane. That reaction was no doubt generated by constant barrage of ‘Tznius extremism’ by extremist Charedim brought to public attention by the media. Not an unreasonable conclusion. But it was immediately made clear that that was not his motivation. He was a Kohen and sought to protect himself from Tumah –  spiritual contamination.

Although there are a few exceptions we no longer practice these laws. But Kohanim (those who descend from the priestly line of the first Kohen, the biblical Aaron) - do.  A Kohen must avoid any contact that would make him spiritually unclean. In most cases this means avoiding corpses. There are various ways that they go about this. The laws are very complex. One of those ways is by avoiding being in the same room with a corpse or passing over a grave site. Tumah rises straight up in the open air (it does not spread sideways) and fills up any enclosed area.

This fellow probably feared that there was a corpse on board. (That is occasionally the case as many people who wish to be buried in Israel after they die are transported as cargo on board commercial flights.) One of the ways a Kohen can be protected is by being in his own enclosure. That will prevent the Tumah from entering and contaminating him spiritually. My guess is that this was his goal.

In a vacuum I have no problem with him doing that. But on a commercial fight where normal people are on board, this can only bring ridicule upon our people.  It was not necessary for him to do that. There are better ways for a Kohen to avoid Tumah. Not being a Kohen myself, I am not the one to advise him. But I don’t think there is a single Kohen who has ever wrapped himself up in a plastic bag. And they all take flights. They find ways which are normal to avoid a problem that is specific to them.

Obviously this fellow didn’t care what people said about him. Frankly neither do I. But I do care what people say about the Jewish people.

When a Gadol says that we must honor a political leader in the US because he represents the United States, that is a Kiddush HaShem. When a Jew who appears to the world as the most religious among us act like a fool that is a Chilul HaShem.  That this fellow doesn’t realize what he has done with his foolishness – or worse, doesn’t care – is why I constantly criticize it when it happens.

I wish I didn’t have to. But unfortunately this kind of behavior seems to be on the increase.  Why is this so? I’ve said this before. The insularity in which they live breeds both ignorance of the outside world and contempt for it. In these circles non Jews are at best tolerated. But they are looked down upon. Or worse seen as anti Semites. The attitude I often hear them express about “Goyim” is that they hate us anyway so why bother being decent to them?! They hide their contempt when they seek public benefits. The condescension to non Jews is expressed only among themselves. Trouble is that it is not only wrong but only a ignoramus born of insularity would ever think that they can keep this attitude private.

So now once again, I am forced to disavow and protest that this fellow’s behavior very loudly. It has nothing to do with normative Jewish behavior. No matter what his motive was.

*Warning - images in this video may be offensive to some people.

The Sharansky Option

Women of the Wall - photo source: The Forward

Natan Sharansky has come up with a plan that he feels is a workable compromise between Charedim and heterodox movements. It will enable people to attend egalitarian prayer services (where men and women have equal stature in all ritual aspects of a Minyan) at the Kotel (the Western Wall), Israel’s holiest accessible site. I believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu supports it.

There has been a lot of controversy at the Kotel in recent times where some women have tried to buck traditional practices at the Kotel by holding unusual services there. The Women of the Wall (WoW) have tried to have a monthly women’s prayer service there that includes such traditional male modalities as wearing a Talis, and doing Kriyas HaTorah.

This has disturbed the Charedi world since it is such a wide departure from tradition - which has always dictated practices at the Kotel. They complained to the government. The Government responded with new rules about a woman wearing a Talis that has resulted in multiple arrests every Rosh Chodesh when WOW tires to hold its services at the main plaza. It happened again a few days ago.

I have in the past argued against this group because I felt that they were more about demanding women’s rights than they were about serving God in ways they choose to do so. There was no rule against their having any type of service they choose at a different location along the Kotel called “Robinson’s Arch”. But they have chosen to do their service at the main Kotel Plaza and thereby upset the traditional worshipers there who feel that at best they are a distraction.

That these women are sincere in their devotion to God is somewhat undermined by their insistence that they use an area used by traditionalists who have always done their prayer services quietly and individually without drawing any attention to themselves.

The argument by WoW and their supporters is that people should have the right to pray anywhere they choose along the main Kotel Plaza and they insist on doing so to make a point of that.

I have come around to the view that these women should be left alone. As long as they are not disruptive – who cares if they are wearing a Talis… or doing Kriyas HaTorah?!  At the same time if conflict can be avoided – it should be. If WoW  could be given a place that is both free and similar in size to the main Kotel Plaza, I think they should take it and avoid any future  conflict.

Sharansky’s proposal addresses another women’s issue - egalitarian Minyan. This is not WoW. There are no men in their group. Technically I suppose there are no Halachic issues with WoW – other than breaking traditional non Halachic taboos.

But feminism has given rise to egalitarianism in heterodox movements. In order to preserve the peace and accommodate both Charedim and those who seek egalitarian Minyanim – he has proposed that Robinson’s Arch (which is out of view from the main Kotel plaza) be expanded so that its space equal that of the main Kotel Plaza… and that there be free access to it in the future. This would in essence be the actual realization of separate but equal rights for Heterodox movements.

Just to be clear about mixed setting for prayer at the Kotel… I don’t think this is an issue. The only place where there is a requirement to separate the sexes via a Mechitza (partition) is where there is Kedushas Beis HaKenneses. That means that only in a Shul does a woman’s presence interfere with the Minyan. Outside of a Shul women may be present… as is the case at weddings or banquets in hotels where there are ad hoc Minyanim for Mincha and Maariv all the time. Women are present and in view of the men. They are not separated by any partition.

The question about whether the Kotel serves as a Shul has been answered by history. Archival photos show that in pre-state days going back to the 19^th century  - men and women were not separated when they came to pray at the Kotel. I do not therefore believe that the Kotel area can be classified as having Kedushas Beis HaKeneses.

But separating the sexes has long ago become the practice at the Kotel. There is now a Mechitza there. This is how the holiest site in Israel is treated now. I suppose that it is better that way since during busy times like Birchas Kohanim on Yomim Tovim - it can be pretty crowded and having men and women squeeze together at the Kotel is not the best way to Daven. But in my view it is not Halachicly necessary to separate the sexes for purposes of prayer at the Kotel.

