Emes Ve-Emunah

--------------------------- paid advertisement ---------------------------

OHEL’s New Listen for a Change Podcast Series Yields Conversations Never Heard in the Community

OHEL Children’s Home and Family Services has launched a new Podcast series of conversations entitled “Listen for a Change: Personal Stories that Strengthen our Community.” See http://www.listenforachange.org

The structure of each podcast is simple. Two people agree to have a conversation about a particular topic. There is no agenda, no rehearsal, no preparation, no special questions provided by us. We just invite them to sit and converse, and we record.

The podcasts provide an opportunity for sensitive and emotionally charged topics to be discussed. Podcasts that are presented thoughtfully and anonymously can provide a fascinating window into the rich, dramatic and extraordinary experience of everyday people faced with the most usual—or unusual—challenges of life.

OHEL’s Listen for a Change has already recorded many fascinating conversations. To cite a few – 1) Devora and Yonatan talk about their experience in getting divorced at a very young age, 2) Jason and Mark talk about their gambling addiction and recovery at a Jewish Gamblers Anonymous group, 3) Chani and Howard, share their thoughts on dating with a mental illness, and 4) Avi and Yitzchak talk about growing up as Second Generation Holocaust Survivors.

All have agreed to share their personal stories in the hope that their experiences and journeys through life will provide profound and evocative inspiration to those who listen.

Listen for a Change invites you to sit back and listen. It provides a healthily reversal of what we are most used to doing: talking more and listening less. We have been given only one mouth, but two ears. Perhaps this means we should be exceptionally mindful of listening to others and learning and growing from their experience.

The Podcasts are presented thoughtfully and anonymously, provide a fascinating window into the rich, dramatic and extraordinary experience of everyday people faced with the most usual—or unusual—challenges of life. As Derek Saker, OHEL’s Director of Communications and producer of the program conveys, “Our hope is that these very personal but enriching stories, will inspire and fortify individuals and families, and encourage others to share their unique life stories.”

The Podcasts are available on ITunes and Google Play as well as at http://www.listenforachange.organd http://www.ohelfamily.org/podcasts

Perhaps you’d like to have a conversation with a particular person and you know that this topic could be helpful—even inspirational---to others. Contact OHEL’s Listen for a Change Team at listenforachange@ohelfamily.org

OHEL invites members of the community who wish to consider sharing to contact always wanted to discuss with someone clos may you’d just like to celebrate happy moments in your life, or reflect on memories of a dearly departed friend. The opportunities of insightful conversation are endless. This project is about creating a safe and comfortable space for individuals in the community to have the conversation many always sought to have.

It is a pretty unflattering picture. There is no other way to read an article in the Forward about the city of Kiryas Joel. And protestations from the Rabbi Aharon Teitelbaum, the Satmar Rebbe of Kiryas Joel, only seem to make matters worse.

The fact is that a city like Kiryas Joel is a wonderful place in which to live if you are a Chasid and adhere to their rules. No less a critic of such places than Shulem Deen has said as much. Shulem, one might remember, was a member of a similar city (New Square) whose restrictions and rules were virtually identical to those of Kiryas Joel.

Kiryas Joel is a city where everyone is family. I doubt that are more than a handful of residents there that would not give you the shirt off their backs to help a fellow Jew of any stripe – even if they are completely irreligious.

The joy they feel in being Jewish – more specifically Satmar Chasidim is palpable. The poverty is great. And yet this may be one of the happiest towns in America. There is little if any crime. People can leave their doors open and not worry about being robbed. They love their Rebbe, who is their spiritual and even material guide. They rely on his wisdom in all matters.

This relieves them of responsibility in making important decisions in life. The Rebbe knows what’s best. They are content with a life filled with Chasidus. They willingly live in virtual isolation from the rest of the world – believing its influences to be evil. Instead they enjoy doing what they do - oblivious to what goes on outside of their world, and not caring a whit about it.

One may therefore conclude that an article like the one in the Forward (and many others like it) is there for only one purpose: to smear Charedi Jewry, with lies, exaggerations, and innuendos. Thus causing an upheaval in their lvies

However, as much as I believe that the Chasidim of Kiryas Joel are happy and wish to be left alone, I also believe that an article like this one exposes deep underlying problems that need to be corrected. Problems that include questionable practices with respect to government financial assistance programs; ignoring New York State requirements for secular education in their schools; and the ‘in house’ way in which they handle sex abuse… which seems to favor the accused over the victim.

The first two of the above are related. When you do not give your children the tools to make a decent living, they have no choice but to rely on government assistance when they become adults and have large families. They therefore are told to use all means necessary to maximize that assistance. Sometime that entails nibbling at the edges of legality; sometimes crossing that line; and occasionally severely crossing it.

Nonetheless Rabbi Teitelbaum has condemned the scrutiny taking place right now. He (and perhaps the whole community there) feels that they are under siege. Here is how he put it:

“Until now there were also strict laws, but because we live in a kingdom of benevolence [a reference to government authorities] to put it bluntly they simply turned a blind eye to what’s going on by the Jewish children,”

“They didn’t want to look, the benevolent kingdom. Now, too, they’d continue doing that, the government would have continued, they’re happy not to look and not to know. But these worthless people are stirring up in various ways and are demanding in court, forcing the government that they should take a stance.”

“Due to our many sins, it’s very painful to talk about it, there stood up several worthless people from our own who have studied in Hasidic yeshivas, and sadly they arrived I don’t want to say where. They decided to wage war against the whole ultra-Orthodox Jewish community of New York,”

“They went and snitched to the governments of New York City and New York State with complaints that the students of the yeshivas, of all yeshivas (elementary and middle school) are not learning enough general studies as required by law.”

It’s interesting that Rabbi Teitelbaum considers turning a blind eye to their world an indicator of being a benevolent kingdom (Malchus Shel Chesed). But what a terrible way to see government laxity on issues of legality that were created for the benefit of all citizens – including those that live in Kiryas Joel. This is not what I think of when I say the US is a Medina Shel Chesed. The government turning a blind eye to breaking the law is instead a government shirking its duty. I would in fact characterize the enforcing these educational requirements themselves as an act of Chesed. As I would making sure that all financial assistance complies with the law.

The Rebbe labels those deemed responsible for this government crackdown snitchers (Mosrim). I would call them heroes. They are the ones who lived in these kinds of communities and know quite well what their citizens are being deprived of. And they say that there are many in that community that secretly agree with them – but stay quiet fearing the consequences of dissent.

That the vast majority of these citizens are actually happy and agree with Rabbi Teitelbaum is based on their misconceptions of the outside world. Misconceptions based on half truths and an isolationist Hashkafa based on those misconceptions. So of course they feel under siege.

The ‘snitchers’ - says the Rebbe - have decided to wage war on the entire Ultra Orthodox Jewish community of New York. I believe that is a ridiculous charge. There is absolutely no war against ultra Orthodox communities that comply with the law. It is only against communities that don’t.

If Rabbi Teitelbaum would ever read these words (which he probably never will) he would say that I too am waging war against them. But that doesn’t matter to me since I know that I am not.

That said, most of the Chasdim in Kiryas Joel would probably agree with the Rebbe. They would say that I am a nobody compared to him and have no right to contradict the words of this holy man. He knows what’s best for his own community. Not some Modern Orthodox Jew that has no clue about what’s going on there. I fully agree that Rabbi Teitelbaum is a huge Talmud Chacham. I am indeed an ignoramus compared to him. But that doesn’t mean he is always right.

I don’t know where this will all end. The government may back down or find some sort of loophole that will allow Kiryas Joel to continue with business as usual. But that will be sad for the Chasidim of Kiryas Joel. They cannot keep producing people that are unable to support their large families and expect the government to fill the gap. At some point as their numbers increase exponentially the government will just say no. What will they do then?

Invitation to BMG retreat featuring the OU's R' Steven Weil as a keynote speaker

One of the most significant events that happened to Chicago in my lifetime is the advent of the Chicago Community Kollel - a BMG (Lakewood Yeshiva) enterprise. This Kollel has changed the shape of Chicago. I cannot overemphasize their impact. The amount of Torah study they have generated among Baalei Batim (lay religious Jews) since their founding in the 80s is of exponential magnitude.

I can say without fear of contradiction that this Kollel under the very able guidance of the two Roshei Kollel, Rabbi Dovid Zucker, and Rabbi Moshe Francis that the Chicago Jewish community has been transformed. The Avreichim they choose are each leaders in their own right. Many of those who have made Chicago their home have become formidable presences. I have therefore enthusiastically supported – and continue to support the Kollel, both morally and materially to the best of my ability.

(One can only guess the heavenly reward that will accrue to Rabbi Morris Esformes who brought this Kollel into Chicago and paid all the Kollel salaries out of his pocket for its first year. He did so despite communal opposition – including that of Telshe. He shepherded it through all that - and got a few other Orthodox Chicago philanthropists to go along. Morrie (as those of us who know him - call him) has a share in every word of Torah studied by those of us who are doing so now because of the Kollel’s influence.)

But all this Torah study comes at a price. Chicago has moved significantly to the right. While this is true about the entire Orthodox world - Chicago is unique in this respect.

Chicago was always a Mizrachi town. There was practically no Agudah presence here when the Kollel was established. Most of Chicago’s religious population were Religious Zionists. When in the 60s, Rav Ahron Soloveichik became Rosh HaYeshiva of HTC (Skokie) - he was made the titular head of Mizrachi. He sat at the ‘Mizrach Vant’ (the ‘Eastern wall’ in front of the Shul) at the main Mizrachi Shul.

Today, Mizachi is hardly a noticeable presence – compared to Agudah. Agudah now reigns supreme, right along with the Hashkafos it brings to the table. They have the most beautiful Orthodox Shul in greater Chicago. Mizrachi has no independent shul in Chicago proper at all.

Why has this happened? In my view the Kollel had a major part in that. Many formerly Mizrachi type people were drawn into the Kollel and started accepting their Hashkafos. So that a mixed seating affair for example that used to be the standard in Chicago started disappearing.

Now it’s true that the move to the right might have taken place anyway. But there is not a doubt in my mind that the Kollel’s massive and well deserved popularity accelerated it. Additionally Mizrachi’s popularity was reduced because of its own success. Many strong Religious Zionist Chicagoans made Alyiah – the ultimate goal of Mizrachi in the diaspora. So it’s biggest supporters are now gone.

Even though I am an enthusiastic supporter of the Kollel and have tremendous gratitude for what Rabbis Zucker and Francis have done to transform the city, I am not l pleased with the ‘collateral damage’. It is no secret that I lament the fact that many of the Kollel’s stringencies have taken root among the Orthodox populace here. I am a bit dismayed that people that were once dyed in the wool Religious Zionists are now die-heard Agudah supporters.

Do not misunderstand. I am not opposed to Agudah. I support their presence here. I am just disappointed that it has come at the expense of a Modern Orthodoxy that once flourished.

The Kollel’s presence and popularity has made their Avreichim sought after Mechanchim in all Orthodox schools. And the lack of Modern Orthodox Mechanchim made them all the more attractive. So that HTC’s Mechanchim are almost all Charedi. Even the coed Ida Crown Jewish Academy has Mechnchim that were at one time associated with the Kollel.

That has caused a generation of young people to be raised with the Charedi Hashkafos. Hashkafos that sometimes included disparagement of Modern Orthodoxy and its institutions. I don’t know if it is intentional or not. But that there is a negative a view now of places like Yeshiva University and Mizrachi among the right cannot be denied. That means that Modern Orthodox speakers tend to be ignored and avoided by most of Chicago’s large young Charedi community. 40 years ago the reverse may have been true. An Agudah type speaker would have been ignored and avoided..

The question is, how do we change the new paradigm? How do we get back to a world where the permissible remains a part of the culture instead of rejecting it in favor of more stringenicies?

The time is ripe to act. And there are several ways to do that. One of Chicago’s newer Kollelim is the YU Kolllel Torah MiTzion. They are beginning to make an impact here. But they have a very high hill to climb. Rosh Kollel, Rabbi Reuven Brand is rising to the challenge and has become a force to be reckoned with. He has begun to make a dent in the negative attitudes about Modern Orthodoxy and Religious Zionism that have evolved over the last 40 years. He has been speaking to small Charedi groups and changing a few hearts and minds – as these Charedim have come to realize that Modern Orthodoxy is not the work of the Devil after all.

