A Rebuke of Reticent Religious Zionist Rabbis

Rav Mosheh Lichtenstein (TOI)

Not all that long ago, I came across a book containing some of the more important letters Rav Aharon Lichtenstein had written to various individuals. One exchange, in particular, made a deep impression on me. Although I was not surprised by its content, I was struck by the moral clarity and intensity with which it was written. The letters were sent in the immediate aftermath of the following event (as described by Wikipedia):

On February 25, 1994, Baruch Goldstein dressed in an Israeli military uniform, entered a mosque in the Cave of the Patriarchs, and opened fire on approximately 800 Palestinian Muslim worshippers praying there during the month of Ramadan, killing 29 and wounding 125 before he was beaten to death by survivors.

Sadly, Goldstein was sympathetically eulogized by several Religious Zionist Roshei Yeshiva in Kiryat Arba, where he had lived. Rav Lichtenstein was not prone to expressions of anger, but reading his letters, I could almost hear the outrage in his voice as he rebuked those Roshei Yeshiva for the Chilul HaShem involved in eulogizing a mass murderer. When they responded apologetically, attempting to justify their actions by claiming they were praising “the man” rather than his deed, Rav Lichtenstein doubled down in a subsequent letter.

His response did not surprise me. It reflected the moral outlook of his father-in-law, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik. What did surprise me was that these eulogies were delivered in the first place. Although I have encountered admirers of Baruch Goldstein over the years, I never imagined that respected rabbinic leaders could find kind words for a mass murderer. No matter how devoted he may have been to the State of Israel and its people, the deliberate murder of innocent human beings strips away any claim to moral stature.

It is now more than three decades later. Rav Mosheh Lichtenstein now co-heads the yeshiva his father once led together with its founder, Rav Yehudah Amital. Like his father, he has spoken forcefully against the extremist settlers who have increasingly terrorized innocent Palestinian civilians—a position with which I obviously agree.

What makes his position especially noteworthy is that he does not stop at condemning the perpetrators themselves. As reported in an interview with The Times of Israel:

Addressing a recent uptick in settler violence (as of last month, the IDF had recorded over 752 incidents of nationalist crime and extremist settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank since the start of the year), he insisted that ultimately, the mainstream Religious Zionist community and its leaders bear responsibility for stopping it.

“The violence that is going on is horrible and is morally and ethically wrong,” he said.

“The perpetrators do these things because, to a large extent, society will tolerate it,” he charged. “The degree to which members of the community will believe that this violence is a desecration of God’s name or merely unfortunate behavior is a function of what mainstream Religious Zionist communities hear on Friday night in their rabbis’ sermons. If they hear harsh condemnation, it will create a certain dynamic.”

How true.

Indeed, it is the absence of this kind of broad-based rebuke by Religious Zionist leaders that allows such behavior to continue. It is not only a Chilul HaShem but, as I have argued many times, it causes enormous reputational damage to Israel. It provides antisemites around the world with additional ammunition for their already vicious accusations that the Jewish state is guilty of genocide.

When Religious Zionist leaders are reluctant to criticize these extremists forcefully and publicly, they unintentionally lend credibility to the false claim that Religious Zionism itself undermines the moral character of the State of Israel. That accusation is categorically untrue. Yet without clear and unequivocal condemnation from across the Religious Zionist spectrum, they contribute to the problem rather than helping solve it.

Lest anyone think that Rav Mosheh Lichtenstein is some sort of leftist or pacifist regarding the wars Israel has been forced to fight, nothing could be further from the truth. Such an assumption would be a profound misunderstanding of both him and the ideology of the yeshiva he now heads…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free. 

Ignoring Jewish Suffering

Boy George (TOI)

Heartbreaking.

That is how I feel every time I see images coming out of Gaza showing children wandering through the rubble of their destroyed homes in tattered clothing after having just lost their parents in an Israeli airstrike, crying, “Where are my parents? Why were they killed? What will I do now?”

Last night, a network correspondent reporting on yet another airstrike in Gaza practically had tears in his eyes, his voice filled with both sympathy and anger—sympathy for the Palestinian victims and anger at the Israeli government for continuing these attacks even now, long after the ceasefire.

