Give Trump a Chance

Steve Witkoff and the President (Arutz Sheva)

With the best of intentions, sometimes, some of us are just a bunch of worrywarts. We tend to interpret things pessimistically, even when there are clear indications that we should be optimistic. Currently, this is manifesting itself by a number of people criticizing various decisions and events related to the re-election of Donald Trump, particularly concerning his stance on Israel.

I’m not going to delve into all the negatives he has reintroduced to the Oval Office. There are too many to count. One of them is so horrible - so outrageous that even his closest supporters and advisors were shocked. I’m going to talk about the one area where I believe Trump is very positive. His support for Israel.

That is a  consolation for me, A big one. He brings to the White House a return to a more positive attitude toward Israel and its struggle for survival. 

Those who believe that he has no real positive feelings for the Jewish State and motivated only by ‘what’s in it for him’ are blinded by prejudice. Prejudice that is contradicted by a lifetime of strong support, as well as a first term that, by most objective measures, showed the strongest support of any prior administration. Especially if judged by his popularity in Israel at the time. Polls showed he would have won if he had run for prime minister. 

That should not be lost on anyone and demonstrate just how misguided some people are about his motives with respect to the Jewish state. Besides, does it not occur to anyone that Trump might be getting the best of both worlds—serving Israel and serving himself at the same time?

I guess not. They keep saying that his self-serving values do not necessarily serve Israel’s best interests and could, in the end, be quite harmful. Melanie Phillips outlines some of her concerns in an Arutz Sheva oped:

(The deal with Hamas) traps Israel in a potentially exploitative, nightmarish, and agonizing prevarication over the release of all the hostages, while Hamas empowers itself in Gaza.

She also condemns Trump’s Middle East negotiator, Steve Witkoff, saying the following:

Witkoff’s admiration for Qatar appears to know no bounds...

Qatar has been instrumental in bringing mass slaughter. Qatar is behind Hamas. It created it, funds it, and protects its leaders. Qatar promotes the Muslim Brotherhood—the jihadi parent of Hamas… It’s an enemy of the West because it is governed by an Islamist regime that allies itself with other Islamist enemies of the West.

There are also other problematic appointees, like Michael DiMino, deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East. DiMino is an isolationist, which is not necessarily good for Israel either.

Another supposed indicator of a changed policy towards Israel is Trump’s almost symbiotic relationship with Elon Musk. Who seems to be a favorite target of antisemitic accusations. The most recent such accusation stemmed from what appeared to be a Nazi salute at one of his rallies. 

It wasn’t. Both Benjamin Netanyahu and Jonathan Greenblatt acknowledged that. What it was is the hand wave of a man on the autism spectrum. Musk has Asperger’s syndrome, which sometimes leads to awkward comments or jerky movements. He was apparently waving or saluting someone in the audience, and it came off like a Heil Hitler. To the best of my knowledge Hitler was not in the audience. Musk is no more an antisemite than I am.

(As an aside, this should put to rest the notion that people with autism are at a disadvantage when it comes to achievements or making a living. Musk is the founder and CEO of both Tesla and SpaceX, making him the richest man in the world.)

So Aside from Musk, why am I not as worried Philips? Shouldn’t I be concerned about a ceasefire deal that doesn’t accomplish a total victory over Hamas? A deal that frees so many Palestinians with blood on their hands? A deal with a terrorist group that has a track record of violating ceasefires as soon as they think they have the advantage? Only this time with an additional 1,500 terrorists released at their disposal? Has Trump betrayed us?

As I often say, there’s no way of knowing what the future holds. But the one thing I am fairly certain of is that whatever Trump does, he will not let Israel down. Let us examine the problems the worrywarts see.

To point to an appointee who has not said one negative word about Israel - and label him as a danger because he praised an intermediary in a hostage deal is hardly a signal that Trump will change his strongly pro-Israel position. All one has to do to realize just how pro-Israel Trump is - is look at his primary foreign policy appointees. They are as pro-Israel as anyone can get. Not the least of whom is the new ambassador to Israel, who doesn’t even acknowledge the existence of a Palestinian people, never refers to Judea and Samaria as “The West Bank,” and believes Israel’s right to the land is entirely biblical. If that's being anti Israel, I’ll take it.

My message to all the worrywarts out there is to cool it. Don’t listen to all the harbingers of doom and gloom. Instead, give the Trump administration a chance to pursue their own Middle East policy, which does not focus on a Palestinian state as much as it does on expanding the Abraham Accords to more Arab nations. 

One of which, Saudi Arabia, had even made noises about Palestinian leadership looking at Trump’s peace plan put forward in his first term as a realistic option for self determination. Netanyahu had even agreed to it. If that gets done, it will do more than anything else to assure a better future for Palestinians, Israel, and all of its neighbors.

Feminism Cannot Drive Jewish Values

I continue to marvel at the me-ism that has enveloped the far-left wing of Orthodoxy. One would think that Judaism is all about self-fulfillment if one were to look at what an Orthodox feminist considers a victory for Judaism. However, these victories are little more than triumphs for the self-serving goals that feminism, in its current form, represents.