I am told that formerly skeptical people have fallen in love with Rabbi Brand. They now realize that having a different Hashkafa is not a prescription for lesser observance. They have come to realize that past Gedolim actually respected – even venerated - some of the heroes of Religious Zionism – that have been vilified by the right. How many of them must have been shocked to learn for example that Religious Zionist hero, Rav Avrohom Yitzchok Kook was the Mesader Kiddushin (officiating rabbi) at the marriage of Rav Elyashiv, the late Charedi Gadol HaDor?

Charedim in Chicago are giving YU another look because of this young Rosh Kollel – his Avrecihim. Which leads me to challenge the Kollel to do what their parent institution is doing.

BMG is hosting a retreat where the keynote speaker will be the OU’s executive director, Rabbi Steven Weil. The OU is a Centrist type organization. I challenge the Chicago Community Kollel to feature Rabbi Reuven Brand as a keynote speaker at one of their own events. I’m 100% convinced that YU’s Kollel would reciprocate. If we are ever going to have Achdus and acceptance of one another - inviting Rabbi Brand to speak at a Kollel event would be an excellent way to start.

I would be remiss if I did not mention a similar effort taking place in New York. Tikvah is an organization that exposes Charedi Yeshiva men to the world of modernity – at least as it pertains to the world of politics. One can read about it at Cross Currents.

These are the kind of things that are necessary to change the paradigm. At least here in America. Israel is a whole other ball of wax and beyond the scope of this post. But if the Charedi world in America can see that they agree with us on many more issues than they disagree with us, then there is hope. What about the obvious differences? Acudus is not about agreement. It is about respect.

Well, it seems to have happened a lot faster than I predicted. The tide seems to have turned in favor of Donald Trump.

I therefore stand by my prediction that he will be elected the next President of the United States, despite the fact that he may very well be the least qualified person in history to have ever run for that post.

Not only is he an ill mannered boor that has embarrassed this nation by his mere presence in the Republican primary, he is an individual with absolutely no core values. At least none that are evident. His views on core issues have radically changed from what they once were. I believe that is because of the constituency to which he desires to appeal. On the issue of abortion he was pro-choice not that long ago. Now he is pro life. On gun control he was against assault weapons. Now he is in favor of them.

The disgusting things he has said about opposing candidates – which are generally off limits in any kind of dignified run for any office, let alone the Presidency is an almost every day affair. His recent mention of Bill Clinton’s reputation for sexual escapades (some of which include accusations of rape) is his most recent attack on his likely opponent in November. Trump’s own inglorious past on this issue does not stop him from talking about Hillary’s husband.

The media has been extremely hard on him. Their portrayal of his candidacy would have made any other candidate disappear a long time ago. The media never misses a beat in finding fault with something he said, whether it is about foreign or domestic policy or about his penchant for hurling insults at reporters that have said something about him he didn’t like. For late night comedians he is a dream come true, providing an endless treasure trove of material with which to ridicule him. But instead of laughing him out of contention, his appeal keeps growing.

He has absolutely no experience in governing. Knows little about foreign affairs or domestic policy. His negatives are through the roof! Most voters in this country just don’t like him – even as they don’t much like his opponent either.

I have only scratched the surface of how disgusting this guy has been. In short, there seems to be little redeeming value in this guy. He has zero going for him, in my view. And yet, I predict he will win the election. Why? Because as Trump has himself has said, it doesn’t matter what he says or does. No matter how outrageous. . He could shoot someone in the middle of Times Square. It doesn’t matter. Sane people in the Republican party have voted for him. And sane people in the general election will vote for him.

If you are a Democrat, you might be tempted to say that GOP voters are a bunch greedy rich people that could not care less about anyone beneath their station - or just plain old country bumpkins who do not understand who or what they are voting for. But that is a misreading of what’s really going on in my view. There are plenty of smart people that are supporting him. I have spoken to some of them. It actually shocks me to hear them talk about how they are going to vote for Trump… knowing all of the above. Which they discount by saying he is better than the alternative.

There are those still arguing that in the general election people will never vote for such an unpredictable unqualified megalomaniac… that most people in this country understand that a man like Trump would be an unmitigated disaster. That his nomination came about in a Republican party of full of fools but who will be a minority of the electorate in November. They quote polls showing Clinton over Trouncing Trump. Well, guess what happened? The two are in a virtual dead heat now. One poll actually puts Trump ahead of Clinton!

Not to mention the fact that a sizable percentage of Sanders supporters (I believe I saw a 17% figure) that have said they will vote for Trump if Sanders is not the nominee. And he won’t be.

Why is this happening? In my view people are simply fed up with anyone connected to the status quo in government. They would vote for a frog if that was the only candidate running against an establishment candidate like Clinton.

They simply want an outsider and apparently don’t seem to care all that much who that is. Both Trump and Sanders fit that bill. If you are a Sanders supporter and can’t have him, then by default, Trump is that man. They see all the negative stuff about him as irrelevant. They probably think that once in office he will do the right thing and all that as he gets down to business. And where he is weak in knowledge – he will get the best people in those areas to inform him. And maybe along the way, make some good decisions.

Well, we better hope that is the case. Donald Trump will win the election. I have little doubt about that now. It won’t matter what he will say in the campaign. It won’t matter how stupid or ridiculous he sounds. It won’t matter that Mrs. Clinton will show him up. And it won’t matter how much the media beats him up. It will not matter a whit.

This is not my wish. Just the truth as I see it.

That said, I have not given up on this country. We will persevere and grow – even with a President Trump. The country is much stronger than the Presidency. So for those for you thinking of moving to Canada after the election, maybe hold off a bit and see what happens.

Accused Mashgiach arriving in a Jerusalem court (Arutz Sheva)

This is one subject I hate writing about. That’s because the subject matter is so disgusting. Not that I haven’t dealt with it. I have. Many times. But sexual abuse is something that is just plain difficult to discuss… for a variety of reasons. Which of course begs the rhetorical question, if it is so difficult to discuss it, what it must be like to experience it?

That’s why I have discussed it in the past. My goal on this issue was (and still is) to exhort the Orthodox rabbinic leadership to do better. Victims of abuse (or survivors as they prefer to be called) have lives that have been changed forever. They will always be haunted by those memories. Even in cases where they have overcome them and lead relatively normal lives. But as has been demonstrated many times - getting over it is not always the result. I don’t know what the percentages are but there are a great number of survivors that do not get over it. They will often reject the Judaism they were raised with as a bunch of lies because of what they have experienced.

What’s worse many of them fall into a state of depression – unable to function or cope with the real world. They will often drop out of school and ‘self medicate’ with alcohol and/or illicit drugs to try and drown out the pain. Attempts at suicide is unfortunately all too common among survivors and in some tragic cases, they succeed!

The way Orthodox rabbinic leaders in the past have dealt with these issues was clearly misguided - usually based on the presumption that an accused sex abuser is the victim of a false charge. Especially if they are prominent people that would never be suspected of abuse.

Adding to the belief that accusations by survivors were false was the fact that many of them stopped being observant precisely because of it. They were thus seen in a negative light and their stories seen as unreliable. Rabbis then saw someone that went OTD accusing an innocent ‘local hero’ of an unspeakable crime. They were highly skeptical of the accusation and often treated survivors like pariahs.

In some cases where rabbinic leaders believed a survivor - they merely chased the abuser ‘out of town’ – without warning other communities about him.

That has changed somewhat. There is still a lot of work to do. But as one prominent Charedi Rav told me a few months ago in response to my praise of his (and a group of fellow Charedi rabbis) heroic call to report sex abuse directly to the police, ‘We were living in the dark ages’. I only wish all Charedi Rabbis would be on board with this view. Unfortunately this is not yet the case.

I bring this subject up again now because of yet another respected Charedi Rav, Naftali Maklev, who was exposed as a sex abuser. From Arutz Sheva:

Jerusalem prosecutors filed an indictment against a rabbi who served as a mashgiach at a yeshiva in the city, for a series of rapes carried against a number of female relatives over the course of several years.

He had attempted to justify his actions by perversely claiming they were not only permitted under Jewish law, but mandated. In some cases he even went as far as to claim his acts of abuse served to "purify" his victims spiritually and atone for sins their souls committed in "past lives", or to cure them of physical ailments.

In one particularly extreme incident relayed in the indictment, the accused secretly recorded leading haredi Rabbi Chaim Kaniyevsky issuing a halakhic ruling on a totally unrelated subject, then played it back to the accused and claimed the rabbi was in fact endorsing the abuser's actions, in order to persuade her against speaking out.

This is just the latest in a series of reports over the last few years about sex abuse in Orthodox community. I believe the problem is a lot worse than we realize. If I had to guess I would say that as a percentage of the whole - the incidence of abuse in the Orthodox world is probably about the same as it is in the non Orthodox world. There are a lot of sick people out there with sexual perversions. And they find ways to act upon. And do so in secret for many years until they get caught - as was the case here.

Being a Mashgiach at a Yeshiva is not just a job in Chinuch. It is a highly respected position in a Yeshiva second only to being Rosh HaYeshiva. In some cases a Mashgiach is more respected that the Rosh HaYeshiva is. Rav Matisyahu Salomon, the Mashgiach of Lakewood is a case in point.

The Yeshiva this rapist was involved with was founded and endorsed by a who’s who of Charedi rabbinic leaders. None of them suspected him of this kind of behavior. I am certain they believed him to be a Tahor V’Kadosh - a true role model for students. Someone students could go to for advice in life – as is often the case with a Yeshiva Mashgiach. But they know th truth now, since he admitted it in a Beis Din.

In this case the Yeshiva did the right thing. They reported the abuse to the police who arrested him.

Despite all the improvements in how abuse is now handled, we still need to do better. Who knows how many more ‘rabbinic role models’ like this are around, influencing young minds while satisfying themselves at the expense of others when no one is looking. And doing so for years!

I am not calling for a witch hunt. That would be just as wrong as ignoring the problem. But there has to be a way to better vet our Mechanchim to see if they are fit to be around our children. Perhaps its time to implement a psychological test administered by experts on sex abuse for every Mechanech applying for a job - to see whether he has aberrant sexual desires and whether he might act on them. This may seem harsh or overkill. But better overkill than allow for the possibility of ruining so many lives.

Rabbi Ron Yitzchok Eisenman has the right idea which he expressed on his website The Short Vort . My thoughts echo his. If only every rabbinic leader in Orthodoxy had his attitude.

Chasidim - picture for illustrative purposes only (Arutz Sheva)

No matter how much they try, it isn’t going to work. Once again the leadership of a Chasidus has attempted to forbid internet use. There was a convention in Jerusalem last week attended by thousands of Ger Chasidim. From Arutz Sheva:

At the “Emergency Meeting Against the Dangers of Technology”, Hasidim were reminded of the strict prohibition against using internet-capable cellular devices, even if content screening programs are in place. According to the regulation, only those who require internet access for business purposes are permitted to use even filtered internet connections.

The popular Whatsapp cell phone application was also dealt with during the meeting. Speakers lambasted the application and called upon Gur Hasidim to remove it from their phones…

One speaker at the convention issued an unprecedented ruling against internet usage, saying that anyone who uses unfiltered internet connections is no longer deemed worthy of respect from their children.

“Anyone whose parent possesses a non-kosher device is no longer obligated by the [biblical law of] ‘Honoring thy father and mother’, and is not allowed to visit them.”

Well it seems that these new exhortations are being ignored, right in the heart of the Charedi world. I am not talking about outliers that have bucked the system. I am talking about mainstream members of Ger living in places like Bnei Brak. From another article in Arutz Sheva:

Both the Abarbanel Shtibel in Bnei Brak and Beit HaHasidim Shtibel in Ashdod were shut down on Friday and Saturday. Those managing the synagogues noted that strict orders were given at last week’s conference, and that a number of congregants had been seen openly violating the rules concerning cell phone use.

You can’t fault them for trying. But the leaders of Ger are spitting in the wind. As time passes, the rules against the internet are increasingly being observed in the breach. Ger Chasidim realize what the rest of the world does – that there is great benefit in internet use. And all the haranguing in the world is not going to change that.