Of course, no one wants to see children suffering. It is indeed heartbreaking. And the easiest target for blame is Israel’s continued airstrikes against Hamas strongholds that remain armed and ready to resume terrorist attacks against innocent Israeli civilians at the first opportunity.

But the heartbreak I feel is not the same as that expressed by the reporter or by the typical viewer watching those images while listening to the way they are reported. It is almost impossible for the average American viewer not to blame Israel for the suffering of Palestinians. These heart-rending images continue to appear on the nightly news. Although less frequently than during the height of the war, they are still shown often enough to remind Americans of the enormous number of Palestinian casualties resulting from Israel’s military campaign.

And that’s the thing. Almost no one mentions how much Israel has suffered, and is still suffering from the Hamas attack on October 7. Nor is it ever mentioned that Israel has not deliberately killed a single innocent civilian. Much less a child. The same cannot be said about Hamas.

On the contrary, the IDF goes out of its way, more than any other military in the history of modern warfare, to warn civilians to evacuate before carrying out airstrikes. Every one of those strikes is intended as a defensive measure to prevent Hamas from ever again carrying out the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.

Hamas committed those atrocities with glee and a sense of religious righteousness. Its leaders value not only the deaths of Israelis but even the deaths of their own people, believing that both serve their cause. They understand the public relations value of civilian casualties. Every dead Palestinian whom they can portray as an innocent victim helps convince the world that Israel is committing genocide. Their ideology considers it a virtuous religious act worthy of eternal reward.

Virtually the entire mainstream media ignores this reality despite knowing full well that it is true…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free. 

The Liberal View of the War with Iran

Donald Trump and FDR. Will Trump rise to the occasion as did FDR?

One of my more intelligent, knowledgeable, and thoughtful readers sent me the following response to a recent post advocating for a decisive military victory over Iran instead of the dribs-and-drabs war we are now waging.

His perspective is virtually the opposite of mine. A perspective that is not uncommon in liberal circles. And is in fact the prevailing view among most of them. It deserves a response that I think should be read more widely than it would be - buried in a lengthy comment thread.

First, his comment:

Without popular or actual congressional support, Trump could not sustain a full-on war against Iran, especially should victory require a grinding, stretched-out, house-to-house ground war against a nation with 92 million civilians. Trump could start such a war before November 3, but after the initial wall-to-wall attack the bad news would come fast and overwhelming. Americans would put irresistible pressure on Congress to end it all, even if doing so would mean Iran will maintain effective control of oil shipments out of the region.

What Israel wants from the U.S. is therefore unobtainable, short of atomic warfare. Previous American presidents understood this. Trump doesn’t understand, or can’t, or is living in a delusional space in which reality is unwelcome.

Netanyahu understands Trump very well, as a matter of their shared personality-based Weltanschauung. But Netanyahu doesn’t understand America—he thinks he does, but that’s just his ego talking—and he apparently doesn’t realize the extent to which Americans will blame him and Israel for Trump’s suckerdom.

Somebody better fix this whole thing, and fast. Or America will become a self-inflicted victim. Israel will suffer much more, and for much longer.

My response:

The idea that the most powerful military in the world by far - more powerful than any military in history could not defeat a country with vastly inferior capabilities is simply not true. It is absurd to even suggest it. Yet many appeasement-minded members of Congress do say exactly that.

If they are right, then maintaining the world’s most powerful military is little more than a colossal waste of money. It would also mean that members of Congress who advocate military victory in Iran - as the late Lindsey Graham did - are simply ignorant, and that any attempt to achieve total victory is doomed to end in their self-described “worst-case scenario.”

I’m sorry, but I think this view is highly subjective and is hardly unanimous.
It is certainly not the view of the military experts that I have heard interviewed.

Had the United States embraced this kind of thinking during World War II, America might well have evenally become part of Hitler’s Third Reich.

That war was not universally popular. Isolationists in Congress strongly opposed entering it. What ever one my think of Franklin Roosevelt, to his credit, he understood what was at stake and wanted to enter the war long before Pearl Harbor, but Congress would not allow it.

The stakes then were enormous. Millions of people living under Nazi rule were subjugated, brutalized, and murdered. Yet Congress had little appetite for war.