And yet, in theory I oppose an egalitarian Minyan at the Kotel. Not because there is anything wrong with men and women Davening in the same place. But because it makes a religious ritual out of it. To put the stamp of religion on the practices which take place in egalitarian Minyanim that are against Halacha (e.g. including women in the count for a Minyan) cannot be anything that a Halachic Jew can agree with. To do so at Judaism’s holiest site just adds ‘insult to injury’. Also, giving heterodoxy any kind of imprimatur by the government lends legitimacy to them which I certainly do not support.

That said I am also a seeker of peace. Opening up Robison’s Arch for egalitarian purposes will help solve the growing conflict between Orthodox Jews and Heterodox Jews. I would therefore not physically protest Israel’s secular government for establishing it. Egalitarian Minyanim at Robinson’s Arch would not disrupt the people who choose to worship in traditional non egalitarian ways at the main Kotel plaza. Each group would have their own separate but equal access to Judaism’s holiest site.

What about standing up for my beliefs? I empathize somewhat with Rabbi Avi Shafran’s take. And like him I still oppose what they do and will continue to say so (as I just have). At the same time public protests at the site would only generate more enmity and I oppose that (…not that R’ Avi has suggested that it should be publicly protested). That is not good for anyone. I will instead leave it for Moshiach’s times to sort it all out. Until then I think it is to the benefit of all to try and have peace among ourselves and not fight un-winnable internal wars.

WoW would hopefully also take advantage of this new site for their own purposes… and Shalom Al Yisroel… we can have peace in our time (at least among ourselves – at least on this issue). Unfortunately there are other problems unrelated to interdenominational differences that may scuttle the deal anyway. Like opposition from the Waqf -- the Muslim body that controls the Temple Mount. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens.

Obligations, Rights, and Culture

The key to Jewish continuity is the subject of Gil’s post today. He excerpts British Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks’ book on the subject - who posits that the key is not culture but duty.

I think that’s right. In fact one of Rav Soloveitchik’s most oft quoted statements on the subject is the Judaism is a religion of obligations (duties) not rights. This is what Halacha is.

The common feature of these two statements is that it is duty and not some other value whether legitimate or not – that determines Judaism.

If I recall correctly - the Rav’s statement was made in response to the issue of feminism (what used to be called women’s rights issues). 

Feminism is a legitimate issue. Women should be given the same rights as men. But when it comes to the values of Judaism rights take a back seat to obligation. Obligation is what counts. Rights can only be exercised in that context. If Judaism forbids a practice, no one has a right to permit it. Not for themselves. Not for others. No matter how unfair it might seem. The same thing is true for culture. No matter how positive or attractive culture is, that too takes a back seat to obligation.

It is clear to me that if there is no obligation, there is no Judaism.  Someone who strongly identifies as a Jew culturally but does not obligate himself to any Mitzvah requirement cannot seriously perpetuate that version of Judaism.  Jewish humor, Jewish food, Jewish music, Yiddish theater, or even the Yiddish language are all obviously Jewish things.  But does eating gefilte fish, make one a Jew?

The Reform Movement would have you believe that. They say that if one lives like a Jew, then he is a Jew, regardless of whether he is observant.  Not that they consider doing Mitzvos unimportant. But they are only important culturally and not better or worse than Yiddish theater for example. So that Yiddish theater and gefilte fish are the same as eating Matzah on Pesach.

In theory one can just do all non Mitzvah related Jewish cultural activity and be a Jew in good standing in Reform Judaism.  This was also the ideal of the founding fathers of secular Zionism. Halacha was not defining. It was the culture that mattered. To the extent that rituals played any part was to the extent that they perpetuated the culture. To someone like Prime Minister Ben Gurion - the Torah learned in a Yeshiva was important only to the extent that it perpetuated Jewish culture. He had no personal use for Halacha.

If that is the definition of Judaism, then there is no Judaism.  It is merely faddism. Once the fad changes so too does the definition. The Jewish culture of a thousand years ago that is not based in Halacha will hardly resemble the Jewish culture of today. In order for a religion to maintain its longevity the way Judiasm has, there has to be a system of absolutes that are immutable over time and are a continual part of our lives. In Judaism, those absolutes are obligations given to us by the Torah. They are called Halacha.

At the end of the day, culture has little to do with how we define ourselves. To the extent that it has anything at all to do with it – is to the extent that our religious practices have become part of our culture. The reverse is obviously untrue. Culture does not determine Halacha. Nor do rights.

Heterodoxy seems to put a far greater emphasis on non obligatory things like rights and culture. When they conflict with obligation - rights and culture wins. This has given rise to 20^th and 21^st century innovations by Heterodoxy that have changed the face of Judaism in unprecedented ways.  

But rights based activism is challenging Halacha even in some Orthodox circles. The only difference between left wing Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy is that the former still recognizes the primacy of obligations over culture or human rights. But still - the Halachic envelope is pushed as far as it can be. It is almost as if they are saying that Halachic obligations are an impediment to human rights and our ability to enjoy the culture! But… let us hold our collective noses and do what we must while pushing that envelope as far as we can.

That’s why we are seeing some very strange innovations in some parts of the Orthodox world. But you can’t turn a camel into a horse no matter how much you try. Let’s take Women’s Teffilah Groups as an example. I am not putting them down  - but if you want egalitarian Minyanim – Women’s Teffilah Groups don’t even come close. 

In my view, this attitude is wrong. We need to have a far more positive view of our obligations to God and not see them as impediments to our rights or our ability to participate in the cuture. We need to re-prioritize what we see as important in our lives. Halacha should be number one. Because that is the true key to our continuity. 

The Outreach Revolution

Dr. Jack Werthheimer

I think I’ve said this before – or something like it. Jack Wertheimer is one of my favorite Conservative Jews.  A recent article in Commentary Magazine could not be more positive about Orthodox outreach. In fact I think he is even more supportive of it than many Orthodox Jews.

Why would a prominent Conservative Jew be so supportive of Orthodox Kiruv? I suppose that he believes in the values of Torah and Mitzvos.  Despite popular notions to the contrary, Conservative Judaism is not opposed to doing Mitzvos. They actually support it. At least ‘on paper’.  How they define Mitzvah observance is where the problem lies. Another problem with Conservative Mitzvah observance are the percentages of those who actually observe...

