Reading the Kesubah at a Wedding

Is there is any problem with a woman reading a Kesubah at a wedding? I have never seen nor heard of any Orthodox wedding where this has taken place. Not even in the most extreme left wing of Orthodoxy.

Just to be clear, I am not Paskning - issuing a Halachic ruling. Nor do I advocate anyone trying this. But from a purely academic standpoint, I don't see why it shouldn’t be permitted. The only purpose for reading a Kesubah is to separate the Kedushin from the Nisuin. These are the two basic components required in a Jewish marriage ceremony.

First there is the Kedushin – also called Erusin in the Gemarah. It is the betrothal and first part of the ceremony. The Chasan gives the Kallah a ring valued at least a Sheva Perutah – a halachicly minimal required value. He places it on her index finger and says to her the words in Hebrew, ‘Harei At Mekudeshes Li B’ Taba’as Zu K’Daas Moseh V’Yisroel’ – ‘You are hereby sanctified to me with this ring – according to the laws of Moses and Israel’. This binds the couple together as husband and wife. But it does not allow for conjugal relations.

The second component of the wedding ceremony which allows the newly married couple conjugal relations is called Nisuin. This is when the Brichas Nisuin – the Sheva Brachos or 7 blessings – are made under the Chupah.

It is the established practice in all segments of Halachic Judaism to separate these two components of the ceremony – the Kidushin and Nisuin - by reading the Kesubah – the marriage contract. However, there is no real Halachic purpose for doing so.

Ironically the honor of reading a Kesubah is usually given to a prominent Rabbi. I suppose that’s because it is a very difficult document to read. It is written in un-vowelized Aramaic. And I suppose that since it is early in the ceremony right after the betrothal - and also a somewhat lengthy honor - it is given to a distinguished guest. But in point of fact the reading of this document is perhaps the least important feature of the entire wedding ceremony – having no bearing at all on the validity of the marriage.

That said, I could see how there would be major objections. For people who are not used to seeing women doing these kinds of things - it can be pretty shocking. There would probably be quite an uproar if this were to be done at any Orthodox wedding.

But I see no Halachic problem with it at all. It would seem to be no different than a woman addressing a mixed audience at a banquet. And while there are plenty of Charedi organizations that do not allow that, there are plenty of other Orthodox organizations that do - and they are attended by the very same Charedi Rabbis that do not allow it at their own organization's banquets. And to the best of my knowledge there has never been any protest of any kind by them - Halachic or otherwise - against organizations that allow women to speak.

Let us go a step further and ask whether women may make the actual Birchas Nisuin or Sheva Brachos. The wedding is not valid until these blessings are made. Is the marriage only valid if men make those Brachos? I would think not. Since both men and women are obligated in the Birchas Nisuin, a woman can be Motzie (fulfill the obligation of) a man just like a man is Motzie a woman.

I am willing to bet that this will never happen though. Nor will we ever even see a woman reading a Kesubah. But I don’t see why not.

Angel at the Fence - a False Story

Slate magazine has an interesting article about how Hollywood tends to load up on holocaust themed movies near the end of the year when Academy Awards are considered. His article is a bit too flippant for me since I tend to shy away from discussions that are anything but serious when it comes to that subject.

That said, he may be right about his categorizations of the holocaust film genre. But does that really matter? Not to me. What is important is that these films continue to be made and that they are among the most honored films by both movie critics and Hollywood insiders. ‘Schindler’s List’ is considered by most critics to be one of the most important films ever made. And ‘Shoah’ is considered to be one of the most important documentary films ever made. There are so many films of that quality it would fill up the page just to list them.

I have often blamed Hollywood for just the state of sexual immorality into which this country has descended. And the rest of the world has descended even further thanks in no small part to Hollywood which exports these films to foreign countries that are eager to emulate American culture. They now outdo us in terms of immorality. So yes, I believe it is Hollywood that is most (though not exclusively) responsible for the decline in the sexual mores of the civilized world.

Hollywood’s entertainment industry is rightly condemned by many rabbinic authorities for spreading their immoral sexual message. There will be no argument from me about the nature of the industry. My argument is only in how to deal with it. But that is not the subject of this essay. I now come to praise Hollywood, not condemn it.

When it comes to remembering the holocaust, no one does it better than Hollywood. They refuse to allow the holocaust to die. They continue – year after year – to keep it in the consciousness of the world. If there is anyone who has honored the call of 'Never again' - it is Hollywood by not allowing the world to forget. And for that we owe them a tremendous debt of gratitude.

But even that can be carried to far. Hollywood is currently working on a holocaust story that turns out to be a hoax. Until very recently they stood by the claim of the author of that story, Herman Rosenblat, that it was true. But faced with mounting evidence, Mr. Rosenblat has confessed that he fabricated the whole thing.

Hollywood is still going ahead with the project - but as fiction. Normally I wouldn’t object to a story like this which is very dramatic and quite plausible as long as it was clearly labeled as fiction. But in this case - they ought to pull the plug on it. A story that was first touted as true and has since been debunked, should not see the light of day.

It isn’t just a beautiful fictional story anymore. It is a debunked story that was passed off as the truth. It rewards a liar for lying. The negative publicity associated with the genesis of this movie will generate more harm than the story itself will generate good. To their credit, Berkley Books who were about to publish Mr. Rosenblat's fake memoir, 'Angel at the Fence,' has canceled it.

The fact is that what Herman Rosenblat and his wife Roma did is perpetrate a fraud. And it is a Chilul HaShem when a Jew does that. It is true that they are not religiously observant. But the Chilul HaShem remains. They are seen in the eyes of the world as the ‘people of the book’. Had they been obervant the Chilul HaShem would have been greatly magnified. Just as it would have been with Bernard Madoff. But in both cases the Chilul HaShem remains.

What this event does is feed holocaust revisionists. They use stories like this to try and discredit our legitimate claims about the holocaust – saying that at best our claims are exaggerated.

There should be no pass given to the Rosenblats. What they did cannot be tolerated. It has to be completely condemned. The holocaust does not need fictional embellishments of made up stories – lies passed off as truth. The truth was bad enough - to say the least!

Herman Rosenblat is a holocaust survivor. That makes criticism of him very difficult for me. I never condemn survivors because I cannot put myself in their shoes. So if a survivor who was observant before the war comes out of that experience non observant, I dare not question it. As Dr. Eliezer Berkovits writes in his book ‘Faith after the Holocaust’ all victims of the holocaust are holy - religious or not. They have literally gone through hell on earth.

I'm told that the Satmar Rebbe had a similar attitude. There is a story about a holocaust survivor who used to smoke on Shabbos. The Satmar Rebbe was of course upset by this. But supposedly he said that this survivor had already paid his debt in hell and will go straight to Gan Eden - heaven - after his passing. But still, he shouldn't smoke on Shabbos because 'Si Past Nisht far a Yid' - it is inappropriate for a Jew (to smoke on Shabbos). I don't know how true that story is but I believe it captures the essence of his attitude about holocaust survivors.

This couple may end up getting a free pass to Gan Eden too. But that does not excuse what they did nor does it lessen the Chilul HaShem. It has contributed mightily to the fodder of holocaust deniers.

The Embarrassment that is Agudah in Israel

Yet another gutsy article from Jonathan Rosenblum. This time it is in the Jewish Observer where Jonathan takes to task the Israeli Agudah and contrasts it with it with the American Agudah.

For those who don’t know these are two separate entities. Both are products of the same philosophy and are an outgrowth of the original movement founded in Europe almost a century ago (1912).

Their guiding principles are the same. But the two entities could hardly be more different. They both proclaim to be of the philosophy that seeks to combine all of Orthodoxy under one umbrella organization led by the greatest Torah figures of the generation. But that’s as far as it goes. Their differences are far greater than the similarities.