The feminism I supported and had long considered myself a part of was about equality in areas where gender didn’t make a difference. It started as a movement to ensure equal pay for equal work, something worth fighting for. And, truth be told, we’re not fully there yet. At least not entirely. Additionally, it was about mutual respect between the sexes. The idea that men are somehow superior intellectually, emotionally, or in temperament is a stereotype that should have been put to rest long ago.

I am all for that kind of feminism. I always have been. But today, equality between the sexes has been replaced by a goal of self-fulfillment, regardless of where that might lead. When it comes to religious dogma and centuries old tradition, there is no place for feminism. Today’s feminism has nothing to do with denying someone the right to advance in an area traditionally occupied by men. 

But it has everything to do with doing whatever one feels like if it makes them feel good about themselves. If the dogma or tradition does not allow it, it is to be discarded as an antiquated impediment to self-fulfillment. So, as it is defined today, feminism and religion are incompatible - especially if you're an Orthodox Jew. And yet, there are Orthodox Jews and organizations that consider themselves both Orthodox and feminist.

If you are an Orthodox Jew, this contradiction cannot be resolved unless you modify the definition of feminism—limiting it by religious dogma. Orthodox feminists concede this, which is why they haven’t discarded the Mechitza, the most obvious symbol of inequality between the sexes in traditional Orthodoxy. What they will say is, ‘Okay, we have to limit it, but let’s see how far we can push the envelope in other ways.’

This is where the far-left innovation of ordaining women comes in. While there are arguments to be made that today’s rabbinate has no real Halachic standing and therefore has nothing stopping it from being implemented, a woman nonetheless cannot fully comply with other duties often assumed by a rabbi. For example. a woman may not be a Chazan, read the Torah, or be called up for an Aliyah. She may not even be in the same room for prayer much less be counted as part of a Minyan. 

Then there is the plain awkwardness of a woman taking a pulpit in a synagogue and sitting behind the Mechitza for the entire service, Is it possible? Sure. Does it make sense? No. Just because something may be permitted doesn’t mean it ought to be done.

It is a centuries-old tradition that women cannot be rabbis. The argument that tradition can and has been broken when the time or circumstance demanded it has been used to justify ordaining women in our day. And since there is no hard and fast law about ordaining women in its current form, some argue that it should be done. That the time is right. That the culture of our time in fact demands it?

But tradition should never be broken for the sake of personal self-fulfillment—and certainly not if the very idea of women becoming rabbis is generated by a movement that, by definition, overrides Halacha when the two conflict. Even if it doesn’t conflict in this particular case, surely overriding tradition should not be done to serve a purpose driven by that kind of movement.

How do I know that feminism is what motivates these women? Because they actually say so. Whenever the subject comes up, one will inevitably hear the term "breaking the glass ceiling" a lot more than any other reason. Until you challenge them on it. Then they might say it is about fulfilling themselves spiritually as Orthodox Jewish women.

Prior to the mid-20th century, I do not believe there was ever a woman who wanted to be a rabbi. The role of a rabbi was exclusively deemed to be a man's domain, not a woman's.  As noted it was the advent of feminism (as it is understood today) that generated that desire.

That being said, there should be no objection if a woman wants to study Torah, including the material studied for the rabbinate. Jewish knowledge is always a good thing. But what is the point of becoming a rabbi, other than to achieve a sense of self-fulfillment? Is there no better way to do that - that wouldn't be so controversial? Getting the degree should not matter. Acquiring the knowledge is the only thing that should matter. The Chafetz Chaim was not an ordained rabbi for most of his life. Would anyone question his achievements in Torah? Does anyone think he did not feel a sense of self fulfilment?

Rabba Sara Hurwitz discusses the latest achievement in breaking the glass ceiling in her JTA article. When advocating for women in the Orthodox rabbinate she rarely discuss the spiritual value of that. It is almost always about advancing the cause of Orthodox feminism. She opens up her article praising the first woman to be installed as a senior rabbi in an Orthodox synagogue. She calls it a cause for celebration for Orthodox women everywhere. Note that she does not mention how this benefits Judaism or the Jewish people—only that it will make Orthodox women happy. At least those on the far-left who have made a religion out of feminism.

To make matters worse, she points to heterodox rabbis being far ahead of Orthodoxy in this department, saying it’s about time we catch up: 

The journey of Orthodox female rabbis bears striking similarities to the trajectory of the first female rabbis in the Reform movement. While liberal denominations have since made significant strides in women’s representation in rabbinic roles, challenges persist across all streams of Judaism. Looking to other movements, we can better understand the obstacles faced by Orthodox women and the progress that remains to be made.

As though catching up with Reform and Conservative Judaism is a worthy goal. I do not believe it says anywhere in the Shulchan Aruch that we should catch up with heterodox movements that glorify feminism as though it were one of the 613 Mitzvos in the Torah.

I’m sorry, but as far as I’m concerned, this disqualifies her as a bona fide spokesperson for Orthodox Judaism. Using the Reform or Conservative movements as models for Orthodoxy shows that she has lost her way. True, she is not advocating a violation of Halacha, but admiring these movements in any way smacks of legitimizing them.

