Emes Ve-Emunah

The Two Satmar Rebbes: Brothers Aharon and Zalman Teitelbaum (5TJT)

“Bibi Netanyahu shame on you!” These words were heard on the streets of New York recently. I know a lot of people are – shall we say, not completely enamored of the current prime minster of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu.

That is an understatement. There is actually a visceral hatred of the man by his political opponents. Even among American Jews that otherwise support Israel - I have heard the vilest of comments about him. He is a hated man. How strange it must be to support a country but hate the leader democratically elected by its own people. One that has served as its leader longer than any other Prime Minister, including David Ben Gurion.

I understand why some people feel that way. They believe that his words and actions have done much to alienate world leaders – no less the one that leads this country, President Barack Obama. He is a individual whose primary interest is in promoting himself. He would sell his mother to the devil to secure his position as Prime Minister. (I completely disagree with them for reasons beyond the scope of this post.)

I agree that he is an ambitious politician. And that he will do whatever it takes to stay in power. But that doesn’t really make him much different than any other politician. That’s why even Presidential elections in the United States are filled with negative advertising by both candidates against each other. They will stretch the truth to cast their opponents in the most negative light possible. At no time was this truer than it is now. But this election is certainly not the first time negative ads have been used. It has been going on for decades. Politicians are all birds of a feather when it comes to using unethical means to win elections.

Netanyahu bashers might find some comfort in Satmar’s feelings about him. The opening words of this post were chanted by very young Satmar children in New York. In two separate incidents. One was from children in a summer camp affiliated with one Satmar Rebbe (R’ Zalman Teltelbaum) and one affiliated with the other Satmar Rebbe (R’ Aharon Teitelbaum). And they backed up this chant with eggs. (See video below) From YWN:

(T)he young children are all given eggs and when the mock vehicle with the “Prime Minister of Israel” drives through the crowd, the children pelt the vehicle – covering it in eggs. Chants of “Bibi Netanyahu shame on you!” can be heard as the children cover the vehicle in eggs.

I wonder how Netanyahu haters feel about this. Would they join Satmar in this endeavor? Given the chance would they pelt his vehicle with eggs and scream “Bibi Netanyahu shame on you!”? I hope not. I doubt that they want to be seen as aligned with Satmar? And yet, when it comes to bashing the Prime Minister, they are of like mind it seems.

What makes this particularly egregious is that it was not a spontaneous demonstration of protest against a prime minister they disapprove of because of his policies. It was a Chinuch lesson. The entire event was staged to indoctrinate the very young children of Satmar to viscerally hate the Jewish State and its leaders. It was not so much an anti Netanyahu protest. He was just a surrogate for the State!

This is the legacy that Satmar founder, R’ Yoel Teitlebaum, has left his people. A people that may very well be the fastest growing demographic in all of Jewry. It is a legacy of hatred. A legacy that generates an international Chilul HaShem. One that generates the worst epithets at other Jews that do not toe the Satmar line on Israel.

I know that Satmar does many good things. They have some wonderful service organizations where their Chasidim donate time and money (from the wealthier of their Chasidim) to help their fellow Jews. Like their famous Bikur Cholim society that visits the sick and tries to help them out in any way they possible can. Regardless of their level of observance.

And yet I still cannot understand how anyone can support people that indoctrinate their youth to hate fellow Jews they disagree with about Israel. Teaching them at such an early age - not only shout hatred – but to act on it. That they are otherwise nice people does not erase this very egregious Chilul HaShem. Doing a good deed does not erase doing a bad deed. When that bad deed is a Chilul HaShem, there is nothing that can erase it. (They of course think it is a Kiddush HaShem.)

It is not often that find myself agreeing with editorial comments of a Charedi website like YWN. (Although I probably do so more often than people might think.) But in this instance I agree with their closing comments completely:

If anyone wonders where the deep hatred comes from to yell Nazi at other Jews, to have the Chutzpah to call 100-year-old Mahigei Hador “reshoyim” and “lowlives”, it begins at age 5 and ends in violent Hafganos in Meah Shearim, where public property is destroyed, the lives of tens of thousands are inconvenienced and people are violently attacked.

Will we be seeing more images like this? (VIN)

There is good news and there is bad news. First the good news: Charedim are joining the Israeli army (IDF) in greater numbers than ever. Now the bad news (See: good news).

What I of course mean is that this statistic is either good or bad depending on your perspective. If you think that joining the army is a ticket to destruction of your soul (which is the view of most mainstream Charedi leaders) than you will obviously see this as bad news. If you think that joining the army is an obligation to be shared by of all able bodied men no matter what their Hashkafa, then it is a good thing.

To the uninformed observer, it might be perplexing as to why anyone would see serving one’s country in the armed services as anything but patriotic. And certainly not as a path to the destruction of one’s soul.

Well, there are some things to worry about in that department. Especially if you are Charedi. This was expressed recently by Rabbi Tuvia Schulzinger, one of the leaders in the fight against drafting Charedim. In a short Arutz Sheva article he said the following:

(I)t's clear to everyone that those haredim who join the army do not remain haredi. "Whoever says otherwise is simply lying. In our city of Kiryat Atta, out of 10 graduates of the local school, 3 joined the IDF, 2 in the 'Nachal haredi' and 1 in the Givati brigade. Two out of the three became completely secular and one is semi-religious. 3,200 draftees in 2016 means 60 buses worth of lost souls."

"This piece of data is sickening, the Kollels [post-marriage Torah study institutions] in the smaller cities are emptying. I think that all haredi public figures and Rabbis need to reassess things because it can't go on like this.

Rabbi Schulzinger then lamented that none of the Charedi newspapers were talking about this ‘calamity’, claiming that if this trend continues there will be nothing left of the Charedi community.

I disagree with his assessment. Even assuming the numbers he cites are accurate (which is far from clear) I do not think the Charedi community will disappear. I believe the opposite will happen. They will thrive. They will however have to readjust their paradigm of full time Torah study for all men for as long as possible without any distractions.

They will have to return to the glorious model of the past, where the best minds that are suited for Torah study will do so. And the rest will go where their innate talents lead them, while being Koveiah Itim - studying Torah in regularly established time periods. They will spend time studying Torah full time for a year or two prior to army service, do their army service, after which they will find jobs. For which they will get training. Hopefully there will be an additional adjustment in their educational paradigm. One that will lead to establishing a few Yeshivos that offer a secular studies program based on the American Charedi model. This will be the ideal. Charedim can continue living as they choose, serve their country, support their families and contribute to the economy.

But what about the Nisayon - where your faith and commitment to observance is tested - that Rabbi Schulzinger refers to? A Nisayon that one encounters when joining the army?

I think it exists to an extent. I know people to whom this has happened. But I don’t know how pervasive it is. I believe it depends on how committed one is to Yiddishkeit. A good education will protect most people from the pull of a secular lifestyle one finds in the army.

The best example of that is the Hesder student. Through their education as Religious Zionists they become highly motivated soldiers. They opt for a lengthy program that alternates periods of Torah study with army service. I tend to doubt that there is a significant number of them that go OTD – if there are any at all. They are committed to God and country.

And then there is Nachal Charedi, which provides a Charedi environment. Recruits have no secular lifestyle pull at all.

In his example of Charedim going OTD, Rabbi Schulzinger’s included someone that joined Nachal Charedi, implying that it does. I strongly doubt that serving in Nachal Chaedi caused him to go OTD. That he found an example of that does not make it the rule. Anyone can go OTD at any time in his life. There are tons of reasons someone will do that. Joining Nachal Charedi is surely not one of them.

There are those that might argue that the typical draft age of 18 is when an adolescent is highly vulnerable to Arayos – temptations of the flesh. A Charedi recruit not used to being around women, will come into contact with Chayalot, female soldiers. Making them highly vulnerable to that type of temptation. I think that is a legitimate concern.

But Nachal Charedi doesn’t have women in their units. So that problem is solved for the most part. Besides, Charedim will be drafted at an older age. Since they will be spending some time learning in Yeshivos post high school they will be older and a bit more mature when they serve. Some of them may even be married by then, reducing the impact that coming into contact with Chayaolt might have.

So at the end of the day, I would tell Rabbi Schulzinger not to worry. Charedim will not disappear at all. Neither will Kollelim. They will still exist and they will flourish. There will be less of them, but they will be better Kollelim. Instead of elite Talmidei Chachamim (Talmudic scholars) being unfairly disparaged as parasites by far too many people, they will be respected as true rabbinic scholars and leaders of the future. By more people in more diverse segments of Judaism than ever. And with greater communal acceptance and more people working, it will be easier to support them financially. Allowing them to earn a living wage. So the way I see it, it is a win/win for everybody.

Guest Contribution by Rabbi Baruch Turkieltaub*

One among similar portraits once available at Walmart

A few days ago, I discussed a deplorable facet of Satmar Chinuch with respect to the State of Israel.

In short I condemned the indoctrination of their very young children to hate the State of Israel and its leaders. I also condemned how in their summer camps - they taught them to act on that animus by setting up a mock scenario of the Israeli Prime Minister being driven in a car though a crowd - and giving campers eggs with which to pelt his vehicle while shouting, ‘Bibi Netanyahu, shame on you!’