My guess is that the percentage of Conservative Jews who observe Shabbos in any meaningful Halachic sense  – is very small. I believe that Professor Wertheimer is a part of that minority.

Theological differences exist too. But those problematic views are not mandated… and thus surmountable in an individual. That they are tolerated by the movement is beyond the scope of this essay.

Professor Wertheimer has done an excellent job of studying and analyzing Orthodox  Kiruv - in virtually all of its incarnations. He discusses its history, financing, appeal, and examines why it flourishes. He credits the Lubavitcher Rebbe for starting this revolution. And he correctly notes that many non Chabad Kiruv workers have learned from Chabad.

From Chabad; to Aish HaTorah; to Torah U’Mesorah; to community Kollelim; to Modern Orthodox Kiruv... he lauds it all. He even concludes that Orthodoxy underestimates its own success. Success that he views with a very positive eye.

He also notes the friction created  between Conservative rabbis who lead synagogues and Kiruv workers. The claim is that Chabad (for example) will set up shop and undermine the Conservative Shul business structure by offering smaller friendlier Shuls with little or no synagogue dues. They also offer to provide Bar and Bat Mitzvah ceremonies without any minimum Shul religious class attendance requirement (typically 3 years). Bar and Bat Mitzvah celebrations are a drawing card for membership. True to form, it seems that Professor Wertheimer has no problem with Chabad doing that.

The realities of 21^st century life in America have caused lofty Kiruv goals of bringing Jews to full observance to be lowered.  One of those realities is the massive attrition of Jews from the Conservative movement into secular lifestyles. The pool of Jewish Kiruv targets from there has been diminished. Conservative Jews tended to give their children at least a minimal Jewish identity making them more receptive to Kiruv. Those who have left it to become completely secular makes it much harder for them to be attracted to an observant lifestyle. I agree with him.

That the expectations have been lowered and that the Lubavitch model of linear success is increasingly becoming the model for non Lubavitch Kiruv.  Any increase at all in their level of commitment is now viewed a success. As such Professor Wertheimer contends that Orthodox Kiruv is having far more impact on American Jewry than anyone might imagine. Those who have come into contact with Orthodox outreach programs but do not become Orthdodox themselves take that knowledge and impart it to other non Orthodox Jew is their Shuls. These Jews might never come into contact with Orthodox outreach. Thus there is a sort of multiplier effect.

Proferssor Wertheimer has the  highest praise for Chabad. They seem to be the most successful and the most organized. For example he points out their JLI program:

Of particular note is the Jewish Learning Institute (JLI), by far the largest internationally coordinated adult-education program on Jewish topics, offering the same set of courses at hundreds of Chabad locations around the world, all on the same schedule. This means that Jews who are traveling can follow the same course from session to session, even if they find themselves in a different city each week. In the fall of 2012, nearly 14,000 American Jews were enrolled in JLI courses, and overall close to 26,000 participated in Chabad’s teen- and adult-education programs.

The Chabad network is striving to create a seamless transition, so that young people who attended its camps or schools will gravitate to a Chabad campus center when they arrive at college and later, as adults, will join Chabad synagogue centers. No other Jewish movement offers this kind of cradle-to-grave set of services. The participants in these programs, needless to say, range in their Jewish commitments, but with the exception of a small minority, all are drawn from the ranks of the non-Orthodox.

But he also notes the explosion of non Chabad Kiruv organziations as well – including the far more insular world of Charedim.  There are about 50 or so Community Kollelim that do outreach. My only real quibble with Professor Wertheimer is that these Kollelim are really more about in-reach than outreach (although they do outreach too). They tend to reach the already observant world and ‘raise the level of observance and Limud HaTorah’. There are drawbacks to this too which I have discussed in the past but are also beyond the scope of this essay.

Professor Wertheimer does note that there are problems as in the ‘pushback” by Conservative rabbis who see Chabad (for example) poaching their memebrs. Ironically the most critical of it are the Orthodox themselves. Among them Rabbi Ilan Feldman who discussed the issue in Klal Perspectives (I posted about it a while ago. It generated 175 comments!):

“Frum communities as cultures are simply not conducive to outreach,” he believes, because those communities have a defensive perspective and don’t welcome Jewish seekers who are not yet planted in the Orthodox life. Put differently, outreach workers of necessity develop a far more empathic understanding of the non-Orthodox population than do other sectors of the Orthodox world.

There is much more in his article. It is a very worthwhile read. I highly recommend it.

My hat is off to Professor Wertheimer. It almost sounds like he would like to see a merger of all movements into one that will truly be guided by Halacha… and that he is willing to concede the process to Orthodox outreach. I wonder how the hierarchy in his own movement feels about an essay like this. Or about him.

What are the implications of all this for Orthodox Jews? Should we become more directly involved with Hetrodox rabbis? Chabad already is.They have no problem appearing on the same platform with Conservative rabbis. But most of the Orthodox leadership has always rejected that – claiming that it would amount to giving them legitimacy. I agree that we should not do anything that would do that.

But where do we draw the line? If the goal is making Jews more observant there ought to be some leeway in this regard. Our battles with the Conservative movement are over. They no longer pose a threat to Orthodoxy. Now that the Conservative movement is shrinking all on their own, we need to re-think this issue.  Without getting into specifics (which I am not at liberty to say) I detect that this is already beginning to happen quietly with tacit approval even from the right. And that is a good thing.

Making Lemonade Out of a Cardozo Lemon

Although I actually voted for him (...against Ford. I voted against him - for Reagan the second time) one of the worst Presidents of my lifetime has to be Jimmy Carter. Some of the damage he did to this country during his four year tenure is still being felt. Not the least of which is his impact on the rise of Islamism and the terror associated with it. I blame him for the fall of the Shah and the rise of the current Iran. It is not all that hard to draw a line between Iran’s export of terrorism to the world and the events of 9/11.

