Emes Ve-Emunah

70% of Israeli Charedim want a good secular education for their children

Pew. That word used to indicate a foul odor. Hence the name Pepe Le Pew… the famous Warner Brothers striped skunk cartoon character. But when you mention that word now, you think of the highly regarded Pew Research Center- a nonpartisan American think tank that ‘provides information on social issues, public opinion, and demographic trends shaping the United States and the world’. (It’s amazing how words can evolve to mean something entirely different than what they meant just a short while ago. Of course the word pew can also mean a bench in a Church or synagogue. I guess it depends how you say it or in which context you use it. But I digress.)

If there has been any institution in recent years that has given the Jewish world a lot to think about, it is Pew. It is the data gathered by Pew that has revealed the true status of denominational Judaism in America. Their data revealed that all major Jewish denominations but Orthodox Jewry are dying at a rate so rapid that it has the Reform Movement re-defining itself and the Conservative Movement scrambling to make itself more relevant.

And now Pew has done it again. This time in Israel. Mishpacha Magazine reported on this study in their most recent issue. Pew has come up with some statistics that may be surprising.

I have been saying for some time now that one of the most serious issues facing the Charedi world in Israel is their staggering poverty. A poverty that could be substantially reduced if only their educational system would introduce Limudei Chol – secular studies into their curriculum. Much like most of the Charedi Yeshivos and day schools in America have. If they did that, Charedim in Israel would be better prepared for the training they might need in the future for better paying jobs.

That they get no training at all means that some of them do not know how to make the transition to a trade school, technical school, or professional school. They simply never developed the study skills required to be successful there. The skills learned in Limudei Kodesh (religious studies) are helpful, but not enough. The bright and motivated students will overcome that deficit. But some of them won’t. And they almost all have very large families to feed.

The retort form their defenders is that they choose that lifestyle because they are willing to sacrifice their material well being for the spiritually uplifting lives they lead. They therefore gladly sacrifice the study of secular studies in favor of religious studies.

But as Pew has now revealed, this is not true. 70% of the Charedi world believes that secular studies are important. They also believe that finding a high paying job is important!

What about all that spirituality and sacrifice? While it does exist at all levels, it does not exist at the expense of Limudei Chol and getting a good job. The point being that the assumption that Charedim don’t care about secular studies or a good job is false. An assumption upon which the system operates.

The philosophy of the Charedi world is to learn full time in Yeshivos without a stitch of secular studies once you complete 8^thgrade. (And until then, at best you are taught some very basic math.) You remain in that mode well into your married years even after having many mouths to feed.

Can this model continue to exist, if so many Charedim consider a secular education importnat while it is being denied to them? It has so far. But how much longer can this model continue to be sustained? Again, 70% of all Charedim in Israel consider it important to give their children a good general education! And yet none of their schools do.

There are some other interesting findings. 51% of all Israelis consider themselves religious. Religious as defined in this survey means either Charedi (Ultra-Orthodox), Dati (Modern Orthodox), or Masorti (Traditional). Now, I’m not exactly sure what that last category means. But I know it means a lot more than just having a Seder on Pesach since 81% of all Israelis do that. 49%.consider themselves Chiloni (secular).

It is also a fact that their Jewish identity is very important to Israelis no matter how secular they are. 93% of all Israelis said they are proud of their Jewish identity. Contrast that with the number of Jews in America that could not care less whether they are Jewish or not; intermarry freely and do not raise their children with any religion.

While it is true that secular Jews in Israel define their Judaism culturally, which is different than how religious Jews define themselves as a matter of religion, the fact remains that in all cases, their Judaism is important enough to them to perpetuate it. Intermarriage in Israel is extremely low.

The sense of Jewish identity that is so important to almost every Israeli Jew should not go unnoticed by the Charedi world. I have heard far too often voices coming from the Charedi world that accuse Israeli society of being anti religious. That is obviously not true at all. They should not mistake opposition to certain positions taken by the Charedi world as being anti religious. That opposition is usually only in response to positions that are contrary to what they see as the welfare of the country (e.g. being upset that Charedim do not generally serve in the military. Or that they do not contribute to the economy – instead preferring to be supported by taxpayer dollars). Charedi politicians should realize what’s bothering them, and not see them as anti-religious.

What about politics? Are Israelis more politically right or left? According to this survey they are either centrist or right. The left comprises only 14% of the Jewish population in Israel. Do they believe the current government in Israel is making a serious effort to bring about peace? The answer is a surprising yes! 56% of the Charedim, 61% of the Daatim, 62% of the Masortim, and 50% of the Chilonim think the Netanyahu government is seriously pursuing peace! Considering all the hatred I see of the Netanyahu government expressed here and in various media all the time, this one surprises me.

There are a lot more surprising statistics such as whether they believe in the Theory of Evolution or not. In all 3 religious streams, the majority do not. Only Chilonim do (83%)

This is truly a fascinating study with an even more fascinating result. Something that should give all of us a lot to think about.

People are evacuated from Brussels airport following twin blasts (cnbc)

A while back I recall reading (no longer recall where) about the Koran - the document upon which Islam is based. It was in an interview with a former Islamist terrorist who has changed sides. He said very plainly that the Koran is very clear. Among other shocking statements promoting violence against infidels it states very clearly if one does not convert to Islam, he should be killed. All in pursuit of a holy war (Jihad) whose goal is to impose Sharia law on the entire world. Where every human being will submit to Allah (God) - whose will is recorded in the Koran.

He was also asked the obvious question. What about the fact that the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people who wouldn’t hurt a fly… people that are just as worried about being victims of attack as anyone else… people that condemn the violence perpetrated by their coreligionists? These terrorists distort Islam they say and add that Islam a religion of peace.

He answered that indeed the majority of Muslims are peaceful – peace loving people. But that their views are not based on a direct reading of the Koran – but on modern day interpretations that allow them to remain peaceful in our day despite the fact that an accurate reading of the text tells you that Islam extols violent Jihad.

The one thing that the current administration, along with most European governments have failed to recognize is that Islam at its most fundamental level is not a religion of peace. Most of its members may be. But its foundational document is clearly not. It is a religion of Jihad – holy war.

So when ISIS, Al Qaida, and other Jihadist Muslims commit what the civilized world considers crimes against humanity, they instead see it as a fulfillment of their Divine mandate. Calling them radical Islam may actually be a misnomer. They are not the radical ones. They are the devout ones who carry out the fundamental mission handed to them by God, through His messenger, the Prophet Mohamed, as recorded in the Koran. These are not crazed madman beheading people willy-nilly. These are God fearing fundamentalist Muslims following the Koran – killing infidels as required by their foundational document.

I bring all this up in light of yet another attack against the free world by these Muslims. There was another major attack in Brussels this morning. From The Guardian:

The confirmed death toll from both attacks now stands at 34. Maggie de Block, the Belgian health minister, said 14 people died and 81 were injured in the airport explosions. The Belgian metro authority, STIB-MIVB, and emergency services said 20 people were killed in the Maelbeek metro blast. STIB-MIVB said a further 55 people were injured, including 10 critical…

There has already been a lot of discussion in the media about who was responsible for this. Was it ISIS? Or was it some other Jihadist group? As far as I am concerned it doesn’t matter. What matters is that we are fighting Fundamental Islamic beliefs. Not just radical Islam.

Again, this is not to say that all Muslims are terrorists. I am absolutely convinced that most Muslims are not. Most of them are potential victims just like the rest of us. But what is also clear is that it is their religion that inspires the very terrorism they fear.

But even if Jihad is a Godly mandate, in what religious world is it right to kill innocent victims? Some of whom might be Muslims themselves? I have to assume that they believe that all’s fair when trying to reach their religious goals. If terror is what it takes to force people to convert, then terror is what it’s going to be. If some Muslims ultimately die in pursuit of that… not to worry. They will be considered martyrs and go straight to their ultimate reward in heaven. Besides, if a Muslim does not adhere to the ‘right’ version of Islam, they might as well be infidels too and worthy of execution.

It’s time for the world to wake up. And I include the United States here. Our governments are sleeping. By focusing on ISIS, they are ignoring the real threat. They have to realize that they are fighting Islam at its most fundamental level. If ISIS were to be completely destroyed, another ISIS would soon arise under a different name but with the same goal. It’s about time the civilized world started fight Islam on its own terms. This is a holy war. We are fighting fundamentalist Islam! There is no other way to look at it.

Just to be clear. Fighting fundamentalist Islam does not mean we are fighting Muslims. This is not, God forbid, an attempt to commit genocide against a people most of whom are indeed peace loving. This is an attempt to know what and who we are really fighting and how to best deal with them. Unless we fully recognize that, we are spitting in the wind. We are not fighting ISIS. We are fighting a multi headed Hydra where killing one head will be replaced by many more heads.

Once we know what we are actually dealing with, we can begin to fight it properly and take appropriate security measures. Measures we have avoided because of our own decency as a moral people that respects human dignity and the rights grated to us by our own constitution. What can we do that will help? I am not in a position to know I am not in the field of counter-terrorism. But here are some ideas that immediately come to mind.

The idea that we can’t water-board someone to get life saving information - someone that would behead us given the chance - because ‘this isn’t who we are as a people’ is laughable. We are not talking about torturing an enemy that respects the Geneva Convention. We are talking about an enemy that respects only achieving its goal – whatever it takes. Does anyone for a minute think that if the tables were turned they wouldn’t use water-boarding? Is there a sane person that thinks that if we are honorable and don’t water-board our prisoners - that these potential mass murders wouldn’t either? If water-boarding mass murderers is the way you save lives, than that is what you do.

What about Muslim refugees? Is there any question anymore that fundamentalist Muslims have slipped through European borders along with the vast majority of those who are running for their lives from countries like Syria where fundamentalist Islam rules? It is legitimate to ask whether being humane by accepting them is going to result in more terrorist attacks like the one on Brussels.

All it takes is one from among the tens of thousands of legitimate refugees begging for refuge. One that will continue the ‘struggle’ for Islam by strapping a suicide belt to himself, walking into Times Square and blowing himself up! Can’t happen here? Not only can it happen here, it already has. Remember San Bernardino? Or the Boston Marathon? These heinous crimes were committed by fundamentalist Muslims. How many of those do we need before we face reality?

And the idea that hi-tech giant, Apple, refuses to grant a government request to break the encryption code of a terrorist communication device because of the principle of freedom of expression and the right to privacy is beyond ridiculous.

In a normal world, I would be siding with Apple. Freedom of expression and the right to privacy are rights that I hold dear. They are bedrock of American style democracies. But taken too far, we become our own worst enemy. Rights cannot exist without security. Security comes first. What good will that right do for us if we lose the war with Islam?

The ability to live freely in a country where rights like this thrive requires us to give up a little of those rights, just to survive. Big Brother is watching? So what? Unless you are committing a crime you will have nothing to fear. This is not the Soviet Union. Or Iran. Or China. Or North Korea. Or Cuba. Once we defeat the real enemy, those rights can be fully restored.

I don’t have any answers. Just a lot of questions and a few suggestions off the top of my head – for what they are worth.

