What Exactly Are They Proud Of?

Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz, Dean of RIETS

Can anyone imagine, even in their wildest dreams, a club like Hareni being established in BMG (Lakewood)? I think you’d sooner see them invite the Pope to teach Jewish history than allow a club that defines itself in any way as gay. Even if it were to operate under the strictest Halachic guidelines, the very word gay is indicative of sodomy - behavior the Torah considers an abomination

The people at places like BMG must be having a field day with what just happened at YU, which recently recognized such a club. They are either laughing in ridicule or outright condemning YU for officially recognizing a club that identifies as gay. They may even use this as proof that their philosophy of isolationism is the right way for a Jew to live in a world gone mad with depravity.

But the truth is, if that is how the people at BMG feel, they are wrong. Their world does not recognize the possibility that there may very well be a significant number of gay people learning in their own Beis HaMedrash. People who would never dream of coming out of the closet. So they live in constant fear of being exposed. Or they may sin on the down-low and hope they never get caught. Either way, they must suffer mental anguish over desires they know are clearly forbidden by the Torah. Acting on those desires is what the Torah calls an abomination.

This kind of struggle can lead to severe depression and even suicide. It was recently revealed that there has been a spate of suicides in Lakewood. It would not surprise me if, in some cases, they were by people struggling with these issues.

It seems to me that if the rabbinic leadership had a better understanding of what people with these kinds of struggles go through, they would not be ridiculing or condemning what YU has done. Instead, they would be more understanding and accepting of it, realizing that YU’s approach to tolerance on this issue is not only acceptable but laudable.

In fact, YU’s Roshei Yeshiva and BMG’s Roshei Yeshiva are on exactly the same page on the issue of homosexuality - the Torah’s page. No one at YU thinks that having pride in being attracted to members of the same sex is in accordance with Torah values.

So how does Hareni fit into this? Did YU compromise on these values? According to LGBTQ advocates who agreed to this new organization, it might seem like they did. But that is false. The only thing that might be true is this sentence uttered by the group’s co-president, Hayley Goldberg, "You are allowed to be a queer Jew on campus at Yeshiva University." That’s because being gay is not the sin. Acting on it is.

Here’s what YU’s leading Roshei Yeshiva had to say in response to what must have surely been the greatest possible misunderstanding of what YU  agreed to:

In a series of public statements since the March 21 settlement, senior rabbis at Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary (YU’s rabbinical school) have repeatedly asserted that the only LGBTQ+ club they would tolerate at the school—and the one they say was approved—is one that encourages celibacy.

Were the school forced to recognize a club that espoused pride in queer identity, one RIETS Rosh Yeshiva (head rabbi) indicated he would quit.

“It would be akin to the Yeshiva being asked to teach the New Testament,” said Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz, RIETS’ director of ordination, in a March 28 episode of Halacha Headlines, a podcast about Orthodox community issues. “You would sooner shut down the Yeshiva than teach the New Testament.”

Rabbi Schachter called Goldberg and her co-presidents “wiseguys” who had lied to The New York Times about the deal’s terms. He described homosexuality as one of the most “egregious and vile” forms of behavior and recommended therapy for Jews attracted to the same sex. He also stated last week that he rejected LGBTQ+ “ideology, lifestyle, and behavior.”

Lebowitz, who became the head of the ordination program last year, described LGBTQ+ people as having “a yetzer hara to do very serious aveiros (sins) of arayos (sexual immorality).”

So why have a group like Hareni at all? That’s because the Roshei Yeshiva at YU recognize that this problem exists and that it can, and often does, lead to suicide. Something that has happened with at least one student at YU. They see Hareni as a legitimate way of dealing with this ‘impossible’ problem. The only solution that aligns with Jewish law, as they see it, is a path of celibacy.

In Rabbi Schachter’s view, the university was helping the plaintiffs by offering a support group that helped them achieve that goal.

Unfortunately, the pride community had an entirely different understanding of what Hareni was supposed to be. Their goal is for gay people to have pride in who they are. Which, by definition, means having pride in behavior that is sinful in the extreme. No rabbi who calls himself Orthodox could ever agree with that. One can be a proud Jew and be gay, but one cannot be proud of being gay.

I pretty much expected that this was the only way in which Hareni could be approved: Love the sinner, hate the sin.  And of course, to strongly discourage every Jew from sinning. A club that does that should be applauded. But pride in being gay? That would be no different than being proud in being a thief. Or of any other sinful behavior.

Not that I haven’t said all of this before. But I’m glad to see YU’s Roshei Yeshiva saying it publicly. And I’m quite happy to remind all YU’s critics on the right about this club - that they might just be on the wrong side of the issue.

My Granddaughter’s Wedding

 I am currently in Lakewood, New Jersey to celebrate the wedding of my beautiful granddaughter, Yaffa. Lots to do here today in preparation for the Simcha tonight. As a result there will be no new post today. Tomorrow is doubtful since I will be traveling all morning and with a prediction of severe storms, there are sure to be delays if not cancellations. 

God willing I will be home Thursday and back to my regular posting schedule until next Monday. More about that in a future post.

Doing What's Necessary

Yarden Bibas on 60 Minutes last night (JTA)

Netanyahu must make any deal necessary to secure the release of all hostages from Hamas captivity. Whatever it takes. Anyone who watched the 60 Minutes report last night featuring Yarden Bibas had to come to that conclusion. Recall that his wife and two very young children were slaughtered by Hamas while in captivity. Mr. Bibas demanded that President Trump stop the war and make a deal with Hamas to release the rest of the hostages. I agree with him.