Despite the progress Rabba Hurwitz is so happy about, I do not believe this is the wave of the future in any segment of Orthodox Judaism. The vast majority of Orthodox Jews, both men and women, reject this kind of radical departure from the norm. So, even if it occasionally shows some movement in that direction - as it did here - the overwhelming sentiment of Orthodox Jewry, which consists mainly of Charedim and Centrists, will never be comfortable with it. To the extent that it grows at all, it will be infinitesimally small by comparison. When feminism becomes a religion that overrides religious dogma and tradition, the only place it can go is outside the pale of Orthodoxy into heterodoxy. And we all know where they are headed. 

What is Modern Orthodoxy?

Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm - a 20^th century modern Orthodox leader

Michael Feldstein published an interview in the Times of Israel with Steven Bayme about the now defunct Modern Orthodox organization, Edah. What it was... whether it had any impact on the modern Orthodoxy of today... and whether there are any current institutions that have taken on its role. That got me thinking about my own version of Modern Orthodoxy. (More about Steven Bayme and Edah later.)

I have long been a proponent of Modern Orthodoxy. I will never forget the pride I felt when in 1962 I joined my alma mater, HTC, as a junior in its Yeshiva High School. HTC was the flagship Yeshiva of Modern Orthodoxy in the Midwest back then. 

The sixties were the peak years for the Conservative Movement. Their synagogues were proliferating like wildfire. Meanwhile many Orthodox Shuls in the Midwest were changing. They were rebuilding in newer neighborhoods and in the suburbs. Many of the lay leaders of those Shuls wanted to eliminate the Mechitza.  Believing it was the American way to have mixed pews in houses of worship. However, they still wanted to remain Orthodox and sought Orthodox rabbis to lead them and turned to HTC graduates. Young rabbis seeking pulpits in those days had little else to choose from if they wanted a career in the rabbinate. 

So they sought guidance from their pre-eminent, highly respected Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Chaim David Regensberg, ZTL. a European trained Talmid Chacham. Surprisingly, he told them to take the position despite the inherent problems. He argued that if they didn’t, those shuls would become Conservative and their members and children will be lost to Judaism. He further argued that in the meantime they would keep the Shul Orthodox in every other way and be able to influence its members to send their children to Orthodox days schools.

Fast forward to today and many would say he was right. Many of those parents did send their children to day schools. Never to return as members having been taught not to Daven a shul without a Mechitza.

Rav Regensberg was severely criticized by the rest of Orthodox rabbinic leadership. They bitterly fought the Traditional Movement. Rabbis that took those Shuls were ostracized

A few years later Rav Ahron Soloveichik was hired as Rosh HaYeshiva of HTC. He told me personally that when he sought advice from recognized Gedolei HaDor of the time about whether he should take the position at HTC, they all urged him to take it for for precisely that reason: To fight the Traditional Movement. He took the job and he fought mightily against the movement. Some would say that it cost him his health.

The Traditional movement is pretty much dead now. Most of those shuls have installed a Mechitza. It was probably more of a death by attrition more than it was from the efforts of the opposition. As members got older and moved away or died, they were not replaced by their children who had either chosen Orthodox Shuls or in some case abandoned observance altogether.

Although Rav Regensberg was right about influencing many parents to send their children to day schools, the movement itself was wrong. There is no better proof of that than becoming extinct. The question remains however, should an Orthodox Shul be built with compromises for purposes of keeping members in the fold - as long as base Halacha is not violated?

If the answer is yes, then Traditional Shuls were a good idea. To the best of my knowledge, there is nothing in the Shulchan Aruch that requires a s Shul to have a Mechitza. It is all based on what the custom was in the days of the Beis HaMikdash. A strong tradition that is followed for centuries to this day,

But the answer is no. One does not break long held tradition to accommodate current cultural influences. An individual desire for self expression - even if it has spiritual roots cannot override that.

 Back to Edah. Among other things, Steven Bayme said the following:

Edah demonstrated the existence of a strong grassroots Modern Orthodox constituency dissatisfied with the Orthodox status quo and particularly its steady drift rightward since 1970 or thereabouts. That constituency remains waiting to be energized.  A recent Nishma poll found, for example, that about a third of self-defined Modern Orthodox Jews favored greater roles for women in Orthodoxy, including clergy.  Edah conferences gave voice to calls for directional shifts within Modern Orthodox ideological thinking and within key Orthodox institutions. 

This was exactly the rationale for Traditional Judaism. The spirit of the times then was of a melting pot philosophy: If we are culturally more like everybody else, it will be easier to remain observant.

Today the spirit of our time is no longer about fitting in. It is about self fulfilment. It is about the feeling of self fulfillment that one will get by advancing the cause they believe in. To that extent they will advocate for any loopholes they can to achieve those goals Jewishly. 

The problem with that is that if enough loopholes are found and applied you can easily end up with a version of Judaism that is unrecognizable. And can easily cross the line into violations of Halacha. At some point a movement will deviate so strongly from the norm it becomes at risk of abandoning Halacha altogether.

Don't think so? Consider this. 