That generated the following communication from a prominent Charedi personality who shared some misgivings about the broader Charedi community. For obvious reasons he prefers to remain anonymous. I have featured his thoughts here before. I truly value his opinion even when we disagree. In this instance as in many instances before, I thought them worthy of sharing with my readers. So I asked for - and received - permission to post it as a guest contribution. His thoughts follow:

I agree with you about the horrific legacy that contemporary Satmar displays as if it is the will of Reb Yoelish. We might fault him for leaving that impression, if it is for us to have such opinions. Personally, I shudder at the nastiness with the ensuing chilul Hashem that are dominant features in present day Satmar.

However, I am one that does not see this as (only) a Satmar problem, though they certainly have their unique portrayal of a much larger issue. The real problem flaunts itself in every frum community, and each specific community has its own flavor.

Frum Yidden have flipped around the missions and goals, affording far more significance to trivia, and trivializing the real ones.

Our Ani Maamins order things properly, We make no mention of neviim until after we have made it thoroughly clear about Hashem’s dominance, His Torah, etc. HKB”H (God) has never had a problem with Yidden having a leader. After all, He created them. He designated Moshe Rabbeinu, set up Aharon to be Kohen Gadol, nesiim, 70 zekeinim, etc. Each leader has a specific task list and responsibility. None of them was to approach the importance of HKB”H Himself.

As a community, we have watched this wither away. We glorify, almost worship photos of all of these leaders. Every event has become the subject of numerous photographers, from nichum aveilim, to simchos, Chanukah licht, hatoras nedarim, Kinos on Tish’a B’Av, etc.

This has come at the steep price of shrinking the respect given to HKB”H. I recently commented to a good friend that a quick walk though the buildings of their mosdos reveals a substantial number of large, framed photos of their rebbe (estimate anywhere between 25-40). In all of those buildings, just how many Shivisis are found? (The signs that say שויתי ה'לנגדי תמיד. They can glorify their rebbe. But do their yeshivas push the agenda of Emunoh in Hashem?)

We have regressed to a childish “hero worship” that has extended far beyond the concepts of Kavod HaTorah, Emunas Tzaddikim, or any of the great maamorim about the role of the tzaddik that are found in the many sifrei chassidus (in particular the Noam Elimelech). The secular teenager who adorns the walls of his room with posters of various celebrities, whether actors, sports figures, etc., is quite similar to the obsession with photos of Gedolim.

Reb Yoelish had his shittah about Zionism. I have followed others with different shittos, and I can respect his. But the nonsense we view today is not truly his shittah at all. It is an obsession, one that makes the vilifying Zionism the most important mitzvah, which is a grave distortion of the true shittah.

Neturei Karta that began with a mission to safeguard the kedusha has turned into a hate group, which has flipped over Torah values on its head.

Some years ago, I heard a story that a Satmar chossid informed the rebbe (Reb Yoelish) that he had a nephew who was in IDF and was killed in battle. Reb Yoelish began to cry. This chossid then told the rebbe that he thought he would make him happy with the news. The Rebbe was enraged. A Yid was killed and I should be happy!? The Chassidim seem to have failed miserably in getting the message.

I have been personally embarrassed at what the Litvishe velt has done to their Gedolim. Almost none of them ever say shiurim anymore. Very, very little of their wisdom or learning is shared with us. All they are busy with is “photo-ops”. Appearances at simchos, where they are given (often well deserved) kibudim, visits to everywhere where they are followed by teams of cameramen, and other events where their appearances involve less from them than candidates seeking election. The chitzoniyus is all there. And we are addicted to viewing all the photos in virtually every single publication, from print, to digital. I question whether all this is contributing anything positive to our existence. I fear that we have violated the Torah prohibition of לא תעשה לך פסל וכל תמונה.

The “pomp and glamour” of many events, particularly weddings of celebrity families is inciting. I am apt to recall the wedding of Prince Charles, and the extravagance that ended in divorce and pain for all. There is an air of competition that has no place in Klal Yisroel. Does anyone really believe that this fulfills Ratzon Hashem?

Satmar misplaces their energy into this anti-Zionism nonsense. Others divert their energies into other things of dubious value.

This is one of the challenging nisyonos of today’s generation. Everything must look good for the pictures. Have you noticed the many photos of people of stature dancing at weddings? When was the last one that exhibited a smile? I always see them scowling, as if they are busy in dveikus with HKB”H by doing the mitzvah of being mesameyach a chosson.

How ‘terrible’ it might be if they were happy for the simcha and indicated this with a facial expression of joy! It would be awful for the pictures. Is this where we have fallen? Just what chinuch do we give our children? Is it about Torah, or have we shrunk to the “hero worship” like the sports stars?

* Not his real name

Zev Farber, clearly labeled an Apikores by YCT

Zev Farber is an Apikores, a heretic. This unambiguous statement by YCT Talmud Chair, Rabbi Y’soscher Katz, is a welcome clarification of YCT’s acceptable parameters of Jewish theology. Zev Farber is an Apikores because of his characterization of our biblical patriarchs as fictional – never having existed.)

I for one was very gratified to hear one of YCT’s top faculty members say this. It similar to an earlier statement made by YCT President, Rabbi Asher Lopatin. How to deal with heretics in our midst is where I might differ with YCT. But at least the theology itself is clear.

For me at least, that makes YCT’s theology - Orthodox. If one believes in that theology and is observant, they are Orthodox. However, I still have major issues with some of the things YCT does, has said, or supported. (For reasons that are beyond the scope of this post.)

I believe that Rabbi Katz is a Yorei Shomayim - a God fearing Jew. This is what I got from an interview with him by Rabbi Dovid Lichtenstein on his radio show ‘Headlines’.

And yet, he says things which are problematic. That he does so L’Shma (which I believe to be the case) does not mean that his approach is OK. The fact is much of what he says and advocates is not accepted at all by mainstream Orthodoxy.

But it helps to understand what his rationale is for doing things the way he does. There is one word for it. Kiruv. That’s right. The sole purpose of YCT is Kiruv. Reaching out to a segment of Jewry that would otherwise reject observance.

These are bright, educated Jews that have little to no religious background but may be drawn to the beauty of an observant lifestyle. And yet they have been heavily influenced by the culture, morals, and ethics of our time. Which in many cases contradicts some of the things written in the Torah (and its interpretation by rabbis throughout the generations).

These Jews cannot reconcile their values with those of the Torah. For them issues like egalitarianism or gay rights are seen as positive values and the Torah’s condemnation of them is seen as archaic, unethical, unfair, and immoral. They might also value modern scholarship of the bible that rejects the belief in a ‘Single Author’ in favor of multiple authors at different times. Rabbi Katz maintains that if we do not validate their feelings in some way, they will be lost. Since 90% of Jewry is not observant, we need to make some changes in the way we reach out to them. It’s hard to argue with that.

Where I part company with him is in how we do that. Using shock value to get their attention may work. Like when he said in a Facebook post that a conversation about the events at Sinai by the ‘4 sons’ in the Hagadah never happened. That he clarified it by saying that the conversation never happened; that the 4 sons are mythical; but that the events actually did - can still lead to a misunderstanding that implies the events themselves never happened.

Another example which is dwelt upon in that interview is in how he says we should approach gay rights. First he qualifies his approach by considering it appropriate to speak with two faces. One to the outside world. And one to ourselves .

When speaking to those of us that are believers and practitioners of Halacha, we are clear about the forbidden nature of homosexual relations. It is in the Torah and there is no question about that. But when speaking in public to non Jews or secular Jews, we put a positive spin on it by approving of things like gay marriage. What we should be saying, he says, is that opposition to gay rights is a denial of human rights.

This, he continues, is not contradictory to the Torah because it is not advocating or approving forbidden homosexual acts. All it does is approve formalizing in secular ways the companionship between members of the same sex.

In other words we are just looking at the reality of our world today and expressing a way to treat gay people humanely. Rabbi Katz adds that of course we would never speak that way to religious Jews. Nor would he perform a gay marriage himself. He was once asked to do that by a gay couple. He told them he would not do it because it there is no such thing as a gay marriage in Halacha.

The problem with an attitude like this is that it is extremely misleading. A prominent rabbi telling the secular world that Judaism supports gay marriage implies that we accept all facets of it – including the forbidden act itself. That he might explain it as supporting only formally legalizing companionship and not endorsing the actual homosexual act is not what people hear.

We cannot reach out to Jews by leaving the false impression that modern ethics and morals trump what the Torah clearly says. It is dishonest. One must tell the truth about what the Torah says. We can’t be two faced. We can’t fudge it. Observance based on a lie is not observance at all. It would be like keeping Kosher for health reasons. If you don’t eat a cheeseburger because you don’t think it’s healthy, you have not observed Kashrus.

Telling one group of people what they want to hear while telling another group of people what they want to hear is doublespeak and not an ethical way to reach out to people.

Still, I lament the fact that the left wing of Orthodoxy has gone to lengths that have caused it to be rejected as legitimate by virtually all of mainstream Orthodoxy in America. We do need to do what Rabbi Katz says and reach out to this type of Jew. But you can’t do that by rejecting traditional values that have been accepted for centuries, just because they don’t fit the times. Nor should it be done by fudging the truth about Halacha.

How sad it is that YCT Musmachim cannot be accepted. YCT does an excellent job in actually training their students how to minister to their congregations. I understand that their practical rabbinics courses are superb! Something that all Semicha programs would do well to emulate.

But YCT has crossed too many lines.