This is my immediate reaction to the carnage in Brussels. One thing seems certain, though. Tiptoeing around the truth about fundamentalist Islam has to end. We need recognize the real enemy and get serious about how to deal with them effectively. And by ‘we’ I mean the entire civilized world. Defeating one Jihadist group will not change anything. We need to treat this like the Jihad it is and defeat fundamentalist Islam. And do whatever it takes to achieve it. There has got to be a better way to do this than the way we are doing it now!

Among the many duties of the Kohanim (Temple Priests) is the charge by God to bless the Jewish people. This is called Birkas Kohinim or Nisiyas Kapayim - the raising of the hands. This blessing is recorded in the Torah word for word. It was done daily in the Beis HaMikdash. Kohanim are to raise their hands and say those words.

It is God's desire that this blessing be transferred through the hands of the Kohanim. Only Kohanim may do it this way. Non Kohanim may not. Although they are permitted to use these words to bless others informally. Commonly this blessing is said by a father blessing his children before Shabbos or Yom Tov. But this is not the same as the blessing given by the raising of the hands – a privilege granted only to Kohanim.

What about a female Kohenet? May she raise the hands and recite this blessing the way male Kohanim do? Let us first look at what a Kohen actually is. The Torah is very clear about this. Kohanim must be direct male descendants of Aaron, the first Kohen. Although a female descendant has certain rights and privileges that a Kohen has, she does not have any service rights. She may not perform any of the Temple services. And if she marries a non Kohen, she loses all Kohanic privileges.

This is not sexism. The Torah assigns various roles to different segments of Jewry including male and female segments. It has nothing to do with who is better or more empowered. The Torah defines the role of a Kohen, the role of a Levi; the role of men and the role of women. Judaism is not egalitarian by its very nature.

There are some things that are mandated for only one segment that are nevertheless permitted to another segment. But not all things. As noted non Kohanim and female Kohanot are forbidden to perform the Temple service. And since Nesiyas Kapayim is considered part of the Temple service, they are forbidden from doing that too. Although they may say the words of the priestly blessing, they may not do it with raised hands.

Nesyias Kapayim has become a tradition at the Kotel every Yom Tov. It’s quite a sight to behold. Not to be outdone, the Women of the Wall have announced their intent to do it too - in the female section of the Kotel Plaza. Why? They say why in a Facebook event notice. It is to empower women. They have invited female Kohanot to do Nesiyas Kappaim at the Kotel on the 1^st day of Chol HaMoed Pesach.

I’m sorry. This is just plain wrong. What is gained by making this spectacle? Why do they feel the need break yet another tradition? What purpose can they possibly have other then what is stated on their website – to empower women? Why do something that will no doubt cause a tremendous disturbance to the regular prayer goers who prefer traditional prayer? Why invite yet more violent protest by zealots who may once again rear their ugly heads?

Will their spirituality really be enhanced by doing this? Or is it only that they will feel more empowered? Even if their spirituality would be enhanced… at what price? Does it outweigh the angry protest that will no doubt ensue?

I’m sorry. Female empowerment is not a reason to violate tradition so publicly and cause a probable disturbance. Regular attendees at the Kotel prefer praying in the traditional way that has been the norm since the Kotel was restored to us in 67. This spectacle will no doubt invite even more hostility than we have experienced to date. What kind of spirituality will they have if that happens?

I therefore urge the Women of the Wall to reconsider this ill begotten idea and refrain from doing it. If they truly care about preserving the sanctity of the Kotel and preserving the spirituality that so many feel when they are there, they would be wise to avoid doing anything that will cause disruption, disturbance, and possible violent protest. Please. Let us not have the attitude that ‘I’m going to do this no matter what because it empowers me’. Judaism is not about empowerment. It is about doing the will of God. And I don't think doing this is in that spirit.

Anti IDF poster aimed at Charedim

The profound words of Rabbi Shraga Feivel Samuels can be seen... no EXPERIENCED! in a video taken at an anti army gathering in Israel. Those words moved me to tears. Bitter tears. Very bitter tears. So bitter that I nearly threw up after listening to him. (Now that's bitter.) I feel his pain. You will too.

Even though he speaks in Yiddish, his emotions speak louder than his words. But why go on and on and on about the profundity of his words when you can witness it for yourself. As a public service I present it below. (H/T Matzav)

Happy Purim.

Warning. May not be suitable for children under 18.

Profoundly offensive act by Jews we should reject from Orthodoxy

There are a lot of Orthodox Jews, myself included, that often say that all observant Jews have more that unites us than what divides us. No matter how widely our Hashkafos differ. Even if the gap is wide as it is between Satmar and the most left leaning of Orthodox Jews.

I have always believed that. As long as we all do not entertain heretical beliefs we are all united by our adherence to Halacha. The Halacha that is seen as the most indicative of that is Shmiras Shabbos - Sabbath observance. If one is a Shomer Shabbos, that shows that they are observant. Even if there are minor infractions of Halacha – which all of us are guilty of at one time or another. With few exceptions in history, there is no Jew alive or was ever born that lived their lives without sin.

But sometimes behavior becomes so offensive that it challenges that notion. At least for me. A photo of a hanging IDF soldier on display in the Meah Sheraim section of Jerusalem yesterday qualifies as challenging that notion. The group responsible for that abomination not only challenges that notion, for me it disqualifies membership in the greater Orthodox world.They should be rejected from Klal Yisroel, despite their obvious observance of Halacha.

Their observance of Shabbos is probably more meticulous than that of most other Orthodox Jews. And yet by this act they have removed themselves from the congregation of Israel no less than Korach and his Eidah did when they challenged the leadership of Moshe.

Hanging Jews in effigy – even on Purim – is so beneath contempt, that I have no words. IDF members are holy Jews whether they are observant or not. They are ready to give up their lives in defense of the Jewish people, Meah Shearim Jews included.

What makes this even more offensive is that the model for hanging anyone on Purim is that of Haman, the Hitler of his era. Haman, like Hitler, wanted to commit genocide against us. So that when someone is hung on Purim in effigy, they are basically comparing him to Hitler.

One may want to counter my words with the ‘broad brush’ argument. Saying that I should not paint the entire Meah Shearim community this way because of a few miscreants. And that the extremists responsible for that ‘prank’ are just as condemned by their leadership as they are by me.

Sorry. I don’t buy that for a minute. One need only look at the screaming rabbi embedded in yesterday’s post to see how false that is. This attitude is shared by their leadership. The leadership may not be the ones hanging an IDF soldier in effigy. But they certainly agree with the sentiment. If they do ever mouth words of public condemnation, it is only for public consumption. They are otherwise on board with it.

This is not a case of Elu V’Elu – Divrei Elokim Chaim – these and those are the words of the living God. Elu V’Elu is meant to support legitimate Machlokes - Halachic disputes in Klal Yisroel. Like those of Hillel and Shamai. They disagreed on almost everything and yet their views are considered legitimate in the eyes of God. Elu V’Elu is not meant to justify an evil such as this.

Had they just maintained their opposition to joining the IDF for ideological reasons, that would be an Elu V’Elu. But hanging a Jew effigy to illustrate just how opposed they are - is so disgusting that in my view it completely destroys their membership – not just in the holy nation of Israel, but in the human race as far as I am concerned.

And yet, the Charedi world seems to tolerate them. And even admire them.

Who are the people of Meah Shearim? To the best of my knowledge most of them are descendants of the Yishuv HaYashan – Orthodox Jews who made Alyiah (emigrated) to Israel well before the Zionist founders of the state did - and established residence in this part of Jerusalem. They were devout Jews consisting of Chaisdim and the Talmidei HaGra – disciples of the Vilna Gaon. They settled there without any of the modern conveniences of our day, just so they could fulfill the Mitzvah of Yishuv Ha’aretz – living in the land of Israel. They have maintained a constant presence in Israel since then – rejecting outright the legitimacy of Zionism in any of its forms.

I recall an article in one of the Charedi magazines a year or two ago where these people were praised as devout Jews - pure and holy. Where family values reign and Chesed abounds. Any one of them would give you the shirt off his back. Their only concern was serving God in the best way possible, living their lives modestly without government support – rejecting outright any government financial aid. They followed their rabbinic leaders honoring them with respect usually reserved for a head of state. In short the author of that article painted the entire community as one we would do well to emulate.

Would that this description was the beginning and end of it. I would agree that their devout, modest, sincere, and compassionate way of life was something to emulate. But as this event (and many others like it) shows these are not people to emulate. These are people to reject.

I will not be hanging anyone in that community in effigy. I would never stoop that low. But I will reject them as members of Torah Judaism despite the fact that they observe Shabbos meticulously. All of them, leaders included – even as they might mouth some sort of tepid condemnation that would no doubt include apologetics like ‘but their hearts were in the right place’.

I only wish the rest of the Orthodox world would do the same instead of always apologizing for them. Their views about Israel are more like those of ISIS than they are like those of rest of Orthodox Jewry – even in the Charedi world.

I can excuse an occasional emotional anti government outburst by a Charedi leader that - whether I agree or not - feels that his world is crumbling at the hands of a government edict. But hanging a fellow Jew in effigy is far more offensive. By orders of magnitude. And this kind of thing happens too frequently to be called an occasional outburst. A single condemnation by the Charedi world is not enough. They have to cut them off from the rest of the Torah world in all ways - financial and otherwise.

This may not affect them. They probably don’t care what the rest of Orthodox Jewry thinks of them. But they might care about losing our financial support. If that is what it takes for them to stop it, then it ought to be done.

Law Professor and Author, Roberta Rosenthal Kwall

Kitniyos. How many Jews know what that word means? I believe that most Orthodox Jew know what it means. But how many Conservative Jews and other heterodox Jews know what it means or even care to know?

So what is Kitniyos? It is the Hebrew word used in the Gemarah for legumes (How many people know what that means?). Legumes or Kitniyos are basically beans. A food item that has a controversial status on Pesach (Passover) because of its similarity to actual Chametz. Depending on whether your heritage as a Jew is Ashekenzi (European) or Sephardi (Middle Eastern) it will be either Halachicly forbidden (Ashkenaz) or permitted (Sephard) for consumption on that holiday. Most Jews in America are Ashkenazi and therefore forbidden from using Kitniyos on Pesach.

In yet another bizarre Halachic ruling, the Conservative Movement’s Law Committee (i.e. their ‘Poskim’), has now removed the prohibition on Kitniyos on Pesach. I say ‘bizarre’ for the following reason. This is a movement in turmoil. As most people know by now, a Pew report has shown that they are a movement in decline. They are losing massive numbers to assimilation. And as has been pointed out here numerous times, they are scrambling to find ways to become more relevant to their membership in a bid to stop the hemorrhaging.

And this is what they have come up with?! Maybe I’m wrong, but it would not surprise me that you could count on the fingers of one hand the number of Conservative Jews that care about Kitniyos on Pesach.

Just to be clear. It’s not as if this Halacha is the most vital one in Judaism. There were serious and highly respected Asheknazi Poskim in the past (e.g the Chacham Zvi and his son, R’ Yaakov Emden) that had proclaimed that if they had in their power they would eliminate this stricture from the body of Jewish law. That the Conservative movement has now done this is not the end of the world. Their permit to drive to Shul on Shabbos was a far more grievous ‘Psak’. One than they now regret making. I am going to go out on a limb and say that this new ‘Psak’ will not persuade a single wavering Conservative Jew to stay in the movement.