I have said this before. The social activist side of Agudah in America has one of the most effective lobbying agencies for Orthodoxy in America. They have cultivated good relations with both the legislative and executive branches of government and have over the years been responsible for some very important legislation as it pertains to all Orthodox Jews- no matter what their Hashkafa.

By contrast Israel’s Agudah is little more than a political party interested in how much money they can get from the government. They do that by 'selling' their votes in the Knesset to the ruling coalition - that needs their vote on their own legislation. They get 'paid' in earmarks to the budget that goes to the institutions of their choice.

These ‘earmark’ - pork barrel -additions to the budgets are important because the state coffers are many times greater than the philanthropies from which they recieve donations. The constant wrangling for dollars among the factions in the Charedi parties is their most visible aspect . For decades individual members of the Knesset had the authority to dole out government cash to their personally designated organizations and institutions.

This factionalism has resulted in giving up Jerusalem to a secular mayor. They had a Charedi mayor: Uri Lupoliansky. He was popular among all Jews in the city – religious and non religious alike. The odds are he would have won handily.

But he didn’t run because of a power sharing agreement. The two main factions each had their own candidate and the agreement was that the two factions would take turns sharing power. When Mr. Lulpoliansky’s turn as mayor was up - the other faction got their turn. Of course their candidate, Rabbi Meir Porush did not have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the election. But it didn’t matter. That faction wanted it’s turn.

I’m told that Rav Elyashiv was approached about whether they should run Mr. Lupoliansky anyway. He said, no. He keeps his promises. It would be a Chilul HaShem, he said, to break them.

The question is, why make this power-sharing deal in the first place? I guess they think in terms of ‘strength in numbers’. The more united they are as a voting block in the Knesset, the more government funding they can get.

It is truly a shame that the religious parties in Israel are so divided. I don’t know how many religious members there are in the Knesset but I’ll bet that if all Shomer Shabbos Jews would combine they would have one of most powerful parties in Israel. But let’s leave that alone for now. The Religious Zionist parties and religious members of the secular parties are not about to join Agudah. But even had Agudah itself remained united it would have been huge.

How divided is Agudah? It was always divided. In 1988 Degel Hatorah was created by Rav Shach –slitting off from Agudah. It left the Agudah in the hands of Chasidic Rebbes - primarily of the Gerrer Rebbe if I recall correctly. As Jonathan points out - until then Agudah was little more than a collection of highly distinct factions. And before that Sepahrdim broke off – under Rav Ovadia Yosef to found their own political party: Shas.

I guess if you have three Jews there has to be four parties.

Degel has since re-united with Agudah but as mentioned earlier but on condition there would be a power rotating agreement. That caused them to lose Jerusalem to a secular Jew.

I recall that Bnei Brak had a similar power sharing arrangement. In their case either side would have won the election – no secular candidate would even dream of running for mayor of Bnei Brak. But the sad thing was that a proven effective mayor – highly rated by even secular standards - was forced to hand over the reins to an untested mayor simply because it was his turn. Is that any way to run a city?

Nothing demonstrates the shambles of the Agudah in Israel more than the mayoral election. One of the biggest figures in Agudah is the Gerrer Rebbe openly opposed the candidacy of Rabbi Meir Porush. His Chasidim were actually encouraged to vote for the secular candidate. I doubt that Mr. Porush would have won even of the Gerrer Chasidim would have voted for him. But this shows just how counterproductive the Agudah in Israel is. This is ironic considering the growth of the Orthodox demographic there. Their population grows they had a winning candidate – a successful and popular incumbent mayor - and they nonetheless chose to ‘snatch defeat from the jaws of victory’.

Not that I think the newly elected secular mayor, Nir Birkat, will necessarily be a bad for religious Jews in Jerusalem. He may very well turn out to be a good mayor who will serve all the citizens of Jerusalem. The now vilified Ehud Olmert in fact had a great relationship with the Charedi population when he was mayor. Birkat may very well do the same thing - if he wants a second term. What better way to get it than to please the largest single demographic in Jerusalem?

Agudah in Israel is an embarrassment. They have no grass roots support. Almost all the active members are paid employees of one or another of their factions. Even the average Charedi in Israel has little if anything to do with it. The best known members of Agudah are its politicians who are seen mostly as wrangling for government dollars.

That one of their own living in Israel, Jonathan Rosenblum, recognizes this and publishes it in an Agudah publication is pretty amazing.

Gaza

Finally the Israeli government has decided to act with force. It took a called off cease-fire on the part of Hamas to do it. Hamas has resumed shelling Israel with barrage of rockets after a relatively peaceful truce. Israel has retaliated:

Israel Air Force warplanes struck at least 60 Palestinian targets in the Gaza Strip early Sunday, after a day of intensive air strikes that killed some 230 Palestinians and wounded close to 800.

Those who read this blog regularly know my penchant for peace. I am a strong proponent of 'land for peace'. But only if one can achieve a true peace with it. That has been proven to be a virtual impossibility. So at this point in time I am completely opposed to 'land for peace'. It would have to be proven to within a shadow of a doubt that giving the Palestinians a State would result in peaceful co-existence in order for me to return to that position.

Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Islamic Fundamentalist terror organizations have assured that this will never happen as long as they have even one member left standing. It took giving them the Gaza Strip to prove that point. They could have set up a country. Israel would have helped them. Instead they chose to hit Israel with everything they have using Gaza as their new and closer base of attack.

At this point in time Israel has no alternative but to defend itself. And defending it self means Palestinian civilian casualties Hamas operates out of a civilian population - daring Israel to retaliate so that they can have those casualties. And if Palestinian children are killed or wounded – all the better. They garner more sympathy that way! This way can show how much suffering the ‘evil’ Israeli ‘Nazi-like’ occupiers of holy Arab Land in Palestine inflict.

Israel therefore has no alternative to doing what they did. And as noted above there were many civilian casualties. That has angered Hamas leaders who are calling for reprisals by any and all willing to attack Israel or Israelis in any way they can. Demonstrations abound.

I believe that at this point Israel should re-take Gaza. Perhaps that is their ultimate goal. They have called up 6500 reserve troops and are amassing tanks on the Gaza border. Once there Israel should militarize Gaza. No civilian population allowed. No settlements. Just military bases. They should seek out and kill or arrest every Hamas leader as a war criminal – They should not be treated any differently than Nazi war criminals were treated in Nuremberg. Those who point to all the social services Hamas provides to their people - so as to prove they are not all about terror - are of a morally repugnant view. I does not matter. Hitler was just as nice to Aryans – his people. Murderers are murderers.

Of course this action – even if they go to the extent of re-taking Gaza – will not change the dynamic enough to reconsider 'land for peace'. The Arab nations will scream bloody murder. And their European lapdogs will be right there next to them condemning Israel in the United Nations. So Hamas et al will live on to fight another day. As long as Islamic Fundementalism exists, their can be no peace. Any one who thinks it can is just plain naïve. Islamism itself must be destroyed if Israel is ever to consider making peace with the Palestinians via a Palestinian State. How likely is that? Not very.

And that’s why I applaud President Bush. He understands Islamic Funementalist terrorism. And he has courageously supported this action. He rightly blames Hamas for their own trouble - a fact that should be recognized by the Palestinians themselves. Fat chance.

President George Bush has proven himself to be a true friend of the Jewish people and the State of Israel. That he does so when the vast majority of Jews oppose him and voted against him in both election says much about his character. Gerorge Bush does what he believes is right, not what he thinks will make him popular. He is truly a great man - one of the Chasidei Umos HaOlam, a righteous gentile.

History will ultimately be the judge as to whether he will be treated overall as a great President or not. But to the Jewish people there can be no doubt. He has proven his mettle with us. He is one of best friends of the Jewish people to ever hold the high Office of President of the United States. I think that most Orthodox Jews already know that.