I only wish Rabbi Lopatin would have done what I thought he would when he accepted his position as YCT president. To pull back on the reins of its leftward move; and even pull it back a bit the right. But he has done the opposite – which makes its acceptability by mainstream Orthodoxy less likely than ever.

YCT head, Rabbi Asher Loaptin

I reject it. I reject the hijacking of the Modern Orthodox label by Yeshiva Chovevei Torah (YCT). That’s because I define it in far different terms than they do.

YCT head, Rabbi Asher Lopatin has of late eschewed the Open Orthodox label. I don’t blame him. It has been the source of much controversy in Orthodox circles. In some cases it has been called heretical. Based on interviews I have heard I am convinced that it is not. But that has not stopped the controversy surrounding them.

Changing your name does not change who you are. They are still controversial. YCT can perhaps say they are part of a larger group of Modern Orthodoxy. But they cannot say they are the sum and substance of it. I submit that they are not really Modern Orhtodox at all but Open Orthodox as they have claimed in the past. (A term coined by YCT founder, Rabbi Avi Weiss).

I consider myself to be a Modern Orthodox Jew. We do not see Modern Orthodoxy as a movement. We see it as a natural outgrowth of Judaism’s encounter with the modern world. And we see that encounter in a positive way.

We see the world and ask, how can we benefit from what it has to offer? And then we attempt to find out by studying both its academics and its culture… and applying the lessons learned to our way of life. Which will enhance our Avodas HaShem (i.e. serving God).

This is not an original idea. It was first conceived by Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when he formulated his philosophy of Torah Im Derech Eretz (TIDE). He truly believed that the modern non Jewish world has many positive things to contribute. And when he found it, he promoted it as an ideal for the Jewish people. Which is why he famously extolled the virtues of German poet, philosopher, physician, historian, and playwright, Friedrich Schiller. His view was that any source that can enhance our service to God was a legitimate source to study and incorporate into our lives.

American Modern Orthodoxy has a different origin sourced not so much in Hashkafa as it is in circumstance. The Jewish world that dominated early America was very limited religiously. There was little Jewish culture at all and no formal schools of Jewish education at any level.

As immigration increased over the years, religious life began to be rekindled by the newer immigrants who arrived here more religiously inclined. But the melting pot society that was America until recent times was a powerful force. In a country where freedom prevailed unlike any other, the children of these new immigrants Jews were quick to abandon religion in favor of becoming American and living the American dream.

It didn’t help that it was typical of that time for people to work on Shabbos. In many cases a religious Jew could not find or keep a job if he did not work on that day. So as much as these new immigrants wanted to be observant, many of them succumbed to the pressures of supporting their families with the security of not losing their jobs. So they reluctantly worked on Shabbos.

They nevertheless wanted their children to remain observant. But in most cases the children saw that as hypocritical and soon abandoned it all– rejecting any form of observance while chasing the American dream all the way. Meanwhile Jewish education in America was in its infancy.

And yet, there were Jews that struggled to retain their observance. Willing to put up with multiple firings or working at menial jobs at very low pay. This was the environment of the observant Amercian Jew. Little to no Jewish education, living in a modern culture with liberal values and customs tugging at their children’s hearts. It was a struggle to be observant in live in a society which by definition was to assimilate everyone into its culture and values.

Even observant Jews became acculturated and adopted the American way of life. Their level of observance was limited by their own limited education and the pull of the assimilationist society. This, I believe is how American Modern Orthodoxy evolved. It was not an intellectual process but a cultural one that combined modernity with observance.

The lack of a solid Jewish education and the pull of the culture meant that their observance that by today’s standards was minimal. Many things crept into Orthodoxy that would be frowned upon by most observant Jews today. Like Orthodox Shuls hosting mixed dancing affairs.

Obviously this is a bit of an oversimplification. But I think it more or less describes the evolution of Modern Orthodoxy in America.

A cultural evolution of Modern Orthodoxy cannot be the definition of a Hashkafa. A Hashkafa must have an ideology. I think we have to go back to its Hirschean roots in order to define it as a Hashkafa.

At this point I would note that adherents of Hirschean TIDE take strong issue with being called Modern Orthodox. But I think it is fair to call a philosophy that puts a positive spin on both observance; and modern education and culture, Modern Orthodox.

I do understand their objection, however. They define it the way it evolved in America as a cultural phenomenon not based in an ideology. They do not see TIDE as modern, but as the best way to serve God. I would say that it is really both.

Modern Orthodoxy as I see it is basically Hirschean. We can quibble about the differences between TIDE and TuM (Torah U’Mada). And there are significant differences. But the bottom line is that it is the positive encounter between Torah and Mada is what defines us. What does not define us is the desire to fit into Judaism a modern ethos that in many cases is anathema to our beliefs and practices. That takes our encounter with modernity into new territory. Territory that compromises rather than compliments our service to God.

Once you start compromising, you never know where that will lead. Ask the leaders of the Conservative Movement where compromise has led them. Like the leaders of YCT, they wanted to ‘conserve’ Judaism in order to appeal to the masses that wished to live their lives as assimilated as possible. Which ended up being a prescription for disaster.

YCT’s motives are more of an appeal to the intellectual Jew of the day rather than the cultural Jew of the past that was the target of the Conservative movement. In some ways YCT’s motives are worse than those of the Conservative Movements were. Culture can change. We are no longer a melting pot society. We are multi cultural. But once you establish an ideology it is much harder to change it. And if that ideology is rejected by the mainstream, you no longer just have a Hashkafa. You have a movement.

You cannot really call yourself Orthodox if the group you wish to be a part of rejects you. Insisting on the name Modern Orthodox doesn’t make YCT Modern Orthodox. By its statements and actions YCT has changed the original Hashkafic understanding of its founder, Rav Hirsch. They are no longer just seeking ways in which modernity can enhance ones observance. They are seeking ways to incorporate modern ideas foreign to Judaism into it with a sledge hammer - using tortured explanations of verses in the Torah to make their case. That is not Modern Orthodoxy. That’s Open Orthodoxy. That’s what they are and they ought to stick to that name.

Photo from TOI for illustrative purposes only

Everybody has to make a living. Of you are a Charedi Jew that living needs to be substantial if your family is the typically large one so common in the Chareid world. Unfortunately As I have lamented many times, there is much poverty in those circles because of the lifestyle they choose. They are willing to sacrife much for the privelge of full time Torah study. In this they are generally supported by their wives who go out to work to help support that lifestyle. But in far too many cases that income just is not enough. How to remedy this situation has been the subject of many posts here.

But there are some among them that do not need my advice. They are very resourceful. And might even have the blessing of their rabbinic leaders for unorthodox ways of doing so. At least tactily if not overtly.

Case in point. An article in the Times of Israel reports that several Charedi men were involved in a very successful business enterprise. Had they not been caught, they could have provided a wonderful living for the very large families they no doubt have. HaLevai (if only) all Jews make the kind of money these very enterprising Charedi Jews made.

Unfortunately for them, they no longer have this option available as a means of income. That’s because as I said they were caught. What exactly were they doing that was so bad? What was so bad about the way they were making money? Here is the rest of the story:

Israeli customs officials recently arrested two ultra-Orthodox men at Ben Gurion Airport in possession of 7.5 kilograms (16.5 pounds) of cocaine stashed in a suitcase.

Several other men are suspected of involvement in attempt to smuggle the illegal substance, Channel 2 reported Friday.

A suspect’s lawyer told Channel 2 that his client was arrested two weeks ago and said he was given the suitcase in Amsterdam to bring to Israel without knowledge of its contents.

Police were investigating the possibility of a larger drug smuggling ring attempting to bring hundreds of pounds of cocaine into the country.

The bust was the latest in a series of arrests of alleged drug smugglers attempting to sneak illegal substances into the country. In July officers seized five kilograms (11 pounds) of ecstasy found in liquid form in a man’s suitcase.

The drug, said to be worth NIS 2 million ($524,000), was concealed inside wine bottles and absorbed within the walls of a suitcase.

Three ultra-Orthodox Israeli men were also nabbed in July for allegedly operating an international drug trafficking operation after authorities found thousands of ecstasy pills on their person at the airport.

According to a Walla news report, their traditional ultra-Orthodox apparel didn’t raise suspicions among airport and customs authorities.

One suspect, a 25-year-old man from Netanya, was nabbed upon landing at Ben Gurion Airport in possession of six kilograms — 13,000 pills — of ecstasy in his suitcase and another kilo of “raw drug material of great worth,” according to the ultra-Orthodox news site B’hadrei Haredim. The other two suspects, a 22-year-old man from Beitar Illit and a 26-year-old from Jerusalem, were rounded up shortly afterward.

Nebech. I really feel bad for these guys. They were just trying to feed their families. They had no idea they were doing anything wrong. Why would they? What’s wrong with drugs? Besides, they weren’t selling it to anyone important. Just people in the outside world. Who cares about them? They all hate us anyway.

I will never forget the reaction my father had to exactly this kind of situation. There was a young Chasidic father in Bnei Brak back in the 80s that was caught doing the same thing. My father was incredulous. He could not believe that someone so Frum… someone that wears a Shtreimel on Shabbos and Bekeshe all week long would do such a thing.

When he mentioned this to the Bilitzer Rebbe, who had a Shteibel nearby my father’s home (where my father Davened during the weekdays) the Rebbe responded to him with something along the following lines: "Nu. Reb Shimon, Nebech.""You have to understand.""He has a large family to feed."