In fact world peace is currently being threatened by the Iran created during Carter’s tenure. They are led by a fanatic Islamist Cleric (Khameni) and his puppet, Ahmadinejad… no prize himself! There is little doubt among the civilized (and even not so civilized) nations of the world about Ahmadinijad’s rush to create nuclear weapons… and his promise to annihilate the Jewish people while wiping Israel off the map.

That was not Carter’s only problem. He presided over one of America’s most inflationary periods in modern times. It was double digit! Gas prices began to sky-rocket. There were gas shortages and long lines at the pump. The government even started talking about rationing gas! I do not recall much of anything that was positive about the Carter Presidency… except for one thing. More about that later.

Since he left office his anti Israel rhetoric has increased.  If I am not mistaken it was Carter that first called Israel an Apartheid state. It was in the title of one of his books, “Peace, Not Apartheid”. Israel’s enemies have clearly adopted this description of Israel and use it every chance they get.

I don’t know if Carter is just badly misguided or just a good old fashioned anti Semite. My guess is that he is just badly misguided. But his rhetoric sounds as bad as if he were an anti Semite.  His ‘blame Israel first’ mentality is right out of the anti-Israel playbook. Since he left office I have not heard him ever say anything positive about the Jewish state. The Arabs could not have a better spokesman for their cause than Jimmy Carter if they tried.

What makes this insideous is that he never says anything directly anti-Semitic.  He tries to come off as someone seeking peace in the Middle East. That he blames Israel entirely for the lack of progress clearly shows his bias. Even if I were to concede that Israel shares some blame here it is clear that Palestinians share some blame too. In my view – most of it. But for  Carter – it’s all Israel’s fault.

Which brings me to the latest controversy about him. Tomorrow, Wednesday, April 10, 2013, The Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution will honor Jimmy Carter with its International Advocate for Peace Award.

This organization is some sort of official student project of YU’s Cardozo Law School. And they are getting considerable and deserved flak for it. Yeshiva University President Richard Joel  has distanced the school from this event saying that:

"President Carter’s presence at Cardozo in no way represents a university position on his views, nor does it indicate the slightest change in our steadfastly pro-Israel stance."

That said, Carter did one thing in during his tenure as President that no other President before or after has done. He secured a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, up to that point the largest most militant anti Israel country in the Arab world. Without Egypt - no Arab country could go to war with Israel. That happened over 30 years ago. And with all the turmoil now going on in the Arab world, that peace treaty still exists. As do embassies and ambassadors in both countries.

Any supporter of Israel must concede this, no matter how much they hate Carter for the evil he has done since.

I will never forget that moment in 1979. Jimmy Carter, Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat actually looked like good friends at that moment in time – all saying very nice things about each other.  Begin put on his Kipa and recited Tehilim on the occasion… and praised Carter as a ‘fighter for peace!’ 

He was. He spent endless hours getting those two leaders together at Camp David. He went to Israel to speak to Israeli Kenesset. The first time any President had done so. He was relentless in his pursuit for peace and spared no effort to get that done – in ways like no other President has – before or since.

What a glorious day that was. The world had so much hope for the future then. It seemed like peace between the Arabs and Israel would finally happen. And it was to Carter that credit for this was due.

But as we all know by now peace is as illusive there as ever. Carter has gone from being a hero to being one of the vilest American critics of Israel in my lifetime.

I am sure that this award is for what Carter did then. Had he been given that award then, I would have applauded it. He deserved it then. But now after over 30 years of continuous venomous attacks against Israel since that glorious day... Carter has forfeited his claim to be a peace-maker in that region. Although he may believe in some warped way that this is exactly what he is trying to do!

There has been an attempt by Cardozo alumni to stop this event from taking place. But I agree with Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who has been one of Carter’s strongest critics. He said that he can’t imagine a worse person being honored for conflict resolution but thinks the event should go on as planned.  From the Algemiener: 

“Carter during his presidency sat idly by while 2 million Cambodians were killed by Pol Pot. He has been bought and paid for by Saudi Extremists. His Carter Center stopped investigating human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia when he received payment from important and wealthy Saudi businessmen,” Dershowitz said. “He has used the word apartheid to describe Israel but he never used the word in reference to Saudi Arabia which practices gender apartheid, religious apartheid, sexual preference apartheid.”

Dershowitz thinks that Carter’s presence on campus this week should be used as a positive. Students should attend the ceremony “and in a dignified and respectful way show contempt for Jimmy Carter,” he said. “Students should know who they’re honoring. The response to bad speech is good speech. You don’t cancel the event you use it as an educational opportunity to teach people about the evil things that Jimmy Carter has done.”
 

The Making of Rav Nosson Tzvi Finkel

Although I haven’t read any of the biographies that have been written about Rav Nosson Tzvi Finkel, I happened to pick up the ArtScroll bio this past Shabbos and skimmed through it. I noticed something remarkable. Rav Nosson Tzvi recognized that his experiences as a young man growing up in Chicago made him who he was.

I’m not saying that his background here was the only thing that made him great. Obviously there was a lot more that went into the making of this Gadol than just his background. The stories told about him are legendary. We all know about the way he ran Yeshivas Mir – growing it into the largest Yeshiva in the world.

We know about his Hasmada (diligence) in learning Torah. We know about the closeness he felt towards his students in the Mir. And the enthusiasm he had in building not only the huge attendance but the bricks and mortar to house them.

And we especially all know about the Parkinson’s disease that plagued him until his death. The disease he suffered was not curable but... it was treatable with medication. But when he was told that it might slow down his mind, he refused to take it – preferring to struggle with the symptoms rather than allowing anything to interfere with his mind.

By the time of his unexpected and sudden death he was recognized world-wide as a Gadol B’Yisroel - From the Charedi right to the Modern Orthodox left.

One often reads in various biographies written by the right that if one of their Gedolim did not come directly from their Charedi midst, they would either ignore that, or say something like, “Despite his background he became the great and heroic figure he was.” Some call a biography with selective editing to conform to preconceived notions be, Hagiographies. They simply omit the parts of the bio that do not conform to their Hashkafos.

When ArtScroll publisher R’Nosson Scherman was once asked why he omitted what Charedim consider unflattering historical facts about his biographical subjects he answered something to the effect that in Judaism - history is not about regurgitating facts ‘willy-nilly’. It is about inspiring the reader about the greatness of those people.