This is not to say that I trust this ultra-liberal news source for any kind of balanced reporting. They lost their credibility on that score long ago. That being said, it’s hard to dispute what was reported directly by Mr. Bibas and other recently freed hostages about the way they were treated during their captivity.

The savagery of Hamas is subhuman. The physical and mental torture of hostages for well over a year was beyond brutal. This segment of 60 Minutes was one of the most riveting things I have ever watched on TV - even in fictional drama. It is beyond description. I defy anyone to watch and listen to these recently released former hostages and not be as outraged as I am.

Which is why I have no misgivings advocating doing whatever is necessary to secure their release. But Israel’s mission should not end there. These subhuman pieces of garbage, parading around as if they were human, ought to be utterly destroyed. Hamas must be wiped off the face of the earth. Once the hostages are released, Israel must do whatever is necessary to obliterate them, including violating any agreement made with Hamas to secure their release - if that is what it takes.

I have absolutely no ethical or moral compunctions about that. These ‘people’ do not deserve to have any agreement honored. On the contrary, if obliterating them means violating the terms of an agreement, I consider it a Mitzvah Min  Hamuvchar - the choicest of Mitzvos to do that. Nor does it matter to me how many civilians Hamas throws in Israel’s way to prevent her from accomplishing that goal. Justice demands their end. The death or dismemberment of any number of Palestinians (men, women or children) thrown in Israel’s way is entirely at the hands of Hamas themselves.  

What about world opinion? Foremost on my mind is pursuing justice. The only justice with respect to Hamas is erasing them from the face of the earth. Along with anyone who tries to help them, including (and perhaps especially) Iran.

(On that score, it would not surprise me in the least if the president were on board with a plan designed to bring the Iranian mullahs to their knees with the help of Israel in some sort of coordinated attack. Which would destroy their nuclear capabilities. But I digress.)

The world opinion about Israel that comes out of the UN is so antisemitic, that I have long ago discounted anything they say about the Jewish state. Europe’s uber progressive approach to justice – most recently expressed by the International Court of Justice (ICC) is only the most recent manifestation of that. Their pronouncements are unalterably skewed against Israel. So any additional condemnation that might result from Israel’s holy goal could not concern me less. As long as Israel has US support, I am not worried. Under this president, I think they will.

Europe may not like it, but they need us a lot more than we need them. If the U.S. backs Israel, that’s all that really matters.

But even if there were international repercussions for Israel by violating the terms of an agreement with Hamas, the bottom line for me is the absolute justice of destroying these monsters - and every other jihadist group. All of whom rival Nazi Germany in terms of man's inhumanity to man.

If, after watching that 60 Minutes piece, anyone still feels that this course of action is immoral, I’d love to hear their justification. Because I don’t think any rational being can make that case.

If anyone thinks this is just an angry post – let me assure them that - that is exactly what it is. Only I would leave out the word ‘just’. Yes. I am angry. Sometimes it takes a bit of anger to break out of the complacency of conventional wisdom - and with the help of God - do right thing.

Leaving the Fold

Leaving the Fold (Jewish Action)

I have addressed this issue before. More than once. But now that the OU has initiated a study on why people raised as Orthodox Jews leave Orthodoxy, it is worth revisiting the issue. The problem is not going away. As the observant Jewish community grows, so too does the issue of attrition. It certainly deserves to be studied to better understand the underlying causes and to develop more effective ways to address them.

This is a subject I have always been interested in. The idea of someone radically changing the lifestyle in which they were raised is something I find very difficult to understand. I have always wondered, ‘What causes someone to do that?’ Similarly, I find it just as perplexing - perhaps even more so - when someone embraces an observant lifestyle after being raised in a non-observant home. However, that is beyond the scope of this post.

Dr. Moshe Krakowski is the lead researcher for the OU study, which he describes in the latest issue of Jewish Action magazine. I found his insights to be quite illuminating, some of which align with my own, albeit very limited, observations.

There were several key findings in Dr. Krakowski’s study that stood out. One of them echoes a concern I have had since my children were first enrolled in a religious day school. At the time, it seemed like a no-brainer that parents who identified as centrists - like me - would naturally choose a centrist school for their children.

I was genuinely shocked by how many centrist parents instead chose right-wing schools. Their reasoning was invariably that they could always make their children less frum at home. I tried to convince these parents that this was a mistake, but they were convinced they were making the right decision. Only to regret it in some cases later on. The study confirms that this type of thinking can be problematic:

"In the OU study of people who have left Orthodoxy, twenty-two out of the twenty-nine participants reported experiencing a ‘misalignment’ between themselves or their families and the schools they attended. They described having to ‘constantly negotiate their religious identities,’ performing for an audience of teachers and peers at school while adopting a different lifestyle at home. The feeling of hypocrisy this engendered—and ‘secondary consequences’ such as bullying from peers—eventually became a factor in their decision to leave the community."

Misalignment, as defined by the study, can manifest in many ways. Dr. Krakowski explains:

"Even if your family is more religious than the school, there’s a sense of disruption. My family is saying I have to do this or that, but my school doesn’t require it. So does all of this really matter?"