The Nazi war machine was formidable. Far more advanced for its time than Iran is for its time today. Germany was fully prepared for the Allied invasion of Normandy. American soldiers were expected to be mowed down as they stormed those beaches. And many were. Roosevelt knew that. Eisenhower knew that. But they also understood what was at stake, and they did not flinch.

The war took years, but the United States and its allies ultimately defeated Nazi Germany. Hitler committed suicide. Many of his henchmen were tried at Nuremberg, convicted of crimes against humanity and genocide. And hanged.

The dangers posed by the current Iranian regime are not entirely dissimilar…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post  - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free.  

Polls, Statistics, and the War with Iran

Polls showing widespread American opposition to the war with Iran should be viewed in the spirit of Mark Twain’s famous observation: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

The problem with polls is that they often reflect the way the questions are asked. Statistics, too, can obscure important truths by failing to probe the reasons behind the answers. Which can vary widely among those being polled.

Several recent polls suggest that, by margins approaching 60%, Americans disapprove of the president’s policy toward the war in Iran. That appears to align with the Democratic narrative that this is a war of choice with no clearly defined objective, one that has only made matters worse by strengthening Iran’s hardline Islamist regime. They argue that Iran now appears to exercise permanent control over the Strait of Hormuz, and that if it is ever reopened, they will charge fees for passage. Which was free before the war.

And that even if a new nuclear agreement is eventually reached, that was already the case under Obama that Trump tore up! Thus the region will be less stable than before after a costly, counterproductive war.

But here’s what many of those poll reports fail to mention.

Most Americans actually agree with the president’s stated objectives: preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, stopping the development of long-range ballistic missiles capable of reaching the United States, and ending its support for terrorist proxies. Where they disagree is over whether this war will achieve those goals.

I count myself among those skeptics. I, too, question whether the current strategy will accomplish its stated objectives. But I do not share the reasons offered by the war’s Democratic critics.

They claim the war has no stated objective. Really? The president has repeatedly declared that its purpose is to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

They call it a war of choice. Should the United States have waited until Iran possessed a fully operational nuclear arsenal and chose to use it or threaten to use it? That is not a risk any responsible government should take.

History offers a sobering lesson. Neville Chamberlain believed diplomacy could satisfy Hitler’s ambitions. Instead, appeasement emboldened him and contributed to the deadliest war in human history. Diplomacy with expansionist tyrannies rarely succeeds. It is even less likely to succeed when those tyrannies are driven by religious fanaticism and believe they are carrying out a divine mission.

That is why I find the president’s continued pursuit of negotiations with Iran so perplexing and disappointing. He still appears to believe he can strike a deal with a regime whose ideological goals are fundamentally incompatible with any lasting agreement.

Why he continues to believe that is an open question.

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post  - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free.  

The Truth About “Settler Violence”

One of the most frustrating issues plaguing the Jewish world is the phenomenon labeled “settler violence.” It is frustrating because the label is both misleading and accurate at the same time.

It is accurate in the sense that there are indeed certain elements living in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) who have literally lost all sense of morality when it comes to Palestinians in general, and especially those living nearby. They see every Palestinian as a mortal enemy of the Jewish people and treat them accordingly whenever they encounter them.

Even worse, they sometimes take revenge on Palestinian villages and their residents after a Jew is murdered in a terrorist attack—even though those residents had absolutely nothing to do with it. This has happened more than once. It involves settlers—better described as extremists—in greater numbers than many well-intentioned apologists are willing to admit. I also suspect that there are more than a few IDF soldiers serving in those areas who sympathize with them.

But even if every Palestinian living in the West Bank hated Jews with religious fervor, that would not justify attacking innocent people who have done nothing to harm a single Jew.

It is precisely the religious zeal of these extremist settlers that leads them to believe it is a mitzvah to expel every Arab from Greater Israel so that the entire Land of Israel can be settled by Jews. Far from helping Israel, this only fuels Palestinian hatred. The mitzvah of settling the Land of Israel is no justification for what these people do in its name. it is almost as if that were the only mitzvah they care about.

The result is that all settlers are condemned because of the actions of these extremists.