Whether President elect Barrack Obama will be of a similar mindset remains to be seen. He has not yet commented – as of this writing – on the Gaza invasion. My hope is that he will support it the same way President Bush has. If he does, that will go a long way to dispelling my initial fears about how strong his support will be. One thing seems certain. The way he responds now will set the tone for the future. We’ll see.

The Sins of the Fathers

There is a marvelous essay by Rabbi Gil Student on the issue of blogging which I highly recommend. I believe it touches upon all of the aspects of this genre of communication. It is very thoughtful and examines the pros and cons honestly and forthrightly. It is truly a must read for all who participate in any way in the blog world – whether as a blogger, commenter, or reader. And it is a counter to the hyperbolic rhetoric of those who unconditionally condemn bloggers and blogging outright.

Blanket condemnations and bans are indeed the modus operandi of some of the more extreme rabbinic leaders on the right. Instead of the nuanced and balanced approach of more moderate Charedim - and the rest of Orthodoxy - they will just condemn the entire enterprise. And though they will admit that there is a something to be gained even by their own constituency, on some blogs - they nevertheless believe the down side is so bad that it justifies a total ban. ‘It isn’t worth it’ - is the claim made about the good side since the bad side is so vile and the dangers so great.

I have said many times about modern technology like the Internet - that it is not the technology that is evil but the application of technology that can be and often is. And even though I too – just like the most right wing of Charedim – believe that the pure vileness, level of porn, or heresy available on some blogs is very dangerous to certain individuals – it still does not justify dismissing the entire medium – any more than any other technology that can be misused should be dismissed.

Rabbi Student makes a valid comparison to telephones. They can be used for extremely bad purposes including such things as phone sex… or the promotion of heresy. Just to cite one example: A phone call to one of those 900 phone sex numbers can very easily be made by an adolescent in the privacy of his own bedroom. Should we ban telephones? No Gadol would say that.

There was one line in his essay that really troubles me. And it is very telling about the extent to which those who would ban bloggers are willing to go:

The mashgiach in Lakewood said that there should be no room in yeshivos for the children of bloggers. I kid you not.

The Mashgiach would deny my son entry to his - or any – Yeshiva. This is Torah?! This is what the Mashgiach feels is beneficial to the Torah world?! ...that the sins of the fathers should impede the education and Chinuch of their children who are in no way responsible for what their fathers or mothers do?! Who is he really punishing here? Not me. Not even my son. But Klal Yisroel itself.

The Torah world would be a lot poorer if the great potential of the children whose parents they do not approve of were denied the opportunity to learn in the great Yeshivos. Despite my objections to some of the things going on there, and my differences with their Hashkafos there is no doubt that the level of Limud Hatorah is very intense. The depth and scope of the Torah learning in these Yeshivos is tremendous – unparalleled in modern times. How dare anyone suggest that the children of bloggers be denied the opportunity to learn Torah in that environment – in that way?

What if that child is the next Rav Moshe or Rav Aharon Kotler? By denying someone with great potential the ability to learn Torah in an institution like Lakewood he is denying the world the benefit of that person’s potential. Does he think that bloggers' Hashkafos will ‘rub off’ on the children? Often the children of the most Modern Orthodox – and blogging - Jews become the most Charedi of Jews themselves, even before they enter the big Yeshivos. Why punish the child for the sins of the father – especially when the child himself may even agree with the very Hashkafos that such bans are trying to promote?

I think it behooves the Mashgiach of Lakewood to re-think his attitude. I am not even asking him to repeal his ban – although I strongly disagree with it and think he should. I am simply asking him to stop punishing his own constituency by denying potential Gedolim to learn in his Yeshiva just because he disapproves of their fathers.

They may very well have the potential to become the rabbinic leaders – Gedolim – we need, that are so sorely lacking in our day. Because by denying them their Torah learning, he denies it to Klal Yisroel their Torah. And this is not what a Mashgiach of a great Yeshiva should be doing.

This is not to say that one cannot become a Gadol unless he attends Lakewood. I have yet to see a Rav Moshe emerging from there. And the argument can be make that Gedolim like Rav Moshe don’t need Lakewood to achieve what they did. But denying a great school to a potential Gadol would be like denying the next Albert Einstein entry to Harvard. And that would be a disservice to mankind.

No matter how great one’s potential in any filed is or how unnecessary formal education might have been to great people in the past, denying potential ‘greats’ entry to the great schools for reasons unrelated to their potential is wrong and counterproductive.

Misyavnim and the Power of the Pen

Yeshiva World News has an interesting article ‘re-printed’ from the Yated by Rabbi Pinchos Lipshutz, its editor.

It is about Chanukah and Misyavnim. Misyavnim were the Jews who during the Maccabee era advocated the Helenization of all Jews. They believed that by abandoning Torah and Mitzvos – even one as fundamental as Bris Mila - they would better their lives.

There are such Jews today. They are members of the Reform Rabbinate who advocate abolishing the Bris Mila – calling it a meaningless ancient ritual and a barbaric act.

But Rabbi Lipshutz never even mentions them. Instead he has decided to equate Misyavmin to bloggers.

A similar attack has been made before by others. Certain Modern Orthodox Rabbis were called Misyavnim by certain Charedi rabbis who - because of health concerns - advocated abolishing Metzitza B’Peh.

Metzitza B’Peh is a part of the Bris procedure that our Sages considered a necessary health requirement in their day. I am not going to rehash that argument here. Suffice it to say that this accusation was an outrage – whether one agreed with those Modern Orthodox rabbis or not.

Rabbi Lipshutz has a point in some instances. There are some bloggers whose goal is to separate Jews from Torah. But as a general principal I believe he is wrong. In any case I don’t think he is talking about the 'skeptic' blogs. I think he is talking about those who frequently criticize Orthodox Jews and their behavior.

And even though there are some who seem to focus exclusively on that, I do not believe that in most cases they do so because they hate Torah. I think they do so to point out hypocrisies among some of those who claim to adhere to it. They are not Misyavnim. Their goal is not to separate Jews from Torah.

But that does not stop Rabbi Lipshutz from saying the following:

In today’s day and age, Yevanim hide behind the power of the pen, the web, blogs and populist demagoguery to attack us. Misyavnim offer wild accusations to back up their unfounded charges. They spare no effort to vilify and castigate us, as if they were paragons of virtue. The more growth our community experiences, the more scorn the misyavnim heap upon us.

This description can just as easily refer to my blog or others like it. Of course he doesn’t identify me by name. He could therefore easily deny he meant me. But that he doesn’t make it clear whether he does or he doesn’t - leaving it to the readers to draw their own conclusions.

The fact is that there are many who attack me using the same kind of rhetoric he does– or worse. So are people who run blogs like mine Misyavmin? Do we seek to assimilation to the point of destroying Torah Judaism? Do we want to uproot Mitzvah observance?

I can only speak for myself. Yes, there is power in my pen. What is my goal? It is none of the above.

My goal is not to bury Torah Judaism, God forbid. My goal is to lift it up! It is to show the world the beauty of the Torah and to separate those whose behavior dishonors it. My goal is to rid the Torah world of its trash and their trashy behavior.

My goal is to make the Torah world a viable community where Torah can be lived and learned. My goal is to make the Torah world as safe and self sufficient as possible and to seek leadership where very little exists.

So I criticize whenever I see something wrong. I criticize when I see bad decisions being made. I criticize when I see blinders on certain leaders to community problems. …or apologetics for bad behavior by certain members of the religious world.

I advocate for a Hashkafic tolerance. I advocate for full participation in the culture in areas that are halachicly permissible – as a means of a living fuller lives for those who appreciate that culture. In most cases people who are more fulfilled serve God with greater joy than those who are not.