Of course there are Chasidim that adhere to the rules – probably the majority. But I have to wonder just how long it will be before that majority becomes a minority – as the world increasingly becomes more dependent on internet use in their daily lives.

As I have said many times in the past - this is not to say that the concerns rabbinic leaders have about internet use aren’t legitimate. Of course they are. They are right to be worried about the dangers inherent in it - when convenience turns into addiction. In many cases those addictions are to internet porn – which is what I think is the focus of their concern. But what may actually be worse than porn are websites that question our fundamental beliefs. That can be a danger to anyone. But no one is as unprepared as for those encounters as those whose secular education is as minimal as theirs.

This is why their approach is doomed to fail. It isn’t working that well now and will work even less in the future. Instead of honoring a ban which has been in place for a few years now, we see incidences like the one described above. They plunge into the web without any preparation or guidelines. Those that have filters might fare well. But if something is completely forbidden as one speaker at that convention indicated - why bother with filters?

Besides filters do not filter out everything. I don’t think there is a filter that can eliminate websites that question our faith. At least not all of them. A community that has absolutely no preparation for such encounters is an easy target for their arguments.

(On that last score, those of us that do allow internet use have not yet risen to the challenge of those websites in our educational systems. More work needs to be done with that. A lot more!)

The rabbinic leaders of Ger – and like-minded leaders of other types of Chasidus, are barking up the wrong tree. The more they ban… the more they yell and scream, the more people stop listening to them. And once they stop listening to them on one thing, can it be that long before they stop listening to them on other things… or eventually everything?

Chasidic leaders have had a fairly successful run at keeping their Chasidim isolated from the rest of the world. They did that because they saw the outside world as harmful to a Torah- true lifestyle. And to one’s very soul! They maintain that the more exposure one has to it, the more they will be tempted by it. They saw isolation as the best answer.

Perhaps. In my view that is at best debatable. But even if it worked in the past, it cannot work anymore. The internet won’t let it. And forbidding the internet is becoming about as futile as forbidding air. The internet is everywhere. It is not going to be stopped. And Chasidim are not going to be isolated from it.

I know I am basically talking to the wall - as nobody in the Chasidic world is going to pay any attention to me. But I am going to give them some advice, anyway.

Start treating technology for what it is – a useful device that can improve one’s life. One must respect both its benefits and its dangers. Ignore it at your own peril.

Take a page from us -your Modern Orthodox brothers. Not that we have all the answers – nor have we developed methods to implement some of our suggestions – but here they are. Don’t ban it. Teach responsible usage of it. Educate your children how to deal with websites that question your faith.

And by all means use filters – especially when there are children in the picture. Isolating yourselves from the rest of the world is no longer a realistic option. Teach your children how to engage with it responsibly. In my view that is the best – if not the only way to preserve your culture… and maybe even expand it.

There is much that is good about the Chasidic world. It is a brotherhood like no other. It is that sense of brotherhood that in my view was the impetus for forming the Shomrim Society back 1977. Shomrim are a group of usually Chasidic Jews that are volunteer neighborhood watchmen. Kind of like Curtis Slewa’s Guardian Angels. They patrol Jewish neighborhoods in order to provide protection against things like vandalism, muggings, assault and domestic violence.

The Shomrim Society has spread beyond its original borders of Williamsburg, Crown Heights, Boro Park, and Flatbush . There are now branches in cities like Baltimore, Miami, Lakewood, and London.

The fact is that a lot of Jewish residents in those areas are happy that they exist. They seem to have political support and some (if not universal) police support – who are happy to have some of their burden relieved by them. Shomrim even has some government funding. They not only add an extra layer of protection to those Jewish neighborhoods, they are often seen by Jewish residents as a first line of defense against crime. Their response time is generally a lot quicker than the police.

There is not a doubt in my mind that there has been more than one occasion where an elderly victim was spared a mugging or an assault because of their quick response. And not all of the people they help are Orthodox Jews. According to a 2014 story in the Hackney Gazette:

…around 70% of the victims (in London) they help are not from the Orthodox Jewish community, usually just local residents from any race or religion.

Although I tend to doubt whether that 70% figure is anywhere near in a Chasidic enclaves like Williamsburg, I do believe that if a caller in distress is not Jewish, they will respond to them just the same.

But that is not the end of the story. I have had my issues with these self appointed watch groups. While there may be a benefit to having that kind of protection by one’s own people, there is a definite downside that makes me question their ultimate value.

The truth is I never liked the idea of volunteer neighborhood watch groups. My feeling has always been that despite the fact that theywere created to protect their communities, many of them were basically police ‘wannabes’ looking for adventure but untrained to do police work.

True, they do not carry weapons (thank God). But a lot of damage can be done with a fist. Or a foot. Or a stick. In their zeal to protect the innocent, they will sometimes go overboard. And in some cases hurt innocent people – mistaking them for a perpetrator. Now this can happen to police too. We all know what has been happening on this front these days. Ask the families of mostly black victims unjustly killed or beaten by the police in cities all over this country.

The difference is that the police are trained to know when and how to react – and how much force to use. So that hopefully – as bad as the recent cases of police brutality have been - they are a very small minority of the police department. As a percentage of the whole, the numbers are probably miniscule. There are bad apples in every group. But Shomrim have no such training. Certainly not on the level of the police department.

So, although I am happy that many people have been spared great tragedy as a result of quick response by Shomrim - preventing for example violence against an elderly Jew - it comes at a terrible price. A price that can best be described in a Forward article by attorney, Michael Lesher. If it were up to him, he would abolish these groups entirely. And with good reason:

The Brooklyn Hasidim accused of beating a young, gay black man named Taj Patterson back in 2013 are reportedly about to get a plea deal so sweet, they won’t serve a single day in prison. Patterson, who was beaten so badly that he was left blind in one eye, and who had homophobic slurs hurled at him throughout the ordeal, is surely having a hard time understanding the aftermath.

I don’t know the details of this case. But it surely smacks of something way beyond protecting fellow Jews. I don’t think that beating and blinding a suspect while hurling homophobic insults at them is what protecting fellow Jews is all about. And this is not the first nor only case where excessive force was used. More from Mr. Lesher:

For too long we’ve allowed a system of Jewish-run patrols to dominate the heavily Orthodox Jewish enclaves of Brooklyn, usurping the role of the official police force (with key support from vote-hungry politicians), despite their record of violence toward non-Jews. And for years we’ve held our tongues as the patrols’ unchecked behavior carried on…

When retired police captain William Plackenmeyer told Newsday in 2003, “In Brooklyn, it almost seemed like there were two penal codes, one for the Hasidic community and one for everyone else…”

When Michael wrote an article in the New York Post exposing some uncomfortable truths about Shomrim this was in part the response he got:

Although several thanked me for telling the truth, a more common note was sounded by a gentleman who informed me by email that “Hitler succeeded to kill 6 million jews only because of such people like you.” “God will make you cry one day so hard,” another prophesied, adding, “I can’t wait for that day.” Summing up the case, one New York City rabbi’s message accused me of “trashing out fellow Jews” in what “may prove to be one of the most treacherous acts of messira [informing] in modern times.”

I am appalled by this response. Whether one agrees with him or not, this is not how to respond someone who has worked so hard to seek justice for victims of sex abuse. Instead of condemning him, they should be honoring him as a role model for the Jewish community.

For me the truth about the value of the Shmorim Society lies somewhere between the 2 extremes of the good and bad they do.

On the one hand, they do offer an added layer of protection to the communities in which they serve. They fill a gap made by not having a big enough police force to properly protect a neighborhood for all crimes, big and small. The police department acknowledges that.

On the other hand, there’s Taj Peterson who was beaten and blinded in one eye by overzealous homophobic Shomrim. Shomrim that are about to get away with it. He deserves a lot better than he’s getting from the criminal justice system.

I don’t know that I would disband them. But I would certainly have people seeking to join them, better vetted for psychological issues; better trained; and subject to the same standards and sanctions for wrongdoing as the police. I would at the very least require every call made to the Shomrim be monitored by the police department.

Chabad Shluchim in front of 770 Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn- 2012 (VIN)

I’m sorry they removed the post. Cross Currents had recently featured an article by Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer that was critical of Chabad in a highly respectful and constructive way. Apparently Chabad, or at least the Chabad Shaliach in California, Rabbi Dovid Eliezrie took umbrage at it. Rabbi Gordimer apologized, Rabbi Eleazrie accepted it gracefully - end of story.

The problem is that there is no ‘story’. We now have no record of what Rabbi Gordimer said - and apologized for. Which is too bad. I read the article when it was originally published and if I recall correctly found it to be just as I said it was. Respectful and constructive.

The issue at hand is whether Chabad is the new ‘center’ (...or middle - as Rabbi Eliezrie puts it) of Judaism. As a card carrying Centrist, I would take issue with that. I am not a member of Chabad. And I definitely do not believe that their Hashkafos are mainstream. At least not when it comes to their views of their Rebbe as Moshiach. That issue is far from dead. This is one of those internal struggles mentioned by both Rabbi Eliezrie and Rabbi Gordimer. Rabbi Gordimer said in his letter of apology that we ought to let Chabad deal with their own internal issues and let us (outsiders) deal with our own internal issues. Which are in some cases considerable.

Normally I would agree with that. But when a a movement claiming to be the new center is still ‘hung up’ about whether their long deceased Rebbe is Moshiach – it becomes a matter for all of us. It is a matter of whether a view that a man can be resurrected from the dead to become Moshiach is theologically acceptable. Whether such beliefs are acceptable is just as problematic as accepting the bible critic’s argument that events at Sinai were allegorical. Neither of these positions are internal. They both relate to the fundamental principles of our faith.

Rabbi Eliezrie does not make any reference to the ‘Moshichism’ issue – as though it doesn’t exist (other than to refer to it vaguely as an internal matter). I don’t blame him for that. But sweeping it under the rug does not make the issue go away. It is a serious one that has yet to be resolved by Chabad. Ask anyone that has been to their headquarters at 770.

There are other issues that argue against a claim of centrism. For example many of Chabad’s customs are their own and not practiced by other Orthodox Jews. And yet they promote them as though they were Mitzvos on par with keeping Shabbos or Kashrus. (Like teaching secular Jews that all women of any household and of any age - must light shabbos candles on Friday evening. A custom specific only to Chabad.)

This is not to impugn the good they do. Which is immense. I have pointed this out many times in the past. I in fact agree with Rabbi Gordimer who said:

(I)t is clear as day that Chabad is a crucial ally – actually a foremost leader – in the battle to preserve tradition and keep Jews affiliated, without compromise, through genuine love and mesiras nefesh.

There is no denying their massive accomplishment in these areas over the last 70 or so years. They are sincere in their outreach and uncompromising in their beliefs. As Rabbi Eliezrie says:

By choosing Chabad the new generation is boarding a train headed towards observance instead of away. For some it may move at a slow pace, for others more rapid, but the direction is a new one for many Jews…

Every Jew is welcome, but the rules are not changing. As one prominent leader of a local Temple told me some years ago “You guys don’t move the goalposts.” They appreciate that Judaism is not imposed on them, but rather they are given the space to grow at their own pace in observance, slowly, Mitzvah by Mitzvah.

I think it’s safe to say that they have virtually cornered the market in outreach. They are of course not the only ones doing it successfully. But they are by far the most successful at it - at least in terms of sheer numbers. The rest of Orthodox Jewry would do well to study their successes and incorporate some of their methods.

That said, I doubt that we can reproduce the “Shaliach’ system. I don’t think there are many people in outreach outside of Lubavitch that would be willing to live in a city where there are no other Orthodox Jews; no Jewish educational facilities for children; and no Jewish infrastructure. Chabad Shiluchim are about the only ones that do this. And they do so in huge numbers.

So at the end of the day, I agree with Rabbi Gordimer. We need Chabad. Nobody does what they do. Even as we have our issues with them, the good they do far outweighs the problems they have. And since the main problem of their messianic views are not promoted in their outreach work, I for one am willing to look the other way. For now.