What Charedim must mean by saying that is that they do not want to imply that there is any other way to become a Gadol than the Charedi way. In the rare instances where they can’t hide it, they explain it away with the word ‘despite’. Meaning that don’t you dare try and raise your children that way because you are not the Gadol R’ (fill in the blank) was. He overcame it, you might not, and who knows… you might even go off the Derech!

I do not call that inspiring. I call it propaganda and misleading. Thankfully Rav Nosson Tzvi Finkel’s legacy would not allow for such an omission. One of the things he is famous for saying, both privately and publicly is that he excelled in his role as a Rosh Yeshiva of the Mir because of his childhood, not despite it! There was very little Artscroll could do to scrub that out of its bio of him. So they published it in the introduction to chapter 12 -  his youth in Chicago.

So what was his youth like? He went to a coed Orthodox Jewish high school. And he lived a more or less modern Orthodox lifestyle. That is what Chicago was like then. There was no Agudah then. Telshe had just begun. Mizrachi (Religious Zionism) ruled the city. If you were religious in those days, you very likely were a member of Mizrachi. I don’t know if R’ Nosson Tzvi went to Camp Moshava (a coed Mizrachi camp) but it wouldn’t surprise me. Just about everyone who went to a summer camp in those days went to Moshava.

As R’ Avraham Chaim Levine said in his Hespid for him. R’ Nosson Tzvi was a typical American kid. A good kid, to be sure - but American no less.  I don’t know if you could say he was raised modern Orthodox. But the fact that he was sent to a coed high school even though HTC had been around since the 1920s seems to indicate that this is how he was raised. He must have interacted with the girls in his class just serving on the student council.

And yet he said that his childhood made him who he was. I’m sure that some will laugh at this and say that this is not what he meant. But to the best of my knowledge he never qualified his statement.

Of course he didn’t raise his own children that way.  I suppose that would have been impossible as the Rosh Yeshiva of the Mir. Nor do I think sending a teenager to a coed high school is a good idea. I don’t think it is. But it was certainly a good idea in R’Nosson’s case.

I don’t think his children will have the same advantages he did as Rosh Yeshiva… Nor will their character develop in the same way.This does not mean to say that his children aren’t great people. I’m sure they are in their own way. But in my humble opinion, they will not be as great as their father because they will not have had his background… the background that R’ Nosson Tzvi attributes his success to.

R’ Nosson Tzvi is not alone in achieving greatness because of a background that is dissimilar to how he ultimately lived his life. There are many great people who had backgrounds like that. I personally believe that the broader the background the greater one can become. If one follows the straight and narrow of singular Hashkafa, he may become a great person too. But in many cases his greatness will be limited by the limited background experiences.

In my opinion, this means that if you want your children to excel in life, your should expose them to many Hashkafos – including those that are different than your own… and let them choose. Barring any unusual circumstances, you will not be sorry.

Dishonoring the Holocaust

Photo by United States Holocaust Museum

Today is Yom HaShoah – Holocaust Remembrance Day in Israel. My parents were both Holocaust survivors. If my father were alive today he would be 109 years old. My mother would be 99. My two brothers who were in their early teens when they were freed from their bunkers are today in their mid 80s.

The fact is that the survivor population is aging. Many survivors are now gone having lived to ripe old ages. Some have retained their faith and some have not. Most have renewed their lives; had families and seen much Nachas from the children, grandchildren and great grand-children. They have seen the birth of a Jewish State, a rebirth of Judaism, and an unprecedented growth of Torah observance. 

But the memory of what happened to them and their loved ones who did not survive stays with them. How can it not? We need to recognize that. This was once again pointed out by Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel who this morning was interviewed on CBS’s Sunday morning news show in a Holocaust memorial segment.

When he was asked to describe his experiences, he said it is not possible. He said that there were no words in any language that could describe the pure evil of what Nazi Germany did. The Nazis managed to perpetrate acts that were so evil that they were beyond human description. How, he asked, does one describe what it’s like to stand naked in a line on your way to be murdered  (along with everyone else in that line) in a gas chamber disguised as a shower?

I think he is right. Yes, there are genocides taking place in the word even to this day in some uncivilized societies.  But never like the systematic and scientific murder machine that was Nazi Germany. They saw murdering Jews as an ideal to be worshiped.  Hitler considered it his ‘sacred’ duty to annihilate the Jewish people.

I know that the religious right objects to observing a memorial to the Holocaust during the month of Nissan in the Jewish calendar. We are not allowed to eulogize the dead during this month. But this has never stopped even the most right wing rabbis from doing so at a funeral that takes place during Nissan. They simply say something like - 'Since we may not make Hespedim (eulogies) during Nissan I will just say a few words of praise about him.' – and then they dive right into an elaborate eulogy.

But I understand their objection to making an official day of remembrance during this month. I wish it were not on that day but at a date where eulogies are permitted.  But it isn’t.  Unfortunately their anti Zionist rhetoric has spilled into Holocaust Remembrance day even if they have not said anything specific publicly about it. A lot of disrespect of that day persists – some of it public. And that is a Chilul HaShem. An example of this can be found on Rafi’s blog.

It is also disrespectful to edit out women from photos from that era as was recently done. While I don’t approve of the practice of editing out pictures of Tzanua (modestly dressed) women under any circumstances, I understand that there are some members of the right wing – mostly Chasidim – who feel that any picture of a woman is not appropriate for men to look at.

Much as I disagree with them, they are entitled to their opinion. But there are times when it should be inappropriate even for them. Such as the time the former Secretary of State was photo-shopped out of a widely distributed ‘iconic’ picture of the President and members of his administration watching the “Navy Seal Team’ assassination of Bin Laden as it was happening.

However, when it comes to tampering with Holocaust images it should cross every line of human decency. There is no way to justify that. The picture in question has blurred out the images of women in a famous photo. How in heaven’s name can anyone claim that viewing the women in that picture is in any way inappropriate?! 

It is an insult to them memories of all 6 million Jews to decide that because a victim in such a photo is a woman it should be somehow blurred out of it. The reason for eliminating photos of women is so that there won’t even be the remotest chance of their eliciting an improper thought on the part of a man. In this photo? Are they kidding?!