The study also found that misalignment at home is an even greater factor in attrition. If one parent is observant and the other is not, that certainly raises concerns about which path a child will choose. But even when both parents are observant, if one is significantly more stringent than the other - causing conflict between them - it can also create confusion and tension that may lead a child away from observance.

Another striking finding was the impact of rabbinic figures on individuals' religious trajectories:

"Another finding we had not anticipated was the enormous emphasis our subjects placed on the impact religious authority figures, particularly rabbis, had had on their life trajectories - both for good and for bad. In a cohort of twenty-nine people who left Orthodoxy, it was amazing how often, completely unprompted, we heard the refrain, ‘There was this one rabbi who . . .’ The end of that sentence was inevitably something horrible or something wonderful - never in between."

Another, more obvious reason some people abandon observance is experiencing physical or sexual abuse at the hands of a loved one or a teacher, as well as the poor response from teachers and rabbis when they reported it. This is completely understandable.

One factor the study did not address is those who leave observance for intellectual reasons. There are some highly intelligent people who seem to have left not due to emotional trauma but because of philosophical or theological doubts. Interestingly, none of the twenty-nine people interviewed in this study cited that as their reason for leaving.

As I have said in the past, there are as many reasons for leaving observance as there are individuals who leave. However, the fact that the vast majority of this admittedly small sample cited their educational experiences as a backdrop to their decision cannot be ignored. 

Dr. Krakowski acknowledges that the sample size was too small to draw definitive conclusions about which factors are the most significant contributors to this phenomenon. This is why this is only the first phase of his study, which he describes as qualitative. The second phase will be quantitative, involving a much larger and more representative sample that can be subjected to statistical analysis.

This OU study is an important read for anyone who cares about the continuity of the Jewish people. While Jewish education has never been more widespread or more effective in perpetuating Torah values to the next generation, there are nonetheless some serious flaws that need to be addressed. I am glad to see the OU tackling this issue in such a methodical and scientific way.

Does the WZO Controversy Spell the End of 'Daas Torah'?

Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah of Agudah (Matzav)

Is the world of ‘Daas Torah’ falling apart? Though this question may seem shocking, the answer is not entirely clear. However, to someone like me who does not derive their Torah wisdom from the Kol Korei (decree) of the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah of Agudah, it is beginning to seem that way.

I say this with no malice in my heart toward any of the great Torah leaders who comprise this esteemed body from which ‘Daas Torah’ emanates. I have only the utmost respect for these great Talmidei Chachamim.

So, what is this thing called Daas Torah that is so sacred in the Charedi world? Anyone who has paid the slightest attention to what has been said by numerous Torah luminaries and personalities at Agudah conventions over the years would realize that Daas Torah equals whatever their Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah says. The term is used liberally throughout speeches at those conventions. As noted by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein in his latest contribution to Cross-Currents:

“It is forbidden to agree to matters that the Torah leadership of Klal Yisroel has explicitly forbidden.”

The implication is that by not following Daas Torah, one risks losing their Olam HaBah - their place in the World to Come.

The problem with this kind of thinking arises when other Gedolim of comparable or even greater stature disagree with the Moetzes. Or worse, when there is dissent within the Moetzes itself. Who should be followed in such a case?

Agudah, whose Moetzes members are selected from among the most knowledgeable senior rabbis of the generation, asserts that they alone represent Daas Torah. Disobeying their edict, they claim, is tantamount to disobeying God, as they are deemed best positioned to understand His will.

This debate is currently playing out over whether to participate in the World Zionist Organization (WZO) elections. The disagreement is not merely about whether one should or should not vote. It is whether voting is outright forbidden and constitutes a Chilul Hashem (desecration of God’s name). That is the publicly stated belief of Ner Israel Rosh HaYeshiva and Moetzes member Rav Aharon Feldman. Apparently, he has convinced the entire Moetzes to adopt this view and publicize it in absolute terms. As reported by various publications, here is an excerpt from VIN:

The Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah of America, the rabbinic leadership council of Agudath Israel of America, has released a formal declaration opposing participation in the upcoming World Zionist Organization (WZO) elections.

The declaration, titled “Kol Korei Regarding the Elections for the WZO,” emphasizes the organization’s position that it is “forbidden to vote for any party in the election for the WZO,” listing several religious concerns, including what it terms “issurim” (prohibitions) involved.

However, as Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein pointed out:

People who have followed the story know that the psak does not reflect the positions of many, many Torah figures. That includes members of the Moetzes itself, some of whom have aligned themselves in recent weeks with the opinion of zekan hagedolim, R. Shmuel Kamenetsky…

They know that even in Israel, there are large numbers of roshei yeshiva who have endless kavod, as they should, for Rav Dov Lando… and know that he has positioned himself against the stated position of R. Chaim Kanievsky, who instructed people to vote in the past.

So, who represents the real Daas Torah? The Moetzes, which has long been regarded as the de facto—if not de jure - infallible word of God? Or those to whom the Moetzes themselves look up to?

One may ask: if Rav Kamenetsky is the head of the Moetzes and disagrees with their Kol Korei, how can they sign it as though it were a unanimous decision - especially when his position is well known?

This is due to a policy in which, if the majority decides public policy one way, dissenting opinions are not listed, as that would lead to people picking sides. This way, there is no ambiguity about what Daas Torah truly is.

Except, in this case, there clearly is.