Is that condemnation justified? One might think so based on what I have just described. But the truth is far more complicated.

Violence in Judea and Samaria is not a one-way street. In fact, Palestinian violence in the West Bank dwarfs settler violence. Yet by using the term “settler violence” without sufficient context, the implication is that all 750,000 Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria, and eastern Jerusalem are violent extremists who spend their days harassing Palestinians—or worse.

Nothing could be further from the truth…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post  - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free.   

The Price of a Thin Judaism

Photo for Quiz ‘Em (My wife is 2nd from right)

A reader who knows my thinking on a variety of subjects - sent me a Substack essay with the comment, “Your sort of stuff!!!”

How well he knows me. It is yet another voice of sanity from within the heterodox rabbinate that, I’m afraid, will largely go unheeded.

Conservative Rabbi Steven Abraham has written a hard-hitting critique about what is wrong with heterodox movements. It is a critique I could have written myself and, in fact, have expressed many times over the years. In short, he excoriates his own movement for missing the boat on Jewish education. Focusing too much on Tikkun Olam while neglecting the Torah and its demands.

An example of what I mean is found in the following excerpt:

You cannot balance tradition and modernity when your students know only modernity. You cannot teach historical Judaism to children who have no history. You cannot cultivate halakhic seriousness while presenting mitzvot as folkways, charming when convenient and disposable when they ask something of us. If we are honest, we too have bent to the cultural wind, lowering our expectations and apologizing for the severity of the covenant. But a Judaism that exists to ratify a secular political platform will be discarded the moment its usefulness ends. Why rise early on Shabbat to wrestle with a text three thousand years old if its conclusion merely echoes an op-ed one could have read in bed?

I have to say that the values he champions are the very same values that I - and any knowledgeable Orthodox Jew - would champion. Had he not identified himself as a Conservative rabbi, I might have assumed he was Orthodox, - as another excerpt also indicates:

It is a fine thing to care about the world, but Jews must first know their own. Our children need to know more about Yom Kippur than they know about Ramadan. They need to feel the moral drama of the machzor before they are asked to master every other tradition: why Kol Nidre still trembles, why Neilah feels like the gates of heaven swinging shut, why Jews fast not because suffering is holy but because return is possible...

What our children need first is their own inheritance: Hebrew on their tongues and Jewish memory in their bones, Israel in their consciousness, mitzvot in their hands, a people in their hearts. They need the poetry of Yehuda Amichai, the arguments of the Talmud, the grief of Tisha B’Av, the joy of Simchat Torah, and the terrifying intimacy of standing before God on the Day of Atonement. Then, yes, teach them about their neighbors with seriousness and respect—but teach them as Jews, from somewhere, with enough literacy that encounter becomes dialogue rather than dissolution.

Honestly, I could not have said it better myself.

Imagine what the Conservative movement might have accomplished had it implemented from the very beginning - an educational system that consistently taught these values and the importance of living them. One that encouraged serious Jewish education from kindergarten through high school. In other words, an educational system like our Orthodox one.

It is probably true that many Conservative Jews would still have chosen to send their children to public schools or, if they could afford it, to elite private college-preparatory schools. But it is also likely that a substantial number would have chosen instead to educate their children in the Jewish heritage of their parents or grandparents and pass it on to the next generation. Or at least convinced to try it out.

Orthodoxy once faced similar challenges…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post  - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free.   

The Suffering of the Olam HaCharedim

Suffering Charedim (Mishpacha)

Just when I thought every argument about the Charedi draft exemption had been exhausted ad nauseam, along comes Mishpacha publisher Eli Paley with yet another defense of exempting all full-time yeshiva students from military service.

Since the October 7^th massacre, that debate has taken on an exponential urgency. Israel’s response required an unprecedented mobilization of reserve soldiers, many of whom have spent months in combat, risking death or serious injury while their families lived with constant fear. Even those who returned physically unharmed have often paid a tremendous price in lost careers, financial hardship, PTSD, and strained family relationships. Their sacrifice for the country is immeasurable.

None of this is new.