This is what happens when you stop thinking and see everything in linear fashion. They say that a photo of a woman is always a possible source of indecent thoughts in men. No difference here. If they hadn’t shown this picture at all, that would have been one thing. But they obviously felt it was important enough to publish it as part of their message. But the message they sent was not about the horrors of the Holocaust. It was about how ridiculously far their views about showing a woman in a photo goes.

I truly do not understand how anyone can be an adherent of a movement that thinks like this, no matter how warm and fuzzy it otherwise is.

I am not one to make a religion of the Holocaust. Unfortunately there are some people who do. The Jewish people are not defined by the Holocaust. We are defined by God’s mandate for us as expressed through written and oral Torah law. Even so, God forbid that we minimize what happened by using it to promote various agendas (as have animal rights activists)… or dishonor survivors by ignoring Holocaust Remembrance Day entirely - in some cases even thumbing our noses at it… or by injecting the most extreme interpretation of modesty for women into it.

Here is my message to these people: Get a clue. The Holocaust was not about your agenda. It was not about Tznius. Do not dishonor the memory of the victims or mock the sensitivity of the survivors by using the Holocaust for your own purpose or injecting your unreasonable Tznius standards by photo-shopping women out of Holocaust pictures.

And to those who in other ways dishonor Holocaust Remembrance Day… Stop it! All you end up doing is dishonoring yourselves and bring mockery upon the Torah!

How to Lessen the Hatred

Jewish Home party leader Naftali Bennett - Photo credit: Times of Israel

Jonathan Rosenblum asks a question in the title of  from his most recent column in Mishpacha Magazine  (republished in  Cross Currents):  Can We Do Anything to Lessen the Hatred?

He is referring to a common theme I write about here - the conflict in Israel between Charedim and non Charedim. Please note that I did not say Charedim and Chilonim (secular Jews). That would be incorrect. Datim - or Religious Zionists - are increasingly being lumped (by Charedim) together with Chilonim. But they don’t need to be lumped together by Charedim. Datim are actually siding with Chilonim against Charedim on many issues.  As in the one referred to as ‘sharing the burden’ - meaning subjecting Charedim to the draft.

I recently wrote about this very issue. And I made note of the fact that thinking Charedi writers like Jonathan have expressed the same thoughts I have on this issue. He does so once again.

What surprised Jonathan is the level of hatred that actually exists – even among Religious Zionists. He gives the following example:

I sent a national religious colleague my piece in Mishpacha on the chareidi draft issue. I consider this woman to be Israel’s finest columnist. She always writes in a measured style, building her argument block by block, like the engineer she is by training. I was sure she would approve of my pragmatic argument for allowing processes well under way to develop.

I was wrong. Perhaps she would have agreed five years ago, she wrote, but now she was fed up and fully behind Bennett. Even a statement by Rav Aharon Leib Steinman, shlita, that army service represents a spiritual threat to chareidi recruits – an unassailable sociological fact in the current IDF environment – elicited paroxysms of anger. The evident frustration coming from someone normally so temperate and with a number of chareidi friends clued me in to the depth of feeling in the national religious world.

In light of all that Jonathan concedes that their attitude is based on how the Charedi world presents itself to the non Charedi world… and suggests that it ought to change. He gives examples  of successful interactions where preconceived notions about Charedim were changed. Like the following:

Over the last decade, the Karlin-Stolin community, led by the Rebbe himself, has hosted between 10-15,000 Jews in small groups for Shabbos meals. Last week, one of the Torah flyers distributed in national religious synagogues on leil Shabbos included a letter from a waiter at Shabbos gathering of 370 Karlin-Stolin chassidim. He wrote of the warmth and respect the chassidim showed him, of how they saved a seat for him at the table and invited him to join them in their dancing, of how they washed so neatly so as to minimize the clean-up.

“Shabbos ended and so did all my stereotypes,” the waiter wrote. So moved was the waiter that he called the Rebbe himself, who cried with joy and exclaimed, “That’s how I educated them for decades — in ahavas Yisrael and mutual respect.”

He ends up saying that this is an example worth emulating. I agree. This is indeed the kind of behavior to emulate. But this is not enough. It isn’t only about PR. It is about actually sharing the burden of military service.

But even if we were just to follow Jonathan’s advice about PR – it will not happen. It is one thing to writing abot this issue to a sympathetic public. But as long as the rabbinic leadership continues their harsh rhetoric - changing their approach along the lines of this one Chasidic group will not happen. No matter how many times Jonathan - or how many writers like him say so.

Jonathan is not a rabbinic leader and neither are any of the common sense Charedi writers like him (R’ Yitzchok Adlerstein comes to mind). I think that in their heart of hearts, most Charedim would agree with Jonathan.

But as long as rabbinic leaders live in the past and insist on calling the idea of ‘sharing the burden’ a Shas HaShmad - comparing even observant Jews like Naftali Bennett that advocate it to what Czarist Russia did over 100 years ago - there will be no change in that paradigm any time soon. Especially when an influential Charedi publisher like Rabbi Yitzchok Frankfurter salutes his Rebbe and asks how high up the flagpole he should climb! (...in honoring his directive to make sure  that the Charedi public understands that it is unequivocally a Shas HaShmad).

The trick is not for Charedi writers to recognize that the problem begins with themselves. I think they already do. The trick is to get their rabbinic leadership and their ‘soldiers’ to recognize it. Some would say that we have to start somewhere. I agree. But starting is not enough. Unless Jonathan and other Charedi writers can do that and at least change the rhetoric if not the paradigm, they are probably wasting their time. Lessening the hatred starts at the top.

Another Baby (Almost) Bites the Dust

There has been yet another case of neonatal herpes reported in the media. From the Forward:

Another Jewish newborn — the second in three months — has contracted neonatal herpes due to a controversial oral suctioning technique employed during ritual circumcision, New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene has reported.

I frankly do not completely understand why even Satmar Chasidim continue using the procedure of Metzitza B’Peh (MbP)*. Even more perplexing is their opposition to a New York City Health Department requirement to sign a consent form before allowing that procedure to be performed on their newborn immediately after the Milah.