My father came home after that conversation and ‘had a cow’. He was more upset at the apologetic of the Bilitzer Rebbe, than he was at the Charedi drug dealer.

That - in my view - is in part why such problems keep happening. Not that all Charedim are drug dealers. Chas V'Sholom. Of course they aren't. The vast majority are fine upstanding honest Jews who might feel the same way my father did about these things. But when you have a rabbinic leader saying the kinds of things the Bilitzer Rebbe did - it leaves the impression that it is not so bad for a Frum Jew to sell drugs if he does it to support his family. That contributes to the possibility of things like this happening again.

It is now 2016, about 30 years after this happened. And virtually the same thing happened again. (And it was not the only time since then that it happened.) I doubt that the elderly Chasidic Rebbe that had this reaction is alive anymore. But I have to wonder if that attitude still exists among some rabbinic leaders of the Bilitzer Rebbe’s inclination. If not in public, than in private.

I suspect that it might. We may not hear them say it anymore. They may pay lip service condemnation to it. But it would not surprise me that if they then went to herculean efforts to get these drug dealers out of trouble… and spare their families the grief of living without a husband and father.

What about the terrible consequences of the drugs they distributed? Well, you can’t have everything.

Picture from VIN for illustrative purposes only

Another step in the right direction was taken recently by a group of 300 rabbis. All from a diverse cross section of Orthodoxy. They signed a proclamation. From JTA: (A slightly longer version of this story in can be found at VIN):

“We condemn attempts to ignore allegations of child sexual abuse. These efforts are harmful, contrary to Jewish law, and immoral,” it said. “The reporting of reasonable suspicions of all forms of child abuse and neglect directly and promptly to the civil authorities is a requirement of Jewish law.”

The letter strongly condemns ostracizing victims of sexual abuse and calls upon synagogues and schools to set up policies to prevent sex abuse, including carefully screening new employees, raising awareness of the issue, and teaching children about sexual development and safety.

The proclamation draws upon the biblical precept not to “stand by while your fellow’s blood is being spilled” (Leviticus 19:16). One of the signatories likened sexual abuse to murder.

The signatories include members of the Orthodox Union, Rabbinical Council of America and Yeshiva University.

I reported about a similar letter signed by 100 Charedi rabbis last year.

As I said, this is a step in the right direction. Unfortunately proclamations don’t go far enough. Statements like these need to be followed up with action by the communities they address. Although I am aware of progress in this area, I’m not sure how many schools have heeded the call and implemented the suggestions of these proclamations.

That sad fact of life is that pedophilia is a mental illness that will not soon disappear. To the best of my knowledge pedophiles cannot be cured of their prediction of being attracted sexually to children. And since there is no way to satisfy their lust legally or morally, they do so illegally and immorally. That is how we get the serial sex abusers like Avreimel Mondrowitz.

The only way to combat this is by doing whatever we can to protect our young. They need to be educated about it, and perhaps more-so parents that tend to shrug these things off… until it happens to one of their children.

We need to make sure that sex offenders are reported to the police, are publicly identified and registered as sex abusers - and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And to make certain that those that tried to cover it up - thereby enabling further abuse be made to pay a very high price for their complicity in it.

So we now have virtually the entire Orthodox world on the same page. Both the Charedi world and the MO world have made strong public statements about it. But I have to ask, ‘Where is Agudah? There is not a single member of the Moetzes that signed onto either document. They are famous for saying that before accused sex abuser is reported to the police, they must first consult with a Rabbi who will decide whether to go ahead and report him to the police.

We know from experience that when the accused is someone that is part of their community, they tend to avoid reporting it. As was the case in Lakewood when the son of one of their biggest Talmidei Chachamim was sexually abused by his Mechench.

The father followed protocol and reported it to the Rabbonim. Who promptly told him that he should not report it. And that they would see to it that that the abuser/Mechanech would get therapy. Not unexpectedly that Mechanech did not continue his therapy for more than one or two sessions and then stopped. When that Talmid Chacahm found out, he went straight to the police. Which caused him to become an outcast in Lakewood. Where he eventually was hounded out of town.

Although there was some regret expressed later on by some of his critics, the damage was done. And there was never any apology made to this Mechanech by the rabbinic leaders that handled the issue at first.

Is this still the position of Agudah? Do they still prefer handling sex abuse in-house when someone from their own community is accused? I hope not. But I have yet to see any change in their views as evidenced by the absence by any member of the Moetzes as a signatory to those proclamations.

Will they respond publicly to this question? Who knows? (I’m glad to see Rabbi Emanuel Feldman, the brother of Agudah Moetzes member, Rabbi Aharon Feldman’s sign on to this. Are the two brothers in disagreement?)

At this point I would like to note the very positive article in the Forward about Rabbi Yakov Horowitz, one of my truly great heroes. Himself a Charedi Mechanech, he is running a one man crusade from that community against sex abusers. He has done more than most of the rest of us that just talk the talk. He walks the walk and has paid a price for that… having been recently sued by a convicted sex abuser now living in Israel for defamation of character.

Rabbi Horowitz has published widely used materials on how to deal with sex abuse – and how to help prevent it. Those materials have been translated into Hebrew and Yiddish so that Israelis and Chasidm that have difficulty with the English language can benefit from those materials.

What is also quite sad is that there are some advocates that have strongly criticized him (and in some cases vilified him!) for not supporting legislation they felt was important to their cause. So too has he been criticized by some (mostly Chasidic) members of his own Charedi world for not toeing their line on how to deal with the accused.

If anyone deserves a medal for trying to change the culture of sex abuse in the world of observant Jewry it is Rabbi Horowitz. He deserves our gratitude and recognition for all he has done and continues to do for our young people and for Klal Yisroel.

Images from the New York Post

The list of grievances against Hillary Clinton continues to grow. In any normal election year, this would destroy her candidacy. But in this bizarre election year, she continues to lead her opponent in the polls reflecting the will of the general electorate as well as the will of the electorate in key battleground states. Battleground states are those where votes swing Democrat or Republican from one election to the next, depending on who the candidate is.

The rest of the states tend to go either blue (Democrat) or red (Republican) in the vast majority of elections. But this year, even they are up for grabs. If I had to make a prediction now, I believe that there will be a goodly number of red states that will turn blue come election day. And I do mean blue. Because the results of that vote will not make too many people happy – even those that vote for the blue candidate, Hillary Clinton. And I include myself in that category.

A while back I predicted that Donald Trump would win the election, Not because I think he deserved it. But because I believed it was fate. When Trump announced his candidacy on an elevator in one of his buildings, I remember thinking (as I’m sure most people did) that this guy will not even come close to winning any primary. He will be tomorrow’s forgotten news after a landslide defeat in the first one. Boy, was I wrong. He not only won the first primary, he won most of the rest of them against a field of Republican candidates far more qualified than he.

It made no sense to me. But as I began to think about it I realized something. Trump appealed to the fears and concerns of the ‘forgotten American’. Those blue collar voters that privately resented being ignored by their government. There are two examples of this.

Trumps strong language against illegal immigrants was a welcome attitude to the political correctness of politicians on both sides of the political aisle that created a virtual free for all of illegal immigration. The fact that some of those crossing our borders were harsh criminals was never addressed. Trump addressed it. That he tarred all illegal immigrants with the same evil brush by calling them rapists and murderers - despite the fact that this characterization applied to only a few of them didn’t seem to matter. His rhetoric was seen as a breath of fresh air by his supporters. Many of whom had the same thoughts. No politicians ever talked like that. So when he promised to deport them all – in contradistinction to even his Republican opponents, he won their hearts.

The same thing was true about his call to bar all Muslims from entering the country. Although that was a possible violation of the first amendment and rejected as racist by virtually all candidates on both sides of the political aisle, it appealed to the fears of the his supporters. One need not look further than the nightly news to know why. Europe had been flooded with Muslim immigrants and had begun to experience Islamic terrorism unlike anything they had experienced in the past.

Trump was the only candidate sounding tough on it. Everybody else was saying that we can’t treat Muslims that way because it is bigoted - not to mention unconstitutional. The compassion Americans might feel for Muslim refugees was outweighed by the fear that one or more of them would be radical Islamist terrorists out to harm us. Trump spoke to that fear. And his supporters applauded. Barring these refugees may have been inhumane. But fear is a strong motivator which Trump exploited.

These two issues plus the fact that Trump promised economic prosperity based on the business acumen that made him so successful, is why he won those primaries. That along the way he personally insulted or ridiculed a variety of targets including the handicapped; women; and ethnic minorities (like Mexicans); blacks; and even Jews seemed trivial to his supporters who just shrugged them off. They otherwise loved what he was saying. They saw him championing their causes. That he sounded racist did not seem to faze them.

That is why I thought he would win the election. I now no longer think he will. In fact, I think that many of those that voted for him in the primary now regret it. It began when a ‘Gold Star American Muslim Family’ attacked his attitude about Muslims. They had lost their son, a soldier who died a hero protecting his comrades in arms while serving his country. He had some very harsh things to say about them - despite the universal outrage at insulting a Gold Star Family. Instead of apologizing, he doubled down on his criticism.

He also continued his outrageous comments about his opponent (She founded ISIS; crooked Hillary; mentally deficient Hillary; bigoted Hillary; incompetent Hillary; low stamina Hillary…). As a result the polls are now reflecting a different outcome than I had first predicted. Which is a good thing. Because Hillary Clinton is by far the lesser of two evils.