For the first time (at least to my knowledge), people who value Daas Torah and fear the implied consequences of not following it are in a dilemma. They do not want to lose their Olam HaBah, which violating the Kol Korei suggests. Yet by not listening to Gedolim who hold otherwise, they may lose it as well.

I, for one, am grateful that my Daas Torah has nothing to do with either of these opinions. Their debate is over whether they should vote for Eretz HaKodesh, a Charedi party that would ultimately benefit their own community through a larger Charedi turnout at the polls.

My Daas Torah is my Rebbe, Rav Ahron Soloveichik, ZTL, a Gadol recognized as such even by peers in the Agudah Moetzes. A Gadol who supported the Jewish state. A Gadol whose Yeshiva (Brisk) sang Hatikvah (with slight modifications) at every banquet. A Gadol who recited Hallel (without a blessing) on Yom Ha’atzmaut. A Gadol who was the titular head of the Religious Zionists of Chicago. A Gadol who taught the late Rav Yaakov Perlow, ZTL (the Novominsker Rebbe and Yoshev Rosh of the Moetzes), how to learn a Rambam - as Rav Perlow himself testified at Rav Ahron’s Hesped Shloshim.

Rav Ahron is no longer with us, but I have no doubt that he would have encouraged voting in the WZO elections - and that the vote should go to the Religious Zionist party. That is exactly what I did, and I encouraged other Orthodox (even Charedi) Jews to do.

What will happen to Agudah now? Is this the beginning of the end of their influence over the Charedi world? Will they still be regarded as the exclusive voice of Daas Torah?

At the end of the day, I am sure they will. The next convention will hardly differ from the last in this respect. It will surely feature the same slate of Torah luminaries and personalities as before. This episode will likely be forgotten.

Or will it?

Rabbi Adlerstein raises an important point:

Since October 7, Anglo Charedim have seen past the headlines about protests and civil war and witnessed a renaissance of interest in Jewish roots among those “pesky” secular Zionists. They have stood in awe of their mesiras nefesh for Am Yisrael. And they have stood shamefaced, realizing that the Charedi community (as a whole; I am not speaking about thousands of individuals acting as individuals) has lived apart from the rest of the country. They are going to be wary of positions and pronouncements that affirm the isolation of Charedi Jews from everyone else and will seek the leadership of those with a tad more openness…

Some Anglo Charedim have had enough of this kind of thinking. It is infantilizing and humiliating to thinking people. Backed into a corner, they will continue to accept instruction from Torah leaders rather than follow their own instincts—that is part of what makes them Charedi. But if given a legitimate choice, the outcome may no longer be as predictable.

We shall see.

A Letter from a Charedi

R' Dov Landau - a leading opponent of Charedim serving in the IDF

A couple of days ago, I received the following letter (lightly edited for clarity) in response to a recent post:

Hi, my name is Moshe Cohen, and I'm a card-carrying Charedi. My kids learn in Ponovez.

For many of us here, the issue is clear: if our kids could remain frum in the army, we would send them. Not all, of course—a boy who is deeply immersed in Torah learning does not belong in the army. But enough are eligible to solve the manpower problem. However, the army does not want us. They refuse to change the ethos and values baked into the system and have expelled frum officers.

This may be untrue. But this is what we believe.

So when politicians wax indignant about "sharing the burden," we are little moved by their fine talk. We are the first to contribute—if we can remain frum, on our terms. Spare us the pious speeches. To us, the army is run by wicked missionaries who want to claim the souls of our children. Change needs to start with the army itself.

Oh, you say, but the army has changed. They even opened a special brigade for Charedim. Yes, and then punished soldiers who wanted to use the mikvah, throwing them in the brig for insubordination, and forced them to have female instructors. So we distrust the army completely.

Again, this may or may not be true. But this is how it seems to me and my peers. And that is why my sons do not go to the army. It’s not because we are afraid of dying, and it’s not because we seek comfort or feel entitled. It’s out of concern for the religious life of our families.

To a frum person, the choice between "sharing the burden" and "keeping Shabbos" is a non-starter. Even the mere possibility that army service will ruin a soldier religiously is enough to say no. By the same token, a secular person has no question—certainly, sharing the burden comes before keeping Shabbos. (As one secular man asked me: "And is it so terrible to be secular?") So I accept that they don’t understand me. So be it.

I also understand that Modern Orthodox people may have a system in place to protect their religiosity within the secular framework of the army. Perhaps that works for them. I know that for the Charedim, it does not.

First, let me say that I do not dismiss his concerns, some of which are quite valid. But it is revealing that he wrote: ‘This may be untrue. But this is what we think.’

The truth is that the very nature of army service requires a soldier to never question a direct order. If a superior officer demands that a soldier violate Halacha in a non-combat situation, that is a non-starter for any religious Jew. Does that happen? I’m sure it does.

The question then arises: How can any religious Jew agree to serve in an army that either ignores or deliberately sabotages a recruit’s desire to follow Halacha?

This used to be a much bigger problem than it is now but it was not insurmountable. Now, since the advent of special Charedi units it has become far less of a problem. Even though it probably still exists in some cases.

It’s not only about being forced to violate Halacha. It’s also about an environment that has led many young men from devoutly observant homes to abandon their religious practices due to the influence of secular environment and their secular IDF peers. I personally know a few families where this happened.

It’s hard to argue against an argument backed up with anecdotal evidence. At the same time, I do not believe this happens in most cases. I believe it mostly happens to those who were already weak in their observance before they ever set foot into the army.