The Conservative Movement will surely counter by saying that that was not the reason they came out with this new “Psak’. They were just acting in their capacity as Poskim. Indeed their stated reason was likely based on the Halachic principle of ‘being chas al mamon Yisroel’ caring about the money of the Jewish people. Since Pesach is so expensive they have made it more affordable for a Jew to observe it. (I find that a bit of a stretch. But I digress.)

What makes this even more bizarre is the fact that one of their brighter lights, Rabbi Neil Gilman, 10 years ago suggested that his movement would do well to stop calling themselves Halachic, since the Conservative movement has made moves that ‘some have seen as contravening traditional rabbinic Jewish law’. Not to mention the fact that very few of its members actually observe even their version of Halacha.

Maybe this is exactly why they have come out with this ‘Psak’. To prove to the Neil Gilmans of the world that the Conservative Movement is still Halachic.

Author and DePaul University Law professor, Roberta Rosenthal Kwall, (who is not Orthodox) has weighed in on this new decision calling it a misstep. This is not the first time she has criticized the movement. And it probably won’t be the last. Here in part is what she says:

This decision goes against the movement’s mantra of “conserving” the tradition and discards a long-standing custom for no good reason.

Further, for traditionally observant Jews who remain affiliated with Conservative Judaism, this decision increases existing concerns about the movement’s perceived creep to the left.

The Jewish tradition reflects a blend of both what the rabbis declare as the law and the grass-roots practices of the people. Therefore, the role of minhag, or custom, has a special significance in the development of halakhah, Jewish law…

“(T)radition” connotes positive associations and the desire for transmission.
When seen in this light, the law committee’s decision to permit kitniyot for Ashkenazic Jews has far more significance than allowing previously forbidden foods during Pesach. It represents an erosion of long-standing tradition, which is a very dangerous step for a movement to take when it claims to care about conserving tradition and even maintaining halakhah.

Professor Kwall makes the same argument against the Conservative Movement that many of OO’s (Open Orthodox) critics have been making about them and their own abandonment of tradition (Mesorah).

Even if one were to grant that OO has not crossed any Halachic lines, are these moves really wise? Is abandoning tradition a virtue? Or is it a liability? Professor Kwall has argued that it is a liability. For every Jew applauding the abandonment of tradition in favor of embracing the winds of cultural change - there may be just as many that will be put off by it. Not to mention the fact that one or more these changes have been thoroughly rejected by virtually all mainstream Orthodox rabbinic institutions. (e.g. the Rabbinical Council of America, Agudath Israel, the Israeli Chief Rabbinate, and the Conference of European Rabbis.)

If I were a rabbinic leader in this movement, I would take a serious look at what Professor Kwall has to say.

Rabbi David Ozeri (Mishpacha)

The intractable problem of the high cost of Jewish education has once again been discussed in a major Charedi publication. This time it focused on the woefully underpaid Mechanchim. Mishpacha Magazine featured a cover story on Rabbi David Ozeri, the leader of Brooklyn’s Sephardi community. He has made it a top priority to improve the lot of these dedicated teachers. To say that most Mechanchim currently struggle on the salaries they are paid is an understatement.

I have discussed this issue many times. The problem is that parents can barely afford to pay what they are already being asked to pay. I don’t know too many parents of a typical family size of 4 or 5 children that pay full tuition for all of their children. And I also don’t know too many Orthodox parochial schools that don’t run on deficits. Which leaves their Mechanchim out on a limb.

How can we raise their salaries to a point where they will no longer have to buy groceries on credit - not having enough money to pay for them when they are purchased? They are constantly in a state of debt to the religious grocery store owners who extend this kind of credit out of the goodness of their hearts. They too deserve to be paid what they are owed. Not to mention the fact that often Mechanchim have to borrow money to pay for life cycle events like weddings for their children. Weddings that are generally very modest.

There are no easy answers. Traditional fund raising by these institutions have their limits. In far too many cases those efforts are maxed out and there is still a short fall at the end of the year. In the more right wings schools where family size is often substantially larger, the scholarship allowances are greater making the shortfall greater. That makes their ability to raise salaries to a livable level a near impossibility. Their parent body is already ‘taxed’ to the limit - paying as much as they possibly can in most cases.

And yet as is quite clear now more than ever, if we want to perpetuate Orthodox Judaism well into the future, a good Jewish education is indispensable!

Everything I just said is not new. The problem seems to be unsolvable in traditional ways. We can’t expect parents to pay higher tuition from money which they do not have. Fund raising is maxed out. And even if we could find and eliminate waste in the school budgets, I doubt that would significantly impact their bottom line.

I have in the past made some suggestions about how to remedy the situation. The most important of which has as of yet not been implemented. The fact is that the Orthodox Jewish world has enough money to fund Jewish education. The money is there.

One of the eye opening comments made in the Mishpacha article was a statistic quoted by one of Rabbi Ozeri’s wealthy donors. He made the astonishing claim that there are 12 billionaires in the Torah world. If this is true, then my proposal that they take ‘the pledge’ would solve the problem.

By coincidence 60 Minutes re-broadcast a story yesterday about ‘The Giving Pledge’(see below). Billionaires Bill and Melinda Gates, and Warren Buffet have started a very exclusive club where they and fellow billionaires pledge to give away at least half of their wealth to the charities of their choice. If there is one ‘charity’ that is vital to the future of Judaism, it is Jewish education. Imagine if these 12 billionaires took the pledge and chose Jewish education as their philanthropic recipients. Imagine funding a super endowment fund with 6 billion dollars designed specifically to supplement the budgets of all parochial elementary and high schools. That would generate who knows how many millions of dollars per year that would go directly to Jewish education.

One might ask whether it’s fair to ask anyone to give away half their wealth to a single charity. I think it's fair if we are talking billionaires. I don’t see a problem living off the remaining 500 million. I could live on half that. What about other legitimate charities? I think there might be room for additional contributions from the remaining 500 million.

The Jewish people have inherited the trait of Chesed form our patriarch Abraham. But it appears that the non Jewish world has a head start on us. If it is true that there are 12 billionaires in Orthodoxy there is not a doubt in my mind that they should do this. I don’t see how a Torah oriented billionaire could refuse to do it. They know the value and importance of Jewish education. And they must also know about the economics of it. Of what value is that money if it just sits in their bank accounts?

And this hasn’t even touched the multi millionaires that could donate millions of their own wealth to such a fund without breaking a sweat.

So here is my message to any Orthodox billionaires and multi millionaires that may be reading this post: You have the ability. There is no reason not to do this. It will advance the cause of Jewish education to unprecedented levels; raise the pay-scale for these devoted Mechanchim; help attract top teachers in the future; and take the enoromous pressure off parents struggling to pay their tuition bills. Come on guys. Just do it!

View More: Newsmakers News|Overtime Originals News|Live News|More News Videos

Guest Contribution By Paul Shaviv

Seated: Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld and Rav Avrohom Yitzchok Kook

I received the following submission from Paul Shaviv. I am always honored to post essays by this very knowledgeable man. It was in response to a recent post where I made a brief (but not entirely accurate) mention of the history of the Old Yishuv (Yishuv Hayashan) - as being the precursor to today’s Meah Shearim. Mr. Shaviv wanted to clear things up. I am pleased to accommodate. His essay follows.

In his posting last Friday (March 25th), Rabbi Maryles discussed the disgraceful phenomenon of the hanging of an effigy of an Israeli soldier in Meah Shearim on Purim. He asks the question “Who are the people of Meah Shearim? To the best of my knowledge most of them are descendants of the Yishuv HaYashan – Orthodox Jews who made Alyiah (emigrated) to Israel well before the Zionist founders of the state did - and established residence in this part of Jerusalem.”

But few of the current inhabitants of Meah Shearim and other Haredi communities in Jerusalem are “descendants’ of the ‘Old Yishuv’ families; and the ‘Old Yishuv’ families themselves in many cases immigrated to Israel simultaneously with all other Zionist ‘Aliyyot’ (including many before and after the Second World War, and after 1956).

The characterization of the 'Old Yishuv' ("Hayishuv hayashan") as an ancient community of twinkly-eyed pietists is, I am afraid, a totally romanticized picture of a complex (and fascinating) community. It is, broadly speaking, in the same category as claiming that 'everyone in Eastern Europe was frum and learned'. (The rather sinister, underlying implication in both is that were it not for ‘Zionists, or Reformers’ or other unspecified malevolent agents, these worlds could have continued undisturbed and unchanged for ever…. While it is seductive to ignore reality and history, and whether you approve or disapprove of change, unfortunately such views are delusional.)

The Old Yishuv was the subject of an extended study I did as part of my graduate work at Oxford many years ago. You can read what I wrote here .

In brief: the 'Old Yishuv' comprised many elements, Ashkenazi and Sephardi. In the nineteenth century, many of the Ashkenazim were indeed Perushim, the descendants of the Gr"a, but they were a rather turbulent crowd, as Prof. Arie Morgenstern has shown. For example, there was a widely entertained anticipation of the coming of the Moshiach in 1840 (= 5600) - yes, among Misnagdim! The Messiah's non-appearance resulted in some Jerusalemites converting to Christianity, under the influence of the Anglican Mission, with whom the Perushim had intricate connections.

Others – connected to the influential Hungarian Kollel – were followers of the Hatam Sofer, who believed strongly in resettling Eretz Yisrael as a way of ‘normalizing’ Jewish existence – arguments which are precursors of later Zionist ideology.

The Rav of the Old Yishuv was R'Shmuel Salant, who passed away in 1909.

But - crucially -- the Old Yishuv was, broadly speaking, not unsympathetic to modernity and practical efforts to improve the productivity and education of the Jewish population. Note that the first attempt to found an agricultural colony in Petach Tikvah (1878) was by Hungarians of the Old Yishuv – even BEFORE the First Aliyyah. ‘Modern’ schools were established in Jerusalem in the second half of the nineteenth century -- not without controversy, but they had students! The Bnai Brith Library (1892) was supported by the modernist circles of the Old Yishuv. The proposal to teach Arabic in the Etz Haim Yeshivah was supported by R’Shmuel Salant, and opposed by the Maharil Diskin (see below). The differing perspectives were clearly summarized by R’Shmuel Salant himself – ‘Arabic is not German and Jerusalem is not Berlin’ – in other words, Arabic, the language of Jerusalem and Levantine commerce, was not the gateway to threatening Enlightenment that German represented in Europe.

UNTIL -- the arrival of R'Moshe Yehoshua Leib Diskin in 1878. Maharil Diskin (and his wife - another story) came from Rumania-Hungary, and brought with him the battles of Europe against modernity and secularization. He saw in Ottoman-ruled Jerusalem a refuge of a traditional, pre-modern society which would be impervious to the cultural and religio-political struggles of Europe – certainly including Hungary, where, again, contrary to current belief, Reform and Neolog had made significant inroads.