But being the lesser of two evils does not by any stretch make her an attractive choice. There is not much positive about her. She has been lying throughout her campaign about the illegal use of a hack-able private server as Secretary of State; about the kind of e-mails she sent out saying none were classified (some clearly were); Erasing 30,000 e-mails with the claim they were private and non government related (who knows); And finding an additional 15,000 e-mails she apparently tried to hide from investigators;

Then there is the questionable practice of granting special access to the major donors of her charity. Although she claims there were no special favors granted to them- as does spokesmen for the State Department - that has yet to be determined.

This is hardly a resume for the Presidency. I remain convinced that had any other Republican candidate run against her, she would lose in a landslide. But now, it seems the reverse will be true.

But, nothing is certain. Especially in this bizarre election year. What if Trump does win? Should we all move to Canada? Of make Aliyah to Israel? I don’t think so. (At least not for this reason.)

I have said it before and I will say it again. Trump is not a bigot; a racist; a misogynist; an antisemite; or any of the other things he is being accused of. There is no record of anything like that in his past. The worst thing you can say about him is that he had questionable business ethics. (Think - Trump University.) Which is pretty bad. But that doesn’t him racist or any of those other things. What he is guilty of is attracting racist constituencies with his rhetoric. They believe he is all those things. He’s not.

It’s not enough, however, to say that he is not really racist. I do not believe he has the temperament to lead this country. Will he have the restraint necessary to lead this country without bringing disaster upon it… and perhaps the world? Does his penchant for getting even quickly put us in danger of nuclear war if the leader of a adversarial foreign government insults him?

I don’t think so. At least I hope not. Such an impetuous nature would have sunk any business venture he ever tried. And we know that it didn’t. Once in office, he may continue to bark. But he will be careful about biting. He does listen to advice despite his reputation that he doesn’t. At least according to his trusted executive employees. In any case, I don’t want to find out.

The irony of voting against Trump is that his policies with respect to terrorism and Israel sound a lot better than the policies of Clinton. Her policies seem to be a continuation of Obama’s. Although short on details, I like the sound of his determination to destroy ISIS. I like his friendlier and more supportive attitude towards Netanyahu and his policies. If I were to vote only on those things, Trump would be a no-brainer for me. But there is no way that I will. I will vote for the very flawed but clearly superior Hillary Clinton instead.

Rav Chaim Kanievsky

Someone sent me a link to a story on Yeshiva World News. It was about R’Chaim Kaneievsky’s Kuntres - published notes on dealing with a Choson and Kallah – a groom and a bride.

One of the more salient points he made is that when seeking a bride - the seminary she attended is not important. It is far more important that she follow the Hashkafa of her husband… even if it differed from the Hashkaka of her home.

It is always a good idea that the husband and wife be on the same page Hashkaficly. For me, it is immaterial whose Hashkfa is followed – or whether there is some sort of melding of the two. The important thing is to be on the same page when raising children. Serious differences in Hashkafa can create hyper arguments to the point of dysfunction. Which can easily undermine a child’s observance and emotional welfare.

Another point he made was that it doesn’t really matter whether the parents were on board with his or her marriage choice. Their disapproval does not mean that they were not Bashert (intended for each other). While I agree in theory, in practice if the parents do not approve of the marriage, that is a prescription for trouble down the road. I have seen too many marriages destroyed when one or both sets of parents are constantly meddling - bashing their child’s mate.

But somewhat more surprising was his advice that a father in law should not speak to the Kallah at all except when absolutely necessary, other than offering a typical greeting like ‘Good Shabbos’ or ‘How are you’. My correspondent made the following observation about this:

(T)his is ridiculous and an example of gender separation taken to its absurd conclusion. While some will stipulate that this was not meant as Halacha Lemaaseh, (practical law) the tendency for hero worship of Torah luminaries, will invariably be followed by some at least to some extent.

I too have to wonder whether this takes gender separation too far. I cannot imagine what it would be like to never have spoken to my daughter in law prior to her marrying my son. Or my daughters never to have spoken to their fathers in law prior to their marriage.

That said, the great Poskim of the world certainly have the right to see things in their own way. But to make blanket statements about the propriety of such an interaction when it is clearly not mainstream Halacha (which R’Kanievsky admitted to in a disclaimer prefacing his Kuntres) is to add further Chumros to the lives of people even outside of his own community in Bnei Brak. Because as my correspondent indicated, it will invariably be followed by some at least to some extent.

One of the characteristics of the Charedi world is that many among them will follow the customs or suggestions of the people they see as great leaders. It would not therefore surprise me that at some point in the not too distant future, this becomes the norm and quite mainstream among Charedim.

It would not be the first time in this has happened. For example it used to be the norm for a Kallah to come over to the men’s side of the dance floor during the wedding, sit next to her new husband and watch the men dance. This has becomes far less frequent in recent years. Why? Because it’ s Frummer for a woman not to go where the men are. What about the Mitzvah of dancing in front of the Kallah? Small sacrifice for the increased Fumkeit they now embrace.

Now Charedim can obviously do as they please. If they feel that taking upon themselves this new Chumra will somehow advance their Avodas HaShem, God bless them. They have that right. Except that it creates yet another Frumkeit target goal for the rest of the world to achieve. A Fumkeit that already has incorporated many other Chumors that are unreasonable in the greater Orthodox world. It will become yet another cog in the wheel of Frumkeit that already has too many cogs. Like the one (besides the above-mentioned one) that refuses to publish a picture of even the most modestly dressed woman. Why? Because it may cause a temptation in men to sin.

As in all things there has to be common sense at play. In this case common sense depends on the kind of society in which we live. If one segment of Orthodoxy is extremely sensitive to the sight of a woman, that does not mean it should become the standard for the rest of us. That a particular segment is so sensitive can easily be based on how isolated they choose to be from the rest of world. They may live in a closed society where men and women rarely see each other in public. Whereas the rest of us live in an integrated world where men and women are frequently in the same place at the same time. Whether in a job, in public transportation, or in the market place.

If one is on constant contact with members of the opposite sex, it would be absurd to tell a father in law to refrain from talking to a future daughter in law for reasons of modesty. And yet it would not surprise me if this kind of thing catches on by those whose eyes are always chasing Frumkeit by looking eastward for religious guidance.

It is in effect why certain publications that will not publish pictures of women. Publishers look to their right and see it as the Frum thing to do, despite the fact that they see women on the job every day of the work week. Not to mention walking in an American street where women walk around in all manner of undress in the summer. And where one finds billboards filled with ads featuring women in suggestive poses wearing very immodest clothing.

It boggles the mind to see how they can justify not publishing a picture of a modestly dressed woman so as not to entice their male readers who see much worse every day. And yet that has become the new standard for the right.

New York and Chicago are not Bnei Brak. You are going to encounter women - both real and in images - that are not dressed modestly all over the place. You are going to be in social or business situations where you will have to speak with women that sometimes look like that.

It seems almost hypocritical for someone to say he will not look at a picture of a modestly dressed woman in a magazine when he encounters immodestly dressed woman every day just by walking in the street! And it is just ridiculous for someone to not talk to his future daughter in law when conversations with women take place all the time and are a natural part of living in America.

I am therefore disappointed with this Kuntres. Even if R’ Kanievsky only intended it for his own community. Because we all know that such things don’t stop there but spread to the rest of the world in the never ending chase for Frumkeit.

Open Orthodox Rabbi, Shmuly Yanklowitz

Off the top of my head, I can think of at least 4 cases of illicit sexual activity between consenting Orthodox Jews. And I emphasize ‘consenting’. Two were students at a coed Jewish high school where the young women became pregnant and had ‘shotgun’ weddings. One was a Yeshiva student who got a girl friend no one knew about pregnant. He too had a shotgun wedding. And the fourth was a rather famous (or infamous) case where the respected Rosh HaYeshiva of a respected Hesder Yeshiva in Israel committed adultery with a married staff member. (He obviously is no longer the Rosh HaYeshiva).

I mention these cases to demonstrate a famous Talmudic principle: Ayn Apitropus L’Arayos – there is no guardian for sexual activity. It can happen to anyone at any time. No matter how devout they might be.

This is why there are so many fences built around Orthodox Judaism with respect to interaction between the sexes. This is why there is a Halacha called ‘Yichud’ which forbids any man to be in the same room alone with a married woman (and to a lesser extent any woman - married or not) other than his wife.

(The details of this Halacha are beyond the scope of this post. Suffice it to say that this Halacha is often observed in the breach. If it were observed more scrupulously, there would be far less accusations of rape or sex abuse. But I digress.)

As has been noted here many times, we live in a culture where interaction between the sexes is as common as breathing air. Coed education in western culture is therefore very much the norm. And that is the reason we have many (but not all) Modern Orthodox day schools and high schools that are coed.

I am opposed to coed schools beyond 6^th grade and especially high school. Once a child reaches puberty the sex drive kicks into high gear. Teenage boys think of little else when their minds are not being distracted by their studies. Which is often the case when in the same classroom with young teenage women. I have always felt that the benefits of learning how to socialize with members of the opposite sex are outweighed by the harm it can theoretically cause in a variety of ways. The less distraction there is in the classroom, the more a student will learn.

But that is not the only problem. More important is the fact that coed high schools increase the chances for sexual activity. The fact is that violations of the Halachic prohibition against men and women touching each other (commonly called Shomer Negiah) are completely ignored by the majority of coed students – which can easily lead to more explicit sexual activity in some cases.