This is not Helenizing any more than Rav Hirsch was Helenizing with his advocacy of Halachicly permissible participation in the culture.

It is articles like this one by Rabbi Lipshutz that are polarizing. Instead of pointing to the real Misyavnim, he points to bloggers and the power of their pen. We are the Misyavnim in his eyes.

Rabbi Lipshutz does his readership no favors by writing this way. He is a divider – a polarizing influence in Orthodoxy. He would rather write us all off than pollute the purity of the Charedi Hashkafa. Charedim against the world - ‘us’ versus ‘them’. That is his world view.

The Torah world does not need Askanim like him. His rhetoric causes more animosity and hatred on both sides than anything I write about.

If there was ever anyone who pushes Jews away from Judaism with ‘the pen’ it is Rabbi Pinchos Lipshutz.

Facing the Truth of History - Torah Im Derech Eretz

Torah Im Derech Eretz (TIDE). In a nutshell this is the Hashkafa that seeks to integrate the study of Torah with the study of worldly knowledge. It was founded and elaborated upon by Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch.

As I have pointed out many times the differences between TIDE and Torah U’Mada (TuM) are relatively minor and more academic in nature rather than practical. So as a believer in TuM I am completely comfortable advocating a TIDE educational system for the Torah world. And by Torah world, I mean the Charedi Torah world too. That’s because as an adherent of TuM who places a high value in Mada as an independently important area of study (whereas TIDE sees Mada exclusively as an important but integrated part of Torah) I could easily achieve my goals in a TIDE system as I could in a TuM system. So as I said, from a practical standpoint – a very minor almost insignificant difference.

The main thing is that both TIDE and TuM value the study of Limudei Chol – Mada - as a L’Chatchila. This means that one should seek to study it and not think of it only in terms of a B’Dieved - a necessary ‘evil’ - to be avoided if possible. Rav Hirsch certainly considered it a L’Chatchila.

Unfortunately the revisionists in the Charedi world have decided that TIDE is not a L’Chatchila, but a B’Dieved. In fact it is worse than a B’Dieved. They claim that even Rav Hirsch considered it a B’Dieved and instituted it a only as Hora’as Shah – a necessary demand of the times to save Judaism.

Any student of Hirschean thought will testify that this is not so. He clearly states it in his writings. But the revisionists ignore it. In fact I believe that Rav Shimon Schwab, the great leader of the American German-Jewish community which is the home of TIDE was told by Rav Baruch Ber Leibovitz that TIDE is a B’Dieved and that Rav Hirsch did in fact consider it Hora’as Shah.

This view was recently more or less rubber stamped by the new leader of the German-Jewish community in the Washington Heights section of New York city. Rabbi Yisroel Mantel, Rav of Khal Adath Jeshurun told a group of his constituents that only Rav Hirsch himself could properly implement TIDE. For the rest of us, we need to rely on what the Gedolim tell us to do - which is of course to avoid all secular study and study Torah only if possible. That’s what the Charedi world in Israel does. And that’s the ideal promoted by some Charedi Rabbinic leaders here. Ironically Rabbi Aharon Feldman the Rosh HaYeshiva of Yeshivas Ner Israel - which is famous for allowing its students to attend college facilitating them as much as possible - has been a proponent of this ‘Torah only’ ideal for the ‘best and brightest’ students.

But this was not the ideal in pre World War II Europe. The famous story about the Yeshiva of Volozhin closing down rather than incorporating Mada into their curriculum had absolutely nothing to do with an anti Mada Hashkafa - as many Charedim would have us believe. It had to do with an anti Torah Czarist government goal of weaning people away from Torah via an insidious, innocent looking route. So of course Volozhin closed. But not for anti Mada reasons. Although the Yeshivos Gedolos (post high school) had no secular studies the elementary and Yeshiva high schools did.

I just received the following e-mail on Avodah, the Aishdas e-mail list that is archived and published. I present it in part here. It speaks for itself:

The December 2008 issue of the Jewish Observer contains a review of Ish Yehudi written by Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer. The Editor of the JO wrote an "introduction" to this review. In part he wrote:

"This essay extracts from the book under review details of the manner in which educational methodologies of the great German school of Torah im Derech Eretz were being introduced to be employed in the Lithuanian Yavneh and the Polish Bais Yaakov school networks to combat the problems of the day. This review has been reviewed by gedolei Torah and roshei yeshivos, who confirmed the picture drawn by Rabbi Carlebach in his new work, and who encouraged us to put his "new" historical insights before our readership."

The article describes how Rav Carlebach set up TIDE schools in certain parts of Lithuania.

"The Yavneh system was the main Orthodox school system in the shortlived independent republic of Lithuania. In the milieu created by this modern state, the old-fashioned cheder became extinct."

The footnote to this sentence says:

Heard from Reb Zalman Alpert, shlita, in the name of Rabbi Tuvia Lasdun. Reb Zalman also related to me in the name of his own rebbi, Rabbi Shimon Romm, that the vibrant young Orthodoxy that flourished in independent Lithuania between the wars was known as "Kovno Orthodoxy" (A similar Orthodoxy existed in Latvia.) It was anchored by the yeshivos of Slabodka, Telshe, Kelm and Ponovezh and the gedolei Torah that the yeshivas produced, but in the larger community outside the yeshivos it was dominated by ba'alei battim and movements such as the Agudah. The rav of Kovno, Rabbi Avrohom Dovber Kahana-Shapira was recognized as the leader of this Lithuanian Orthodoxy. By contrast, in the part of Lithuania (Minsk, Slutzk, Bobruisk and east) that was annexed by the USSR, religion was banned. Only Chabad managed to maintain limited, underground Jewish education. The part of Lithuania (ViIna, Lomza, Bialystok, and Brisk) that was annexed by Poland was also not as affected by the Torah im Derech Eretz influence. By the outbreak of the Second World War, with the exception of the talmidim of the great yeshivos (and a relatively nascent network of schools founded by talmidim of Novaradok), the youth of this region had been lost to Orthodoxy. Only the Chassidim of the region - Chabad, Slonim and Karlin-Stolin - fared somewhat better. Indicative of this trend is the fact that in 1936, Rabbi Elazar Menachem Mon Shach took a position as rosh yeshiva in the Karliner yeshiva in Luninets.

The article also says:

"With the approval of gedolei Torah, Rabbi Carlebach founded a Gymnasium (the European term for an academic high school), based on the German Torah im Derech Eretz model. Rabbi Carlebach brought in highly qualified teachers from Germany to assist in the venture. Among them was Dr. Leo Deutschlander, who later became famous for his enormous contribution to the Bais Yaakov school system. The school became known popularly as the Carlebach Gymnasium. By its third year of existence, it enrolled one thousand boys and girls in separate schools. Its remarkable accomplishments made a deep impression on the gedolim in Lithuania, particularly on the Rosh Hayeshiva of the great yeshiva of Telshe, Rabbi Yosef Leib Bloch. Rabbi Bloch invited Dr. Deutschlander, in collaboration with Rabbi Carlebach, to found the network of similar schools that came to be known as 'Yavneh."

"The network included separate teachers' seminaries for men and women in Kovno, Gymnasiums in Kovno, Telshe, and Ponovezh, and approximately one hundred elementary schools - all of which brought the chinuch methodology of 'Western Europe to Eastern Europe. Yavneh was intertwined with Zeirei Agudas Yisroel, and it was mostly the idealistic Agudist young men and women who served as the leaders and teachers of the Yavneh system.

"Leafing through the extraordinarily impressive pages of Hane'eman also impresses upon one the extent to which the Lithuanian yeshiva world embraced elements of the German Jewish derech."