With contemporarily-documented violence (see, for example, the memoirs of David Yellin), he and his followers conquered the Old Yishuv. (One Shabbat morning his followers entered the shul of R’Shmuel Salant in the Old City, smashed it to pieces and threw the remnants of furniture out of the windows.) His followers, including his successor, the impressive figure of R’Yosef Haim Sonnenfeld (1848-1932) and the fascinating figure of R’Moshe Blau (1885 – 1946 -- brother of R’Amram) founded the ‘Palestinian’ (= Eretz Yisrael) branch of Agudah.

But no society could be immune to world events. The defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War simply blew away the protective umbrella enjoyed by religious minorities.

The First, Second and subsequent aliyyot considerably outnumbered and overtook the Old Yishuv, whose influence was in any case confined to Jerusalem. Also, after the First World War, many left the Old Yishuv, either to emigrate (note the number of klei kodesh in English-speaking lands who were originally emigres of the Old Yishuv) or to join the ‘new’ Yishuv. The Old Yishuv itself was divided regarding the Balfour Declaration and the rebuilding of Eretz Yisrael – reflecting, to a degree, the split between the ‘Palestinian’ and the European Agudah.

The relationships between the Jerusalem Haredim and the Zionist Yishuv in the period between the two World Wars was fraught with tension, but also had a fundamentally ambiguity. (Authoritatively described by Dr. Menachem Friedman.) The Haredim guardedly welcomed the strengthening of the Jewish infrastructure and society in Eretz Yisrael, while disapproving of its character and secular leadership.

All this changed with the rise of Nazism. After 1933, the Agudah both in Eretz Yisrael and Europe supported Jewish immigration to Israel. Moshe Blau, as shown in a wonderful photograph, represented the Agudah at the St. James’ Roundtable Conference called by the British Government in early 1939 to discuss Jewish immigration. He was part of the Zionist delegation led by Chaim Weizmann.

In or about the early 1940’s, however, the extremist faction of the Palestinian Agudah, headed by Amram Blau, declared opposition to Jewish independence (really – opposition to Jewish secular leadership), and formed a group known initially as the ‘Chevrat Chayyim’, and soon after as ‘Neturei Karta’. But most of the Old Yishuv fought for the Haganah and the Lehi in the War of Independence. R’Itche Meir Lewin, Agudah leader, was a signatory to the Declaration of Independence of the State of Israel.

So the story is not at all as simplistic as often portrayed, as a clash between the pious, passive awaiters of Messianic deliverance and the activist Zionist pioneers.

Both the ‘Old Yishuv’ and the ‘New Yishuv’ were products of history, and reacted to it. Unfortunately, we live in an anti-historical Orthodox community, where real, detailed history is barely known, if at all, and is often reduced to simplistic and blatantly inaccurate ‘false memory’, designed to reinforce contemporary religious-political battles. Censorship and deliberate falsification feature prominently in the accounts of the personalities and incidents involved.

The nuanced positions of the Agudah have given way to widespread adoption of attitudes closer to (and in some cases more extreme than) the ‘classic’ Neturei Karta, together with adoption of revisionist historical narrative. (For example, I don’t believe that R’Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld or Amram Blau would have approved of the hanging effigy of the Israeli soldier.)

The story of the complex relationship between intensive Orthodoxy (including the history of the Old Yishuv) and modernity in all its forms (including the Jewish National Revival), awaits its comprehensive chronicler. In the meantime, here is a small window onto history for the benefit of the ‘Emes ve’emunah’ devotees!

Paul Shaviv, after many years of heading Jewish Day Schools, is a management consultant for independent schools and NFP’s.

Guest contribution by Yissochor Dov Alter*

Are children like these being short-changed?

The author of this post is someone that is a firmly integrated member of the Torah world. Although not an educator, he is in a profession that makes him uniquely qualified to comment on the negative consequences of Jewish education in that world. He has been a contributor to this blog on a variety of issues relating to Jewish education in the past. And now, once again he has offered the following response to a recent post of mine on the same subject.

Although I regret his need for anonymity I completely understand his situation and agree with his decision to remain anonymous. (I decided to use an alias this time.) I realize that anonymity reduces credibility. But since I do know his identity; attendant credentials; and respect his views I would be remiss if I did not make those views public. Views that are highly critical. This is not some sort of Charedi bashing post by an agendized anti Charedi poster. This is a respected Charedi individual pained by what he sees are major failings. His words follow.

Another well written post on the overwhelming problem of the poverty of Jewish education. You are, of course, right on the money (pun intended) in pointing to several of the gaps in the system.

Waste and poor budgeting – can actually be fixed significantly with proper guidance. This is a challenge, because the ones who hold the purse strings are resistant to relinquishing control over money. There are spending priorities which reflect their very personalities. The remedies needed here are bitter pills to swallow, but have worked quite well for those yeshivos that took the plunge.

Salaries – this is far more complex than just poor wages. My kids are out of yeshiva, but I can share sentiments that I had, which were echoed by many of my peers. Why should I push myself to insure the rebbes get their paychecks? I find most rebbes incompetent, untrained, apt to discipline unfairly and narcisstically, unavailable when I call them to address my child’s issues, and untrained on the basics in Jewish education.

Few rebbes understand bullying, which occurs frequently. Most express their anger and frustration by shaming and degrading students, which is clearly not acceptable. This, on its own, is one of the most common reasons why parents are less than fully compliant with paying tuition.

Fund raising – This issue is quite sore. All yeshivos rely greatly on the soliciting of charitable funds. We have been reading for a while about the shenanigans of questionable practices in use of government funding. There are almost always major events, such as dinners, Chinese auctions, and the like to raise major amounts of money to support the mosdos. Nearly every yeshiva I know has one or more major donors who remain behind the scenes (until the guest of honor appearances).

Many are appalled by the use of the students, sometimes of younger elementary ages, to collect money. This practice is couched in highly debatable descriptions. They refer to this as chinuch on the mitzvah of tzedokoh (should be to give, not take). It is also labeled hakoras hatov, as if the children who were publicly embarrassed feel grateful or should feel gratitude. The collecting turns into a competitive sport, with incentives given for the students who bring in the most money.

Purim is notable for the very rare scene of a child without a wad of money in hand. I have nothing but disdain and negative emotion regarding those who collect during those parts of davening when one is not permitted to be mafsik, including Shema, Shmoneh Esrai, and even during Kriyas Megilla.

The children are sent out with one supreme mission – gelt. It is prioritized over tefiloh and the mitzvos of Purim. That chinuch is decidedly negative, and repulses many. Yeshivos that I have confronted do not care at all. They just look at what arrives in their office, not at the mitzvah-aveiroh ratio.

Let’s return to the teachers and mechanchim. They may well need higher salaries. Few can debate this. But we must ask whether they deserve higher salaries. Let me explain. I have heard from many older teens and young adults who leave yeshiva and want to go to work. When they are offered entry level jobs with minimum wage, they reject it, expecting to earn far greater salaries, despite having zero training or job skills.

Are the rebbes and teachers that complain of low pay deserving of raises? Do they have training in the field that qualifies them? It is tragically comical that we treat Jewish education as an entry level job and open to anyone regardless of training or experience. Spend more on the payroll for inferior work? That’s a hard sell.

One last general comment about chinuch (somewhat less relevant for mosdos that are out of town). There is something drastically wrong when the retention of talmidim that can grow in Yiddishkeit and follow their heritage is weakening. The fallout, whether expulsions, the refusal of admissions, and the dropout rate, are all staggering, growing at astronomical rates. With the ships leaking so badly, precisely what kinds of investments are expected?

Pardon my cynicism. I try to shake it, but it pounces back on me every time.

*Not his real name

R'A.L. Shteinman: The new MO leader? Maybe on this issue

Modern Orthodoxy may have a new leader. Well he may not be all that new. In fact at over 100 years of age he’s quite old. And very few people would think of him as Modern Orthodox. But he has a very clear mind and has just articulated a Modern Orthodox view of Emunas Chachamim - Faith in our wise leaders upon which the Charedi world bases its concept of Daas Torah. His name is Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman, a man that many in the Charedi world consider the Gadol HaDor.

Rafi Goldmeier’s blog, Life in Israel, posted a video that poses this very question to Rav Stheiman. His response: There is no Emunas Chachamim today. It existed only in the times of the Gemarah. There can be no mistake about what he said. It is there permanently recorded in Hebrew and posted on YouTube for anyone to see. (available for viewing below).

This seems to undermine the very concept of Daas Torah upon which Agudath Israel was founded and still based upon. From its very inception the idea was that we are to be Mevatel our Daas (negate our own views and common sense) and submit completely to the views of the Gedolei HaDor. (Just to be clear, these are not Halachic issues. A Halachic Psak must be obeyed. These are policy issues like whether we may use the internet.)

The argument is as follows. Since they know the most Torah and know it better than anyone else, their views are the closest thing we have to the Torah point of view on any issue placed before them. So that even though they can be wrong (since human beings are fallible) we have no choice but to trust their judgment and listen to them when they make public policy statements. As noted - they call it Daas Torah and base it on the concept of Emunas Chachamim, a requirement of Judaism discussed in the Gemarah.

But not today, according to Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman. He says there is no such thing any more.

The question arises, ‘How could this be?’ The Gemarah also tells us, Yiftach B’Doro K’Shmuel B’Doro. Yiftach is a biblical figure who was a leader in Israel during the period of Shoftim – before the establishment of a kingdom in Israel. The story of Yiftach is that he made a foolish pledge to God in preparation for war, saying that he will sacrifice the first thing that passes through his door after being victorious. That ended up being his daughter - an only child. He felt obligated to make good on his vow and he actually ended sacrificing her! (There are other interpretations but this is the plain meaning of scripture (Shoftim,11:39).

And yet as a leader in Israel the Gemarah makes no distinction between Yiftach and the prophet Shmuel, the greatest of the biblical prophets - second only to Moshe. They have an equal status of leadership in their respective eras.

This argument is often used when people try to compare today’s rabbinic leaders with the Gedolim of yesteryear - saying that they are nowhere near that level. Their obvious point is that these are the leaders of our era. ‘We play the hand we are dealt’. We must, therefore, accept their version of Daas Torah because that is all we have.

Well, it appears that Rav Shteinman disagrees with that.

So how does that impact major policy decisions in our day? When the Agudah Moetzes makes a public policy decision, are we bound by it - even assuming that the members of the Agudah Moetzes are the leading wise men of our day?

I think the answer is clearly, no. We are not bound by their edicts at all – despite Agudah loyalists at virtually every public gathering saying that we are. Especially if there are other rabbinic leaders who disagree that are not on the Moetzes. That would be the case even if we do apply Emunas Chachim to our leaders. But if there is no Emunas Chachamim at all today – as per Rav Shteinman, it seems we don’t have to obey any rabbinic edict on matters of public policy. No matter how great their stature in Torah the might be.

Does that mean we can do whatever we want on issues of public policy? And how do we treat those rabbinic opinions if we are not required to obey them?

First of all, to answer difficult questions that arise today, we need people that are expert in the subject matter at hand and who are also expert in the Torah applicable to it. So their views do have value and should be given considerable weight. But they are not in my view necessarily the final word - as they would be if we applied Emunas Chachamim to them.

Just some of my thoughts on this surprising video.