But calling Chabad centrist is just plain wrong. Just because they have attracted a lot of unaffiliated Jews into their programs – filling a avoid left by failing heterodox movements - that does not make them centrist.

As an aside Open Orthodoxy (OO) is motivated in a similar vein. YCT Talmud Chair, Rabbi Y’soscher Katz once indicted, that OO is all about reaching out to a certain type of Jew - so that he (or she) can find a place in Orthodoxy. However, to paraphrase what was said above about Chabad, you can’t move the goalposts in order to win the game.

But centrists they are not. To be a centrist is not only about a growing demographic – as Rabbi Eliezrie seems to posit. It is about where one stands philosophically relative to other Orthodox Jews. Or at least how one fits into the spectrum of religiosity. And whether that demographic center can be perpetuated.

Chabad has a very clear Hashaka that is unique to them. It is distinct. And their interaction with other Jews tends to focus mostly on the non religious. They have their own schools and social organizations that are separate and apart from the rest of mainstream Orthodoxy. Whether Chasidic or Yeshivish or Centrist or on the left wing of Modern Orthodoxy (…if that still exists outside of OO).

If one looks at sheer numbers, the growth of other types of Chasidim is exponential. Add to that the world of Yeshivos and the world of Modern Orthodoxy - both of which are growing - and Chabad will never catch up to the combined growth of all the other Orthodox groups. Even if they include their outreach successes. .

Furthermore, sheer numbers now does not necessarily predict what those numbers will be in the future. It remains to be seen whether a system that avoids a secular studies curriculum for elementary and high school students can sustain itself. Chabad’s philosophy is to avoid a secular curriculum in their schools (for boys) if they can help it… same as Satmar. The only difference being that Chabad will compromise and have one if that is the only way a community will support their schools. Detroit Chabad has no secular studies in their elementary school and Chicago doesn’t have one in their high school.

I therefore still maintain that the new centrists will be the moderate Charedi world (consisting of both moderate Yeshiva types and moderate Chasidim) combined with the right wing of Modern Orthodoxy. In my view they have the best chance at real growth since they are best suited to deal successfully with the modern world.

Democratic Presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders (The New Yorker)

I had always thought that if a Jew became a serious candidate for President, I would very likely support him. Of course that support would have been dependent on whether his political views for the most part reflected my own. But I must admit that it is a matter of pride to see ‘one of my own’ as President of the United States. So being a Jewish candidate is weighted heavily in my consideration of whether to vote for him.

This was the case with Joseph Leiberman – when Al Gore chose him as his running mate. Even though I tended to lean more with George Bush politically, I felt at the time that Gore’s views were close enough to mine so that his VP choice swung me over to his side. And certainly Lieberman’s views were similar to mine.

My pride was not only that an observant Jew was chosen by the Democratic nominee, it was in the fact that Leiberman’s addition to the ticket actually improved Gore’s odds in the polls. Before Leiberman, Gore trailed Bush by 10 percentage points. After Leiberman the race became a dead heat.

I recall a poll conducted by one of the leading newspapers at the time asking voters whether Leibeman’s Orthodox Judaism would hamper his job as President - which he would have been a ‘heartbeat’ away from if elected. The answer surprised me. A common response was that his religious views were considered an asset. One that gave him an ethical advantage.

That was a seminal moment for me. It showed me that mainstream America is not only - NOT antisemitic, but that they are actually philosemitic - unlike any other country in the history of the world.

Image that, I thought. Observant Jews were now seen to be the most ethical of people. America is truly different. This is not like the golden era of Spain that lasted about 500 years where Jews thrived. This was a sea change in attitude by the non Jewish world in America. Esav did not hate Ya’akov in this country. Especially if he was observant.

(I have since learned that I was wrong about Gore and am glad he was not elected. To quote an old cliché, it seemed like a good idea at the time.)

It is still a tribute to the American people that Bernie Sanders’ Judaism is a non issue - no matter what side of the political aisle they are on. But I am sorry to report that I cannot and do not support him. That Bernie Sanders is not observant is not the issue. The issue is that his views on Israel are at best naïve and at worst - it would cause great harm to the Jewish State if his views became policy.

It is one thing to express sympathy for the plight of Palestinians as he does. I too have expressed sympathy for their plight. I just see the blame for that placed squarely on the Palestinian leadership and on a base underlying Muslim/Arab hatred of the Jewish people. That foments a constant stream of violence to which Israel must react - sometimes harshly - in order to protect its people.

First, I would never support a socialist for President, Jewish or not. But even if I would tolerate his socialism, his attitude about Israel is unacceptable. And his attitude will have a definite impact on the Democratic party. Because of his wide popularity among various demographics, primarily among the young, the DNC (Democratic National Committee) is letting him choose 5 of the 15 people that will form the party platform. 2 of the people he has chosen are not ‘Israel friendly’ to say the least. When a Jew chooses people that are as overtly anti Israel as James Zogby and Cornell West – that becomes extremely problematic to me.

James Zogby is the President of the American Arab Institute and supports BDS. But his views seem tame compared to Cornell West who also supports BDS. Here is a glimpse of West’s views with respect to Israel and the Palestinians from a 2015 article in Salon:

“It’s ugly, it’s vicious, it’s brutal”: Cornel West on Israel in Palestine… there is no doubt that Gaza is not just a “kind of” concentration camp, it is the hood on steroids.

West made a point of insisting that raising the Palestinian flag should not be seen as an act of narrow nationalism, but rather as an act of solidarity with an oppressed people…

Of course then he added the obligatiory disclaimer about not being antisemitic – just anti Zionist.

I realize that party platforms have become pretty meaningless these days. (I think Trump actually said that he doesn’t care what his party’s platform says.) But I disagree. It’s true that the platform has little to do with what a President’s actual policy will be. But I don’t think it can be ignored. If you have a party platform that advocates changing the way it deals with Israel – as now seems will be the case, it should give supporters of Israel pause.

If that party’s candidate does not completely disavow that portion of the platform, that could spell disaster in the future. Because it sets up a mindset that that party should be more even-handed in dealing with Israel that a President may take into account. In ‘Middle-Eastern speak’ that translates into less intelligence sharing; less military aid; and less foreign aid; all in the guise of being even-handed. A tilt like this could weaken the military edge Israel has over its neighbors and make them far more vulnerable.

There is not a doubt in my mind that terrorist entities like Hamas and Hezbollah will take advantage of any weakness they perceive in Israel’s defense capabilities as a result of a shift in American policy. Israel does not need to be in this position. They need all the help they can get.

Which leaves me with a dilemma. I do not see how I can support Hillary Clinton if she does not disavow any kind shift away from supporting Israel by her party. On the other hand. I can’t think of a worse choice for President than Donald Trump. I guess I will have to wait and see how this all plays out over the next few months. But I will not vote for a candidate whose party platform weakens Israel. As of now however, no endorsements.

Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein (Patheos)

How many prominent Charedi rabbis would join a Catholic nun and together - see a remake of the movie, The Ten Commandments– and then do a review of the movie from an Orthodox perspective? I know one such rabbi. Which is just one of many reasons that I admire him. His name is Yitzchok Adlerstein, and doing things like the above is part of his job.

Rabbi Adlertsein is the Director of Interfaith Affairs for the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. He is a Musmach (rabbinic ordainee) of Chafetz Chaim, a Charedi Yeshiva. And the founder of and CEO of Cross Currents.

I personally heard this story from him during a visit to his office last year. It shows that there is a place for interfaith interaction even in the Charedi world. Both Rabbi Adlerstein and I agree that the Torah world’s view of Catholic and Christian attitudes towards us is heavily skewed as being negative, when the reverse is more often the case (As always - there are exceptions). One of the things he’s been trying to accomplish is to change that attitude to a more realistic one.

As a suma cum laude graduate of Queens College in New York, and the Sydney M. Irmas Adjunct Chair in Jewish Law and Ethics at Loyola Law School, …and based on the kind of job he has, Rabbi Adlerstein could be described as the quintessential ‘moderate Charedi’. And I am a huge fan.

Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer

I bring this up in light of a lengthy comment he made on my post dealing with Chabad, and Rabbis Gordimer and Eliezrie. Since that thread is several days old, I felt it best to feature it here because I think there are important things in it that should be read by all. Here it is in full:

Harry – I’m going to take responsibility for the back-tracking on R Gordimer’s piece. It had nothing to do with any of the reasons people offered.

There was no pressure from Chabad. Nada. Not a syllable.

None from R Eliezrie either – although he is a good friend, and he could have tried. Before we accepted his piece, we told him that there would be lots of criticism, and he would have to deal with it.

I asked R Gordimer to declare a truce (with or without withdrawing the original piece; that didn’t matter as much) because I felt that people would not understand his intentions.

Klal Yisrael owes him a lot for assuming the thankless job of chronicling just how far removed from Orthodoxy is the entire Open Orthodox enterprise. He gets lots of flack for it. While many understand why a line in the sand has to be drawn between genuine Torah practice and belief and the OO (Open Orthodox) distortion, many still do not. They attribute all sorts of nefarious motives to Rabbi Gordimer.

The truth is that he is a sweet soul with an unusual sense of emes. He is aware of the stance taken by Gedolei Yisrael, by his own rabbeim, and by rov minyan and rov biyan of the Torah world who regard OO as both illegitimate and confusing enough to the undiscerning to be a threat to their emunah and practice. He speaks not for himself, but for a constituency that numerically swamps any adherents that OO will be able to generate.

I didn’t want people to think that R Gordimer is some sort of passive-aggressive contrarian. He is anything but. He pointed out some issues with Chabad. Some had merit; some I would personally disagree with.

But they are not as front-burner issues as demonstrating why OO as an ideology must be kept at arms length (while we daven that its adherents should keep up their practice of mitzvos, and gain the clarity to come back to the fold.)

Pulling back from the Chabad issue was a statement that any issues we have (and we do) are issues we have with those who clearly share the most important aspects of Orthodox thought. His criticism, however valid, should not be regarded as coming from some font of negativity. He could pull back in an instant. He couldn’t from the condemnation of OO. He couldn’t and wouldn’t.

Rabbi David Eliezrie (Torah Cafe)

Rabbi Eliezrie read the piece before it came down. So did thousands of people from within Chabad. Maybe a few of the lines hit home, and some will give the criticism some thought. At least on the surface, there was mutual admiration, and mutual concession that not all is perfect. That’s positive.

At the same time, I fear that many misunderstood what R Eliezrie meant by new “center” and “realignment.” He did not mean that Chabad is replacing the ideological center – taking over for Modern Orthodoxy. I believe that he meant that there are tens of thousands of Jews who are neither Orthodox nor effectively heterodox. They have joined something in between, and thus are part of that new center.

Granted, they are not fully shomrei mitzvos. Many are hardly that even in any minimal sense of mitzvos bein adam l’Makom. Many are intermarried. Many drop by for the socializing or the kiddush. But they are aware that what stands behind it is a Yiddishkeit whose goal-posts don’t move (as he put it), and places Ahavas Yisrael on a pedestal. That means that many of their kids will go to a Chabad school, where at least some of them will move on to something more. And many, many more will be slowed in their exit from Judaism, c”v. By increasing their identification with Judaism and Jews, many (and their children) will not be taking the final step so quickly.

The rest of us have not been interested in this kind of triage. We’ve had different priorities. But we are now at the end of the eleventh hour for millions of Jews. Chabad, at the moment, has the only game plan for those masses.

They deserve credit for it.

I mostly agree with Rabbi Adlerstein here. My only quibble is that he should have left the original post up. So that Rabbi Gordimer’s and Rabbi Eliezrie’s responses to it would make more sense.

I stand by what I wrote in that post about Lubavitch – which I do not believe contradicts anything Rabbi Adlerstein said – even as we might disagree with a point or two I made. But Rabbi Adlerstein’s comments go far beyond the issues with Chabad and addresses one of the hottest topics of discussion in the Orthodox world: the legitimacy of Open Orthodoxy; its institutions, and its products.

I believe (as does Rabbi Adlerstein) that the overwhelming majority of legitimate rabbinic opinion about OO is that it is not a valid ‘stream’ of Orthodoxy for reasons I have stated here many times (which are beyond the scope of this post). For the record, however, I do not impugn their motives… which are in essence a form of outreach. Just the unacceptable compromises they have made in order to achieve that goal.