The way an observant soldier should deal with this dilemma is to follow the guidance of the devout Religious Zionist Poskim who are as serious about Mitzvah observance as Charedi Poskim. Their view is that every Jew has an obligation to serve if called upon. Some of the most devoutly observant young men from the Religious Zionist community serve with honor and have learned how to navigate these challenges by relying on their halachic guidance. And this was all before special units for Charedim were created. Units designed specifically to accommodate Charedi needs.

Moshe believes that these units have failed to live up to their promises. That is likely true in some cases. However, although I’m sure there are exceptions, it is my understanding that these units are trying their best. When they fail, it is mostly due to the ignorance of their unit leaders. Who have asked that mistakes be pointed out and they will rectify them. There are in fact some Charedi rabbis that have suggested that Charedim should serve and that new and better Charedi units have been created for them.

Moshe’s argument that a Charedi Jew will not compromise Halacha for the sake of sharing the burden is understandable. While he agrees that contributing is important, violating Halacha in service of that contribution is not an option.

Thing is, that is true for Religious Zionists as well. And yet, as noted, they are told by their Poskim they have a halachic obligation to serve. There is no way those devout Religious Zionist Poskim would obligate observant Jews to violate Halacha for purposes of army service unless mandated by Halacha (e.g. Pikuach Nefesh). Which is exactly the job of army Poskim.

Interestingly, Moshe agrees with my own view that there are enough Charedim who could serve in the IDF. Those who are deeply immersed in Torah study could, in theory be exempt. But that still leaves more than enough Charedim to serve. Moshe’s sole objection is the fear of being forced to violate Halacha.

At the end of the day, this letter is more positive than one might assume, given its antagonistic stance on army service. If the army could guarantee that Charedi recruits would not be hindered in their mode of religious observance, his community would be willing to serve. Opposition is not due to fear of injury or death, but purely out of concern for maintaining their religious standards.

What seems to be missing is any sense of sacrifice on the part of his community. It isn’t enough to feel bad  or even to empathize with families who have lost loved ones or seen them return permanently disabled. He doesn’t seem to grasp the gravity letting others to do the sacrificing for them – while his entire community goes on with life as usual, without parents having to worry about whether their sons or daughters will return home without an arm or a leg… or at all!

That is the 300 pound gorilla in the room that his concerns do not address.  No matter how much one empathizes with a bereaved family that lost a child in battle, that is nowhere near the experience of losing one that way. If one avoids that possibility by design, the resentment and even anger from the rest of society is more than palpable and quite understandable. Even if all of Moshe’s concerns were legitimate, it would not matter to the grieving mother who lost a beloved child in Gaza while his sons sit in a Beis HaMedrash in Ponevezh.

That said, I am glad that at least he feels Charedim could in theory serve in enough numbers to relieve the excessive burden placed on the rest of Israel. Hopefully, that reflects the sentiment of most Charedim.

If that is indeed the case, then I truly believe this problem can be solved. But I have to wonder whether the current Charedi leadership in Israel would ever agree to it. My gut feeling is that they never would ever agree under any circumstances. I’d love to be proven wrong. But I doubt that I ever will.

Yeshiva University Responds

Yeshiva University Beis HaMedrash (RIETS Press)

I am pleased to say that Rav Hershel Schachter has responded.

A few days ago, I, along with many other Orthodox Jews, was perplexed by what appeared to be Yeshiva University’s recognition of an LGBTQ student club. As I noted at the time, I was perplexed but not shocked. Based on my ‘theory of the case’ I reserved judgment until I heard from their Roshei Yeshiva. 

That has now happened - in the person of Rav Schachter, who responded almost exactly as I expected he would. Which is, of course, the Torah way to respond.

I speculated that there might be a rationale allowing YU to recognize this club without it being an endorsement of sexual behavior that makes such recognition so problematic. Here is the pertinent part of Rav Schachter’s statement as reported at YWN:

"Two and a half years ago, when I was last consulted, I gave my blessing to a Yeshiva University initiative to help students struggling with problems of same-sex attraction and gender identity. My position, then as now, emphatically rejects the ideology, lifestyle, and behaviors that the LGBTQ term represents.

My position, then as now, is that all relevant prohibitions (homosexual behavior, same-sex marriage, castration, etc.) must obviously be uncompromisingly upheld. Simultaneously, all halachically legitimate means of support should be provided to struggling students to foster and sustain their unwavering commitment to Torah and mitzvot.

I gave my blessing to providing guidance and support in maintaining full, uncompromising shemiras ha-mitzvos—toward this sacred goal and nothing more.

Helping Jews keep the Mitzvos they struggle with is not only permissible; it is an obligation upon all of us. This is what 'Kol Yisrael Areivim Zeh BaZeh' is all about. If there is a club specifically designed for that purpose, it should be lauded, not criticized.

Adding to this, YU President and Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Dr. Ari Berman, stated the following:

"The Yeshiva has always conveyed that what a Pride club represents is antithetical to the undergraduate program, in which the traditional view of marriage and gender as determined at birth is transmitted. The Yeshiva never could and never would sanction such an undergraduate club, and it is due to this that we entered litigation," Berman wrote.

He then introduced the Hareini club, which he says was created to support students who 'are striving to live authentic, uncompromising halakhic lives.' The club, he said, was 'agreed to by all of the parties to be in accordance with halacha, consistent with the rabbinic guidelines of the senior Roshei Yeshiva.'"