Steven Bayme (American Jewish Committee) JTA

Steven Bayme, the American Jewish Committee’s director of contemporary Jewish life has written an op-ed about a new organization called PORAT (People for Orthodox Renaissance and Torah). Its purported mission is to revitalize Modern Orthodoxy. Which he claims has been under attack and weakened by the move to the right - to the great detriment of the many Jews who would choose that path of observance.

First he delineates 3 segments as follows: Charedi, Centrist, and Modern. I do not accept those delineations. Because Centrism is a modern denomination. Not some cross between Charedim and the left. A more correct delineation would only include 2 groups: Charedim and Modern Orthodox – each with their own subdivisions (e.g. Chasidim and Lithuanian Yeshiva types of the Charedi world - and Centrist and the Left Wing of the Modern Orthodox world.)

Centrism is very much modern in its positive attitude about secular education and secular culture. We value both in cases where they are compatible with Halacha. And that includes a wide variety of secular studies and general culture. This is not different than those of us to our left. But is different from the right that does not value secular education except for - at best - its utilitarian value (e.g. Parnassa). And they do not value secular culture at all. Modern Orthodox Jews (Both Centrists and the left) believe in participating in the culture. The Charedi world strives to avoid it as much as possible… assigning no positive value to it whatsoever.

If Mr. Bayme’s delineations would stand, Yeshiva University (YU) would not be considered Modern Orthodox anymore. Which is ridiculous. YU is the flagship Yeshiva of Modern Orthodoxy albeit with a heavily Centrist leaning.

The difference between Centrism and the left is in some of the innovations it has. Things which may fall within the parameters of Halacha, but which Centrism rejects as inappropriate. Centrism is Mesorah oriented and tends toward a more traditional Charedi approach to ritual observances.

An example of the left is Rabbi Avi Weiss’s Shul, The Hebrew Institute of Riverdale. The configuration and customs of that Shul are designed to appeal to a more egalitarian Orthodox market. Although this is unappealing to a Centrist, and some of it even controversial (like Women’s Tefilah Groups) there are people that find this approach appealing, are drawn to it, and remain Orthodox because of it.

So since it does not violate Halacha and there is a genuine need for the left, I support its existence even though it isn’t as traditional as it should otherwise be.

Back to Mr. Bayme and PORAT. Although I disagree with his equating Modern Orthodoxy with the left, I agree that the left should be restored as a viable choice for an Orthodox Jewry that consists of a broad spectrum of Hashkafos. (Yes, there is overlap between all the Hashkafos. There are no hard lines.)

But Mr. Bayme’s description of PORAT’s mission does not address its intent in my view. It contradicts it.

Instead of reigning in the recent excesses of Open Orthodoxy - which for me would be a legitimate and laudable goal in restoring the left’s legitimacy - it is instead indistinguishable from it. Mr. Bayme lists three reasons to justify PORAT’s creation which make that clear. None clearer than his third reason:

PORAT is necessary today precisely because rather than becoming moribund, modern Orthodoxy appears to be on the cusp of resurgence. Gender equality, new rabbinical training programs, receptivity to modern scholarship in the study of the Bible and Talmud, renewed interest in interfaith dialogue — all have appeared on the Orthodox scene in novel ways in recent years. PORAT aims to work with the nascent institutions and voices promoting these values in the hope of creating a vibrant, exciting and inspired modern Orthodoxy.

So instead of creating something new - this is yet another attempt to justify the extremes that Open Orthodoxy has embraced. I see no difference between the two. With all due respect to Mr. Bayme, I see no value in repetition. Creating yet another version of Open Orthodoxy will not help its cause. It will only serve to reinforce the resolve of their opponents to resist - and even reject them.

Children of Stamford Hill. What will their future look like? (Independent)

‘Tateh, M’Shnad Payis’ - father, they’re cutting off Peyos. I recall this Yiddish comment being made by a survivor in the movie Shoah, the epic 613 minute 1985 documentary by filmmaker Claude Lanzmann about the Holocaust.

This Yiddish phrase was heard in pre- war Poland and other Chasidic communities in Europe. where antisemitism was rampant and expressed in pogroms – violent acts by their Christian neighbors. Cutting off Peyos (a distinctive feature of Chasidic Jews) was a common way for antisemitic Pogrom participants to demonstrate their hatred of the Jew.

I mention all this in light of what’s happening in England. Authorities there are cracking down on schools that do not offer any secular studies in the Chasidic section of Stamford Hill. From the BBC:

As many as 1,000 boys from strictly Orthodox Jewish families may be pupils at a network of between 12 and 20 illegal private schools in east London.

These schools are not registered with the authorities, which makes them illegal, and they offer a narrow, religious syllabus.

The Department for Education is working with Ofsted to find and shut them.

These private schools serve the small so-called Charedi community - a grouping that contains within it a wide variety of strictly Orthodox Jewish traditions. Hackney council estimates there are around 30,000 Charedi Jews in the borough…

Some of the schools and yeshivas are run in contravention of the 2008 Education and Skills Act, which stipulates that "a person must not conduct an independent educational institution unless it is registered".

An individual convicted of running an unregistered school could face up to a year in prison. Ofsted and the DfE began a crackdown on illegal schools in January.

Seven schools have already been closed. Now it might be true that parents of children in these schools generally support the type of education offered there. At least publicly. But that is certainly not always the case. I wonder how many students there have the attitude expressed by this former student:

One ex-student of illegal Charedi schools, now in his 20s and outside the community, told Newsnight: "I'm starting to study for my GCSEs. I'm maybe like an eight-year-old, nine-year-old. That's my level of education."

My guess is that this attitude is held by more than an insignificant minority. I tend to believe that the reason these feelings are not more prominently expressed is fear of the consequences to those who question a system based on the cardinal principles of its Chasidic leaders who see little value in anything except their own Chasidic approach to Judaism.

The state of education in Stamford Hill section of London is mimicked in similar Chasidic enclaves here, in America. Most notably in towns like New Square and Kiryas Yoel; and in neighborhoods in Brooklyn like Williamsburg and parts of Boro Park.

These schools are under similar scrutiny by New York State education officials. But as YAFFED founder and director, Naftuli Moster indicated in a recent article, they are dragging their heels in their commitment to deal with this issue. Meanwhile students are not being educated enough to live in the 21^st century without the aid of benefactors, and government financial aid. It is an unofficial matter of policy in these kinds of Chasidic enclaves.

It seems that the authorities in London are doing something about it. I only hope that New York follows suit.

So what has all this got to do with anti-Semitism? Sure as I am sitting here, I can already hear someone there calling this a pogrom. There is not a doubt in my mind that there are people in these communities that will see it that way. And those of us who support government actions here will be accused of supporting antisemitic acts. (I can’t count the number of times I have seen a Charedi commentator say something like, ‘If you substitute the word ‘Charedim’ with the word ‘Jews’ the ADL would justifiably call you an antisemite!’

An argument one might hear from these Chasidic circles or their defenders to this new ‘pogrom’ might be that as citizens in a democracy they should have the right to educate their children in any way they choose.

Sure - if they didn’t need government support because of it, and their constituents generally approve - I would agree with that. But when the government is forced by their lack of education to give them our tax dollars in the form of financial aid to the poor, then their rights impede on the rights of everyone else.

But let’s leave that argument out of the equation for a minute. In what world is it even remotely ethical to fail to provide even the most basic education in order to live in the 21^st century? Is the education of an 8 or 9 year old enough to accomplish that?

They will most likely retort that as long as their constituents are part of the community their needs will be somehow met. As long as they remain loyal to the sect and the Rebbe, they will do just fine. No family will be left behind. The willingness to live a modest lifestyle combined with a community support network and government aid and they will all be happy campers. As for Naftuli Moster... ‘Who is this little ingrate expatriate Chasid think he is - to contradict what our Chasidic Rebbe decides is best for us?!’ - they might say.

This approach forces them to stay in the ‘commune’ lest they venture outside and find themselves completely lost – unable to support themselves or their families.

I completely reject the idea that what’s happening in Stamford Hill is antisemitic. It is not. It is a blessing. The Chasidim of Stamford Hill ought to be grateful that someone is looking after their welfare. And the Chasidic enclaves in Amercia should just as grateful to Naftuli Moster for his efforts in that vain. Unfortunately these Chasidim have been largely indoctrinated not to trust ‘The Goyim’ seeing an antisemite under every rock. But antisemtism is certainly not the reason that they are being forced to comply with the law.

I don’t know how this will all end. But my guess is that these communities will find a way to circumvent the law and avoid teaching their male students any more than they already are.

Which is a tragedy if you ask me. This community will certainly grow. As will their dependence on others for their financial welfare. Government resources are limited and subject to changes in the law. And private benefactors may not be able to keep up with their growth which will be exponential per generation. How will they survive then? I have no clue. And I’ll bet neither do they.

Image cross posted from Cross-Currents

I have been a fan of Rabbi Emanuel Feldman ever since I heard about him many years ago. He is one of the true heroes of Orthodox Judaism. He did in Atlanta what few Orthodox rabbis in his situation were able to do. In 1955, an era where many old line Orthodox Shuls were removing the Mechitza that separates men and women he installed one in his Shul after being hired a few years earlier.

Needless to say there were detractors. His initial attempt was rebuffed and the Mechitza removed the next day. Undaunted, Rabbi Feldman put his job on the line threatening to leave if the Mechitza was not reinstalled. It was and remains there to this day. How one may ask did he dare challenge the spirit of that time? Was he not worried about losing members that insisted on sitting together with their families in Shul?

I’m sure he was. But what was important to him was that the Halacha of separating men and women during prayer in a Shul setting – be restored in his Shul. He was - and is a man of principle who understands that when the spirit of the times clashes with Judaism, Judaism wins.

And as a man of principle he also understood that there are many voices in Judaism that deserve to be heard even if he didn’t agree with them. Which is why he was a long term editor of Tradition Magazine, a Journal of Orthodox thought. Tradition occasionally featured some controversial articles. It was during his tenure that Rabbi Shubert Spero wrote an article suggesting that because of the geological data to the contrary - perhaps the Mabul (the world-wide flood mentioned in Genesis) may never have actually happened and was only an allegory.

I’m pretty sure that Rabbi Feldman is not on board with Rabbi Spero’s thesis. As Rav Ahron Soloveichik said, this view is Karuv L’Apikursus – near heresy! And yet he allowed it to be published. I honestly don’t think I would have had the courage to do so - had I been in his shoes.

Rabbi Feldman retired from Tradition and his rabbinic position in Atlanta - and made Aliyah many years ago. He is now well into his 80s but remains active as a regular contributor to Mishpacha Magazine – writing about various issues of the day. Cross-Currents features one of his latest articles. It is one with which I whole-hardheartedly agree. And yet feel somewhat conflicted about. It deals with a theme featured here quite often.