Before addressing Mr. Paley’s arguments, I want to correct a misnomer often used by Charedi leadership. Referring to themselves as the Olam HaTorah is offensive. Not because they are not part of the Torah world, but because the term implies they alone represent it. They do not. The Religious Zionist community is every bit as committed to Torah study lishmah while simultaneously serving in the defense of the Jewish people. A more accurate name for this group would be the Olam HaCharedim.

Ironically, Mr. Paley acknowledges the enormous sacrifice of the Religious Zionist community:

“Our hearts went out to a community that has lost so many sons, husbands, students, and friends — a community that has demonstrated extraordinary self-sacrifice on behalf of Klal Yisrael and paid an unimaginably heavy price.”

That is precisely why his conclusion is so baffling.

Despite recognizing this sacrifice, he doubles down on the claim that efforts to draft Charedim constitute a war against Torah world. Only now he accuses the Religious Zionists of being the most aggressively against it. In his view, the issue is no longer Israel’s desperate manpower shortage but an ideological assault on the Torah world.

As evidence, he points to Religious Zionist opposition to legislation that would have postponed the draft issue until after the next election while ending arrests of draft resisters. To him, that proves Religious Zionists are targeting Torah itself. As if there was no Torah being studied at all in their Yeshivos!

He then recounts a conversation with the Rosh Yeshivah of a leading Hesder Yeshiva. Mr. Paley complained that Religious Zionist leaders had not spoken forcefully enough against what Charedim perceive as persecution.

The Rosh Yeshiva thanked him for raising the point and acknowledged that perhaps more rabbanim should express that concern. Then he asked if he could share a personal story…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post  - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free. 

 

The Making of a Kiddush HaShem

Image from Photography by Rick and Rich

I don’t often brag about my city. (Well... maybe I do. A little.) But I can’t help taking pride in how Chicago’s Orthodox Jewish community presents itself to its non-Jewish neighbors.

That is not to say there isn’t the occasional chilul Hashem here, just as there is in other large cities with sizable Orthodox Jewish populations. There most certainly is. And when I become aware of it, I call it out.

But in the aggregate, the Jews who make up Chicago’s entire Orthodox community make me proud. All of us—from Chasidim to the right-wing yeshiva world, to Centrists, to Modern Orthodox—deserve credit for making a Kiddush Hashem at the many public gatherings where non-Jews are present.

Last Monday night I attended a screening of Names, Not Numbers, an annual project in which my alma mater, Fasman Yeshiva High School, participates. Students interview and film Holocaust survivors, preserving their stories for future generations.

A photographer was hired by the school to photograph the speakers and attendees. His name is Rich. At 73, he is now semi-retired. Back when he was in his prime, he and his partner, Rick, were among the most sought-after photographers in Chicago. During my own years as a professional videographer, we frequently worked side by side. Rich and I became good friends. Rich is not Jewish.

I mention all this because of a brief conversation my wife, Annie, had with him that evening. She noticed the words “Baruch Hashem” printed in the upper-right corner of his business card, which she had asked him for in order to stay in touch. Curious, she asked him about it. He didn’t have time to answer while he was working the event, but he promised to send her an email explaining it.

Here is what he wrote:

Good morning Annie,

As to your question, I have a profound respect for your religion, and I often use those words in conversations when appropriate. Although, as I mentioned to Herschel, I am exploring all aspects of religion, both present and past, I feel a kinship with yours.

That is why whenever I am partaking in an event within the community, I wear a yarmulke as a sign of respect and a personal feeling of belonging, in a small way, to the community.

I do on occasion forget my prized yarmulke, and when I do, I am very much aware of feeling more like an outsider.

Of all the events I’ve done in my career, I’ve always felt more connected with community events, even though I am not a Jewish person. This feeling is why I have focused on doing community events over Christian ones in the twilight of my career.

Rich

This letter is a real testament to how a Jew - especially one who identifiably Orthodox, as indicated by wearing a yarmulke (kippah) - should conduct himself in public.

Even at events attended almost entirely by Orthodox Jews, such as weddings, non-Jews are almost always present. Photographers, waiters, hotel staff, musicians, and other vendors are watching us. So are many non-Orthodox Jews. Some may view us with a jaundiced eye, looking for confirmation that we are no better than anyone else. Or perhaps even worse. Others simply know very little about us and are forming their impressions based on what they see.