The last thing Hareini seems to be about is pride in a sinful lifestyle. It appears to be the exact opposite. I am quite pleased that both sides have agreed to those terms and that the litigation is being dropped.

All’s well that ends well, I guess. But I would be remiss if I didn’t express my deep (albeit unsurprising) disappointment at the knee-jerk response of the Charedi world when the news of YU’s recognition of Hareni first broke. Which is exemplified in the very title of a YWN hit piece:

NAIL IN THE COFFIN: Yeshiva University Caves, Recognizes Toeiva Club In Landmark Surrender

That was followed by this:

"In a stunning capitulation, Yeshiva University (YU) has officially recognized an LGBTQ+ student club, bringing an end to a protracted legal battle but solidifying its descent into a Torah-compromised institution. The newly sanctioned club, now called 'Hareini,' will operate under the university’s banner - an unthinkable development for an institution that once prided itself on maintaining a Torah-observant identity."

It’s almost as if they couldn’t wait to condemn YU, as if they were salivating - waiting for the day  when YU would surely capitulate. And when they perceived that it had, they pounced with some pretty incendiary language.

The idea of being Dan L’Kaf Zechus - judging YU favorably - never occurred to them. They decided to condemn the school - and, by implication, its Roshei Yeshiva. They didn’t even attempt to understand what was meant by YU doing this with the approval of senior rabbis. Nope. They just couldn’t wait to drive the final nail into YU’s coffin.

Well, they backpedaled somewhat by releasing Rav Schachter’s and Rabbi Berman’s comments. But as of yet, they have not apologized for their original harsh, knee-jerk reaction. Here is a little Mussar for them from the Gemara (Bava Basra 60b):

K’shot Atzmecha V’Achar Kach K’Shot Acherim - Correct yourself (first) and afterwards correct others. If they don’t know what to correct, they might want to start by checking out the list mentioned in this post.

Huckabee: Reform Opposition - Orthodox Support

Mike Huckabee at the Lubavitcher Rebbe's gravesite (Matzav)

Guess what? Jewish Insider reports that Reform and Orthodox Jewry have starkly different ideologies. Is anyone surprised by that?

Not me. The former has abandoned millennia of Jewish laws and customs to create a religion more in harmony with constantly evolving American values. While Orthodoxy has remained steadfast in adhering to those laws and customs. When it comes to matters of public concern, these ideologies drive how each group responds. Which is exactly the case with how they view Governor Mike Huckabee’s nomination as U.S. ambassador to Israel.

Reform Judaism’s progressive approach to Israel aligns with the longstanding U.S. and global policy of creating a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) along its long border with Israel. They consider anything short of that to be an injustice to the Palestinian people, who deserve the right of self-determination. Consequently, they condemn any suggestion of annexation of any portion of Judea and Samaria, arguing that it would extend Israel’s current harsh military governance over Palestinians.

To the progressive left, which defines Reform ideology, anyone who favors such a policy is a fascist and should certainly not represent U.S. foreign interests. Especially given that a two-state solution has been long-standing US policy under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Huckabee basically sides with extremist right wing Israeli politicians like Ben-Gvir who supports annexation The idea that someone like this should be the U.S. ambassador to Israel goes against everything Reform Judaism stands for. Reform leaders, along with progressive organizations like J-Street, strongly oppose his nomination and are lobbying Congress to vote against him. They also claim that Huckabee’s eschatological beliefs drive his pro-Israel views. Which they argue are counter to Jewish beliefs. It doesn’t matter that there is strong evidence (which is beyond the scope of this post) that  suggests this is not his motive. They cling to this claim because, they cannot stand his conservative, pro-Israel views and are quite angry over his nomination.

I’m sorry, but my tolerance for fake ideologies is nonexistent. I have zero respect for Reform Judaism. I feel deeply saddened that so many American Jews have been duped into believing that it has any authenticity at all.

It’s not their fault. Most of American Jewry lacks the fundamental Jewish education that has been part of our history since our founding as a nation at Sinai. Without that knowledge many Jews have been indoctrinated to believe that the progressive values that define Reform Judaism is the purest form of it.

If only I could reach out and convince them of the simple truth: When something is ‘reformed’ it is no longer what it was intended to be as defined by God in Scripture. But I digress. The point remains that Reform Judaism is anathema to tenets of Judaism that guided our existence for millennia.

Orthodox Jewry, on the other hand, is quite happy with Huckabee’s nomination. We understand that he is a Christian and see no problem with Christian support for Israel. Even if it comes from someone with his eschatological beliefs.  As noted in Jewish Insider:

The Orthodox Union Advocacy Center expressed this in a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stating that Huckabee’s opposition to a two-state solution and his support for Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank align with the views of “many American Jews.”

This perspective also reflects a shift in how many of us view the creation of a Palestinian state, especially in light of the events of October 7th:

“[The Oct. 7 attack and its aftermath] has caused many pro-Israel Americans who share the goal of achieving security and peace for all in the Middle East to view the model of the peace process pursued in the past as stale and illusory,” the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center letter reads. “These Americans support a new approach to how the United States will engage with this important aspect of American foreign policy.”

The letter also emphasized that most Israelis oppose Palestinian statehood, adding:

“Gov. Huckabee understands the existential concerns of Israelis, and that understanding will be very valuable in discharging the duties of U.S. Ambassador.”