I am not going to go through the reasoning as to why this procedure is not Halachicly mandated. Been there and done that more than once. Suffice it to say that suctioning blood from the circumcision wound was understood by Chazal to be a requirement for medical purposes.

That it is mandated in the Gemarah makes it a Halachic requirement. But it does not make it part of the actual Milah. The Talmud also does not say how that suctioning should be done. Nowhere does it say that it must be done directly by mouth.

But Chasidim for reasons not completely clear to me say suctioning the blood by mouth is an essential part of the circumcision itself – without which the circumcision would be invalid. I suppose they base it on a mimetic tradition. This is how they saw their ‘fathers’ do it. And this is how it’s always been done. It therefore must be a requirement.

What about babies that have contracted herpes? They reject completely any evidence that is has been transmitted by a Herpes infected Mohel. How, they ask, could it be that a Torah requirement would cause a danger to a child? The truth is not what we see but what ‘God says it is’. (Or as I prefer to characterize it - what they THINK God says).The babies who have contracted it post circumcision could not have possibly gotten it from an infected Mohel no matter what the evidence shows.

What is even more perplexing is how common MbP is even among non Chasidim. And the fact that Agudah wastes poltical capital fighting even the requirement that a consent form be signed. Their response has been that this is a church/state issue. And that tampering in any way with any part of Milah is an attack against Milah itself.

What’s worse is that in their zeal to protect this procedure they have compared government concerns about the health of the baby to anti Bris campaigns of ancient Greece – where a Bris was outlawed so as to Helenize their Jewish subjects taking them completely out of the Torah’s orbit.

There are many Mohalim here in Chicago. Some do MbP and some do not – using a sterile pipette for suction instead. Those who do MbP are the most popular Mohalim among Charedim. Even those who are not Chasidim. It’s almost as if they did not know that MbP is an issue. Or don’t care.

How can a father not care what happens to his baby? How can he say that it’s probably going to be OK? True – it probably will since the incidence is of an infected Mohel transmitting the disease is very low. But why do they insist on these Moahlim? And why do these Mohalim insist on using MbP anyway? They are not Chasidic. And yet MbP is automatic with them. (Although my understanding is that some of them will not use if if asked not to... still - MbP is their default.)

Most people know that R’ Moshe Tendler is vehemently opposed to MbP. He has been publicly called a Hellenizer for his efforts by some members of the right. But according to the Forward so too is R’ Hershel Shachter. From the Forward:

In a public lecture last February in London, Schachter, who is a rosh yeshiva, or senior chief rabbinic authority, at Y.U.’s Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary, claimed that his daughter’s hospital treated three cases per year of Hasidic babies infected with herpes. The infections were “obvously because of metzitzah b’peh,” Schachter told his audience, citing his daughter r.

Schachter also cited his daughter as claiming that there are, in fact, about 15 such cases per year in the city, including the three cases or so she claimed per year at her own hospital. Schachter said his daughter explained that the hospitals do not report these cases because Hasidic clients would not return if they were made public. Schachter’s remarks were first posted March 14 on the website Failed Messiah and authenticated by the Forward.

What is not so well known is that as far back as 1972 the issue of Metzizah P’Peh was discussed by HaRav Moshe Pirutinsky in his “Sefer HaBris”. This monumental work includes  Haskamos (approbations) from  R’ Chaim Shmulevitz, R’ Yitzchak Hutner,  R’ Yitzchok HaLevi Ruderman,  R’ Mendel Zaks, R’ Modechai Gifter, R’ Shneur Kotler, R’ Nachum Perlow (Rabbi Yaakov Perlow’s father) and R’ Moshe Feinstein.

     

On pages 215-216 in his chapter on Metzitza, Rabbi Pirutinsky discusses the issue at length quoting many sources - both pro and con. But he concludes that if medical experts (the only ones qualified to do so) determine that there is a danger posed by a Mohel using the mouth for suctioning the circumcision wound - it should be performed by other legitimate methods. Ultimately Chazal required Metzitza for health reasons. If using the mouth is unhealthy for the child it ought not to be done that way.

*Grammatically - Metzitza B’Feh (MbF) is the correct Hebrew term and acronym. I choose to use Metzitza B'Peh (MbP) only because it is the more commonly used expression and acronym.

A Mistaken Plea to Klal Yisrael

Ami Magazine 

One of the most pressing issues facing Israel right now (at least internally) is the issue of ‘What to do about the Charedim’. I do not say this in any pejorative sense at all. But the fact happens to be that the last election was all about that.  This is a subject that gets discussed a lot here. And it may be tiring to keep reading about it. But the issue has not gone away and remains as controversial as ever. It has as of yet not been solved.

I purposely characterized this as an over-all problem and not just a problem with the draft. Drafting Charedim into the army is but one facet of a much larger multifaceted problem. Aside from ‘sharing the burden’ of military service by submitting to the draft in equal proportion to the rest of the population, there are issues of rising poverty; the increased reliance taxpayer funded government welfare programs for sustenance; the  lack of education; and the ability to get decent jobs. And they are all related.

Let me begin by first making clear (if it isn’t already obvious by my many posts on this subject) that I am not opposed to the Charedi way of life. Nor do I reject the philosophy of learning Torah full time as a legitimate Hashkafa – even though I do not see it exactly the same way they do. But even if I didn’t agree at all - people have a right to believe as they choose and act in accordance with their beliefs as long as they do not interfere with the rights of others. My only issue with Charedim is their unwillingness to accept – or at best to consider as second class - other Hashkafos. Like Torah U’Madah  or Torah Im Derech Eretz.

To the extent that Charedim in America are better educated and a lot more productive than their Israeli counterparts is to the extent that I support them. Yes, there are pockets where poverty is great and education poor to non-existent. Like Williamsburg, Kiryas Joel, and Squaretown for example. But leaving out those Chasidic enclaves I think it is fair to say that most Amercian Charedim do get a basic secular education and in some cases go on to have professional careers. Or at least have to ability to do so. And the draft is not an issue here.

But as I mentioned so many times in the past – Israel is a whole other ballgame. Charedim in Israel are nowhere near where American Charedim are.  Charedi Hashkafos in Israel are so extreme that there is no such thing as education outside of Limudei Kodesh (religious studies) in high school and beyond.  There are some exceptions to that – but those schools are few and at best considered outside the mainstream.