Rabbi Meir Kahane's grandson, Meir Ettinger

I have to take strong issue with Naomi Zeveloff. Writing in the Forward she maintains that ‘Orthodoxy and Right-Wing Extremism Go Hand-in-Hand in Israel.’ She cites as proof a study done by Pew which points out the following:

The most shocking acts of terrorist violence by Jews — like Baruch Goldstein’s 1994 massacre of 29 Palestinians in the Cave of the Patriarchs or Yigal Amir’s 1995 assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin — have been carried out by Orthodox extremists with exclusivist ideologies of the sort measured in the Pew polls.

Also cited is the fact that most Orthodox Jews in Israel believe that Arabs should be expelled. And that Jews should receive preferential treatment.

The fact is that Orthodox Jews do not support right wing extremism. Certainly not as a theological idea. What may be true is that a certain element with Religious Zionists do. They are the messianist types who want to hasten the coming of Moshiach. They are the ones who believe that the Religious Zionist view that we are in Aschalta D’Geulah - the beginning of the redemption of the Jewish people means that we are required by Halacha to settle all of the land of Israel, including places like Chevron.

It is this kid of thinking that created monsters like mass murderer, Baruch Goldstein and assassin Yigal Amir. Baruch Goldstein was an ardent follower of Rabbi Meir Kahane. The latest of this type of extremist is Rabbi Kahane’s grandson, Meir Ettinger. He and his followers have taken extremism to a new level.

Major Jewish publications like the Jewish Press seem to support Ettinger. They definitley support settling places like Chevron. And many mainstream Religious Zionists - even though they do not do so themselves, are sympathetic to those that do. Both morally and financially.

This is not to say that all Religious Zionists are like that. But a significant number (perhaps even the majority) feel that way. After several Intifadas, the most recent of which was done on a ‘one incident at a time’ basis where an Arab would pop up out of the woodwork and stab an innocent Jew, one can easily see why they would express a view desiring to expel the Arabs from Israel. When there is so much violence by Arabs against Jews in Israel – it should not be surprising that so many Jews might agree with Rabbi Kahane: ‘You have to cut off the cancer!’

But not all Orthodox Jews in Israel think like that. The fastest growing segment of Orthodox Jews in Israel are the Charedim. I don’t know if they comprise the largest segment of Orthodox Jews. But they surely are a significant minority that at some point in time will surpass the numbers of other Orthodox Jews (if they haven’t yet). They do not support expulsion nor do they do anything to advance that idea. That is not what their focus is on.

They spend their time and energy trying to get better treatment for themselves as a group from the government. Their issues are mostly financial and about avoiding army service. What to do about the Arabs in Israel is a very low priority for them. They are far more inclined to be opposed to the tactics of extremist settlers. Surely those in outlying areas in the heart of Arab neighborhoods like Chevron or someplace deep in the West Bank.They are far more amenable to things like a 2 state solution. They tend to oppose anything that would incite indigenous Arabs.

Rav Elazar Menachem Mann Shach, ZTL

Rav Eliezer Menachem Mann Shach, who until his passing was considered the Gadol HaDor by the vast majority of the Charedi world famously said that ‘Land for Peace’ (at least in theory) was acceptable if it would indeed save Jewish lives. This does not sound like the kind of extremism Orthodox Jews are being accused of by Zeveloff.

The bottom line is that Orthodox Judaism and extremism against Arabs do not go hand in hand at all. Most Charedim are not extremists and many Religious Zionists are not. Those that are –are the ones that get the publicity. Obviously.

A word about the belief by many Orthodox Jews (and not a few non Orthodox Jews) that Jews should be given preferential treatment. It is true that many Orthodox Jews in a Jewish State might feel that way. It is based (as Zeveloff points out) on the concept that Jews are the chosen people of God.

But it is a mistake to say that being God’s Chosen people means not treating Arab citizens justly. The opposite in fact is the case. As God’s chosen people we have an obligation to teach the world what Jewish ethics and morality is. We have an obligation to behave in ways that will want the rest of the world to admire us and emulate our ways - the ways of God. It’s called making a Kiddush HaShem. What it does not mean is that we subjugate our non Jewish residents on any level. We instead treat them like people created in the image of God. Because that is exactly what they are.

Harambe, the 400 pound gorilla killed to save the life of a 4 year old

I am more than a bit surprised at the public reaction. This is not to say that I think the shooting of a 400 pound silver back gorilla – an endangered species - is something to celebrate. Far from it. When something like this happens it should make people sad. But in this case it was by far the right thing to do. And because of these circumstances I was actually happy that the life of a 4 year old boy took precedence over the life of an animal.

For those not familiar with the story – which has been all over the news for days now, here is what happened. While on a visit to the Cincinnati Zoo, a 4 year old boy managed to escape his mother’s attention for a moment, climb over a barrier separating the gorilla exhibition and fell into a moat where this gorilla was located. The gorilla started ‘playing’ with the child in a very dangerous way. The decision was made to shoot the gorilla so that the child would be spared.

The gorilla was not at fault. He did what came naturally to him. But a young boy’s life was in danger. There is not a doubt in my mind that the only response was to eliminate that danger as quickly as humanly possible. Shooting the animal was apparently the only way to do that. That should have been the end of the story. A mother’s fear was quickly turned into relief. It’s sad that an animal that did nothing wrong had to be killed. But when to comes to human life, there is no contest between that and animal life.

And yet hundreds of thousands of people have complained about an animal being needlessly killed. As though killing an animal was the same as killing a human being. These people had nothing to say about the fact that a child’s life was saved by that act. No concern about the child or his family. They were upset that an animal was killed. That was the extent of it. I said I was surprised. But I am actually shocked at how many people are more outraged by the killing of an animal in pursuit of saving a human life than they are relieved about the fact that a human life was saved because of it.

There was some legitimate questioning by these people about why a stun gun; or tranquilizer gun; or other non lethal weapon wasn’t used. That, they thought, would have spared both the lives of the child and the gorilla. But as zoo officials explained, that would not have immobilized the animal quickly enough. Between the time the animal was hit and the time it became immobilized, that boy could have been killed or seriously injured.

I am reminded of a story from 2003. About the animal rights activist organization, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). In order to promote a vegetarian diet, they compared chickens slaughtered at factory farms to Jews annihilated in Nazi death camps.

This exposes a philosophy that sees human beings and animals as equals – with equal rights to life. Killing a chicken to them is the same as killing a human being. There is no Godliness to the human being… no being created in the image of God. We are all animals - with human beings just a bit higher up in the food chain.

It isn’t much of a leap from there to saying that an animal that is part of an endangered species should be given precedence of life over that of a child.

I’m not saying that any of the people who are complaining about killing this gorilla think that. But it can’t be that far off based on the outrage they are expressing at the animals death. Thank God that Cincinnati’s zoo keepers are more ethical than that. A child’s life was spared.

A word about the public animus towards the mother. Thousands of people have expressed a desire to see ‘justice’ being served by blaming the mother for not watching her child well enough – allowing him to escape into the ‘arms of a gorilla’. Which ended up forcing the zoo keepers to kill it. I am frankly appalled by this attitude.

This was a 4 year old. How many parents have looked away from their child for a moment only to find him gone. Having slipped away from the mother’s otherwise watchful eye… making her frantic – only to find him quickly thereafter and experiencing a sense of great relief.

People are human. This type of thing happens all the time. In this case, that moment enabled this mother’s son to slip away and end up in that moat with a gorilla. This does not make her irresponsible. It makes her human. I see no value to blaming the mother. I see only anger expressed by a public upset that a beautiful animal was killed. As though the fact that a human life was saved by that didn’t matter. It’s almost as though they turned their wrath against the mother when they couldn’t blame the zoo anymore.

Don’t judge people until you are in their place – say Chazal. Instead of being upset, those people ought to be sympathetic to this family and grateful that they were spared a tremendous tragedy.

I don’t know how much longer this story will linger on. But in my view it is a precious waste of time. In that spirit, I have a message to the media: Stop harping on this and let this family get back to normal.

Please do not think I don’t care what happens to animals. Quite the contrary. The Torah admonishes us to not be cruel to them. It tells us to be kind to them – and spare them needless suffering. Avoiding Tzar Baalei Chaim - inflicting pain to animals is high value in Judaism. It’s just that human life supersedes that of animal life by orders of magnitude.

It is because I care about sparing animals from any suffering that - if it were up to me, I would abolish all zoos. I believe that it is cruel to keep animals in captivity – in many cases locked up in cages - away from their natural habitat. Whatever educational value there may be in a zoo, it pales in comparison to mistreating animals this way. What’s more - abolishing zoos would certainly prevent anything like this from ever happening again.

Picture from the Forward for illustrative purposes only

This is one of those cases where I have to wonder whose rights are being violated by a reasonable accommodation. And what the motivation might actually be behind those complaining about it, including a New York Timeseditorial.

First let me remind people that don’t know my views with respect to Satmar, that I am not exactly a Chasid. I have serious disagreements with them on a variety of issues. Some of them mentioned in the article. I mention this to make clear that my views on this issue are not generated by any sort of bias on their behalf. From the Forward:

Following a string of stories in local media last week, the New York Times editorial page inveighed on Wednesday against a decision by the New York City Parks Department to continue to allow women-only swimming hours at an indoor public pool in Williamsburg.

The pool had set aside time for the exclusive use of female bathers for the past two decades, but was poised to stop after the New York City Commission on Human Rights, a government agency, warned that the gender-segregated hours could break city law.

OK. I get it. It’s a public pool and ought not to be governed by private religious rules. If a religious group has rules about mixed swimming, they need to build their own facilities. That is in fact what a Jewish Community Center (JCC) does here in my Chicago neighborhood of West Rogers Park. They offer separate swimming hours on various days during specific times to accommodate the vast majority of its membership who are observant. Who prefer not to swim in a pool with people of the opposite sex.

The JCC is of course a private organization. They can do what they want to accommodate religious Jews. The public pool facility in Williamsburg is not private. So I suppose that technically the New York Times et al may have a point.

But is it really only a religious accommodation to have separate hours for men and women? Is it only the Satmar Chasidim of Williamsburg that would like that kind of accommodation? I have to believe that there are more than a few women in the world that would prefer more modest swimming arrangements – even some that are not Jewish. I have to believe that there are women that when wearing bathing suits do not want to be seen like that by men - some of whom will no doubt be gawking at them.

Now it’s probably true that most women don’t care whether men stare at them or not. It is probably also true that some women dress provocatively on purpose just for the attention they will get from men. There are all kinds of people in the world. However, the more modest woman may actually appreciate an opportunity to continue her modesty while at a pool wearing a bathing suit without the presence of any men

So that even if the source of this separation of the sexes in that pool is based on the religious views of the majority residents that are Satmar Chasidim, it can definitely be appreciated by others of similar modesty.

There is no worship service there. Nothing religious takes place there at all. Just a group of women who want to enjoy the pool in a state of semi undress knowing that there are no men staring at them . All women are welcome – including non Jewish women. I therefore see this as a reasonable accommodation for a neighborhood desirous of it. And not really a church/state issue at all.

That facility was made for the entire public to enjoy. It should also be noted that this particular accommodation is only being made for women. Men do not have separate swimming hours. So the only people that are inconvenienced by this are the very small minority of secular men in Williamsburg who want to go swimming on the 3 or 4 days a week during hours where these restrictions apply.

Accommodating that segment, which I have to assume is tiny - by depriving the vast majority of women in that neighborhood from using that facility (and who have until now used it for decades) - seems unfair and petty. Even if those contesting it may be technically right. (Which I am not sure they are based on what I said above.)

As long as there are also hours for mixed swimming - having a few hours a week for these women to enjoy is only fair. Denying them that by using the first amendment as a sledgehammer is just plain mean. In my view, the status quo ought to continue. No one is really hurt by it. And I dare say, neither is the constitution. If on the other hand separate hours for women are disallowed, a lot of people will be.