Additionally, the letter defended Huckabee’s evangelical faith and Christian Zionist beliefs, stating:

“We are deeply appreciative of the Christian Zionist community for their stalwart support of Israel and active opposition to the deeply disturbing rising tide of antisemitism in the United States” and their “shared belief in the eternal Jewish connection to the land of Israel.”

This once again demonstrates how liberal Judaism is so anathematic to Jewish values. The more progressive one is, the more one aligns with ideologies that harm Israel and the Jewish people. All under the mistaken notion of empathy for people who would be pleased to see us dead.

Reform Judaism refuses to recognize that the vast majority of Palestinians are devout Muslims who, as a matter of religious doctrine, can never accept a Jewish state anywhere in any part of what they consider Palestine. Any form of Palestinian statehood in Judea and Samaria will be seen as a step toward dismantling all of Israel. Their terrorist factions like Hamas will continue to use armed struggle to achieve that religious goal.

As I have said many times, if the celebratory reaction of Palestinians in Gaza to the October 7^th Hamas massacre of 1,200 Jews and the kidnapping of hundreds of hostages has taught us anything, it has taught us that.

That being said, I am not necessarily advocating for the annexation of any part of Judea and Samaria. But that is no longer such a far out, out-of-mainstream position. 

For the time being, annexation is not official U.S. policy. Huckabee has made it clear that he will not be in Israel to push that policy. He will instead faithfully represent the president’s foreign policy. Which is exactly what a cabinet level official is supposed to do. 

As far as I’m concerned, nothing has changed since I first learned of Huckabee’s nomination. I could not be happier that he was chosen. I hope that Governor Huckabee passes confirmation with flying colors, despite the Democratic opposition to him and their obstinate but faulty insistence that the two-state solution is the only realistic path to peace. 

I’m sure he will.

What Jewish Education Should Look Like

Yesterday, I had the sublime pleasure of attending the Chanukas HaBayis, the ceremony celebrating the opening of Arie Crown Hebrew Day School’s new multi-million-dollar campus. To say that it exceeded my already high expectations would be an understatement. I cannot begin to describe what I saw. The new state-of-the-art facilities surely rival the best elementary schools in the nation - bar none. And I’m not just talking about religious schools; I mean every elementary school in the nation.

To cite just one example, the new facility boasts four separate science laboratories. If I dared to describe the other innovations, I would surely leave out a great deal, so I won’t even try. Instead, I invite anyone who wants to see what kind of facility an Orthodox Jewish religious school is capable of producing - come to Chicago and behold it firsthand. You will not be disappointed.

One might wonder where the funding for this masterpiece of a school came. I can only speculate. But the answer might be found on the donor list displayed near the entrance of the building. There were 3 names that stood out.

Arie Crown’s motto of excellence in both Limudei Kodesh (Jewish studies) and Limudei Chol (secular studies) aligns perfectly with the Torah U’Mada (Torah and secular knowledge) philosophy of the late Joseph Walder. Dr. Walder, an Orthodox Jewish scientist, sold his DNA manufacturing business for well over a billion dollars and was a passionate supporter of Jewish education of the type taught at Arie Crown.

Another major benefactor was my late friend Morrie Esformes, a longtime supporter of Arie Crown and a past president under whom I served on the executive board. A highly successful businessman and philanthropist, his name is found on the buildings of nearly every Orthodox religious institution in Chicago and many others worldwide. He lived to give Tzedakah, and Arie Crown was among his most cherished recipients.

Additionally, the Crown family, a prominent secular Jewish philanthropic family whose generosity is well-known throughout Chicago, lent its name to the school many years ago and has been a significant supporter ever since.

But they were not alone. The donor list includes Jewish philanthropists from across the entire spectrum of Orthodoxy (including many from the Charedi and the Modern Orthodox world) who donated generously, .

That is Chicago.

And that is exactly what Arie Crown represents. Yesterday’s opening ceremonies were attended by a who’s who of Orthodox Judaism - right, left, and center.

However, what makes Arie Crown great is not just its facilities. It’s who they teach and how they teach. The student body consists of children from families with a variety of Hashkafos (religious outlooks). Deep friendships form between students from Modern Orthodox and Charedi homes, friendships that can last a lifetime. I see it happening all the time. The school does not preach one value system over another. The only values it promotes are excellence in Torah study, excellence in secular studies, observance of Halacha, and a love of Israel. All in the spirit of Jewish unity.

With this in mind, I recently read an article in Jewish Action Magazine about parents who send their children to schools whose values do not align with their own. I didn’t need to read the article to know that this often leads to tragic consequences, the exact opposite of what parents hope for their children.

If a home is strict but the school is lenient, children will question why they must follow stricter standards and may rebel beyond just a particular stricture. Conversely, if the school is strict but the home is lenient, it undermines what the school is trying to teach. This, too, can lead to rebellion.

To me, this is simple logic with an obvious potential downside. But it isn’t always obvious to parents. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard a parent say they are sending their child the more ‘religious’ school, believing that it is easier to be more lenient at home than to be stricter than a school they perceive as less strict. Only to deeply regret it, later. Many parents have paid the ultimate religious price for that kind of thinking.

This issue is far less likely to occur at a school like Arie Crown, where students come from diverse Hashkafic backgrounds. For example, if one child follows the stricter standard of consuming only Chalav Yisrael, that choice is respected by the child who does not—and vice versa.