Rabbi Feldman calls ludicrous the attempts by the Reform and Conservative Movements to insert themselves into official religious life in Israel. Although I don’t know that I would have chosen that word, I completely understand and agree with his argument, and have said much the same thing myself. And it bears repeating. Here is some of what he says:

Use of the word “ludicrous” is unavoidable when viewing some statistics. The Reform-Conservative brand has been dominant in American Jewish life for most of the 20th century, when the vast majority of affiliated American Jews were affiliated with them. It is instructive to examine what these groups achieved in America after a century of dominance. Let us look at the record. The just-issued Pew study provides a glimpse of American Jewish life today:

71% of US non-Orthodox are intermarried;
two-thirds of the non-Orthodox belong to no synagogue;
one third of non-Orthodox Jews declare that they do not believe in Gd;
one-third of non -Orthodox Jews have Xmas trees;
34% of non-Orthodox Jews say that one can still be Jewish even if one believes in the founder of Xianity as the messiah and savior.
What we have here is a stark picture of the disintegration of American Jewry with the exception of the Orthodox.

Granted, one cannot blame only these dissident movements for these abysmal numbers. Certainly, other factors were involved . Nevertheless, these statistics are mute testimony to the failure of an ideology that controlled Jewish religious life in America. All their efforts to streamline Torah and mitzvos have ended in bankruptcy, not only for Jewish religious life in general America, but for these movements themselves in particular. They are gradually losing ground in America, unable to retain their young people, and are facing dwindling institutional membership.

I think this says it all. As Rabbi Feldman notes I wish they would have done a little more honest introspection to see the real reasons they have failed instead of trying to export their failures to Israel. The truth of which has been covered by some of their own leaders. Like Jack Wertheimer and Daniel Gordis. But I don’t think they are listening.

That said, I am not celebrating their failure at all. Even though that failure is now as clear as can be, their demise does not bode well for the vast majority of American Jews.

True - there has been a massive attrition away from Judaism by many non Orthodox Jews in America. But there is little doubt in my mind – at least as far as Conservative Judaism goes - that they did have some impact. There are some Jews that actually had their first Jewish inspiration in that movement. And when seeking more they found it in Orthodoxy. I know that many Conservative rabbis consider it a victory if one of their members becomes Orthodox.

I know of several Orthodox Jews that went to Camp Ramah (one of their summer camp that focuses on traditional aspects of Judaism, if I understand correctly) who were inspired enough to seek more… and then found it in Orthodoxy.

I also know that some Conservative rabbis cooperated with NCSY – one of the most successful Orthodox outreach organizations in the world... and perhaps the only one that reaches out to teens.

If this movement ceases to exist - all this will completely disappear. And that is nothing to celebrate.

Conservative Rabbi, Seymour Rosenbloom

As if I needed more proof of the bankruptcy of the Conservative Movement, along comes a distinguished member of that movement suggesting that they rescind their prohibition against rabbis officiating at an intermarriage. This is Rabbi Seymour Rosenbloom’s answer to the high rate of intermarriage among members of his denomination.

It would be funny if it weren’t so sad. And yet despite my incredulity at this latest attempt at ‘salvaging’ his movement, Rabbi Ronsenbloom seems to be serious as a heart attack about it. Here is what he says in a JTA op-ed:

Reality has overtaken us. Sixty percent of Jews who wed marry someone from another faith. The Conservative movement’s prohibition is ineffective as policy if our goal is to reduce intermarriage. It is counterproductive if we are trying to influence Jewish souls and bring them closer to the Jewish community. It needs to be modified if we are to serve our congregants faithfully.

Is this the best they can come up with? Oh wait. I forgot. This goes along with their re-branding initiative.

I’m sorry this is so ridiculous that I just had to comment about it. Obviously the solution to intermarriages is not to officiate at them. That’s like saying that the best way to have gun control is to sell people guns.

But here is his rationale in response to that:

Often they want a “Jewish wedding,” which is why they want the officiant to be a rabbi, preferably one with whom they have a relationship. That is why they are so hurt when we refuse. As they plan their interfaith ceremony, they learn more about the elements of a Jewish wedding. They typically choose to have a huppah, blessings over wine, seven marriage blessings, a ketubah and the breaking of the glass.

Such nonsense! This is his Judaism?! A wedding ceremony? Breaking a glass at the end of the Chupah? Does it even matter to him whether the products of that marriage will be Jewish? Does he care that the non Jewish member may still believe in Jesus, even if they are not active in their church anymore? What is that home going to look like? Will they have a Menorah and Christmas tree in December? Will they have an Easter Egg Hunt at the Pesach Seder and say Mass after they eat the Afikomen? Will they be attending a Shul on Shabbos and a Church in Sunday?

I suppose he might answer that in many cases the children are raised Jewish. Really? What if it is the wife who is the non Jewish spouse? Their children will grow up thinking they are Jewish when in fact they will not be. But with last names like Goldstein or Schwartz and living their lives as Jews this can cause chaos in the Jewish world. It will be almost impossible to know who is and isn’t a Jew without a genealogical pedigree recorded somewhere in a Jewish archive! Besides, why should we want non Jews to practice Judaism? If you want to practice Judaism, convert according to Halacha and become a Jew! You can be ethical and a wonderful human being without being Jewish.

But even if the non Jewish spouse is the man and the children are biologically Jewish, what possible message can they get about the different religion of each parent? The religions conflict. Their father believes in Jesus and their mother doesn’t? What’s their children’s take-away from that?

In what way is this going to help them? Will the 50% non Jews that will be born of this union going to in any way salvage their movement? Seriously? Is acting Jewish or practicing a few Jewish rituals a positive result if the children becomes so confused about the theology of their parents? They will surely not know what to believe -whether the children end up being Jewish or not.

Rabbi Rosenblum then says the following:

Some argue that if Conservative rabbis officiate at intermarriages, it will further lower Jewish standards and encourage intermarriage.

This is nonsense. It is delusional to think that a rabbi’s refusal to officiate will change any couple’s mind about whether to wed. Who would forgo a life with their beloved just because their beloved rabbi can’t be at their wedding ceremony?

Really? Some … argue??? I don’t think that it’s arguable. It not only lowers Jewish standards it eliminates them.

I do agree that a rabbi’s refusal to officiate will not change any couple’s mind about whether to wed. It won’t. But that’s not the reason we don’t officiate. We do not officiate because it’s wrong! It’s called being principled. And this is what they want to import to Israel???

(L-R) Norman Seabrook, Jeremy Reichberg Philip Banks,and Jona Rechnitz (NYP)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with community activists seeking to establish good relations with the police department. But when such good intentions involve breaking the law in the form of bribery and corruption - that is a horse of an entirely different color.

I suppose the intentions of Jeremy Reichberg and Jona Rechnitz were in the best interests of their community. But the best of intentions does not excuse wrongdoing in its cause. From the New York Post:

The gifts were lavish — Super Bowl tickets and vacations to China and London.

The favors were troubling — using NYPD cops to provide security for private cash and jewelry deliveries and police escorts for funerals and airport trips to transfer bodies to Israel.

New details emerged Tuesday in the FBI’s corruption investigation into the police department, including how deep-pocketed businessmen who were the original targets of the probe sought out high-ranking members who they knew could “get things done for them,” sources told The Post.

“They don’t go to police officers or detectives. They’re too far down the food chain,’’ a law enforcement source said of the politically connected businessmen.

“They go straight to the top: the [commanding officer], lieutenants and other top officials at the precinct,” the source added. “They get things done for them. All they need to do is make a call.”

The favors ranged from getting police escorts for their own business deliveries, to crowd control during Hasidic weddings, and even receiving special security when Torahs are moved, according to sources.

I’m sure that both Reichberg and Rechnitz did not do any of this to enrich themselves. (Although it appears they did use them for personal security in at least one instance.) Special security for Hachnasas Sefer Torah (when Torahs are moved) is a communal benefit. But that does not at all justify what they did. It is not only illegal, it reinforces the stereotype of Jews not willing to play by the rules - trying to unfairly influence public officials to benefit only themselves.

With these actions they arrogate to themselves superiority and wisdom over all other citizens that play by the rules… thus getting better treatment by the government (in this case the police department) than other citizens.

It seems like there is never ending barrage of wrongdoing by ‘the people of the book’. A people that should instead be role models of behavior, teaching the world that by emulating us, they will achieve the highest form of ethical behavior. Instead we have the opposite. Religious Jews using their wealth to buy influence from the police.

This attitude is probably a holdover from a Jewish history in Europe that is replete with antisemitism. Often in the form of violent pogroms. Or blood libels. Jews needed to buy influence from government officials over the centuries just to survive. Bribes were probably common fare back then. It was a necessary part of life in the corrupt world in which they lived. That mindset carried over in this country with Jews that immigrated here. They thought that you had to buy influence here – just like you did in Europe. That – they thought – was a way of life everywhere.

From the Forward:

“Historically, police were viewed as part of the oppressors,” said Ezra Friedlander, founder and CEO of The Friedlander Group, a political consultancy focusing on ultra-Orthodox clients. “It’s in the DNA of Jews…to show appreciation to the police, so if the community ever needs police protection there’s that camaraderie.”

Except that bribery is an illegal way of showing appreciation. And the more insular you are, the less likely you are to abandon this attitude.

Of course Jews are not the only ones trying to buy influence with public officials. But non Jews do not represent the Torah. Their acts are just as reprehensible – but they are embarrassing only themselves. When religious Jews do it they are embarrassing the entire Jewish people.

‘Look at what the Torah teaches you!’ would not be an unreasonable reaction to seeing obviously religious Jews being caught doing things like this. Thankfully, the majority of American people are not like that. They generally are not judgmental of the whole by the acts of the few. Judaism is still the most admired religion in America. But I can’t help but wondering how long this will last if that attitude won’t change as this kind of thing keeps happening. And that would be tragic!

It is not enough to say that these people took nothing for themselves and that it was all done for the benefit of the community. Besides, many of the things the police department will do for us along the lines they were bribing police for - does not require bribes. At least not in Chicago.

I refer you to Rabbi Moshe Wolf. This man is a walking Kiddush Hashem. He is a chaplain for the Chicago Police Department. He is as honorable as they come. He does not use money to get the police to help the Jewish community. He uses his extraordinary Midah of Chesed. He is there for any member of the police department – day or night – to help them in any way he can. The good will he has built up is palpable.

I am reminded of a story (which I may have mentioned in the past). It was right after 9/11 and Chicago Community Kollel head, Rabbi Moshe Francis, received an envelope with some white powder in it. There was an anthrax scare at the time, and the fear was that this powder was laced with it.

The police department was immediately all over his house. It was swarming with police. Rabbi Francis stood just outside his house as each officer entered. When they saw that he was a religious Jew, they immediately asked him if he knew Rabbi Wolf and commented what a great a guy he was. One after another – Jewish or not - each saying the same thing. Rabbi Francis did not know Rabbi Wolf at all but thought, ‘What a Kiddush HaShem he was making!’ He repeated this story at one of the Kollel’s annual banquets.

The Chicago Jewish community is well served by the police department here. When we need police escorts or protection it is there in spades. Because of Rabbi Wolf’s altruistic efforts we are viewed with great favor. This is what they should be doing in New York. They need people like Rabbi Moshe Wolf to influence them. Not religious Jews involved in corruption.

Lila Kagedan,- Newly installed Rabbi at Mount Freedom Jewish Center

Lila Kagedan is the kind of person that should be a role model for all Jewish women. This may surprise many people since I am opposed to the ordination of women. And Maharat Kagedan’s notoriety is precisely for that - giving herself the title ‘rabbi’. She explains that even though she was not given that title upon her ordination, she was advised by her mentors that she may use it if it served a useful purpose. What was her useful purpose? In her own words - from a CNN article:

"I knew that I wanted my title to be the most accurate description of my training," Kagedan says. "I didn't want to walk into a room or a space and have there be any ambiguity of what it is that I was there to do. What my training was. What my skill set was."