Union for Reform Judiasm president, Rabbi Rick Jacobs (TOI)

I have to take issue with the Reform leader. He was quoted saying the following in a recent AP story (republished at VIN) about the impediments to an agreed upon compromise whereby heterodox movements would be able to have their own space at the Kotel:

Rabbi Rick Jacobs, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, said the delegation told Netanyahu on Wednesday that this is a “very serious issue.”

“There is a deep concern, bordering on disbelief, that this deal may not be implemented,” Jacobs said. He said the group had made clear that if the deal doesn’t go forward “it will signal a rupture” with North American Jewry.

Jacobs said the treatment toward his movement is “very painful.”

“We express our love for the Jewish state every day. The Jewish state doesn’t return that love,” he said.

There is not a doubt in my mind that the Jewish State loves all of the Jewish people. Regardless of what denomination they are a part of. Even if they are a part of the increasing number of secular Jews that are unaffiliated to the point of not caring enough to self identify as a Jew.

Not only is this true about the government of Israel, it’s true about the entirety of Orthodoxy. Including Charedim. It is not Reform Jews that we reject, God forbid. It is a movement that has made up new rules about Judaism. Rules that made non observance an acceptable part of its theology. One can now ‘belong’ to a denomination and ignore Halacha completely without any guilt. They are free of any burden and believe that this is what God (if they choose to believe in Him) is OK with in the 21^st century.

Back before there were ‘movements’ in Judaism there were plenty of Jews that were not observant. But they all recognized what they were not observing. It was the Judaism of their fathers. The one which is based on Halacha as dictated to Moshe and handed down generationally until the present day. Those laws were orally dictated to Moshe and were eventually codified in the Mishnah, interpreted by the Gemara, commented upon by the Rishonim and eventually re-codified in the Shulchan Aruch which – along with its commentaries we follow today.

How one expresses the uniqueness of being Jewish by ignoring the specific behavior mandated by Halacha - seeing only its ethical value - has in fact caused the many Reform leaders to backpedal a bit. If one cannot tell the difference between a Jew and non Jew - since both behave the same way and share a common sense of ethics - what’s the point of being Jewish? Now Reform leaders say one should voluntarily observe the Mitzvos. But no big deal if they don’t.

What denominational Judaism has done is divide the Jewish people. Instead of being unified by an understanding that the Torah is what makes us Jewish – what makes us unique as a people, Reform Judaism is a new Judaism. One that believes following Halacha is not mandatory. Today, those Jews that are not observant will likely say, they are Reform Jews – if they bother identifying as Jews at all!

This is what Orthodoxy objects to. It is the perversion of what Judaism actually is – and always has been - except for a brief historical period during the second Temple era and a bit beyond when the Sadducees (Tzedukim) and a few other minor sects existed. But they have not survived in any significant manner beyond those days. Since that time and until Abraham Geiger and the advent of Reform in 19^th century - Judaism was defined as requiring observance of Halacha by all Jews.

It is really too bad that Reform Judaism has done this to the Jewish people. Once they abandoned Halacha as it has been understood throughout Jewish history, they felt free to create any method they chose to serve God. Which brings us back to the approved legislation in the Kenesset that would give them their own space at the Kotel. They can then practice their own version of public prayer. Which defies Halacha as it is and has been understood and interpreted throughout the millennia. Until the Reform movement was established.

That said I had believed that the compromise reached in the Keneset on this issue was a reasonable one. It was far better than continually exacerbating tensions among the Jewish people. Let them have their space – as long as they leave the status quo alone - allowing Orthodox Jews to pray there as they choose – which is in the traditional manner.

So, I was a bit disappointed at the sudden change of heart by the Charedi parties who originally seemed to look the other way when this compromised was accepted by the Kenesset. But do not for a minute think that they were not acting on principle. It is the very creation of a movement – separate and apart from their ancestors – that is causing the problem.

Without that, all Jews would understand that it is observant Jews that follow the traditions of their ancestors that have it right. This is in fact the way many secular Israelis understood it. The joke has always been that the Shul that they do not attend is Orthodox!

They understood that if they wanted to pray to God properly, they would ask the rabbi – who until Reform was always Orthodox. Thus there would never have been this kind of controversy… and we would all be on the same page about what is and isn’t authentic in Judaism. Whether we were observant or not.

Yom Yerushalyim at the Kotel in 2011

‘I do what Ben Gurion does, I don’t say Hallel and I don’t say Tachanun’. This was the clever and humorous response of Rav Yosef Kahaneman, founder and Rosh HaYeshiva of Ponevezh in Bnei Brak when asked if he said Hallel on Yom Ha’Atzmaut (Israel's Independence Day). (One does not say Tachanun on certain occasions one of which is on the anniversary of significant event such as the return of our land after 2000 years of exile.)

This was a man of integrity who as a Charedi refused to be cowed by the anti state political correctness in the Charedi world of his time. He appreciated the value of the return of Eretz Yisroel into Jewish hands and the Neis Nistar (hidden miracle) that got us there. He expressed his gratitude publicly by recognizing the significance of the creation of the State of Israel. Not only did he not say Tahcnun - his entire Yeshiva did not say it on that day (with the exception of one faculty member, Rav Shach). Another thing he did on that day was fly the Israeli flag atop his Yeshiva in Bnei Brak. I believe they still do this.

Despite these feelings about the State, Rav Kahaneman is venerated by the entire Charedi world. But his views on this subject are far from venerated. They are rejected in their entirely now. As is the views of another Charedi hero who also recognized the value of Israeli s defense forces, Mir Rosh HaYeshiva, R’ Chaim Shmulevitz.

The more common approach by the the Charedi right in Israel is to not even recognize Israel’s existence. I have noticed an increasing tendency for Charedi publishers of Seforim (religious works) to say ‘printed as E. Israel’. Which of course stands for Eretz Israel. While that is a true statement, it clearly shows disdain to refuse saying ‘printed in Israel’. God forbid that be interpreted as recognition. These are not publications by Neturei Karta. These are mainstream Charedi publications.

Just yesterday, I was informed that Eliyahu Kitov’s monumental work, Sefer HaToda’ah is now published (Hebrew edition) in censored from. In the original version he had a section where he evenhandedly discussed both sides of the debate about Yom Ha’atzmaut between Religious Zionists and Charedim. This is not good enough for the right. That section is now gone in the newer editions.

Unfortunately, the Charedi world in America seems to increasingly feel the same way. The rationale of not saying Tachanun onYom Ha’atzmaut applies to Yom Yerushalyim. Which we celebrate today. This is the day in June of 1967 during the 6 Day War where Israeli General Mordechai 'Motta' Gur entered and recaptured the old city of Jerusalem and announced ‘Har HaBayit B’Yadenu’ – the Temple Mount is in our hands.

Once again hidden miracles took place and the holiest place in the world to the Jewish people was again in our hands. For the first time in 2000 years. An occasion to be recognized by at least not saying Tachnunun on its anniversary. The Shul I attended this morning said Tachnanun. Not such a surprise since it is a Charedi Shul. But not every in that Minyan this morning was Charedi. So when I stood up waiting until the Shul was finished saying Tachanun, I was able to notice if there were any others that felt as I do. Unfortunately I was the only one.No one seemed to care what happened this day in 1967. It was just another day - same as the next one.

I understand the feeling on the right that Israel is not a religious country - and that it should be. I also understand that the right is upset by how they are treated by the secular government. I understand all of the feelings about the anti religious activities that some of the founders and their surrogates were perceived responsible for at its founding. There are many stories about that. Although I believe those stories are exaggerated, I do think there were some people in that era that did everything they could to undermine religion. And yet in spite of this knowledge, people like Rav Kahaneman still understood what having Israel back in Jewish hands meant. And did something concrete to show it.

What’s more. Israel is nothing like that today. Not only is there little attempt to destroy religion, Charedim are active members of the Kenesset and of the ruling coalition. One of those members, Rabbi Yaakov Litzman has for the first time accepted a ministerial portfolio; Minister of Health. I am told that there are now more religious members of the Keneset than a any time in history. The head of the Mossad, Yossi Cohen, is an observant Jew. And the upper echelon of the military hierarchy now has observant generals. Not to mention the fact that - if I understand correctly - there are more people studying Torah full time in Israel than at any other time in history.

The progress that the religious world has made in Israel cannot be denied. Nor can it be denied where at least some of the credit goes. It is the height of arrogance to ignore that fact, and continue to actively and publicly refuse to recognize Israel as a State. How ironic it is that there was recognition of Israel by Gedolei HaDor in its early days whereas today, when things are so much better - there is less recognition - if there is any at all.

Some of the new converts from Madagascar (JTA)

One of the hot button issues of the day is conversion to Judaism as it applies to an estimated 300 thousand non Jewish immigrants to Israel. This has been an ongoing – and unresolved issue for some time now.

The problem is as follows. These 300 thousand immigrants are mostly from the former Soviet Union. They think of themselves as Jewish and were persecuted as such in their former homeland. Which is why they made Aliyah. In most cases they are the products of an intermarriage where the mother was not Jewish. If she was converted at all, it was not by Orthodox standards. But the children of these marriages were raised as Jews albeit without actually being observant (for the most part). They are all proud to be so and their emigration to Israel is their ultimate way of expressing that pride.

In most cases they integrated quite well into Israeli secular society believing they were Jews and participating fully in Israeli life including serving in the military. Which in many cases involve risk to their lives – protecting their fellow citizens. And although they were not fully observant, many of them were traditional and practiced Judaism in some form. Such as having a Seder on Pesach and perhaps even fasting on Yom Kippur.

But as far as Halacha (as defined by Orthodoxy) was concerned, they were not Jewish at all – since in Judaism the religion of an individual follows the mother. So if their mother was not Jewish, being raised as a Jew and thinking one is a Jew – doesn’t matter.

This is where the controversy comes in. The religious world agrees that these people require conversions if they are to be considered Jews. The debate is over how to do that. What does it take for someone to convert to Judaism?

Two of the three requirements is a circumcision (if you are male) and immersing in a Mikvah. Everyone in Orthodoxy agrees to this. The third requirement is where the debate comes in.

To briefly sum up the positions of both sides, the vast majority of Poskim require a sincere pledge to be observant. There is apparently a minority opinion that does not require that. Most of the people from Russia that stem from mixed marriages are aren’t observant , and don’t intend to be. So that any kind of mass conversion of people that are not observant would not be valid according to the vast majority of Poskim. This has been standardized by the Charedi world, Israeli Rabbinate and in America, the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA).

But many religious Zionist rabbis in Israel have been pushing back against this requirement. The masses of Russian Jews that think they are Jewish, are fully integrated into society; serve in the military, and have Jewish blood in them (through their father). They argue that all this militates for relying on a leniency for conversion with respect to observance. They believe that for the greater good of the country and society, this is what should be done. (There are other ways around this requirement in certain circumstances which are also controversial – but are beyond the scope of this post).

To the best of my understanding this is what the debate is about.

It seems that we are at an impasse as many Russians like that have undergone conversion using leniencies – for the sake of the Klal. This is the Religious Zionist position as adhered to by organizations like Tzohar. They believe that without converting these over 300 thousand people, a demographic time bomb exists that will undermine the very Jewishness of the state. That – along with the fact that they have Jewish blood via their fathers is enough to use a Kula of a Daas Yachid.

The Charedi position is that a conversion without a commitment to observance is invalid. This is also the position of the Israeli Rabbinate and it is the official position of the RCA (whose conversions are recognized by Israel). They believe that even if the Klal is undermined, that does not justify ignoring a requirement that they believes is vital to the conversion process to the point of invalidating it if it is ignored. (Lip service to observance alone is not enough. One must actually sincerely commit to it in order for a conversion to be valid.)

What happens to the Klal by virtue of a 300 thousand (and growing) non Jews being part of it? What about the sacrifices by the many among them serving in the IDF on dangerous missions? It doesn’t matter since Halacha is what it is - the chips falling where they may!

I can see both side of the issue. But lost in all of this is the fact that even if the Kula was utilized, we will be creating a demographic that – if they are truly Jewish – will be deliberately be violating Halacha – with all the consequences attached to that. Whereby leaving them as non Jews, they do not need to follow anymore than the 7 basic laws of mankind. Which most of them probably already do.