I bring all this up in light of the lengthy cover story in Ami Magazine. Publisher Rabbi Yitzchok Frankfurter interviewed Rav Dovid Soloveitchik who is the son of R’ Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik (The Griz).  He is a leading rabbinic figure in the Israeli Charedi world and widely respected even among Charedim in America.  R’ Frankfurter studied in his Yeshiva (Brisk) for a year and considers himself a Talmid.

R’ Dovid summoned him to Israel and expressed the urgency of spreading the word about his (and the virtually all the rest of the Israeli rabbinic leadership’s) opposition to the draft. That they consider serving in the army a Shas HaShmad is no secret. He has spoken about this many times. I covered one of those times right here.

What makes this interview interesting for me is the fact that Rabbi Frankfurter actually asked him questions that I would have asked. Although he unhesitatingly accepts the answers from his Rebbe, I do not. He promised to ‘spread the word’ through his magazine and this cover story certainly did that. At least to paid subscribers or those who went out and bought the magazine.

But the questions were a lot better than the answers which can all be refuted. The question I am most referring to is the following.

Rabbi Frankfurter asked him why Charedim could not do both - learn and serve in the army at the same time. His answer was that Torah can have no Hesech HaDaas (interruption of focus and concentration). Torah requires exclusivity. If someone wants to learn Torah he cannot have anything else with it. He must give himself over to Torah completely. A Bachur must commit his whole life solely to Torah. And he quotes the Rambam (Hilchos Talumd Torah 3:6) to prove his point:

A person whose heart inspires him to fulfill this Mitzvah in a fitting manner and to become crowned with the crown of Torah should not divert his attention to other matters. He should not set his intent on acquiring Torah together with wealth and honor simultaneously.

This not only precludes serving in the army while learning, it precludes any possible preparation for the workplace via an even basic secular education.

With all due respect to the Rosh HaYeshiva, this is hardly an argument for not having a dual army/Yeshiva program like Hesder. Nor is it an argument (as implied by his response) to reject all Limudei Chol past 8^th grade (where basic math and the Hebrew grammar are the only secular subjects taught).  What the Rambam must have meant is that it is indeed preferable to study Torah without any distraction. But I doubt very seriously that he meant that this should be the way of life for every single student from age 12 and up to the exclusion of ever learning how to make a livable wage.

If that were the case, the Rambam could never have studied medicine. He must have at some point done both. Perhaps his Torah study was at its best when he was not distracted by Parnassa concerns. But I seriousness doubt that he would tell anyone to ignore it. What he probably believed was that one should strive for pure Torah study. But not at the expense of learning to make a living. Else, how could he have become a doctor? He therefore must have also believed that it is legitimate to combine Torah study with preparation for a Parnassa.  Either that, or he was not very good at taking his own advice.

The same argument can be made for the requirement to give up a couple of years to serve in the army. And if one can still study Torah during that time – like the Hesder program does – all the better.

That secular studies harm Torah scholarship is disproved not only by the Rambam – who many say was an exception to his own rule because of his genius, but by his own cousins the Rav and Rav Ahron who both attended university, one receiving his Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Berlin and the other a law degree from NYU. Is there anyone who would say that the Rav or R' Aharon were deficient in Torah knowledge?

Lest anyone say that they too are geniuses, Rav Ahron clearly states that full time Torah study is not for everyone. Who says that every Charedi in Israel must learn full time from the moment he starts school until well after he is married with children? Rav Ahron might argue the reverse and say that geniuses in Torah like the Rambam should study full time and not be distracted by Parnassa concerns. Everyone else should be Kovieh Itim (set aside regular times for Torah study) and serve God by what suits his intelligence and personality the best.

Returning to the issue of the draft - I completely reject R’ Dovid’s characterization of it being a Shas HaShmad. He compares it to Czarist times and characterizes what is going on now as a 100% war against the Torah.  I think it is quite clear that R’ Dovid is living in the past on this issue. He remembers Ben Gurion who personally saw no value in Halacha and thinks the current political leadership is no different.

For example Ben Gurion and his wife did not bother having a religious marriage ceremony. They only had a civil ceremony in New York. He refused to ever wear a Kipa. He ate bread on Pesach. His concession to the Chazan Ish about maintaining the status quo – guaranteeing Charedim would continue their British mandated control over religious matters in the new State of Israel was entirely political. He did not want them to oppose the creation of a state in the UN which they were going to do. When he promised them that, they supported the creation of the State.

But things are not like that now. Had he paid attention to Yair Lapid during the election he would know that. Ever since the six day war and especially since the Begin era there has been an increase in the respect for Torah among Israeli leaders.  Unlike R’ Dovid Charedi writers have taken note of the fact that the current Kenesset has more observant Jews serving than at any time in history.

This is not a Shas Hasmad. If it were, I would support them. The more these rabbinic leaders say it is, the less credible they sound. Instead of ‘spreding the word’ the way R’ Dovid and his Shaliach (messenger) Rabbi Frankfurter are. They ought to sit down with the government and work out a compromise that everyone could live with.

Just like there was a divinity exemption in my day when America had a draft, so too there should be one in Israel. The only problem in Israel is that because of the philosophy of full time Torah study for everyone - every single Charedi man gets a divinity exemption. That is not right. Divinity exemptions are designed to produce clergy that will serve the populace. Not so that every single member of it becomes a member of the clergy.

With this philosophy in place, the Israeli government has no choice but to set up a quota system – where a certain percentage of young Talmudic scholars will be fully exempt and even subsidized by the government with a living wage. The rest must register and share the burden just like Dati and secular Israelis do. What that percentage should be can be negotiated by men of good will. 

There should also be a track whereby a Charedi can both serve and continue his studies simultaneously the way Hesder boys do. And certainly religious sensitivities of Charedim must be honored so that their way of life is not compromised. Which means that Nachal Charedi and similar programs need to be improved and expanded.

I truly believe this approach or something like it is the best solution. But as long as Charedi rabbinic leaders like R’ Dovid Soloveitchik so stridently sees this as a Shas HaShmad, it will not happen.

As for injecting some secular studies into their curriculum to improve their lot… well... one step at a time.