What about boys and girls learning how to interact with each other? I support social contact outside the classroom on a limited and more or less chaperoned basis. Like inviting families that have teens of the opposite sex from your own children over for a Shabbos meal. Or at a Shabbos Kiddush in Shul. Or perhaps chaperoned Bnei Akiva type functions. (I am opposed to coed camps past high school too. There is just too much un-chaperoned time given to teens that are away from home in those circumstances.)

For me this is the happy medium between complete isolation of the sexes and complete integration of the sexes.

Which brings me to an article in the Forward about sex education. Lana Adler tells us of a call by Open Orthodox Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz’s to change the Orthodox paradigm for this subject. In essence he suggests we embrace the kind of sex education they teach in public schools. Which does not rely on only abstinence to prevent contracting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and to prevent unwanted pregnancies. We need to teach our young about safe sex, he says, because even though sex among Orthodox teenagers is rare, it does happen (as I pointed out). And consequences like contracting STDs can be tragic.

I understand his motives. But I have to question the propriety of a religious school teaching young observant teenagers how to use condoms to avoid STDs or unwanted pregnancies when having sex.

True, teaching abstinence doesn’t always work. Especially in young people in coed schools whose behavior typically ignores Hilchos Yichud and Negiah. Although it may work in the vast majority of cases, it doesn’t work in all of them. But is teaching them to use condoms the answer?!

The problem with teaching young people that is that you are teaching them to violate Halacha. But perhaps even worse is the idea that by inference you are teaching young teenagers full of raging hormones that unmarried sex is not so bad since your religious teacher is telling you how to avoid getting STDs. This is not Jewish education. This is an abomination of Jewish values. And not how we solve the problem of rare cases of teenage transmitted STDs or unwanted pregnancies.

Sure – young people should be educated about those things. But not at the cost of implying that unmarried sex is OK – or at least so common that we have to teach teenagers how to avoid contracting STDs by using condoms. There ought to be a lot more education about the parameters of Halacha that forbids unmarried sex and anything that might lead to it. Education that teaches the severity of having sex with a Niddah (a woman that has experienced menstruation and yet never gone to a Mikva). It is an Issur Kares - one of the most serious violations of Halacha in Judaism.

That in rare cases where it might happen anyway, is not a reason to ignore our values. Teaching teenagers to use condoms when having sex implies that sex is almost expected at that age. Even among religious Jews. Are we teaching our young people to have condoms in their wallets – just in case?! That is an outrage and absolutely not what Jewish education is about. Besides, I have to wonder how many teenagers haven’t heard about using condoms to prevent STDs anyway in this day and age? And even if they know about it, in the heat of the moment, they may not do anything about it.

The best way to handle this problem is along the lines I suggested. Reduce the amount of un-chaperoned time teenagers of the opposite sex have with each other. And if possible avoid sending your teenage children to coed schools. Even though that is not 100% foolproof, condom use isn’t 100% foolproof either. True - as noted above – Ayn Apitropus L’Arayos. But following these guidelines will make abstinence more likely and make rarer the likelihood of illicit sex and the possible contraction of STDs.

Guest contribution by Paul Shaviv

Paul Shaviv

Yesterday, a post on sex education in religious schools generated a spirited discussion about whether it is appropriate at all… and if so, how to go about it. That spurred me to ask Paul Shaviv, a respected educator if we could have his input. He has graciously accepted my invitation to do so. His words follow.

The fundamental question about sex ed in Orthodox Jewish schools boils down to this: do you provide education about the world in which students are actually living, or do you only provide them with education about some idealized world which doesn’t exist?

The issue is further complicated by the bizarre and ever more extreme attitudes to sex and gender separation (masquerading as “tznius”, but actually far more sinister) which have been developing in the Orthodox world in recent years, which all but prevent a rational discussion of the subject.

We live in a complicated world. Some generally-held attitudes and social movements in contemporary society are healthy; many may be judged less so. Children need survival skills, and they need essential knowledge to navigate their way through life. The Orthodox community has, within it, fundamental differences about the definition of “essential knowledge”, and I offer the following in the awareness that we are talking about a community where increasing numbers do not wish their children to learn to read, write or even speak English. In that context, discussion about sex ed is futile.

Having said that, here are some general points for consideration. (Some echo opinions already made in the ‘Comments’ to Harry’s posting.)

The reporting of sexual abuse and molestation in every type of school and community is so widespread that it is impossible to argue that children do not need comprehensive education about how human desires – healthy and unhealthy – operate; how to recognize predatory sexual behavior; and how to protect themselves against it.

Apart from protection against the negative, they also need guidance about the positive, including realistic advice about growing up, the beauty of human beings and of human relationships; and the enhancements which a Jewish religious lifestyle can offer them.

Children need clear, factual knowledge about puberty, adolescence, and the biology of reproduction. Without it they are confused, often afraid, and also extremely vulnerable.

It is entirely possible to teach about contraception (and all other forms of sexual activity and human relationships) while pointing out that there are some practices which halachic Judaism approves of, and some which it doesn’t. Every teenager can understand this, just as they understand that the McDonalds on their main street is not an option for them. If they can understand kosher and treif, they can understand that condoms are not halachically approved.

In every part of society, in every part of the Orthodox world, there will be a range of behavior. The difference in sex ed is the that the consequences of ‘breaking the rules’ are much more far-reaching in human, emotional and social terms. If parents are not giving their children guidance, then the schools have to. It should not be done in a “values vacuum”, but – as mentioned above – our community seems to be totally unprepared and ill-equipped to discuss these matters. Perhaps it is time for some teacher-education initatives?

The emergence and acceptance of LBGT lifestyles, the legalization of same-sex marriage, and the associated cultures permeate American society. No teen is unaware of that world, and, practically speaking, they cannot be isolated or protected from it.

Altogether, sex ed and social ed can only really take place in a context of integrated and healthy community values. I think we are very far from that place, which is why the discussion seems to be so fragmentary. In some Jewish schools, sex ed is left to the biology teachers (where biology is taught…); in others, it is idiosyncratic, and probably only confuses the students further. In many it is non-existent.

Every community has to formulate its positive, reasonable and healthy educational policy. I am not optimistic. (The article in the Forward gave little or no indication of what Rabbi Yanklowitz’ ideas actually are, so I can’t comment on them). The only thing that I can say with some certainty (based on experience) is that scare tactics, negativity and ranting against the ‘perversions’ and ‘evils’ of ‘others’ will have zero educational effect, and only cause the students to a) be curious and b) probably resent that instruction in later years. Ignoring it is also not an option – to do so is to betray our children.

Sexual norms, and sexual behavior in society – including in Jewish society – are changing rapidly. The Jewish family is changing. Many Jewish schools have children of same-sex parents. Every Jewish school and yeshivah sees more children of single parents, or ‘blended families’, and of other family structures which were far less common a generation or so ago. Historically, schools were very often in the forefront of community and religious change. Maybe this is an issue where it will happen again?

After a long career in leading Jewish schools, Paul Shaviv is now a consultant and trouble-shooterfor Jewish and non-Jewish independent schools.

R' Zechariah Wallerstein speaking at an Agudah convention (Agudah Website)

A couple of weeks ago on Tisha B’Av, in the course of a broader lecture, Rabbi Zechariah Wallerstein made some very hurtful comments about survivors. I had criticized him about that angry rant – which can be summarized as follows: You were abused?! Get over it!

Those comments were excerpted and uploaded to YouTube (no longer availabe) for the entire world to see and hear. I was not the only one to criticize him for that. Just about every survivor advocacy group had the same reaction. Including RabbiYakov Horowitz, who had written his own critical piece on Facebook after Rabbi Wallerstein’s subsequent brief clarification of what he said. In essence Rabbi Horowitz said it wasn’t enough. He hurt survivors of abuse deeply.

That clarification was more of a self promotion than it was an explanation. He said that his intent was not to criticize or hurt, but to offer hope for a better future. He mentioned that he has the only high school for girls that were sexually abused. He further said that that excerpt was taken out of context. Had people heard the entire lecture, they would not have gotten that impression. Well, I listened to it. It changed nothing. The excerpt in question remained a rant. His intention may have been to give survivors hope. But if there was ever an intention that was as poorly executed as this one was, I don’t know what it is.

Obviously telling abuse victims that they should have hope is not a bad thing.. But it has to be in the context of understanding the hurt and not an angry rant as though they are victims of their own self pity!

It seems that Rabbi Wallerstein has had a chance to think about what he said and has come out with a new and improved apology (below). He elaborated on what he was trying to do and now understands that survivors and survivor advocates were upset by it. He clearly said that he 100% apologizes. With a full heart.

But he again tried to shift at least part of the blame for the reaction - to outside factors. He said his message of hope was tied to Tisha B’Av in the sense that even on that day of mourning for the destruction of the Beish HaMikdash, there is hope. It is called a Moed (Yom Tov) because with the advent of Moshiach, Tisha B’Av will become the most joyous time of celebration. Survivors should get on that train.

Had he said it in somber terms in the context of recognizing the pain suffered by survivors, he could have avoided the controversy. But he hardly mentioned that at all. He yelled at the survivor community for focusing on their pain instead of focusing on their future and letting go of that pain. As if ‘Abara K’adabra’ – no more pain. Emotional pain suffered through a trauma like sex abuse cannot not be turned off like a spigot. You certainly cannot yell and scream it away.