One may ask, should that really be a concern when it comes to saving the Klal? I don’t know. But is is surely something to think about. One wonders why it is all that important to a non observant individual why it should make all that difference to them whether they are Jewish or not? They can be full participants in Israeli society with all their civil rights intact. Shouldn’t the desire to be Jewish include a desire to follow the laws of Judaism? I think it does. If one is serious about becoming a Jew then one needs to study what that means. And once one studies it they can decide if that is what they want to do. If you want to play the game for real, you must follow the rules.

Contrast this with what happened recently in Madagascar. From JTA:

A nascent Jewish community was officially born in Madagascar last month when 121 men, women and children underwent Orthodox conversions…

The conversions, which took place over a 10-day period, were the climax of a process that arose organically five to six years ago when followers of various messianic Christian sects became disillusioned with their churches and began to study Torah.

Through self-study and with guidance from Jewish internet sources and correspondence with rabbis in Israel, they now pray in Sephardic-accented Hebrew and strictly observe the Sabbath and holidays.

How inspiring! How different this is from what is going on in Israel. These people sought truth and found it in Judaism. And they saw that observance is a requirement. Which made it easy to see these conversions as sincere. And made it possible for three Orthodox rabbis to convene a Beis Din (religious court) and convert them all.

Should this not be the requirement for being a Jew? Learning about Judaism understanding what it really means and committing yourself to it? Wouldn’t it be nice if the 300 thousand Russian immigrants actually understood what being Jewish is? That it’s even more than about serving in the army – as important as that is? That to live as a Jew means being observant of the laws God mandated for us?

I don’t know. Right or wrong - for me there is just something off about saying ‘go immerse in a Mikvah and abracadabra – you’re now a Jew’. ‘Continue as before.’

Typical Yeshiva Beis HaMedrash, - growing exponentially every generation

Once again, another observer has noticed the obvious. I say ‘once again’ because she is not the first one to notice it. It has been noticed many times in the past by many people. And yet nothing changes.

In this instance it is the so called Shidduch crisis. The 1 minute audio clip below is as revealing of the problem as any I have ever heard. In it a young woman was asked why a 25 year old friend was not married yet. As though age 25 makes you an old maid. Nonetheless this is how many young women age 25 are seen.

The numbers of young women like that are increasing, despite attempts to reverse the trend. There have been many explanations and attendant solutions for this unfortunate situation. One of the more prominent ones being the age gap – the difference in age between when men and women ready to get married. Which is around 19 for women and 23 for men As the rate of population increase in the Charedi continues more women become available at age 19, than there are men looking to get married born 4 years or so earlier. The solution? Get married at a younger age – thus decreasing the gap.

I have said many time that this solution is not a good idea. I hardly think a male age 23 is mature enough for marriage. Let alone age 19 or 20. Immaturity is a sure prescription for divorce in my view. As always there are many notable exceptions. But that’s what they are. Exceptions.

The quick answer given by this young lady was that the 25 year old has simply not found her ‘Bashert’ (intended). But more to the point she explained the problem the way I have many times. Young Charedi women today are indoctrinated to seek top tier Yeshiva students. They are encouraged to prepare themselves to support their husbands in full time Torah study by being educated or trained in high paying jobs. These young women are taught to seek a husband worthy of that support. And as I’ve said many times, it is a lot easier to want a budding Talmid Chacham than it is to be one. That is where the shortage comes in.

The Chinuch that has evolved in the non Chasidic Charedi world over the past 60 year or so is that every male is made to beleive that his highest calling – and perhaps his only calling – is Torah study. There are no other options given to him. It is all Torah all the time. This has caused a myriad of problems in addition to the Shidduch crisis.– not the least of which is what has come to be known as the ‘Off the Derech’ phenomenon.

Young men whose talents and aptitudes lie elsewhere are not given any opportunity to develop them. They are forced by their circumstances to see full time Torah study as their only path in life. They are indoctrinated not to worry about making a living – since Parnasa comes from God. While it is true that God is the ultimate source of Parnasa, one is nevertheless obligated to do his part in achieving it.

As I have always said, if someone has an aptitude for a profession unrelated to Torah study, that is what he should be encouraged to pursue, and be given some basic educational tools so that he can pursue it.

But since that isn’t happening, there are students that are at best mediocre in their Torah studies and nonetheless follow that path – negating their natural talents. While some can overcome this lack of preparation later in life; get trained and find decent paying jobs, may do not. They end up missing their opportunity to succeed at what that are really good at. In too many other cases there are those that are simply incapable (for a variety of reasons not all of which are not necessarily related to their level of intelligence) of the kind of Torah study taught at Yeshivos. So they completely tune out and become turned off to their Judaism – going OTD or worse.

For their part, young women are given the same message. But instead of telling they must study full time, they are indoctrinated to believe that only those that study full time are worthy of marriage and their support. And that their purpose in life is to support them – thus getting a share in their Torah study. And as noted above - the pool of budding Tamidei Chachamim is relatively small. Thus the so called Shidduch crisis.

I think the Charedi world already knows all this. But they are doing nothing to change the paridigm. The Hashkafa of pushing full time Torah study for men and pushing young women to seek only them for marriage – not only continues, but is getting more intense

Back in my day, all the Charedi schools had excellent secular studies programs. (There were few if any Chasidic schools back then) When I was in 9^th grade in Telshe or example, we studied Shakespeare. As well as all the standard subjects. Like English, math, science, and history (both American and world). We had a 5 day a week (Sunday instead of Friday) program of secular classes lasting 3 hours each day. We had homework. We had a general studies principal – himself a Telzer - who had a college degree.

The Philadelphia Yeshiva (Philly) was known for its excellent Limudei Chol Program as well as its excellent Limudei Kodesh program. Their Rosh HaYeshiva, Rav Eliya Svei famously said that if you’re are going to have a secular studies program – it is no Mitzvah to waste time in it. He therefore made sure it was a good one.

Today, such thinking is denigrated. Many Yeshivos have reduced the time spent on secular studies. Philly now forbids teachers to give homework assignments. And there are more schools than ever popping up that do not offer any seculars studies at all. Those schools are becoming the most valued ones in the Charedi world. It is almost a status symbol to not offer any secular studies. Is it any wonder that so many young people end up staying in Kollel after they get married? Is it any wonder that increasing numbers of them opt for full time Torah study, no matter how good they are at it? Is it any wonder that young women see only the best and brightest among them worthy of marriage? (It is relatively simple to find out who they are in any given Yeshiva.)

The problem is obvious. But they not only refuse to change the system, they won’t even acknowledge it publicly. Instead they are doing everything they can to perpetuate it. Which in turn serves to perpetuate the problems associated with it including the Shiduch crisis.

Why are Yeshivos and seminaries doing this? They are following the example of people like Rav Aharon Kotler who promoted this Hashkafa as the means to recreate in America the world of European Yeshivos destroyed in the Holocaust.

What has happened is that instead of recreating it, it has surpassed Europe to the point of being detrimental to the Klal. We now end up with a lot of mediocrity. Caused in large part due to the narrow focus on only one thing - Torah study. Instead of unbridled growth in quality we now have unbridled growth in quantity.

The European Roshei Yeshiva sought only the best and the brightest for their Yeshivos. Today’s Roshei Yeshiva do not differentiate. In Europe those not invited to be part of a Yeshiva were therefore far more able to find their true calling in life and do what’s necessary to succeed at it. In America where opportunities are even greater, they could succeed even more if allowed to by a paradigm shift to the pre-war European model.

If that happened - young women would very likely be taught to seek men of good character instead of only the best and brightest studiers of Torah. If that happens, the Shidduch crisis will begin to turn around. And the overall welfare of the Charedi world will improve. Will it happen? I doubt it.

Hillary Clinton taking a victory lap last night (Mother Jones)

I believe that Donald Trump, has a more pro Israel point of view than Hillary Clinton. I say this based on everything I’ve read about him… or more precisely what I’ve read about those who advise him on these issues. I am convinced of that despite his off-hand remark about being even handed.

I’m also pretty sure that Trump is not the buffoon or racist bigot he acts like in front of his fans and the camera. I know a lot of people that would beg to differ with me about that. But even if I am right about that – it does not rise to the level of endorsing him for President of the United States.

I obviously consider all of a Presidential candidate’s positions on the major issues of our day. But the issue I weight most heavily is ‘what’s good for the Jews’. I know it’s a cliché, but that is how I feel. (Maybe it’s because of the over 2000 year history of Jewish persecution in the world that is in my DNA. I don’t know.) There aren’t too many countries whose foreign policies matter as much to Israel as does the policy of the United States. A policy that can be of existential import. A slight change in America’s approach to Israel could spell disaster.

But despite my view about Trump probably being better for Israel than Clinton, I cannot in good conscience support him.

So who is the real Trump? One might be tempted to say, ‘What you see is what you get’ with him. But I don’t don’t for a minute believe that he means all of his ridiculous rhetoric. I believe what you see is a man putting on a show for public consumption. A show that panders to the base instincts of prejudice that a lot of people feel.

For instance the prejudice far too many feel against all Muslims. A prejudice based on the constant barrage of Islamic terrorism, especially the kind coming out of ISIS where Americans are beheaded. Unfortunately when people see this and other atrocities happening all the time they tend to generalize - painting all Muslims this way. Which is the definition of racism. And that is what Trump panders to. He knows exactly what he’s doing. He is good at it. It got him the nomination.

The irony is that those that support him don’t see his statements as racist. They see instead a man unafraid to be politically incorrect. A straight shooter who is telling it like is. Finally there is a candidate that says what they think.

I believe that the real Trump has not shown up yet. And he won’t show up unless and until he is elected. We cannot therefore know what any of his policies will be. Pandering is not policy.

Which is one reason among many that I can’t support him. Although he is not a racist, the fact that he panders to racism, is not someone I want leading the country. Not to mention the fact that he has a penchant for vindictiveness - lashing out at his opponents and even threatening them.

Like the time he said not long ago that if is denied the nomination at the Republican National Convention by some slick maneuvering - his people may riot. (…with a phony disclaimer that it would not be what he wants but that people will do so spontaneously for being denied.) That he can appeal to mob violence to get his way makes him a bully and in my view a threat to the nation and even to world peace. Can anyone imagine the mob violence he might trigger if someone from an ethnic minority insults him? Or what he might do if a world leader insults him? Do we want someone like this to have his finger on the nuclear trigger?

And then there’s Trump University – a scam if there ever was one. From the New Yorker:

Schnackenberg, who worked in Trump’s office at 40 Wall Street, testified that “while Trump University claimed it wanted to help consumers make money in real estate, in fact Trump University was only interested in selling every person the most expensive seminars they possibly could.” The affidavit concludes, “Based upon my personal experience and employment, I believe that Trump University was a fraudulent scheme, and that it preyed upon the elderly and uneducated to separate them from their money.”

And Trump had the gall to say that the Judge in this case is prejudiced against him because he is of Mexican descent?! We are a better people than that. We should not be putting a con-man with no ethics into office, no matter what his policies will be. Even if they are better polices than his opponent’s. Even on the question of Israel.

I could go on. But if this isn’t enough to stop people from voting for him, nothing is.

Which brings me to his opponent, Hillary Clinton. Mrs. Clinton secured the Democratic Party's nomination for President yesterday . Her first reaction was to claim a victory for feminism. As though being the first woman to be a major party candidate is going to do anything for women. A Clinton Presidency will do nothing for women. They will still be underpaid for the same work that men do. And there will still be a double standard in the way men and women are treated in society.

That a woman could become President of the United States is not some novel idea whose time has come. The people of the United States would have easily elected a woman to that office a long time ago – had the right one run for the job. Claiming this to be some sort of feminist victory is at best ingenuous. And it is one reason of many that turns me off of her. And I consider myself an old fashioned feminist who rails against the inequality between men and women that still exists in many areas today.

Being President has nothing to do with one’s gender. Can anyone imagine Golda Meir saying that her election as Prime Mister of Israel was a victory for feminism? Of course not. Her election was a win for the people and the State of Israel. The fact that she was a woman was completely irrelevant. That is how a candidate should run today. Not as some sort of phony symbol for feminist achievement.

If one considers what her policies might be, I think it is safe to say that she will shift leftward because of her primary opponent, Bernie Sanders. She saw his populist socialism resonating with a lot of people that have in the past tuned out of the election process. She will pander to them… and probably govern that way too.