It is therefore all too easy to create a massive chilul Hashem through inappropriate behavior. Especially at weddings. Often this is fueled by excessive drinking. Sometimes it is the result of overexuberance – young people becoming so wrapped up in themselves that they ignore everyone around them under the mistaken assumption that they are merely being mesame’ach chasan v’kallah, performing the mitzvah of bringing joy to the bride and groom…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post  - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free. 

A Holocaust Story

My parents becoming US citizens shortly after the Holocaust

The doorbell rang and Ivan - the righteous gentile who sheltered and fed Jews hidden in a bunker dug below his basement - answered it. 5 people were there claiming to be Aron’s family. They knew about the bunker and asked to be let in. My father, two of his sons, Jack and Barry, his brother Joseph and a young man by the name of Elie were standing there all smelling of excrement. They were let in and given pails of water to bathe in and given clean underwear. My father then sat on the bed sobbing and told them his harrowing story:

We had a difficult time in the forest. Getting food was a problem. ‘Eventually Mrs. Zuk, the forest ranger’s wife took pity on us. “It was an awkward situation. Her husband had no interest in helping us But she had a good heart. We paid her and she agreed to supply us with corn, barley, bread, and potatoes. Her husband didn’t want to get involved with us and even scolded her for getting us food. We would go into the house when he wasn’t around and pick up the food she had prepared for us.

We cooked at night and slept during the day. During the day, no one would venture outside. It was always dark in the bunker although during the day, some light seeped in through the twigs covering the bunker. Many of us developed diarrhea and used a big hole dug inside the bunker for a toilet. There was of course no privacy.

By the end of November the first snow fell and we had to be careful not to go outside and create footsteps in the snow. One of the people in that bunker had developed a severe case of diarrhea and was embarrassed to use that toilet so often. So he kept going outside even though Aron had tried to stop him. No one could hold him back.

Some farmers noticed the footprints. 3 days ago early in the morning Ukrainian and German police surrounded our bunker. They were shooting all over. And then it stopped. Nobody moved. One fellow stuck his head out from among the twigs and was shot in the head.

Aron realized that we were all doomed…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post  - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free. 

Some Pre-Tisha B’Av Ramblings

Jews fighting Jews

It’s hard. Much harder than Yom Kippur. (At least for me.)

Tisha B’Av is meant to be hard. We are supposed to feel the pain of losing the most important structure in all of Jewish history - the Beis HaMikdash, the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, God’s residence (so to speak) here on earth. The Sages therefore gave us a program to follow on the anniversary of the destruction of both Holy Temples—a day dedicated to reflecting upon all the tragedies that have befallen us throughout our long exile.

We are, in fact, still living in that exile. Despite our return to the Holy Land and the tremendous success and growth we have attained, our redemption will not occur until the Messianic era, when the Temple is rebuilt.

And yet, it’s difficult to mourn a loss that happened thousands of years ago to ancestors long since gone. Honestly, I have a hard time doing that because I never personally experienced the glory of the Temple. For me, it’s ancient history—something I had no part in.

I suspect that if most people were honest, they would say the same. Which is why the Sages wanted us to experience the pain, at least in some measure, by requiring us (among other things) to fast, sit on the floor, and refrain from any enjoyable activity on this day. Even Torah study is forbidden.

We force ourselves into a state of mourning in order to better appreciate the magnitude of what was lost when the Beis HaMikdash was destroyed.

The “sins” of our ancestors are not our sins. I would argue that - with some notable exceptions - today’s observant Jewry is far more devout than the generation whose sins led to the destruction of the First Temple. That generation was guilty of the widespread commission of the three cardinal sins: idolatry, sexual immorality, and murder.

The Second Temple, however, was destroyed because of a chain of events that began when one prominent Jew publicly insulted and humiliated another Jew for no good reason. We refer to that as Sinas Chinam - baseless hatred.

I doubt that the vast majority of observant Jewry today is involved in any meaningful way in the three cardinal sins. But I do believe we are still guilty of publicly insulting and humiliating one another. Now more than ever.

And it’s happening at the highest levels…

To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post  - click on this link: substack. You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free.