The Conservative Movement is the model for exactly that outcome. They were founded in order to conserve Judaism. They considered themselves to be fully Halachic and did not deviate from what they believed in earnest was the strict letter of Halacha. They even had Poskim that were Talmidei Chachamim. At their founding, their belief system was the same as that of Orthodoxy. Today, their beliefs are considered heretical and many of their own leaders suggest that they abandon their description a Halachic movement since most of them no longer follow Halacha anyway.

So what is Modern Orthodoxy then, if it can’t embrace the kind modernity that Steven Bayme says it should?

For me the answer is simple. It has never changed. But because of far left  ideologues like Mr. Bayme who advocates going so far afield from it Orthodox tradition and values, I find it necessary do differentiate myself as a Centrist. Which breify is defined as the following.

Like the Charedi world, a Centrist fully embraces Halacha and tradition. Our theology is identical. Our attitude about the primary importance of Torah study is the same as is our commitment to Halachic observance. There is no daylight between us that way, The difference is in how we relate to the secular world. Whether in education or in the culture. 

Unlike Charedim, a Centrist places high value in secular knowledge. We see value in all knowledge and value in pursuing it. We do not see it only for its utilitarian value to be pursued only for livlihood purposes. 

We also participate in the culture where it does not conflict with Halacha. We do not necessarily see it as a waste of time (although it could be if over indulged in) - or worse influencing us in negative ways - the way Charedim do.  

At the end of the day, our lifestyles are not that different. We look the same, Daven in the same shuls and might even send our children to the same day schools. But we do not vilify modernity. We embrace what is good and reject what is bad.

A Complicated Man

Hostage families behind the President addressing supporters yesterday (Forward)

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair…

These lines from A Tale of Two Cities by the beloved 19^th century antisemitic English author, Charles Dickens, is kind of how I felt yesterday as I watched the day unfold.

First let me congratulate President Trump for achieving what - 4 short years ago was considered by most people to be impossible. Which is being re-elected president of the United States for a second term after losing the last election; denying it; and then on January 6^th instigating a violent protest bordering on insurrection. 

This time he actually did win the electoral vote as well as the popular vote. I guess the majority of the electorate didn’t really care about the events of January 6^th so much.

That is about as big a ‘wow’ as you can get. And a big message to the Godless amoral progressives who believed the country was moving in their direction. It clearly is not.  Morality is back with a vengeance! However, even though they lost the election, they are a huge minority. Probably close to half the electorate. Which is why the country is so divided.

Most people are not on the fence about Trump. They either despise him or they idolize him. There are those who believe he will either destroy our beloved democracy and those who believe he will make this country great again… greater than ever, even.

The haters and lovers don’t get each other. But they understand even less the small minority of people, like me that see him both ways. The haters interpret everything he does as evil and the lovers see him as the restoration of all that is good in America. I see both. And saw it yesterday.

I think it is safe to say that Donald Trump is not normal. He is a complicated man whose view of reality is often distorted . As is his view of justice. At the same time I often see tremendous empathy and compassion expressed at the pain of some while complete indifference at – or even callousness to - the pain of others.

He is also a bright man who has made a career of negotiating everything. Which is one of his strengths. Everything with Trump is transactional. It’s all about making a deal that is to his - or our country’s advantage (as he sees it). His determination to do what he says he will do regardless of the consequences is legendary. Caring little about what the media or anyone else including what his own supporters might say about it.

This is what I saw yesterday in all its glory. I saw a lot of good and a lot of bad - as I suspected I might. As always the haters and lovers will each disagree with me respectively about the good I see and surely point out why the good I see is bad or the bad I see is good – depending on which side of the love hate dichotomy they are on.

Let me begin with the good. The ceremony was pretty traditional, All living presidents were there as well as their wives. (Except for Mrs. Obama. I thought it was disgraceful to see her husband walking in alone while all the other past presidents walked in accompanied by their wives. They were honoring the moment. The tradition. Not the man taking office. Apparently she could not distinguish between the two. Or didn’t care to. Shame on her.)

It was nice to see YU president Ari Berman – an Orthodox rabbi giving an invocation at the end of the ceremony. This is only the second time an Orthodox rabbi was asked to do it. The first time it was Rabbi Marvin Hier – which took place at Trump’s first inauguration.

What was also good to hear was the President declare something that should be obvious to all but the most ‘woke’  among us. Which is that from now on the US  government will recognize that there are only 2 sexes: male and female. Aside from the economy - issues like this is why the electorate swung Trump’s way. I was also happy to hear that the US will return to an energy policy that will lower prices at the pump and hopefully at the grocery store as well. 

Another nice thing that happened later in the evening yesterday was the unanimous vote by the senate to confirm the most pro Israel Secretary of State in US history, Marco Rubio. 

The proudest moment of the evening was when I realized that Trump had flown in many of the hostage families to attend his inaugural.  After Steve Witkoff addressed the gathered supporters about the president’s role in the ceasefire and hostage release - he asked those hostage families to come up to the stage and shake hands with the president. Which they did and then went up to the stage and stood behind Trump when he next addressed the crowd. 

It felt good to see that happen at the very first moment Trump took office. There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that the compassion he expressed for those families is real and ongoing. 