Update (12/25/08 1:03 PM CST):

I have just been informed by an inside source that the Jewish Observer article excerpted here was apporved unanimously by the Agudah Moetzes - even the more right wing element in it. This is quite a revealtion and speaks well for their future of Charedi Judaism - at least in America.

I want to congratulate the editors of the Jewish Observer for publshing this 'truth of history'. They desreve tremendous credit for their courage in doing so.

Orthodoxy and a Woman's Hair

The Halachic requirement for married women to cover their hair is one of my most perplexing Halachic issues. A woman’s hair is called Erva – Nakedness. The problem is this concept does not apply to all women. It only applies to the hair a marreid women. The hair of a single woman who was never married does not require covering. It is not considered nakedness at all – no matter how attractive it is made to look.

Certainly 21st century western culture does not consider a woman’s hair to be nakedness either. Not any more than a woman’s face. That is an objective fact.

I suspect that in the late 19th and early 20th century this is why many of the most religious Jewish married women – even those who lived in the Lithuanian influenced portions of Europe - started to walk around with out any hair covering at all. I'm told that this was the case even among the wives of many prominent rabbanim.

An indication of this phenomenon is Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein’s famous Psak in his Halachik work, the Aruch HaShulchan. While he laments that fact that many women no longer cover their hair, he nonetheless permits one to make a Bracha in front of a woman whose hair is uncovered. It is ordinarily forbidden to recite a Bracha in front of an Erva.

Had it not been for internal cultural pressure from the huge influx of holocaust surviving European Chasidim who immigrated to the United States post holocaust - and whose wives meticulously covered their hair – I truly believe this Halacha would have fallen into complete disuse in this country. Very few Orthodox women covered their hair before then.

I wrote a post about hair covering about three years ago that suggested that Orthodox women who in the past did not – and currently do not - cover their hair should be given a Limud Zechus - the benefit of the doubt. It is in theory - if not on practice -possible to say that they do not violate Halacha.

I have recently been reminded that a far more knowledge Rav who is a brilliant Talmid Chacham, Rabbi Michael Broyde, wrote a far better treatment of this subject than I did. It is publicly available in the Avodah archives of the Aisdas Society. Although I strongly suggest it be read in its entirety, I present an abbreviated version of it here:

The vast overwhelming majority of contemporary poskim who address the issue of hair covering rule theobligation to cover to be a torah violation; see Yechavah Daat 5:62,Tzitz Eliezer 7:48:3, Iggrot Moshe EH 1:53, Seredai Aish 3:30. Indeed, one is hard pressed to even find someone whose reputation we are familiar with who disagrees with that.

A limud zichus is a plausible path not taken by the poskim. Sometime, indeed, views that are analytically plausible are not taken by any halachic authorities and one should not follow a practice not endorsed by poskim even if it is analytically plausible within the sources. A limud zechut is not a das yachid, which is not a chiddish. It is, at some level, less than all of them (but more than pilpula belama).

In the context of hair covering, there is quite a bit of pilpul where commentators advance rationales for the prohibition of married women not covering their hair which indicate that married woman need not cover their hair if religious women generally do not. By categorizing
the prohibition to uncover in the manner they do, these poskim seem to indicate that the prohibition is time (or place) bound.

For example Sefer Aleh HaMitzvot (of Rav Chagiz) Mitzvah 262 classifies the prohibition to
cover as part of chukat hagoy; something similar is done by Rav Perlow in Sefer Hamitzvot Shel Rav Sadia Gaon, 1:650.

Yet other pilpulistic analysis focus on the linguistic ambiguity in the hebrew word "per'iah" which is the word used in Numbers 5:18, the verse that is the basis for the prohibition. These authorities ponder whether a torah prohibition is violated when women go uncovered, and appear to limit the torah prohibition to disheveled, which they claim is what the word per'iah means, rather than uncovered; Peni Moshe, commenting on Even Haezer 21:2 (in Mareh Hapanim #2); Rabbi A. Hoffer, "Which Disheveling [Uncovering] of Hair for Women is Biblically Prohibited?," Hatzofeh Lechachmat Yisrael 12:330 (1928); and perhaps Rav M. Kasher,
Devri Menachem, Orach Chaim 5:2:3.

Consider the words of the Ben Ish Chai (in Sefer Chukai Hanashim Chapter 17) written as, I suspect, some sort of a limud zechut on the conduct of Jews in Eastern Europe with regard to hair covering. He writes:

"It is prohibited for a women to reveal any part of her body, only her face, neck and hands may be revealed. . . . However, the women of Europe have commenced . . . to uncover their faces, neck, hands and heads [hair]. It is true, they uncover their hair -- according to our law it is prohibited -- but yet they have a justification, because they say that the tradition has become accepted, both among the Jews and other nations where they live, to accept uncovering of hair, like the uncovering of the face and hands, as not causing provocative thoughts . . ."

This type of limud zechut is not the same as a das yachid, which is the view of a single (or small group) of poskim. In my view, minority opinions (particularly of achronim) are only really of value when they are counter to ones inclination, but yet not provable wrong.

In the context of hair covering, the most eminent example of a das yachid Rabbi Yehoshua Babad (the father of Rabbi Joseph Babad, the author of the Minchat Chinuch), in
Responsa Sefer Yehoshua, #89. He states:

If the tradition had been that married women went with their hair uncovered and single women with their hair covered, then it would be prohibited for single women to go uncovered, and married women could walk around uncovered . . . . All is dependent on the tradition (minhag) of the women.

Similar such sentiments are taken by Rabbi Yosef Masas in Mayim Chaim 2:110 (and Otzar Michtavim #1884), and by Rabbi Moshe Malka (Vehashiv moshe 34). This rationale appears to have been accepted, at least in theory, by the Machatzitz Hashekel (commenting on Even Haezer 21:5) when he states that the reason single women do not cover their hair is because the standards of observant women in society determine the permissibility of uncovering. He states this is so even according to those authorities who consider it a biblical obligation for single women
to uncover their hair.

Allow me to conclude with an observation. I was once participating in an email discussion about cheating on income taxes in Israel (I was against it), and one of the corespondents was quoting rationale after rationale and verbal conversation after verbal conversation with 'poskim' who permit this (he claimed).

I observed that I can find more published teshuvot permitting married women not to cover their hair than I can find written teshuvot permitting cheating on Israeli income tax according to Jewish law! To my surprise, this statement deeply bothered people --even as I think it a true statement about the published literature -- certain people view the obligation of married women to cover their hair as a crucial social component of orthodoxy, to which no breaches in the wall shall be tolerated. That approach is inconsistent with my understanding of how halacha ought to function.

The Menorah

Here is another lesson taken from Rav Ahron Soloveichik's book, ‘Logic of the Heart, Logic of the Mind’.

In discussing the importance studying Mada Rav Ahron refers to an important Chazal.

Chazal tell us that the seven branches of wisdom are represented in the seven lights of the Menorah Our sages say that all the 'surrounding' lights faced the Ner Maaravi, the central light. The Rishonim add that the middle light is Torah and that all other wisdoms must draw their inspiration from the Torah. The Torah is the guiding light for everything.

One should never lose sight of that fact, no matter in which branch of wisdom one is involved.

Happy Chanukah.

Yes, But…

The people smirking in this archival photo on the right are to be despised! They are each about as lowly a piece of human debris as any Jew can ever be. It is from their ranks that some of the most disgusting behavior is found. This photo may seem like a photo of a peaceful protest. But it is a lot more than a protest. It is a warning - that anyone who violates the rules their community has set up will be dealt with violently.

And there is never a counter protest by others in that community. That’s because they support the values that these people are fighting for - a way of life peculiar only to them. This is what they seek. It is what drives the actions of those who are their enforcers.