Clinton’s policies with respect to Israel will probably be along the lines of her immediate predecessor, Barack Obama. I would have preferred a friendlier approach than what we have experienced under him to Israel’s elected leader. He is after all the longest serving prime minster in Israel’s history. That surely would have been the case under any Republican President. Which probably includes Donald Trump.

Her holier than thou attitude about the progressive agenda and her dour speaking style is not something I want to constantly see in a President. She looks just plain mean and angry when she speaks. This does not inspire optimism. It inspires malaise. (Remember Jimmy Carter’s malaise speech?)

Then there are her legal problems when as Secretary of State she carelessly used an unsecured server and private e-mail account to transmit sensitive information (later to become classified). And there is her terrible handling before and after of the Benghazi massacre at the American embassy there. Which cost the lives of the American ambassador and other Americans.

Needless to say, that under any other circumstances, I would not be voting for one such as this. I believe that many Americans feel the same way. These two candidates have the highest negative ratings of any Presidential candidate in American history. And yet, I am endorsing her for President – for one simple reason. She is the lesser of two evils. God help us all.

Scene of yesterday's terrorist attack in Tel Aviv (Times of Israel)

“It’s about the settlements.” This is the constant refrain from Israel’s critics. Even friendly ones like the US. If only the settlement activity would stop, there would be peace on earth. (Or at least in the Middle East.)

Last night in Tel Aviv 2 Palestinian terrorists from the West Bank sat down in an open air restaurant and after finishing their dessert they got up, took out their pistols and started opening fire on the Jewish patrons eating there, killing 4 and wounding numerous others.

I’m sure that someone somewhere among our ‘friends’ will be commenting on this by expressing sympathy for the victims and their families and somewhere along the way will imply that it’s Israel’s fault for being an oppressive occupier of Palestinians on the West Bank. And that the only way to solve this problem will be to implement a 2 state solution as soon as possible. They might embellish those thoughts by saying that the fact that there has been no progress along those lines is what causes these young frustrated Palestinians to act out in such vicious and cruel ways. In my book, that’s called blaming the victim.

This is not to say that I am in favor of settlement expansion. Most people that read this blog often enough will know that I am opposed to it. But what they may not realize is that I do not believe for a minute that settlement activity or even occupying the West bank is the real source of the problem. The real source is decades of indoctrinating young Arabs - all across the Middle East to hate the Jewish people. A hatred exacerbated by promoting as truth anti Semitic books like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Not long ago Egypt ran a miniseries based on that book. It was widely watched, and no doubt believed. In fact Hitler’s book, ‘Mein Kampf’ has become a popular read in Middle Eastern countries.

I have said all this before. Jews (not Israelis or Zionists – but Jews) are portrayed as evil people much the way Hitler Portrayed them prior to – and during the Holocaust. One can see political cartoons about Jews that are reminiscent of the ones Nazi Germany used to sell to their masses the idea of how evil the Jews truly are! Even some of their children’s programming is antisemitic. Arab political leaders, schools, madrases, and media of all kinds - all across the Middle East have often portrayed the Jews as a blood sucking evil cabal out to take over the world by all means necessary. I have even seen Arab political commentators on air - resurrecting the old European blood libel about Jews killing Christians for their blood to be used ritually in our Matzos.

This is what motivates terrorists. For them, there is no such thing as an innocent Jew. So killing a few of us while we sit peacefully in a restaurant is perfectly ethical. That some of Arab Muslims are willing to die in that cause is just their way of serving God. For them it is a Mitzvah. One is rewarded in heaven for dying in the cause of killing Jewish (or any) infidels. Especially if they are members of an evil cabal that have usurped their land. Land which of course includes even pre 67 Israel. Tel Aviv is no different to them than the West Bank. We are all settlers, no matter where we live.

Those terrorists yesterday that stood up and shot a few Jews were not some thrill killers with no conscience. These were not sociopaths. They were soldiers of God in the fight against the Jews (which they misleadingly call Zionists for public consumption so that the world will not think they are antisemitic).

And how does the world feel about all this?

Just a few days ago in a Forward interview with Susan Rice (who I consider a friend of Israel that had defended it many times when she was the US ambassador to the UN) she mentioned US opposition to the settlements and the deterioration of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians. Adding that the US considers the 2 State solution to be the only realistic one and blaming both sides for the impasse and the violence. Which implies a sort of moral equivalency. And as the occupying power on the West Bank, the additional implication is that Israel has a greater share of the blame. Not a word about the above-mentioned real source of the problem.

And as reported in the Jerusalem Post - the world media doesn’t help matters. Especially those with a pro Palestinian bias. Like CNN, the BBC, the Telegraph and the Guardian . Not once did they mention terrorism. They simply reported it as a shooting.

CNN later apologized and modified it by using the word ‘terrorists’ but they put it in quotes. Which as we all know means they aren’t really terrorists at all. They are a people with legitimate grievances. And acts like these are those of desperate people carrying out a mission to make themselves heard as the victims of the ‘brutal’ and illegal Israeli occupation - in the only way they know how. By murdering innocent people.

That is the subliminal message of those quotation marks. They are not really terrorists. They are an aggrieved people. And just like Susan Rice - not a word about the real problem: Rampant decades long indoctrinated Palestinian antisemitism! (At least one journalist got it right, Greta Van Susteren of Fox News told it like it is on her Facebook account. Not sure why she didn’t say so on her program.)

Yes, I am opposed to settlement activity, But not because I believe it to be the cause of terrorism like the one in Tel Aviv today. I am opposed because it exacerbates the problem and upsets our allies, including the US. And there is nothing gained by it other than to assert our authority.

I am also quite aware that West Bank Palestinians do not have it easy. I am aware that they are treated by a different standard that Israelis are. A much harsher one. Which makes life very difficult for them. But the reason Israel treats them this way is not because they hate Arabs. It’s because this is the best way they know how to provide security for their people. It is from Palestinian ranks that most terrorists come.

In theory, I am in favor of a 2 state solution – if it would end Palestinian hostilities once and for all. Land for peace. But I am more convinced than ever that a 2 state solution cannot come about until the Arabs stop teaching their children to hate us. That has not happened yet. And it will take a least a generation to change that paradigm – even if they were to commit to it.

There is no evidence that they will do that any time soon. So the status quo must continue. And unfortunately so too will the violence. Which is sad for everyone. But at least Israel will continue to exist and thrive as it continues to do what’s necessary to defend itself.

There seems to be some confusion among Orthodox Jews about homosexuality and gender identity. I think that these are two separate issues that need to be dealt with separately. I am going to limit this discussion to homosexuality. All I will say about gender identity issues is that we should treat all human beings with the dignity required to all beings created in God’s image. And not judge them. Judging people is God’s domain. Not ours. God only requires of us to believe in Him, His Torah, and to follow His law.

The question is, how do we apply His law to people whose sexual orientation is to be attracted only to members of the same sex? I have written about this before. Many times. My views can be encapsulated in the following popular phrase: Hate the sin, love the sinner. We are all after all sinners in need of constant repentance. Gay people included.

The problem is in how society in general treats them. Until the 70s, homosexuality was considered an abnormal psychological disorder. As such gay people tended to ‘stay in the closet’ for fear of being ostracized. In the 70s the American Psychological Association discarded that description and determined that homosexuality was not a disorder but instead an orientation. Things changed and a lot of people who were gay came out of the closet. But societal attitudes were not so quick to embrace this new description of homosexuality. And still today there is plenty of prejudice towards them. Which is unfair.

It’s unfair because whether it is nature or nurture that is responsible for same sex attraction, (..and I tend to think it is a little of both) there is little doubt that these feelings are almost – if not entirely - impossible to change. If someone is attracted to members of the same sex, that will very likely stay a lifelong attraction.

What I will say next may surprise some people – even though I have said it before. There is no sin in being attracted to the members of the same sex. People can’t help who they are attracted to. Yes, the Torah says that for a man to lie with another man in the manner of a woman is considered an abomination. And that it is an act worthy of a court ordered death penalty – if properly warned and witnessed. But an attraction is not an act. Attractions are not punished at all.

The problem is that much of society will look at a gay person with revulsion. There are I think 2 reasons for that. One is that it is a vestige of the past leftover from the days when it was considered abnormal behavior. But more importantly the biblical prohibition referenced above is generalized to the individual and not the behavior. This too is unfair. And I firmly believe that such attitudes have contributed to the abnormally high suicide rate among gay people. Which is something we should all consider when discussing these things.

It is incumbent upon us all to treat every human being with dignity and respect, regardless of who they are attracted to.

How far do we go with this? That is one of the hotly debated issues right now. Since the 70s we have gone from a society that was aghast at homosexual behavior to one in which gay marriage is now the law of the land. If what statisticians say about the American people is true, most of us are in favor of it. There are however a huge number of people – myself among them - that are still opposed to it.

I believe the following is the correct approach. One must treat homosexuals no different than heterosexuals, but one must not treat what the Torah forbids as though it was permitted. And certainly not place a societal imprimatur on it by - for example - sanctioning gay marriage. One should not celebrate a relationship that tends towards violation of Torah law. Acceptance of an individual with same sex attraction does not mean acceptance of a lifestyle based on it.

Which leads me to Eshel. Here is how they define their mission on their website (edited for brevity):

Eshel’s mission is to create community and acceptance for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Jews and their families in Orthodox communities…(It) provides hope and a future for Orthodox LGBT women, men, and teens… (It) creates bridges into Orthodox communities to foster understanding and support… (and) helps LGBT Orthodox people pursue meaningful lives that encompass seemingly disparate identities while also fulfilling Jewish values around family, education, culture, and spirituality…

I see nothing wrong with their mission as stated. But I have to question whether part of their goal is to normalize the behavior itself. Full acceptance implies that. So that when an Orthodox Shul sponsors an LBGT weekend – as did two such Shuls recently, it appears to be not only be accepting of gay people, but of their lifestyle as well. And that is tantamount to approving behavior that the Torah clearly forbids (even if they don’t say it explicitly). I therefore consider it a mistake for them to have done so.

It would be one thing to have a forum where these issues are discussed… and have a representative from Eshel present their views. It is another to have a Shabbaton implying full acceptance of their lifestyle. Which often includes behavior that is clearly forbidden by the Torah.

So in essence I agree with Rabbis Dovid and Reuven Feinstein who opposed it as reported by Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer in a Cross Currents article. Homosexuality should not be celebrated as a lifestyle choice.

But I also think that how these rabbis characterized Eshel is incorrect – if one is to believe the above mentioned mission statement. Eshel does not ‘demand that we change the Torah’s timeless standards to accord with prevalent secular attitudes’ as those rabbis said in their appeal to those synagogues. If their mission is purely one of acceptance of individuals - it ought to be applauded.

I’m sure that those rabbis would agree with that. It is only what they thought Eshel was doing they do not accept. If that were true, I would oppose them too.

I’m also sure that that both Rabbis Feinstein would agree with Rabbi Aharon Feldman, who said the following (as paraphrased by Rabbi Gordimer):

Navigating the delicate path between forbidden homosexual activity and being a committed, frum Jew, Rav Feldman creates a blueprint and lays forth a mandate for such a person to remain in the community and to be a vital part of it – not by in any way legitimizing homosexual activity, but by moving beyond it and committing to a life of Torah and mitzvos and productivity for Yiddishkeit and K’lal Yisroel.

I could not agree more.

Conversations

Being Blind to Corruption Does Not Equal Compassion

The Challenge of Integrating Orthodoxy

It’s Going to be President Donald J. Trump

How Many More Are There Like Him?

Honoring a Ban in the Breach

Shomrim – the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Where is the Real Center?

Being Jewish is Not Enough

Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein Responds

Orthodoxy Does Not Mean Extremism

The 400 Pound Gorilla

Reasonable Accommodation or a Constitutional Violation?

The Rupture Began with Reform

‘Printed in E. Israel’ and Other Slights

Mass Conversions to Judaism

Full Time Torah Study is Not for Everyone

The Lesser of Two Evils

Terrorism and Peace

Eshel - A Force for Acceptance or for Change?