On a related note those that might be wondering if Trump will control what happens next in Gaza - might be interested in his response to a question about whether he thinks the cease fire will hold. He said he hopes so but he doubted it. And that in any case, it’s not America’s war. That does not sound like somebody threatening severe consequences to Israel if the cease fire is broken and Israel needs to return to war.

The one thing that demonstrates just how distorted his view of justice is - is what happened at the very end of the day in the Oval Office. In a move that surprised me and even some of his strongest supporters including Vice President Vance and Secretary of State Rubio, Trump pardoned (or commuted to time served) every single person convicted of a crime on January 6^th of 2021. All 1500 of them. Including those who committed violence against the police.  

Even the two racist, antisemitic reprobates who head the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers that were convicted of insurrection against the US government were pardoned. The insurrection was something that they actually planned to do. They came locked and loaded. It was not spontaneous. Instead of spending the next 22 years in prison, these insurrectionists get to go home immediately and do it all over again should the occasion arise.

Both Rubio and Vance were recently asked about whether Trump would pardon the violent criminals of that day. And they both said that ‘obviously’ the pardons would not apply to the violent criminals among them. Only those with misdemeanor offenses would be pardoned. And that each pardon would be dealt with on a case by case basis. That didn’t happen. A blanket full pardon for everyone happened.

There is something called TDS – the Trump Derangement Syndrome. That is how some people evaluate those who vilify everything Trump does regardless of how good or bad it might be. But what Trump did here is itself deranged. There is no other way to put it. It shocked just about everyone.

Unfortunately what he did he had every legal right to do as president. But that’s does not make it morally or ethically right. It wasn’t. It was sick.

That being said, there is nothing I or anyone else can do about it. So I am not going to waste my time thinking about it and instead look forward to the good side of Trump doing what he does best. His love of the Jewish people and Israel should serve us well. Returning the nation’s values from a state of amorality to morality (Something that is actually missing from his own character) and common sense was sorely needed and I’m glad to see it being restored.

For Universal Conversion Standards

Rabbi Adam Mintz

One of the most controversial issues in Orthodoxy is Geirus - conversion to Judaism. Although this issue has been under the radar for a while, Rabbi Adam Mintz has resurrected it with his own controversy as head of The Project Ruth Orthodox Conversion Program. The problem with the standards he uses for conversion were immediately made obvious  by Rabbi Mintz (as noted by Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer on Cross Currents) from the following comment he made on a radio talk show:

(The) conversion of active homosexuals is not a problem, explaining that even though Halacha requires that a convert accept the Mitzvos in their entirety, a person whom the beis din knows is violating the Torah and plans.

Although, I am not an expert on Geirus, I do know a thing or two about the requirements as discussed in the Gemarah. These include circumcision (for a man); immersion in a Kosher Mikvah; and  acceptance of all the Mitzvos of the Torah. 

The Gemarah continues - after making a sincere declaration to that effect, the potential convert is then taught some basics (such as Shabbos and Kashrus) and they can convert immediately. Thereafter they should keep learning what the Halachos are and observe them as they learn them. The Gemarah then goes on to say, that even if the convert changes his mind and immediately after conversion decides to purposely violate Halacha,he nonetheless remains a Jew – albeit a sinning Jew.

The problem we face today along these lines is how to judge sincerity. In a rather well known Teshuva (responsa) by R’ Moshe Feinstein - he had declared that we see what follows the conversion. If for example the ‘convert’ celebrates the conversion by going to McDonald’s and having a cheeseburger, there is no  better proof than that - that they were not sincere. That conversion is not valid.

What becomes clear from this is that sincerity in keeping the Mitzvos is mandatory for a conversion to be legitimate. 

Therefore, Rabbi Mintz’s claim that a practicing homosexual’s commitment to observance only means that they accept it in theory but not in practice is not very convincing. To say the least. I therefore agree with Rabbi Gordimer who said:

(The) Project Ruth Orthodox Conversion Program, and that their extraordinarily objectionable endeavors constitute colossal ziyuf ha-Torah (distortion of the Torah) and are bound to irreparably harm the people they purport to help.

In response to Rabbi Gordimer, Rabbi Michael Broyde argued that we should allow for conversion courts with differing and perhaps lower standards. Let them be accepted by the standards of that community and worry about communities that reject them later. And if need be they can go through a second conversion  to the higher standards then - to fit in there. Rabbi Gordimer rejects this as well with the following explanation:

If one undergoes a subpar or questionable conversion, that individual’s descendants will forever bear the consequences. As I wrote in my original article, there are countless cases of heartbreak and tears related by community rabbis whose congregants or their relatives have discovered that their Jewish status, and that of their progeny, is now in jeopardy, due to a questionable or problematic conversion.  

He is of  course right about that. The idea of being accepted here but not there is not acceptance. It is confusion on steroids and ridiculous I therefore agree that conversions should have uniform standards. And that acceptance of full observance is indeed mandatory.

But here is the problem I have. What exactly does ‘highest standards’ mean? In many cases there is no universal agreement on what that constitutes. To cite one example (and there are many) the Eruv comes to mind. An Eruv is an imaginary Halachic ‘wall’ that turns a quasi public domain into a private domain – allowing one to carry there on Shabbos. Doing so without an Eruv is a serious Halachic violation. There are many Jews that rely on Poskim that may permit a certain Eruv. While there are other Poskim who invalidate that Eruv – making carrying within it a serious violation of Halacha in their view

The obvious question is - should deliberate use of this Eruv invalidate the conversion since not everyone accepts its Halachic viability?