The situation in Ramat Bet Shemesh has fallen to a new low. Last week, three girls taking a walk after the Friday night Shabbos meal were beaten by a gang of their thugs. I wrote about it at the time and now it has finally hit the media. Only the event was actually a lot worse than was originally described. I no longer have the patience for any apologetics that the Charedi world offers. I’m tired of the: 'Yes, but…'!

There is no ‘but’! There is no defense whatsoever for what they do. None! This type of vigilantism disqualifies their entire group from being called Torah Jews. They have no moral standing. Their standards are worthless! Their Judaism is worthless. Any group of people who tolerates the kind of behavior described in this Ynet article has lost any right to be called a Torah Jew! And as we can all plainly and painfully see - it isn’t just Ramat Bet Shemesh. This kind of thing takes place all over Israel wherever these people are found. It has happened in Bnei Brak, Meah Shearim and Beitar - as well as other places.

It doesn’t even matter how the girls attacked on that day in Ramat Bet Shemesh were dressed. They could have been wearing miniskirts and sleeveless. Their beating was an unqualified evil. Period.

The physical beating of three innocent young girls by these Charedi thugs in Israel is no different than if a gang of criminals on the West Side of Chicago had done it! They haven’t killed anyone yet – that we know of. But they will...

Part of the problem is their sense of entitlement. Charedim in Israel generally have that sense. How much if a leap is it to go from a sense of entitlement to the need to enforce keeping it.

Now, most Charedim in Israel are peace loving Jews who would never dream of doing anything like this. But at the same time they all ‘understand’ what upsets these people. That’s the ‘Yes, but… attitude’. This gives that entire segment of Jews (and I use the term loosely) the idea that their goals are righteous and the community will be happy with the results if not the methods.

Another problem is that the Bet Shemesh police force is impotent. They seem to be unable to do anything about these people. So these gangs operate with impunity, terrorizing their neighbors into submission.

This group of Charedim has no respect for law enforcement. It sneers at them. They have no fear of it either.

I believe that this entire group of people and their leaders - with all but a few brave exceptions - support those vigilantes. They can deny it all they want. They can even condemn it. They can even call them names like ‘Mushchsaim’ as was reported about one of their leaders recently. It doesn’t really mean anything. That’s because they are quite pleased with the results. They succeed in their goals through terrorism - a minor detail that will soon be forgotten in their brave new utopia of grateful residents!

I have no fool proof way of solving this problem. I have made suggestions in the past along the lines of their community leaders backing up law enforcement and the judicial system. But these suggestions are no longer realistic in my mind. Their community leaders will never side with Israeli law and will always protect ‘their own’. Any verbal criticism forthcoming is pure window dressing and worthless. These criminals are immune to it. And their leaders know it!

The unfortunate reality is that for lack of another alternative the citizens of Ramat Bet Shemesh are going to police the area themselves. Individual citizens who have tried to counter them in the past have had their heads bashed in! So a civilian patrol of Shomrim – guards - has been established. And violence will beget violence.

I am normally opposed to this kind of retaliatory measure. And I don’t support it here. But what are the good people of Ramat Bet Shemesh supposed to do? Now these cowardly criminals will get a taste of their own medicine. But my fear is that this kind of violence can easily spiral out of control and permanent damage or even death could result to innocent people.

If I were the new Charedi Mayor of Bet Shemesh, I would make this situation my number one priority. He has a unique opportunity to change the reality there. I would concentrate on making law enforcement more effective.

Here is an idea. Perhaps an undercover young male and female dressed like Datim – armed and trained in the martial arts - should take a Friday night walk in that neighborhood and behave a bit frivolously. They will then draw out those criminals. Let a watching and waiting police force witness it - and then go in there and arrest them all charging them with violent assault and battery. There will now be willing witnesses and these men (and I use that term loosely) will finally rot in jail - all of them. Let their wives and children be without husbands and fathers for a few years. And let their leaders squawk about police brutality then. It should fall on all of our deaf ears.

Tikun HaOlam

'You may say that I'm a dreamer - but I'm not the only one.'

This is a rather famous line from the John Lennon song, Imagine. And though that song eschews religion among other things - if one can get past that one can see that he is really asking for is Tikun HaOlam - a sincere wish for world peace and brotherhood. This is still an elusive dream that is perhaps more relevant today than when it was written in back in the 70’s.

John Lennon was not the only dreamer. There were other even more famous dreamers. They are mentioned in the Torah. Yosef HaTzadik was one such dreamer. And he too was not the only one mentioned in the Torah.

Yosef did not only dream dreams, he interpreted them. Much of last week’s - and this week’s Torah portion revolves around dreams and Yosef’s intepretaion of them.

Rav Ahron Soloveichik has an interesting perspective on this in his book, The Warmth and the Light on this upon which the following is based.

Sigmund Freud described the significance of dreams. He tells us that there is a psychological technique which makes it possible to interprate them. Dreams he tells us reveal ‘a psychological structure, full of significance, and one which may be assigned a specific place of the psychic activities of the waking state.’ (Freud, The Interpretation of Dreams).

Yosef was able to interpreter the dreams of the Sar HaMashkin – the butler, and the Sar Ha’Ofim – the baker as reflective of their inner character The dream state releases the unconscious and real thoughts and motivations of an individual who suppresses them in the waking state. Actions in the waking state do not as accurately reveal one’s true character.

The butler dreamt of co-operation and harmony; of progress and building; of blossoms and ripe fruit. Yosef was thus able to discern that the butler was of noble character and would be re-instated by Pharaoh to his fromer postion.

The Baker dreamt of birds eating bread out of baskets that rested on his own head. It revealed a resentment towrd society that was concealed in his waking state. As a defense mechanism, he blamed society for his own personal failings. He suffered from a persection complex. Who in society usually experiences such a phenomenon? The criminal! The criminal always feels that everyone discriminates against him and resents society for it. Yosef deduced that the baker must have committed a serious offense for which Pharoah woul not forgive him and would probably be executed.

Chazal (our sages) in fact also say that the butler and baker’s dreams can be explained according to their unconscious interpretation. The Talmud Yerushalmi (Peaschim 10:1) mentions that one of the reasons we drink 4 cus of wine at the Pesach Seder is because of the 4 times the cup of Pharaoh is mentioned in the ream of the butler and its interpretation by Yosef.

The connection between the butler’s dream, the four cups of wine on Pesach, and the redemption of the Jews from Egypt is as follows.

The Butler was in reality nothing more than Pharoah’s chief butler and not a Navi – a prophet. We cannot understand the Gemarah in in a literal sense. Rather Yosef realized that the butler was of noble character. He was one of the righteous gentiles and an idealist. He dreamed of a better world. By commemorating the dream of the butler, we are in a sense acknowledging the righteous Gentile’s vision of redemption.

Everyone is to a certain extent a dreamer. But there are two additional categories of dreamers. One type is the dreamer who dreams of escape from his unhappy status quo. He will fantasize about a better life as a means of escape. The other is one who is not satisfied with escape. Although he too is dissatisfied with the status quo, he utilizes his dreams –not as a means of escape – but as basis to change reality. If one wishes to find joy in life one cannot find it by escaping in a dream. One can only find true happiness by working to change things - starting with oneself.

The Kesones Pasim that Yakov made for Yosef was a garment of distinction. Yosef’s brothers became jealous of the recognition bestowed upon Yosef by their father, Yaakov. As a result they hated Yosef and increased their hatred after Yosef related to them his dreams – telling them how he was going to ‘change the world’.

The world generally hates dreamers especially those who want to act upon those dreams by trying to change the world. When a dreamer tells people of those plans the hatred ususally increases.

Yosef dreamt of a better world. We may deduce from that dreaming to improve the world – Tikun HaOlam - is an essential attribute of the Jewish people.