This should put to rest any thoughts that the title Maharat or Rabba is any different from Rabbi. I therefore continue to challenge Yeshivat Maharat to dispense with these silly titles and call their graduates rabbis.

Just to be clear, this does not change my views. I remain opposed to it for the same reason all other mainstream Orthodox organizations are. To put it the way the RCA did:

It is "a violation of our mesorah [tradition]" and saying the school's decision to do so was "a path that contradicts the norms of our community."

So why am I so eager to call Rabbi Kagedan a role model? How can I not, after watching the video below? Just look at her commitment to Judaism and the Jewish people. She wants to use her knowledge and ‘skill set’ for good. There is nothing fake or misleading about her desires. Her sincerity and commitment are palpable. Would that all of us would be as committed to serving Klal Yisroel as she is.

At the same time, I think she has taken the wrong path in trying to express that commitment. Especially since she says that her primary focus will be on teaching. You do not need to be a rabbi to teach Torah. The Chafetz Chaim famously did not get Semicha until near the end of his life. Long after he wrote his magun opus, the Mishna Berurah. There are not too many teachers greater than he was. Even today, there are many skilled and talented Machanchim teaching Torah that never bothered to get Semicha. Getting Semicha is not what makes you a great Torah teacher. This is true for both men and women.

To quote RCA Executive Director, Rabbi Mark Dratch:

…the (RCA) "encourages a diversity of [sanctioned] and communally appropriate opportunities for learned, committed women," but it does not accept the ordination or recognition of women as Orthodox rabbis.

The question remains, why the need to label herself as a rabbi if her primary focuss will be on teaching? Here is what she said:

"I hope to normalize women in leadership roles," she says. "When I look out at the community and I see ... young girls, I hope that they get a sense that anything is possible. That nothing is out of their reach. And that it might be a tremendous struggle and it might come with tremendous sadness and frustration but that if they want something badly enough it's their responsibility to create a mood where this can come about."

Once you read this, you realize that this part of her motivation is not in service to Judaism. It is in service to egalitarianism. It becomes even more apparent when she implies that misogyny is the reason for the opposition.

Rabbi Kagedan is wrong. It is not about misogyny. And anything is NOT possible in Judaism. A Yisroel cannot become a Levi or a Cohen no matter how much he tries to be. Wanting something badly enough is not a reason to seek it.

As I have said in the past, breaking with this tradition has not been accepted. It has been rejected by all of mainstream Orthodoxy all over the world. I do not see this changing, especially in the Charedi world – which comprises the largest and fastest growing segment of Orthodoxy. You can not marginalize so large a segment. What they say matters whether one agrees with them or not.

So no… change will not come about no matter what mood is created. No matter how many women are ordained. This is just a fact of life. If any Orthodox groups are marginalized it will be the ones which accept women as rabbis.

Rabbi Kagedan mostly has the best of intentions. I actually admire her resolve and commitment. But insisting on a title as a means of breaking yet another barrier for women will serve only to divide us further. How ironic it is when someone so sincere… someone so committed to Judaism and so eager to teach Torah is - by her actions - the one driving the wedge even further between the mainstream and the left.

Speaker Paul Ryan seen here with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Looks like the inevitability of a Trump Presidency, is not so inevitable anymore. Finally, his rhetoric is catching up with him. Once favored in the Wisconsin Primary, he got trounced last week. Cruz beat him by a substantial margin.

What this seems to indicate is that Donald Trump will not get the necessary number of delegates during the primaries to assure him the nomination. But neither will Kasich or Cruz. It is therefore quite likely that we are going to have a contested convention. Once all the delegates vote on the first ballot, they are free to vote for anyone they choose on a second ballot.

The question is, who are they going to choose? If they don’t choose Trump, the Republicans in the primary that voted for him will feel cheated. Especially if he just fell short. Choosing Cruz would at least satisfy Cruz supporters. The problem with Cruz is that his is not very likable. Senator Lindsay Graham has joked about this saying the following:

"If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you,"

But he supports him nonetheless because his core principles are conservative and in any case would make a better President than either Clinton or Sanders. If you are a Conservative Republican, this makes sense.

However, if he is so hated, why not hope for an entirely different candidate? One that is liked? Graham answered along the following lines. Since such a candidate did not run in the primaries and had no public support, it would be unfair for the candidates that did run and got support. So that in a contested convention, the candidate should be chosen from among those that ran in the primaries. Otherwise all those who voted in the primaries will be upset that their wishes have been totally ignored. And might just sit out the election - giving the Democrats a victory.

I think Senator Graham’s perception is wrong. It is my firm belief that there are candidates that would have gotten support had they run by people that voted for those that did run. They just voted for who they could. Had Paul Ryan run for example, he may havegotten more votes than any of the others that ran. Of course we will never know that since it didn’t happen. The point, however, is that it is not unreasonable to assume that someone like Paul Ryan would in the end have tremendous appeal to all Repubilcan voters.

This is the man they should choose at the convention. He said he is not interested. But I am virtually certain he can be convinced to change his mind. He has everything a candidate needs to win an election. He’s smart, knowledgeable, principled, and well respected in congress on both sides of the political aisle. Even President Obama respects and likes him - even while acknowledging strong political disagreement.

Ryan knows when… and how to compromise. And as a popular President he will have a congress that will be ripe for doing that. Most importantly, I believe that he will beat the likely Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton. His negatives are pretty low. Clinton’s are pretty high. I no longer believe she is unbeatable – if the Republicans make the right choice. This assumes that Donald Trump wouldn’t run as a 3^rd party candidate. That will assure a Clinton victory. One can hope.

Here is my current assessment of the field in both parties.

As I have said in the past, Israel is very high on my agenda as to who I would support. If that were the only issue, Cruz would be a no brainer. His support for Israel is about as strong as it gets. And if both houses of congress remain Republican, Israel’s Prime Minister would enjoy the the kind support it hasn’t had in years. It would in my view be unprecedented!

But Israel is not my only issue. I don’t think it’s wise elect a President that is hated by virtually the entire legislative branch!

Clinton would just continue the approach of the current administration if she is elected. Which isn’t terrible… but isn’t great either. And her domestic policies would be more or less the same as they are now. Her values are about as liberal as they can get. I can’t imagine what a Supreme court will look like after her choices are confirmed. (Something Congress should think about with Merrick Garland – who is far less liberal than who Clinton might choose if she wins the election.)

Even though he is Jewish, Sanders is about as pro Israel as Noam Chomsky, another Jew whose criticism of Israel sounds like it comes from Hamas. And besides his lukewarm (at best) support of Israel - his socialist policies would drag this country’s economy down the same drain as the many European economies… most of which cannot financially support all of their entitlement programs they have. Programs that Sanders has promised to implement. Congress may not let him do it. But why would I want someone leading this country that tries?

Trump - aside from being an international embarrassment - has no clue about far too many issues upon which he pontificates. His promises are probably less likely to be implemented than Sanders promises.

Kasich is an unknown entity and has no charisma. I have no clue what his policies would be with respect to Israel – or much else for that matter. And although he has said polls show he would beat Clinton, I have my doubts about that.

That leaves Ryan. His policies with respect to Israel were clearly demonstrated this week during his visit to Israel. His leadership ability has been endorsed by his peers, who picked him as Speaker of the House. He is young and charismatic. He has the kind of family values that the majority of Americans support. I just hope he is the choice of the Republican convention delegates (after the first round of voting) and that he can be convinced to run.

Bizarro World

I was an avid fan of Superman when I was a child. I used to buy every comic book that had stories about the Man of Steel – and save them in mint condition for posterity. No I don’t have them anymore. My father made me give them away when we moved from Toledo to Chicago. Which is too bad. Those comic books are quite valuable now. But I digress.

The current political situation reminds me of a world created by Superman comic book writers called Bizarro World. That is a parallel universe wherein there exists, Bizarro, a Man of Steel with a bizarre appearance who acts in bizarre ways.

I cannot remember anything like the current political season. To say it is bizarre is an understatement. Not just because of the candidates running. But also because there is so much positive public reaction to the candidates by the public - whether by private or prominent individuals. Which is beyond bizarre.

Because as much as there are people that like the two most likely candidates, there seems to be even more that don’t. They have the highest negatives of any candidate in recent memory. Simply put – most people do not like Clinton or Trump. The two runners up in each party do not fare much better in the ‘Bizarro’ factor. Bernie Sanders, an avowed socialist who is not even a registered Democrat is running as a Democrat. And Ted Cruz the most hated man in the senate is running as a Republican. Both of these men have done very well of late.

The conventional wisdom about all of this seems to be that the voters in both parties are fed up with business as usual. Clinton’s vaunted experience may in fact be a liability since it implies she is part of the ‘business as usual’ crowd. With which people are fed up! If there is one thing that Sanders followers have in common with Trump it is the fact that they are seen as the consummate outsiders. In fact that Cruz’s is hated by his colleagues may be part of his appeal. Voters on both sides of the political aisle simply do not want to vote for insiders anymore.

Chicago Jewish News editor, Joe Aaron, an observant Jew and avowed card carrying liberal Democrat that has in the past fawned all over Mrs. Clinton - said the following in his most recent editorial:

Truth is I actually believe that (Trump) may be the sanest, most reasonable, of all this year’s Republican candidates.

And as if that weren’t enough of a surprise, he actually admitted that although Clinton is still his ‘man’, he is not sure which way he’d go in a contest between them.

The list of prominent people that support Trump is , well… HUGE! – had anyone asked me if it were possible that people whose views are as disparate as David Duke, Louis Farrakhan, and Pat Buchanan would support the same man, I would have laughed myself silly just thinking about it. The fact that these 3 people have in common varying degrees of antisemitism could hardly be the reason they support a man whose grandchildren are Orthodox Jews.

The fact that mainstream governors like Chris Christie, Rick Scott, and Paul Lepage support Trump is a somewhat of a mystery to me. I suppose that it might be chalked up to politicians getting on the winning bandwagon early

But all this is not half as shocking as the number of people in the Orthodox world from a wide variety of Hashkafos that have told me they support Trump. These people are not kooks. They are quite normal, rational people that have values similar to my own. And yet they are supporting a man that who has made some profoundly offensive comments during his campaign. A man whose qualifications for President of the United States could not be more lacking. He is - for example - completely ignorant about major components of American foreign policy, or America’s defense posture.

Then there’s the ‘Bernie Sanders phenomenon’. A Jew running for office. Something that should make me proud. It actually does. He seems like a nice guy who cares more about the people he wants to serve than any of the other candidates running. Which is probably part of the reason for his appeal. But at the same time his views are not exactly anything I could support. His views on Israel are more in line with the Palestinian narrative than they are with mine. And his plans to socialize the American economy should be anathema to all Americans.

That no one even notices that he’s Jewish is a testament to the core American principle of religious tolerance. Nobody here really cares what the religion of any given candidate is. But it is still a shock that this socialist is so popular. And of late he’s winning one primary after another!