This is where I think we need to make clear about what ‘highest standards’ means. I would change it to universal standard. Which should allows the most lenient acceptable standard of Halacha be the standard by which converts be required to observe. As long as there are reliable Poskim that allow for that lenient standard, that should be the base. If a convert wants to be stricter, that is up to them. But the standard must be the most lenient one. 

The idea of rejecting a convert because he uses an Eruv that not every Posek accepts should not be an impediment to conversion. And yet I have heard horror stories about rabbis that invalidated a conversion of someone who did not follow his stricter interpretation of a particular Halacha. And that should should never be allowed to happen.

My two cents.

Free at Last

Emily Damari, Doron Steinbrecher and Romi Gonan (CBS)

I admit to choking up. Moments ago (as of this writing) Hamas terrorists released Emily Damari, Doron Steinbrecher and Romi Gonan, 3 of the approximately 100 hostages remaining in their brutal captivity. 

I cannot imagine the feelings of relief and joy of the mothers embracing their daughters for the first time after 470 days of not knowing for sure whether they were alive or dead… or what condition they were in if alive.

There is no monetary values that can be placed upon what these families felt. Any parent can surely empathize with what it must be like.

But there are downsides to this undeniably joyous moment.

One of which is that the bulk of those hostages are still in captivity. Hopefully that is just a technicality that will be remedied somewhat with a total of 33 hostages released piecemeal during the first phase of the deal which is of a six-week duration.

Another downside with repercussions for the state of Israel is that during this same six week period, Israel must release Palestinians (90 as I understand it) held in their prisons. How many of them have blood on their hands is hard to know, but surely some do. As many critics of this deal have noted this increases the danger to Israeli citizens. Masking matters worse is that the second phase of the deal requires over a thousand additional Palestinians prisoners to be relased for the remainder of the hostages. I don’t believe  I can overstate the level of increased anxiety this poses for the Israeli people.

It should also be noted that details of the second phase still needs to be negotiated. The downside of that is that if there is no agreement Israel will resume the war. 

But there are some positive things the deal incudes that make all this a bit more palatable. One of which is that Hamas realizes this and has agreed to it.

More importantly the deal provides that after Israel withdraws, Hamas can no longer rule over Gaza. Gaza must have new leadership from among Palestinians not associated with Hamas. Should that not happen Israel will resume its war in Gaza for that reason. Hamas agreed to this as well. 

Hamas also agreed to a buffer zone around the perimeter of Gaza to be occupied and controlled by Israel. 

To the best of my knowledge these are the main elements of the deal agreed to by all parties, Israel,  Hamas, The US and apparently even the UN.

A  word about the increased risk to Israel. Yes. It’s real. No doubt about that. But those who blame October 7^th on the release of over a thousand Palestinians to Hamas for Gilad Shalit a few years ago are missing some key points. True - the architect of the October 7^th massacre was Yahya Sinwar, who was among the terrorists released for Shalit. The argument being made is that we are making the same  mistake all over again. 

I do not consider that a mistake. First - the people saying that are forgetting where the real blame lies. Which was correctly identified from the very beginning: The massive failure of Israel’s military intelligence apparatus. Had Israel been ‘awake’ on that day. None of this would have happened.

Secondly anyone that believes that without Sinwar this wouldn’t have happened is apparently unaware that Hamas has thousands more like him that could have easily planned and executed it too.Or  something like it.

This doesn’t ,mean that we shouldn’t be worried about proven terrorists with blood on their hands being released and trying it again. Of course we should. Israel knows this and hopefully is far better prepared this time. I have confidence that this time with God’s help they will be on their toes and rise to the occasion 

I therefore have no regrets supporting the deal that got Gilad Shalit released. It’s true that I made the same argument then. But it was just as valid then just as it is now.  What went wrong is that Israel  failed in that mission on that fateful October 7^thday. I don’t think  they will ever drop the ball like that again.

Of interest is President Biden's comments upon the release of the hostages, crediting Israel’s successes in the war (with full US support) as the reason Hamas accepted the deal now whereas they rejected it in the past:

Why the Deal Didn’t Happen Last May

It’s the media. It’s their bias and they lead public opinion. They can’t stand Netanyahu. At no time has the animus against him been more evident than now. Once they made up their collective minds about him, he is painted in the darkest of tones. The latest manifestation of this animus is being expressed about the current ceasefire/hostage deal between Israel and Hamas.

In just about every interview of a Biden administration official who has been involved with trying to get a deal since just about the very beginning of the war, they were asked why now? Why was a deal that was laid on the table last May being agreed to now? 

The implication is obvious. Netanyahu didn’t want to make a deal because he would lose power - fearing his government would collapse by the resignation of his far right coalition members. The implication being that he did are about the hostages. He just cared about winning the war without even defining what that meant. 

That narrative has been quickly adopted by all the Netanyahu haters. Both here and in Israel. 