Unfortunately this important piece of the Jewish pie has been co-opted by the Conservative and Reform Movements. Rarely does one find Orthodox Jews involved in Tikun HaOlam. It seems as though the more right wing Orthodox one is, the less likely one will find him involved in such things – with all kinds of excuses.

But it should not be left to the non-Orthodox alone.

Labeling Jews

An astute poster who truly believes in unity of the Jewish people asked the following question with respect to my post on YCT: Why perpetuate the misguided notion that we as Jews need labels?

I wish we didn’t. It would be nice if we could all just be called religious Jews and leave it at that.

Unfortunately in the world of Orthodoxy there are far too many people who reject other groups of religious Jews because of their Hashkafos. In order to counter that notion it is useful to know how to refer to that group with an identifier. That is called also be called a label. If one can not identify that group - i.e. not label them - how can we counter these rejectionists? How can any group describe itself as a unified body with its own philosophy? And defend itself as a group?

Labels are useful in many other ways without any pejorative connotation. For example, labels are useful when describing specific group behavior. Studying group trends and their spheres of influence can be a diagnostic tool which can be used to predict group behavior. And how that impacts on other groups - and how each group might react. Sometimes labels are used for purely informational purposes. For example it is useful to know if someone is a Sefardi and eats Kitniyos on Pesach.

And that is just labeling within Orthodoxy. There are other more important labels that are very important – denominational labels.

It would also be nice to break down denominational barriers. Why must there be Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform Jews? Let us just eliminate these labels and accept people for who they are. Some Conservative Jews are indeed more ‘religious’ than some Orthodox Jews! Why not just look at the character and not worry about how religious one’s fellow Jew is? It is certainly true that some Reform Jews are more ethical than some Orthodox Jews.

But there is no continuum between Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform. It isn’t only that Orthodox Jews are more ritually observant; Reform Jews are not observant; and Conservative Jews are somewhere in between. They are separate and distinct groups with clear and important dividing lines. And they need to be- labeled! We have to know whether an entire group’s lifestyles and belief system is acceptable or not.

It isn’t only about keeping rituals or ethical character. One cannot accept as religious someone who does not believe that the Torah was not given to us by God on Mount Sinai. Even if he is the most ethical person on the planet. And even if he keeps Chalav Yisroel and eats only Yoshon.

Heretical beliefs trump ritual observance every time. The Conservative movement accepts an allegorical interpretation of the entire Torah. They accept various versions of Documentary Hypothesis which maintains that the 5 books of Moses were written by four different people at different times in history; later redacted and presented by Babylonian scholars post Churban Bayis as a single ancient book of law perpetuating the ‘myth’ that God gave us the law at Sinai so as to keep people in the fold. This is their ‘Emes’.

And this applies to ethics as well. It is not enough to be an ethical Reform Jew who does not believe in God - or if he does - does not believe in the requirement to keep Mitzvos. Because as important as ethics are, especially in light of recent news about frauds and scandals, ethics are not enough in the eyes of God. To be a righteous Jew is to encompass it all; beliefs, ritual behavior, and ethics. And that leaves out groups who either reject the Mitzvos or have heretical beliefs. They need to be identified.

Is YCT Orthodox?

The question that is currently being hotly debated on an e-mail list I belong to is whether Yeshivat Chovevei Torah (YCT) is considered Orthodox. I’m sorry to report that there are people whose opinion I respect that do not think it is.

I am in profound disagreement with them. Let me be clear. In my view Yeshivat Chovevei Torah is an Orthodox institution. Period. They are clearly observant of Halacha. Their fundamental beliefs are consistent with Orthodox requirements and are not in any way Heresy. There is absolutely no question in my mind about that.

Unfortunately some people think that in order to be an Orthodox Jew there must be additional Hashkafic requirements. But if that were true then each segment of Orthodoxy would consider every other one non Orthodox. So for example the Lithuanian style rabbinic leaders might consider Chasidim to be non Orthodox because of certain philosophical Chasidic concepts. Chasidim might - on the other hand - reject Lithuanian style Yeshivaleit because they do not accept certain Chumros that Chasidim consider Halacha. Obviously that is not the case. Nor should it be.

I have been very critical of YCT in the past. And most of those criticisms remain. But they are criticisms of Hashkafa, not of Halacha or Emunah. They are criticisms having to do with a slippery slope argument. There are also areas where they have departed from tradition such as their approach to interaction with heterodox movements and clergy of other faiths. Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik was firmly opposed to these types of activities.

YCT whose founders were students of the Rav - Rabbi Soloveithik - conceded they have departed from the views of the mentor. But are they violating Halacha by doing so? No. They believe that the Rav may have modified his views in today’s world. I personally tend to doubt that. But they have a right to believe he would have.

But even if he wouldn’t have, I do not see this as violating Psak Halacha. But even if would - does that make them any less Orthodox than those of other Hashkafos who reject the Psak of their Gadol? If for example a Chasidic woman from Satmar does not cover her wig with an additional covering or wears seamless stockings - is she no longer Orthodox?

So while I believe YCT is wrong on certain issues I still believe they are Orthodox. I also believe their motives are pure - even as I think they have been unduly influenced by certain winds of social change in our culture.

On can differ with an institution on policy – even strongly as I do. But we should not be too quick to condemn are brethren for doing what they believe is the right thing if they are not heretical and do not violate Halacha.

The fact is YCT has provided a needed service for the Orthodox world. They are training people for practical rabbinics. It is a rabbinical college and its purpose is graduating American trained rabbis. That is their exclusive mission.

There are rabbinic skills being taught there which are not as focused upon by other Yeshivos - even in those like Yeshiva University. In fact - if I am not mistaken - I recall an interview where YU president Richard Joel all but admitted that and said that he has tried to improve YU’s rabbinic ordination courses – the Semicha program - along those lines.

Additionally YU, while having a great Semicha program does not exclusively produce practicing rabbis. Many graduates do not go into the rabbinate but choose a more financially rewarding career instead.

YCT is filling a void. There is a whole left wing of Orthodoxy which needs that kind of leadership. They could easily gravitate to the Conservative movement without it. Here is how a poster on that list I spoke of earlier put it:

Whether or not we like it, there is in real life a continuum between Conservative and Orthodox Judaism, with a good number of people in the middle who could go either way. By holding some of that middle ground for Orthodoxy - albeit left-wing Orthodoxy - YCT and its rabbis and affiliates are creating a comfortable space within Orthodoxy for people who would otherwise opt for Conservative.

For example: I think it is quite hard to justify halachically the widespread practice in some sectors of MO of married women going completely bareheaded. But I would rather that such women - bareheaded and wearing jeans and sleeveless tops, if necessary - have an O community in which they feel comfortable and accepted, than that they feel that O as a whole as "moved to the right" and rejected them.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

So the bottom line is that even though I am strong supporter of YU and would prefer that YCT change its troubling policies, I nonetheless understand where they are coming from and see that there is a void that they fill.

To write them out of Orthodoxy at this point would be as wrong as writing any other segment out. No matter what their particular problem is - as long as they do not accept heretical beliefs and follow Halacha they are Orthodox.

Bernie Madoff and the Monsey Butcher

What do the Monsey Butcher and Bernie Madoff have in common? I thought it might be interesting to compare them.

The Monsey butcher - for those who forget - was a Charedi fellow who defrauded the Frum community of Monsey, New York. He sold much of that community Treif chickens that he labeled Kosher using packaging with kosher certifications on them. The uproar when this was discovered was huge. Understandably so. The poor fellow was forced to divorce his wife and left the country in disgrace. Deservedly so.