The end product of a successful Arie Crown student is a well-educated and well-rounded individual who will thrive in any high school they choose. Whether it be a Modern Orthodox school that prioritizes academic excellence or a Charedi yeshiva that focuses almost exclusively on Torah study. This doesn’t mean that some children won’t fall through the cracks. And that is tragic. But logic dictates that the closer your child’s school is to what is seen in the home. The less likely it is that something like this would happen

So, as I indicated -  it’s not just about the building. It’s about what is taught there. Arie Crown has a long history of producing high achievers in both Torah and secular fields.

I just wanted to take a moment to express how proud I am of the school where I sent all of my children. The great achievers they have become is in no small part, due to the outstanding education they received there.

Has the World of Lakewood Gone Awry?

BMG students attending R' Feldman's lecture (Lakewood Alerts)

If there was ever an example of how certain segments of Orthodoxy are  ‘Krum’ (going down a crooked path despite their Mitzvah observance) this is surely it.

No, I have not lost my mind and joined the chorus of the Charedi world that talks this way about Modern Orthodoxy (...even my own Centrist version of it). What I am talking about is the Charedi world itself.

I do not say this lightly. Unlike many of my fellow Modern Orthodox Jews, I do not harbor any malice against my Charedi brothers. On the contrary, despite some of the serious issues I have with this community, I nevertheless honor and even envy their commitment to Torah study and a lifestyle that consists of much sacrifice toward that endeavor. Their dedication to mitzvah observance often involves the strictest forms of adherence in all ritual matters, often at great expense. Even in matters of Bein Adam L’chaveiro - they live up to their reputation of kindness and generosity of both time and money to help others. Most of the Charedim I know are like that.

So why do I think Charedim are on a crooked path? Ironically, it was about opposition to an event that I actually support and is, in fact, getting broad support among various Charedi rabbinic leaders (both in Israel and here).  As well as the vast majority of Charedi publications (e.g., Mishpacha). They are urging everyone to vote in the WZO (World Zionist Organization) election so that observant Jewry will have more power and influence in Israeli government decisions. Not to mention a bigger piece of the financial pie that is distributed to the WZO’s member political parties. I agree with that goal. My only quibble is that the observant vote should vote Mizrachi (the Religious Zionist party) for reasons beyond the scope of this post.

Even though we all seem to be on the same page about this, it just ain’t so. The fact is that the BMG (Lakewood) Roshei Yeshiva are adamantly opposed to it. How opposed? On March 19th, Rav Aharon Feldman addressed BMG, urging anyone with the slightest inclination of participating in that election - not to do so. His opposition is so strong that he declared the Charedi establishments and publications that advocated for it be boycotted!

To be fair, R’ Feldman is consistent. His rejection of Zionism is ideological. He does not grant any religious validity to the state, seeing it as just another secular government that Jews have to deal with the way they would any other country. Only that this one is worse in the sense that it is - and always has been anti-religious.

His point being that participating in a Zionist election for purposes of gaining political and even badly needed financial support is tantamount to recognizing the validity of ‘the evil, anti-religious Zionist government.’

R’ Feldman, who heads Ner Yisroel - a more centrist Charedi Yeshiva - is nevertheless almost Satmar-like in his rejection of Israel’s legitimacy. He differs from them in that he considers it acceptable to participate in their government, just as it would be to participate in any other foreign government - for purposes of representing the needs of his constituents.

This, in and of itself, is not why I have raised the Krum argument. I was made aware of a letter (apparently from a member of that community) published at VIN that made a scathing attack against that event - for what I thought was a good reason.

As Charedi publications go, VIN is the only one with the courage to speak truth to power. Something that previously led to Charedi leadership calling for advertisers to boycott them. (I believe it has since been rescinded.) Now, they did it again by publishing the aforementioned letter. As you can imagine, it got pulled almost as soon as it was posted. It can no longer be accessed at VIN. But the issues raised have not gone away. To put it the way they did in their headline:

    Lakewood Is In Crisis, But Our Leadership Is Busy Yelling About Shtusim

First, the writer noted that R’ Feldman was basically preaching to the choir. No one there was going to vote in the WZO election (sadly). And yet, they stopped all their Torah study to hear a lecture about that.

Secondly, if they are going to interrupt Torah study, there are plenty of crises happening in that community that deserve this kind of attention and are not being sufficiently addressed. If at all.

What are the crises they talked about? The following is from their now-deleted post:

• How many suicides have we buried in Lakewood over the past year?
• How many overdoses have left families shattered beyond repair?
• How many divorces have torn apart homes, leaving children wandering between worlds?
• How many yesomim have been added to our streets in the past year?
• And what about the thousands—yes, thousands—of children and teenagers lost to us?
• The ones smoking on Shabbos, scrolling through TikTok, slipping through our fingers while we waste time on irrelevancies.

Mental illness is rampant and ignored. Families are struggling to put food on their tables. There are streets in Lakewood that are a battleground of pikuach nefashos—life-and-death stakes playing out just beyond the walls of BMG.

And yet, this is what demands our attention? This is why we stop limud haTorah? An election that no one in the room was voting in anyway?

Indeed. If what VIN posted is anywhere near true, then the path upon which the premier Charedi Yeshiva of the world is traveling down is the wrong one. BMG has truly lost its way. The only way to describe what just happened there is to accuse them of what they accuse those the slightest bit to their left of. Despite their otherwise altruistic lives, they have now become Krum.