But in every case the Biden official who was asked that ‘loaded’ question the answer was the same. The reason the deal was not made back in May or in subsequent attempts at it is because EVEN THOUGH ISRAEL HAD ACCEPTED EVERYTIME Hamas rejected it - every time.

Why are they accepting it now? Because they have been isolated through the loss of Hezbollah at the hands of Israel with the approval of tye US, the subsequent fall of Assad’s Syria, and a weakened Iran. 

Hamas itself was weakened by losses of their own leaders. So they have decided to drop  some of the additional demands made and accept the deal put on the Table by Biden.

One can quibble about whether this is a good deal for Israel or not. But one cannot blame the delay on a deal that was available in May on Netanyahu. 

I would suggest that the ‘blame Netanyahu for everything’ crowd try to see things as they are. Not as their biases have led them to believe.

Turning Yeshiva Students into Criminals

I agree in principle. But I question the wisdom of implementing a law based on it - if the results are counterproductive.

YWN reports the following:

The IDF announced on Friday morning that it has initiated criminal proceedings against bnei yeshivos who did not report to enlistment centers after receiving draft orders.

According to the IDF spokesperson’s statement, anyone designated for enlistment who did not comply with the recruitment order he received will be considered to have committed a criminal offense.

The IDF said that the decision is based “on Section 12 of the Security Service Law, after all necessary processes have been exhausted.”

“The IDF is the army of the people and operates professionally and officially to enlist all who are required to enlist, in accordance with the law and the instructions of the political leadership,” the statement continued.

“The IDF will continue to enforce the law and take action against candidates for service who violate the law and do not report to the recruitment office.”

Until recently (before the war) the majority of Charedi Yeshiva students had registered for the draft as per the instructions of the two most respected senior rabbinic leaders of recent times: Rav Aharon Leib Steinman and Rav Chaim Kanievsky. Once registered they could ask for and receive deferments as long as they continued their full time Torah study. These two great leaders belived in compromise that worked for both the Charedi world and the government and thereby avoided conflict.

There was, however, Rav Shmuel Auerbach, a ‘renegade’ rabbi (so determined by one of the aforementioned rabbis) who did not believe in compromise. He ordered his students in Jerusalem to violate the law and not register at all. That resulted in arrests that were followed by mass protests by students under his influence.

Now under the leadership of new senior rabbinic leaders, they have ordered all students to no longer register. This is their reaction to the IDF need for more manpower due to the duration of the war and seeking relief from a large population base that had been fully exempt. 

Now that the IDF is threatening arrests, Trump’s prediction of all hell to pay may come to fruition. Only not they way he meant it.

One may recall what happened to the students who chose to follow Rav Auerbaqch and refused to register. When one of them was arrested, there were massive protests by hordes of those students that disrupted the peace. Traffic was blocked and no one could get to their destinations, including emergency vehicles.  Violence followed in some cases.

Imagine what it will look like if a student is arrested now. That scenario will be multiplied many times over. It would amount to a civil war. One that would surely end with violence from  both sides. I don’t want to see that. Even if in principle the IDF would be right to arrest draft dodgers. Especially during a war (if the ceasefire/hostage deal somehow falls apart).

My guess is that Charedi leaders believe that the threat of something like this happening will be enough to stop the IDF from doing it, But the IDF just insisted that are going to. 

Charedim believe that God is on their side and that they will prevail. But what if God is on the side of rabbinc leaders who say that IDF service is mandatory under current conditions? Who is to say that God is not in their side?

I don’t want to see what will amount to a civil war. Jew against Jew. I don't want to see masses of Yeshiva students in jail.

As I have said so many times - it doesn’t have to be this way. Even if the Charedi rabbinic leaders are right about Yeshiva students being fully exempt, it cannot be the case that all of them are.

The reality is that the IDF has a quota in mind. They have a manpower shortage that could easily be filled up by a small percentage of the Charedi world. Probably less than 10% of them. Can it be the case that every single Charedi student registered in a Yeshiva is pulling his weight?  Frankly 10% is probably a very conservative estimate of those that are not. And some of those aren't learning at all. They are just registered but end up hanging out all day. Not that they are evil or lazy. They are just not cut out for as life spent all day in the Beis HaMedrash.

Why shouldn’t they be required to fill the gap?  If I am not mistaken the very same leaders that so vehemently oppose any kind of  draft law concede that those students should serve in the IDF. Is there no room for compromise? I guess not.

That there is no willingness to compromise is the problem. They are not following in the peaceful ways of their abovementioned predecessors who did.

Now that push is coming to shove, I fear the consequences. I believe if anything terrible happens the fault will lie at the feet of these very leaders. 

But even if the Charedi leaders are to blame arresting masses of Yeshiva students will not change anything. It will instead probably harden their resolve to resist. 

What's the alternative for attaining a just solution to this issue? No clue. However, now that the war seems to be coming to a close, things may ease up a bit. 

On the other hand resentment from the rest of Israel against the Charedi world because of their refusal to serve in the IDF during war will surely linger. This problem will not go away until a compromise is reached. Once the war is over, perhaps that will be the time to make it happen.