Bernie Madoff is to the best of my knowledge a non observant Jew but with strong ties to the Modern Orthodox Jewish community. He too defrauded the Frum Community. Not that that they were his only victims. Some of the wealthiest Jews in the country were his victims too. (Most of his victims were Jews.) Names like Steven Spielberg and Mort Zuckerman are among those he defrauded. Everyone who invested with him lost every dime they gave him - to the tune of millions of dollars each. Some lost their life savings becoming paupers from being millionaires in a single moment!

But the biggest losers were charities; some of them had to close down. If I understand correctly Yeshiva University lost over 100 million dollars from their endowment fund. His pyramid scheme lost a total of over 50 billion dollars. That is wealth of epic proportions disappearing in a flash.

Two crooks, both putting their own needs ahead of everyone else’s.

Which one is worse in the eyes of God? That’s hard to say. Madoff’s fraud is so huge and so far reaching that it is impossible to overestimate the damage he’s done. It affects the entire economy of this country if not the world, not just his investors. It has lowered immeasurably the already low confidence level of investors all over the world.

So as bad as the Monsey butcher was, his impact was small potatoes compared to Madoff’s.

Which is the greater crime? Both were a fraud. One was a religious fraud and the other financial. We know which one had greater impact. But leaving impact aside which crime is greater? And which is the bigger Chilul HaShem – a desecration of God’s name? Is it a secular Jew who commits a financial crime of monumental magnitude or the Charedi Jew who sold hundreds if not thousands his fellow Jews Treif meat passing it off as Kosher?

The Madoff affair is certainly red meat for every anti-Semite who is now coming out of the woodwork. But causing anti-Semitism is not the same thing as causing a Chilul HaShem. They were both guilty of that but the Monsey Butcher was a far a greater one, in my view.

Here's why.

If one does not claim to live his life by the dictates of God as delineated by the Torah, one cannot say about his acts that they are a desecration of God’s name. One cannot claim their acts are based on Torah values if they do not live a Torah lifestyle. But when does claim to live a Torah lifestyle then his public deviance from those laws is by definition is a desecration of God’s name.

This is not to say that what Madoff did was not a Chilul HaShem. It was. By merely being Jewish his crime is seen as reflective of Jewish values - whether he is Frum of not. But the Chilul HaShem is still of lesser magnitude even though the crime itself was exponentially greater in terms of impact.

The truth is that they both have defective characters. They did not internalize ethical behavior that they may - or may not - have learned. They valued personal desires, money, power, and status over truth and ethics and cared little about the welfare of others.

That said I do not believe that either started out as an evil person. I don’t believe that they started out with a life plan to defraud people. I’m pretty sure they both started out trying to run their respective businesses honestly. And in many ways were fine people - raising fine families.

But when tested, they failed. Instead of taking their medicine - they decided that cheating a little bit was the best way out of their respective predicaments. Perhaps they thought that they could eventually work their way out of their problems by just buying some time. An ethical lapse, yes but with a little luck - back on track.

What happened instead in both cases is that instead of digging their way out, they were digging their hole deeper until one day the hole was to deep to dig their way out of and eventually it caught up with them. And now they will both pay a price.

Criticizing Gedolim

A comment was made in an earlier post that is very significant and should not remain buried in a lengthy comments section. It needs to be put at the head of the table. It was made by an apparently knowledgeable poster about how Charedi Gedolim are viewed by the Charedi world itself. Here is the pertinent segment of that comment:

I have lived in both Charedey and MO strongholds. I have heard more criticism of Gedolim in the Lakewood coffee room and shteiblach than on any other place. A lot of the criticism has to be taken in context; without a broad understanding of the Gadol you will misconstrue the true meaning of the statements …What I will say, is that the vast majority of Lakewood does not consider the Moetzes to be binding. I will leave it at that.

This is not as surprising to me as one might think. Most of my good friends are Charedi and they have pretty much the same sentiment - much like Centrists do. The difference is that that they say so only privately like those in the Lakewood coffee room. Obviously no one there wants to be caught saying that a Gadol stating his ‘Daas Torah’ is wrong. But that is in fact what many of them do say privately.

How can this be? The thrust of the Charedi argument has always been that Daas Torah cannot be wrong… that even though Gedolim are fallible human beings – their Daas must be followed just like the Daas Torah of the past. Yiftach B’Doro K’Shmuel B’Doro. How many times have I heard that?! If a Gadol says left is right and right is left we must still listen to them! How many times have I heard that too?!

But the truth is that most of the Charedim I know are realists who do not walk around with their eyes glazed over. They can see when a Gadol’s comments are at times off base. They in fact do realize, what I have been saying as far back as I can remember, that the Gedolim are human and can be wrong. That in fact right IS right - and not left! The Agudah Moetzes is therefore not necessarily the final word on any subject.

The question then becomes, when do we listen and when do we not listen? The answer is pretty much what I’ve been saying all along. One must respect them - but one should always take what the Agunah Moetzes says with a grain of salt – the same way the Charedim in the Lakewood coffee room do.

Does the Moetzes posses wisdom? Most certainly they do. But are they always right? No.

The majority of those most people call Gedolim truly do sacrifice themselves on a daily basis for the sake of Klal Yisroel. But sacrifice does not equal wisdom. That comes largely from knowledge and experience. It comes from consulting with experts on any topic about which a Gadol issues a statement.

Wisdom must include the recognition that mistakes are made and admitting them publicly when they realize it. And it must include the willingness to re-evaluate a position and change it - if it is shown to be counter-productive. For example, in the current economic crisis - true greatness would be shown when Charedi leaders place a greater value of making a living than they do now – even though it is harder to get jobs now. And even though it will lessen their ranks.

What wisdom is not - is the unwillingness to modify a position based on new information. It is not about always reacting to every crises with a ban. It is not about protecting the system at the expense of the individual. And it is certainly not about perpetuating the current educational system denigrating Parnassa in comparison to learning Torah.

Many of those we call Gedolim do in fact posses the kind of wisdom I outlined here. But some do not. I’m glad to see that there are many Charedim that agree.

Chasidic Justice?

There is no palce I’d rather be than in the Chasidic enclave in Bnei Brak known as Vishnitz. Why - one may ask - is that such a good place to be? Because it is a place where justice may be found. You know - Chasidic Justice. The kind received by Shalom Segal.

Yes my friends if you want to live in a society that practices Torah true Justice - this is it.

Just in case you don’t know what real Torah Justice is, there is an example of it reported in Ha’aretz.

A sermon in the heart of the Teshuva season just before Rosh Hashana was deliverd by Rabbi Yisroel Hagar, the oldest son of the Vishnitzer Rebbe. Here is what he said:

Rabbi Hager declared in the Vishnitz Synagogue that there is "an evil man who is torturing people"

It was made clear to Mr. Segal that the rabbi meant him. What was he doing? He started a business involving debts owed by members of the Vishnitz community:

Segal is a kind of entrepreneur when it comes to debt-collection. A few years ago he started buying bounced checks from private individuals with small businesses. As the owner of the checks, he opened files at the Bailiff's Office or tried to close existing cases. Segal also located debtors for two companies and worked together with the Bailiff's Office.

Over the years he acquired more and more skill in the field and also acted on behalf of several rabbinical courts on financial matters in Bnei Brak - receiving authorizations in rabbinical law for his activity. He also opened a Bailiff's Office charitable fund, and people began applying to him for help.

The community has labeled this Mesirah. That’s the Hebrew word for informing on a fellow Jew to non Torah Authorities. The penalty for that? Death. That little bit of Halacha was disseminated right after that sermon via the distribution of pages from a book by Rabbi Hager's grandfather.

But - the good people Vishnitz who are a merciful bunch decided not to kill him. Instead they do what many other communities like theirs do when they want to mete out justice. They beat this fellow to a pulp and torched his attorney’s car.

Mi K’Amcha Yisroel.