He says he still doesn’t ‘Chap’ (get) how telling people to have hope no matter what happened to them – is a crime. I don’t think he fully understands how he hurt people. He just realizes that he did based on the reactions he was told about to that excerpt. And apologized.

I don’t mean to pile on to this man. I’m sure that his intentions were honorable. But are intentions good enough? Shouldn’t an apology be based on a thorough understanding what he said? ...and why the way in which he said it was hurtful? An not based only on the fact that he was misunderstood? ...or blaming the internet, YouTube, and his critics for not listening to his whole message of hope on that day?

There is another aspect to his ignorance of these matters that he practically admits to. He refuses to have internet access. It almost seems like he brags about it at every opportunity. This means he has no clue about the impact of lectures unless or until someone tells him about it.

Purposeful ignorance is not the best method of accomplishing your goals. One needs to be informed. as quickly and expediently as possible. Those that try and deal with the heavyweight issues of our day and do so without the benefit of internet access are unnecessarily impeded by this handicap. While it is possible to accomplish those goals without it, why slow down the process if there is a better and faster way to be informed? Justice delayed is justice denied.

It may feel good for someone to like Rabbi Wallerstein to say ‘I don’t have the internet’. Thereby ingratiating himself to those who harangue against its evils. But it comes at a price too high.

Back to his apology. I think he was sincere. I am convinced that he never intended to hurt anyone. And that he meant well. But is it enough? I can’t answer the question. I am not a survivor of abuse. The best I can do is to quote a phrase he repeated twice: I’m not sure. I’m not sure.

Conference participant Dr. R. R. Reno, editor of First Things

That’s what I’m talking about! The kind of Achdus that Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein wrote about on Cross Currentsis the way things should be. Bright young thinkers from Yeshiva University, Chabad, Brisk, Mir, Ner Israel, Lakewood, and Satmar getting together in common cause is a wonderful example of my dream of Achdus for the wider Orthodox Jewish world.Which would go a long way toward fostering Achdus with all of Jewry.

We are far from reaching that goal. But at least some very bright representatives from each of those groups have come together with the shared value of positive engagement with our fellow secular citizens, both Jewish and non Jewish.

Rabbi Adlerstein says he was (and still is to a degree) exhilarated by the 3rd annual conference of Tikvah Program for Yeshiva Men. The political philosophy of this program is conservative. I tend to lean conservative on most issues although on some I would be considered fairly liberal. But it doesn’t really matter to me whether they were poltically liberal or conservative. The fact that they were all there in common cause is what stokes my imagination about what could be.

The theme this year was pragmatic isolationism vs. an obligation to share the Torah’s vision with non-Jewish Americans. Rabbi Adlerstein points out something that truly pleased him (and me). The vast majority of participants felt as I do: that we must engage with the community at large so as to be a light unto the nations… spreading the light of the Torah’s values and ethics to as much of mankind as we can. And in that sense Judaism has much in common with the politically conservative point of view.

I fully expect that this would be hotly disputed by those who are politically liberal. They will argue that political liberalism is the real Torah Hashkafa. But for me, there is little doubt that the politically conservative point of view has far more in common with the Torah’s values than does the politically liberal point of view. Albeit with some notable exceptions.

The question is however, do the participants reflect the view of their respective communities, or are they the exceptions? Rabbi Adlerstein correctly notes that by merely attending this conference they show an individual bias towards integration for purposes of sharing our values - rather than being isolationist/protectionist. In a vote taken by the group – integration was by far the preferred model.

But as he also notes, the isolationist/protectionist model was supported by some of the participants (I would venture a guess that it was the Satmar faction). They said that dealing with the government should only be for purposes of self preservation - seeking out programs that would provide the Jewish community with financial benefits (e.g. tuition tax credits or school vouchers) and to fight for legislation favorable to observant Jews (e.g. the right not to be penalized for not working on Shabbos). This - they argued had always been the model for dealing with governments throughout the diaspora.

The participant lecturers were from a wide variety of conservative thinkers that included observant Jews, secular Jews, and non Jews. From Cross Currents:

R. Ahron Lopianksy delivered a major shiur on what could – and could not – be gleaned from the gemara concerning economic policy and government intervention. While that topic leaned towards the theoretical, a conversation between Rabbi Gedalya Weinberger and Dr. Irving Lebovics (Agudah, California) was entirely about the nuts and bolts of problems facing the charedi community, and advocating for our positions in hostile state legislatures.

William Kristol, one of the acknowledged neo-conservative leaders (and one of the first of that group to announce that he cannot bring himself to vote for either Trump or Clinton) spoke about the future of the two-party system in the US, and the very different dangers to Jewish interests of the expected policies of either of the two candidates.

(BMG CEO) R. Aaron Kotler engaged Dr. R.R. Reno (editor of First Things, the most important US journal of religion in the public square) in a vigorous discussion about maintaining one’s moral positions while dealing with political figures and a polity that held conflicting views.

I can’t tell you how pleased I to see the variety of Orthodox Jews from Lakewood to YU participating in this. If only this would spread to the rest of Klal Yisroel – both here and in Israel. We need the participants in this conference to teach members of their own Hashkafa what they have learned there.

That said, I think that to a certain extent it is already happening in America in what I often refer to as the new centrists - defined sociologically rather than Hashkaficly. But - as I indicated above - we still have a long way to go.

I do not however seeing it happening in Israel right now. I see the opposite. The factional fights there are too strong – even within a single Hashkafa. Like the Charedi one. Which is why there are two rival Charedi political parties and why there is a virtual war between the Rav Steniman faction and the R’ Shmuel Auerbach faction. Not to mention the divide between the Chasidim and the Litvishe Yeshiva world; Askenazim and Sephardim. The Religious Zionist faction has its own internal fights. And then there is the controversy over the Chief Rabbinate. Israeli Orthodoxy is just too polarized.

I do however like what Rabbi Adlerstein says should be our take-away. I will therefore end with that thought – just as he did:

Too many people have argued that, notwithstanding the breathtaking numbers of adherents to the yeshiva system, the price paid has been a uniformity in dress and group-think imposed attitudes that stifle individuality and creativity. The Tikvah Program for Yeshiva Men proves that this is not the way it has to be.

Guest Contribution by Rabbi David Berger

Rabbi Dr. David Berger

A couple of weeks ago, I commented on an interview of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah (YCT) Talmud Chair, Rabbi Ysoscher Katz. Therein I lauded Rabbi Katz’s clarity about the acceptable parameters of Orthodox Jewish theology. Even though I remained troubled by some of YCT’s other issues, clearing that up was a big deal for me – in the right direction.

I recently received an e-mail from Rabbi Dr. David Berger, expressing his concerns about the matter as well as his concerns on some of those other issues. As someone I truly respect for a variety of reasons – and in particular his courage to ‘tell it like it is’ - I asked him if I could feature that e-mail as a post. He has graciously consented. His words follow.

Dear R. Harry,

Let me comment on your post regarding R. Ysoscher Katz’s radio interview in which he called R. Zev Farber a heretic because of his views on the historicity and/or content of the revelation at Sinai.

You had reported earlier on the statement by eleven musmakhim of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah affirming the centrality of the traditional belief in Torah mi-Sinai as well as their opposition to partnership minyanim. YCT responded with a vigorous affirmation of their commitment to Torah mi-Sinai and with a defense of the legitimacy of partnership minyanim, which, they added, some of the students and rebbeim attend.

The assertion about Torah mi-Sinai, which is underscored by R. Katz’s assertion in the interview, is certainly an important move on the part of the Yeshiva, and it should decidedly be welcomed.

The major problem on this front was R. Asher Lopatin’s assertion that R. Farber’s position was at the outer reaches of Orthodoxy.

When I wrote an article addressing this matter in the Jewish Link of New Jersey in response to letters by R. Avi Weiss and R. Lopatin announcing their resignation from the RCA, R. Katz wrote a purported response riddled with such startling misrepresentations of my article that reading it was a surreal experience. (Readers can assess the fairness of this strong formulation by reading the two pieces consecutively. My article can be found at the Jewish Link ; R. Katz’s response can be found at this link. My rejoinder is here.)

The one relevant point to emerge from R. Katz’s piece was its manifest avoidance of any indication that R. Lopatin’s remark needed to be retracted.

The current position of both R. Katz and the Yeshiva stands, then, in welcome contrast to R. Lopatin’s earlier statement as well as what appears to have been his own earlier stance. Nonetheless, there is a simple but perhaps difficult step that needs to be taken if the new stance is to be convincing.

I have felt for some time that even those Orthodox Jews who are sympathetic to the innovation that lies at the heart of Yeshivat Maharat cannot accept its Orthodox credentials as long as R. Farber remains on its Advisory Board. R. Herzl Hefter is a member of the YCT Advisory Board, which is clearly a rabbinic--or in the case of some of the women, a rabbinic-equivalent--body.

R. Hefter has affirmed the legitimacy--really the validity--of Pentateuchal criticism in an article on Morethodoxy . In a recent interview in Makor Rishon, he speaks of having gone "wild" when he saw American Orthodox Jews affirm that it is an obligation to believe in Torah mi-Sinai (my entirely legitimate paraphrase). He was no doubt referring to the R. Farber controversy.

If he remains on the board, then YCT signals unmistakably that it does not in fact regard the traditional understanding of Torah mi-Sinai as a sine qua non of Orthodoxy. One hopes that a friendly parting of the ways will be possible.