A Heterodox Rabbi Who Gets It

Yeshiva University - where Modern Orthodox rabbis are trained

I’m not sure if you’ve heard, but there is a massive shortage of non-Orthodox rabbis.

These are the words of Joshua Rabin – one such non-Orthodox rabbi. Which is yet another nail in the coffin of Reform and Conservative Judaism. I say this with no ill intent. I say it simply as the undisputed fact it appears to be about the once powerhouse movements considered to be the future of Judaism in America a few short decades ago.

Calling it a crisis, Rabbi Rabin adds:

With a generation of rabbis nearing retirement and fewer students entering non-Orthodox rabbinic programs, the situation will likely worsen in the coming years, perhaps decades.

I don’t think there is any doubt about that. It is a story of an American Jewish experience devoid of actual Jewish content.  Attending afternoon Hebrew schools like the one he attended - were once part and parcel of the American Jewish experience Every synagogue had one. But by now they have just about disappeared.  

That’s because very few parents of students attending those schools had any personal investment in the Judaism being taught there. If you don’t see it at home, learning about it in school is not going to motivate change that might seem odd by American cultural standards. Becoming a rabbi raised in circumstances like that - as did Rabbi Rabin is an anomaly.

What makes this essay somewhat different from other treatments of this problem is that he gets it. Rabbi Rabin understands exactly what is missing from those movements and suggests changes that have a proven track record of success. Here is what he said:

We can’t anticipate when someone will deepen their commitment to Jewish life; kal va’homer, all the more so, if and when they decide to enter the rabbinate. But the longer a person goes without Jewish engagement, the less likely they are to start.

For over three decades, however, the Jewish institutional world systematically neglected the very institutions we need to thrive to maximize our chances of richly educating the most significant number of Jews such that they might choose the rabbinate... 

In Bava Batra 21a, our Sages credit Joshua ben Gamla with ensuring the vibrancy of Torah learning when he decreed that Jewish children should begin their studies at age six... over time, this decision to start requiring education at an early age is what allowed the Jewish people to become “a small population of highly literate people, who continued to search for opportunities to reap returns from their investment in literacy.”

Non-Orthodox Judaism operates in an environment (of) institutional decay coupled with a Jewish populace largely deficient in Jewish literacy. Like in Joshua ben Gamla’s era, we will not innovate our way out of this problem, because the problem is not about innovation — it’s about our collective negligence of the institutions whose success or failure holds the key to whether or not we will find a solution.

Indeed. Couldn’t have said it better myself. My only quibble is, ‘Why re-invent the wheel?’ If Rabbi Rabin is serious about the cure for what ails American Jewry (and I think he is) let him turn his attention to the schools that already exist. Orthodox Jewish day schools and high schools exist in spades. Why not utilize what’s already there instead of investing time and huge sums of money to build new schools with new budgets to run them?

It's true that Orthodox schools cannot possibly handle the overload of children being sent to them by unaffiliated Jews if they all decided to suddenly do it all at once. (If only that were the problem.) But getting American Jewry en masse to become committed enough to send their children to our day schools will not happen overnight. It will very likely be a gradual process that schools will be able to handle and grow at an equivalent pace.

Based on his article, my impression of Rabbi Rabin is that he is a sincere Jew who wants to see the Jewish people flourish. And that nothing would  please him more than if one of his secular congregants became more observant. Committed rabbis like this far prefer becoming more religious than going the other way. If one of their members goes from being non observant to becoming Orthodox, they consider it a victory!

Imagine the possibilities if we could convince the ‘Rabbi Rabins’ of Judaism to work with us instead of competing with us.

Pipe dream? Maybe. But if Rabbi Rabin really wants to see more rabbis serving the American Jewish community, why not go this route? There are many modern Orthodox rabbis that would fit quite nicely into this new cohort of Orthodox Jews. My advice: Try it. You might like it.

If Trump and Netanyahu are Behind it, It Must be Bad

How much do I hate thee? Let me count the ways

Thank God! It appears that for the first time since Israel's defensive war in Gaza began, Israel is on the verge of deal with Hamas - ending the war and bringing the hostages home. Both sides (Hamas and Israel) have agreed with the broad outlines of the deal and are now apparently working out the details. 

I for one am happy about the deal. I want to see those hostages back home with their families. I want Israeli soldiers out of harms way. Finally getting their lives back. Returning to their families, jobs and careers. 

I trust that neither Netanyahu nor the majority of his governing coalition would  agree to any deal that would harm Israel. Not now and not in the future. Despite protestations from right wing extremist members of his government and their supporters in the public and in the media. They consider the deal a disaster! 

In any case, it is not up to Netanyahu alone to consummate this deal. He must submit it to his governing coalition for a vote. And there is every indication is that it will pass. Hamas got the memo from Trump which may in part be the reason the have already accepted this deal.  

Bearing this good news in mind, it amazes me just how blinded people can get by hate. If you hate someone enough, there is no way anything they do can be seen in a positive light. Even if the hated individual completely changes course into the direction you have advocated - those who hate him will find fault with him even though they once criticized him for not taking that position. 

Which in my view is sad… so sad… it’s a sad, sad situation. And becoming more and more absurd.