It’s the silly season. Only it isn’t really that funny.

‘There something happening here. What it is ain’t exactly clear’. So went the opening verse to the 1967 Buffalo Springfield hit, ‘For What It’s Worth’. That phrase is as relevant as ever.

Warning:The following post contains adult material. Readers be cautioned that it is intended for adult reading only. Please keep comments within the guidelines posted in the right margin and use polite language only.

Time cover from 1995. Things have only gotten worse.

Porn. So reads the title of a recent cover of Time Magazine (...which is by itself pornographic and will not be shown here). I know it shouldn’t shock me anymore. But it still does. I am shocked at how many Americans view pornography today compared to what those numbers were just about a generation ago. According to statistics quoted in the article, in 1975, Playboy Magazine at it’s peak popularity had a circulation number of 5.6 million. Today more than 100 million people visit adult sites monthly!

Although it still shocks me - this increase should not come as a surprise. Back in pre-internet days one had to seek out porn in ways that made it difficult to hide. You‘d have to go to a store and buy a magazine. Or an adult bookstore. Or movie theater. Today, all you have to do is have a smart-phone. So that in the privacy of your own bedroom you can view porn all night long to your heart’s content – and no one will be the wiser. In an era where instant gratification is practically a religious principle, viewing porn in the privacy of your own home is simply a natural outgrowth of that.

It should therefore also not come as a surprise that there is so much animosity towards internet use by the Charedi world. It’s hard to blame them considering the ease of accessing pornography these days. The numbers of porn sites are virtually endless and are as easy to access as eating breakfast. And are treated with about the same degree of casualness.

And this causes an addiction. It doesn’t matter what one’s values are. Once you are exposed to it, values can go out the door. The sex drive is very strong and can overcome the best of us – given the opportunity.

Here are some more statistics quoted in Time that shocked me. A 2015 University of Bristol study found that 40% of British boys between the ages of 14 to 17 watch porn regularly! And a New York University study of 487 men found that nearly half of them had been exposed to porn before they turned 13! Another study showed that one particular adult video sharing site had 22.3 billion views in 2009! And of 259 million internet users, 107 million view porn on at least a monthly basis.

There is no question about the negative effect this has on one’s spirituality. Wasting seed is against Halacha. And yet no matter how religious an Orthodox Jew is, no matter what his Hashkafa - the power of the sex drive can easily override religious values.

Leaving religion outside of the picture, is there anything wrong with viewing porn? The conventional wisdom is no. The sex drive is part of the human condition and is as natural as eating and sleeping. Modern psychology has always emphasized that. Some argue that viewing porn is a natural and safe outlet for the sex drive – without which one that might seek far less appropriate ways of self gratification. What people do in their own homes is their own business, anyway - as long as it does not affect others. Well, if you leave religion out of it - who can argue that this? It isn’t very holy? So what?!

Well, this article does a pretty good job of arguing that viewing porn is indeed harmful. Even without the religious component. Excessive viewing of porn affects the brain. In ways that are counter to one’s sexual health creating an inability of a man to have such a relationship with a woman. The jury is still out on whether this is a fact of not. But the evidence presented in this article is compelling.

Men who have had a steady diet of porn starting early in their teenage years may very well have become so used to the images they see on a screen that their expectations of the same in the real world are never lived up to. No matter how attractive a real woman might be. Furthermore as the number of times viewing porn increases the need for new and more exciting images increases. Making a live experience even more difficult.

This fact has caused a spike in women viewing porn… in an attempt to see what modern day man wants based on what they view - and perhaps imitate it. Or as one woman put it – to see how sex works! According to a study cited in the article, 16% of women aged 18 to 39 intentionally view porn in any given week. As opposed to over 40% of all men.

All of this then argues for a far better approach to internet use. One that will give us a better spiritual life and a better physical life. The men interviewed in the Time article are all relatively young. And all agree about the devastating effects viewing porn has had on them. And they are all trying to rid themselves of that addiction. Among those that succeeded - some have created websites to help others in their situation. And they all have millions of regular visitors that want to ‘kick the habit’.

One may ask if the percentages quoted in this article apply to Orthodox Jews. While it is true that we are not immune, is our level of observance a factor that reduces the percentages significantly? Do our religious principle and values help us? I would hope so. Surely forbidding the internet in certain communities reduces the numbers of possible exposure. And filters surely help in other communities. But one thing seems certain. The ban against the internet seems to be honored mostly in the breach. One never knows what is going on behind the ‘closed doors’ of a smart-phone when no one is looking. So that even if our percentages are lower than that of general society, they are probably greater than we think… affecting even the communities where an Internet ban is total. Where there is a will, there is a way.

Does that mean we should stop using the internet? Of course not. It is way too valuable a tool to ignore. Increasingly so. By leaps and bounds as time goes on. And for the 60% of us that do not access porn sites, it does not affect us.

But for the other 40% - does that then mean they are stuck in a situation of high porn addiction? Will children continue to be exposed to porn by the time they are 13? I don’t know. But it’s good to know that on-line porn addiction is finally being seen for the serious problem it is – even outside of our community. Hopefully we will see some changes that will turn things around and make porn harder to access. How that will be done, I don’t know. But it needs to be.

Illustration from VIN

As if to underscore my contention that in certain circles there is an irrational assumption about antisemitism (or more accurately anti Orthodoxy) in mainstream America, along comes Ezra Friedlander with a VIN oped accusing the Wall Street Journal along with all other journalists of just that.

What’s his beef? Well, he doesn’t like the fact that they reported on recent scandal involving the NYPD and a couple of Orthodox Jews. Here is how he puts it:

The media delivers the news by gleefully describing the individuals involved based on their religious affiliation or in the context of their geographical location. This is unacceptable…

(T)he Wall Street Journal informed us in its very first sentence that the Mayor is facing questions about investigations “that involve supporters in the Orthodox Jewish community.” Scroll down another few paragraphs and again, it repeats that the investigations involve “members of the Orthodox Jewish community.”

We are living in an age of political correctness, for better or for worse… Yet for some reason, when it comes to the Orthodox Jewish community, no one feels obligated to even pretend to play by these rules. Instead, they are delighted to besmirch an entire community just because a lone businessman is in the headlines or is accused of an alleged misdeed. Suddenly, he is identified by his religion.

It amazes me that when a Charedi Jew like Mr. Friedlander reads stories like this he immediately sees an anti Jewish motive. Never mind the fact that the Wall Street Journal is about the most pro Israel news outlet in America.

He is not the first one to make note of anti Jewish bias in the media. Nor is it the first time this accusation has been made. Every time a religious Jew caught doing something wrong is reported in the media, accusations of antisemitism seem to come out of the woodwork in these circles.

As I have said many times - the insular environments in which some Jews choose to live - combined with the knowledge of a Jewish history filled with the persecution of Jews (reinforced anecdotally by grandparents who experienced it) - results in a virtual paranoid fear and even hatred of ‘The Goyim’. This is what Mr. Freidlander’ message seems to be with respect to the ‘Goyishe Journalists’ And I suppose he includes as well – Jewish Journalists who report stories like these. Like reporters in the Forward or The Jewish Week.

(Interestingly Mr. Friedlander accuses people who use the term 'insular' as using it in a pejorative way. And yet does not deny it. Insularity is something they promote and are proud of. Insularity is a description. It is not a pejorative.)

Did it ever occur to Mr. Friedlander that the blame should not be put on the messenger? That the blame belongs on the people allegedly involved in the crime – which in this case are high ranking members of the NYPD and some Orthodox Jewish businessmen? God forbid we mention that. No. Lets blame the media for reporting the truth and call it antisemitism. He thinks indentifying wrongdoers by their religion is wrong? I wonder how he feels about Islamic terrorists? Should the media ignore their religion too?

One might go a step further and say that it is actually a compliment when the media identifies wrongdoers as Orthodox Jews - in the sense that it is makes it newsworthy. It is a ‘Man bites dog’ story when an Orthodox Jew does wrong. Jews are expected to be righteous and ethical. When they act that way, it isn’t newsworthy. Reporting it when they don’t makes it an anomaly.

Ironically, on the same day I saw this report – I saw an exceptionally brilliant article by Rabbi Marc D. Angel. It is a must read. I have my differences with him on certain issues pertaining to Modern Orthodoxy. But on this there is absolutely no daylight between us.

He focuses on the real problem and does not blame any messengers. And expresses ideas similar to those I have expressed here many times. Including the penchant in certain circles to vilify non Jews, non religious Jews, and in some cases even religious Jews that do not share their worldview. Only Rabbi Angel did it so much more eloquently than I ever have, or could.

The essential point being that we Jews ought to stop seeing ourselves as better human beings than the rest of humanity. That our selection by God as the Am HaNivchar – His chosen people does not detract from the essential Tzelem Elokim that exists in of all of mankind or which we are part.

Rabbi Angel began by reporting on a sermon about business ethics given by Rabbi Shaul Robinson at Lincoln Square Synagogue that elicited laughter from the audience when he asked :

(W)ouldn’t it be wonderful if people could say that a business venture was absolutely proper because Orthodox Jews are running it? Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the surest way to attest to the trustworthiness of a business was to say that it was operated by Orthodox Jews?

Why (asked Rabbi Angel) do we laugh at the assumption that Orthodox Jewish sponsorship guarantees the trustworthiness and honesty of a business venture?

Referencing Professor Menachem Kellner’s new book, Gam Hem Keruyim Adam: haNokhri beEinei haRambam (They too are called human: Maimonides’ views on non-Jews) he answers the question.

Maimonides rejected the notion that Jews are ontologically different from and superior to non-Jews. The Rambam maintains the classic Jewish teachings that stress the common humanity of all people.

I think… it is fair to state that “moderate” levels of dehumanization exist within the Orthodox community. This spiritual infection enables a shomer Shabbat to engage in criminal activity against “the other,” on the assumption that “the other” does not deserve better. Who are “the others?” They might be non-observant or less-observant Jews.

If rabbis and teachers are conveying a religious worldview that posits the innate superiority of Jewish souls—and the innate superiority of religiously observant souls—then it is not a long step to feeling disdain for “the other.” And it is not a long step to coming to justify oneself for improper dealings with “the other.”

The day will hopefully arrive when the reputation of Orthodox Jewry will be so spectacularly honest, that everyone will point to Orthodox Jews as the best models of business ethics, trustworthiness and dignified behavior. But that day will not be arriving soon unless we all do some serious soul-searching about our attitudes toward ourselves and toward others.

To this I say, Amen.

More Surprising Findings from Pew

The Enemy is Fundamentalist Islam

Empowering Women at the Kotel

Cry Me a River

Reject Our Unworthy Members

Tradition Matters

The Big Twelve and Jewish Education

The ‘Old Yishuv’ - Yesterday and Today

Pardon My Cynicism

Emunas Chachamim and the Rabbinic Leaders of our Day

An Unorthodox Renaissance

Is Targeting Chasidic Schools the New Antisemitism?

An Attempt to Export Failure

The Slippery Slope to Oblivion

Corruption of the NYPD in Boro Park

Driving the Wedge Further

The View from Here

An Unfunny Silly Season

Porn

Is it the Journalists? Or is it Us?