On the other element of YCT’s response to the eleven rabbis, i.e., partnership minyanim, I wrote the following to a friend who is a person of stature and, like YCT, a defender of this innovation. (He wrote me in this context and related ones that people who draw new red lines are causing schism and that partnership minyanim will not be going away.)

“Partnership minyanim constitute the primary recent innovation in the realm of practice rather than ideology that I see as genuinely disqualifying with respect to Orthodox status. I don’t say this about individuals who attend such minyanim. They have been told by people they respect that this is compatible with Orthodoxy. But I do say this about the minyanim themselves.

As I wrote you earlier, such minyanim are a prima facie violation of an explicit statement in the Talmud and the codes; the argument that the restriction no longer applies and that one may act on this conviction has been made by precisely one rabbi of stature against the opposition of every other such rabbi in the world. (I set aside the fact that he has subsequently taken steps—including the conferring of semichah in partnership with R. Hefter-- that compromise his standing.)

In a matter of such moment, genuine Orthodox Jewry does not act on such an isolated opinion. This move involves a monumental, highly visible change in the central ritual environment of Judaism and leads to the inability of relatives to attend simchas. To classify people who do not recognize this as a legitimate innovation within Orthodoxy as intolerant schismatics creating new red lines is an utter reversal of reality and flies in the face of elementary fairness. The schismatics are unequivocally the innovators.

Will this go away? Probably not. Will it continue to be seen by most Modern Orthodox authorities as beyond the pale? I hope so. Keep in mind that Orthodox shuls without mechitzas were more common at one point than partnership minyanim are now, and the process was reversed. In my view, a strong case can be made that such minyanim constitute a clearer violation of halakhah than a shul without a mechitzah.”

Rabbi Dr. David Berger is an American academic, dean of Yeshiva University's Bernard Revel Graduate School of Jewish Studies, as well as chair of Yeshiva College's Jewish Studies department. He is the author of various books and essays on medieval Jewish apologetics and polemics, as well as having edited the modern critical edition of the medieval polemic text Nizzahon Vetus.

I’m sorry. I cannot understand the Hashkafa that has done what the Israeli Yated has done. If one looks a the carton featured in their back to school issue, I don’t know how anyone that calls themselves the offspring of the Patriarchs, can do something like this.

You have two pictures side by side comparing the first day of school in the Chasidic world and the secular world. In one picture - the Chasidic caricature has a smiling kindly Chasidic teacher warmly welcoming his student back for the new school year. In the secular picture you have a cowering teacher in the background while in the foreground you have a nasty looking student with a tattoo on his arm; and Mohawk haircut. He is holding an ‘evil’ smartphone in one hand; some marijuana in the other; and a bottle of booze in his backpack; holding a leash to his dog while a cowering police officer looks on.

The Yated is the main newspaper of the Yeshiva world whose political party is Degel HaTorah. They do not move without the approval of their rabbinic leaders. This cartoon must therefore reflect what they really think of the secular Jew in Israel.

Now I’m sure they did not go to R’ Shteinman or R’ Kanievsky for specific approval of this picture. But they would not publish something that they thought would not be in concert with their attitude. I hope I’m wrong. I hope that someone informs these leaders about this disgusting picture and they tell the Yated’s publishers to pull it and issue an apology.

But if past is prologue, I’m not going to hold my breath.

How in heaven’s name are you going to convince the Israeli public, most of whom send their children to secular schools that they care about their fellow Israeli citizens? How are the Charedi political parties going to convince the secular public that they have their interests in mind too, when they consider legislation in the Keneset? How are they going to be able to reach out to their fellow Jews if they publish insulting cartoons and caricatures like this?

I have seen arguments that say that religious Jews should only focus on themselves… improving their spiritual status. Outreach is seen as a waste of time at best; and counter-productive at worst since a Baal Teshuva will unwittingly bring residual secular values into the religious world and thus contaminate the purity of their lives. This is counter to everything I believe in.

Is the hashkafa represented by the Chasidic caricature so wonderful anyway? Is that the way God wishes his people to live? Here is a recent example of what’s wrong with this segment. It is in this story Which I read recently. The mother of a handicapped child needed to get a driver’s license so that she could transport that child to the various places she needed to go. Like hospitals, doctors, and school. So great was her need that the national insurance of Israel supplied her with the funds to purchase a car.

For getting a driver’s license, she was fired from her teaching job. Why? Because of the rule against women driving. It is considered immodest for a woman to drive a car. When the principal was asked about it, she said that there are no exceptions to the rule. Women are not allowed to drive for any reason. End of discussion.

This story may sound extreme. And I’m sure that most Charedim are as appalled by this story as I am. But that such enclaves exist in any significant number means that this type of Hashkafa is an acceptable one. Even if it creates undue hardships on the parents of a handicapped child.

Why would any Jew want to become a member of a community like this? Maybe that’s why they think it’s a waste of time to reach out to others. One might ask, what’s keeping people in a community like this? Well if your are isolated from the rest of the world and are not taught how to function outside of your own community, you will not know any better. And if by chance you find out that there are other ways to live Jewishly in a world that is so radically different culturally and Hashkaficly that a transition to it would be virtually impossible.

Being opposed to the kinds of groups that promote these values is not being anti Charedi. It is being anti extremism. It is therefore high time for the Charedi world to call out these extremist groups and ostracize them no less than they ostracize the left.

Unfortunately they won’t They will continue to tolerate them as a legitimate Hashkafa. Live and let live - as long as they are God fearing people and do the Mitzvos, no one has a right to tell them how to live their lives. Well, that is exactly what’s wrong with these groups. Their leaders tell their Chasidim exactly how to live their lives – well beyond the limits of Halacha. Which causes undue hardships on people like that mother of a handicapped child. Which is bad enough. But it is also an embarrassment to the rest of the Jewish people. And hardly being a light unto the nations.

Sadly cartoons like this will continue to be published. And every time I see one, I am going to continue to condemn it.

Satmar Chasidim in Brooklyn (Algemeiner)

I might agree that the New York Times has shown bias in their publication more than once. I might have even agreed that they had a double standard in how they treat the welfare recipients in Satmar versus the welfare recipients in the Black and Hispanic communities, if not for one important difference. It is true that all of these groups are unable - for lack of a decent education - to earn enough income to avoid welfare. But Satmar Chasidim are purposely prevented by their leadership from getting one.

The reasons why Blacks and Hispanics do not get the kind of education they need to succeed financially are complex and beyond the scope of this post. Suffice it to say that it is not because they are told to avoid a higher education by their leaders.

That is not the case with Satmar Chasidim. They purposely prevent their students from getting one by by forbidding it to most of their Chasidim. They do not offering any subjects that would help them do that. Instead they are encouraged to seek financial assistance from as many state and federal government agencies they can to help supplement their (in most cases) meager incomes. I therefore find it highly disingenuous for the Algemeiner's Ira Stoll to blame the New York Timesfor complaining about Satmar.

Mr. Stoll completely ignores the obvious. From the Algemeiner article:

The Times columnist accuses Satmar Hasidim of being welfare sponges…

First, the hypocrisy and double standard of which the Times accuses the politicians applies just as equally to the Times. Times columnists feel free to accuse politicians of racism or callousness when the politicians deplore welfare dependency in the black or Hispanic community. But the Times columnists lead the charge against welfare when the targets are Hasidic Jews.

Doesn’t Mr. Stoll know the difference between the two? Doesn’t he realize that Blacks and Hispanics are not denied permission to learn what they need to learn to earn a better living – while Satmar Chasdim are denied it by their leaders? Their own secular education is so inadequate, that even if some of them decided to buck the system and go to college, it would be nigh impossible to do so with the little education they get in their schools. (Yes, there are exceptions. There are always exceptions.)

What makes Mr. Stoll's complaint even worse is the way he ridicules a core curriculum of secular studies - implying they are wasteful:

The Times quotes one “exile from the ultra-Orthodox community in Brooklyn” complaining about her education: “They didn’t teach us anything in high school so I didn’t know anything, no Shakespeare or anything like that.” Nothing against Shakespeare, but how many Hasidic Jews are going to become Shakespearean actors or English literature professors?

Does Mr. Stoll really believe that all secular studies amount to study of Shakespeare – just because one former Satmar Chasid used that as an example of what she missed out on?

Mr. Stoll seems like an educated man. Does he really expect us to believe that the secular education he very likely received is irrelevant to his career? ...that he did not benefit from it at all? I would highly tend to doubt it. I'm sure that instead - his life has been enhanced by it.

I’m not saying that there is no bias in the New York Times. They are as biased in their reporting as anyone. If you are a human being, you are going to bring your own biases to the table. No matter how much you try not to. They have indeed been guilty of it many times. But this is not one of those times.

Chabad Rabbi Moshe Havlin - supporter of IDF- Chabad agreement (Arutz 7)

Since the passing of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, R' Menachem Mendel Schneersohn, when you mention Chabad or Lubavitch to most non Chabad Orthodox Jews, one of the first things that comes to mind is their Messianism (Meshichism).

Meshichism with respect to Chabad is the idea that in some way shape or form, they see their late Rebbe as either still alive laying in wait behind the scenes about to reveal himself as the Messiah ; or that he died but will be resurrected as the Messiah in a 2^nd coming. In both cases - at some time in the not too distant future. There are also those that do not think he will return as the Messiah - but allow (and perhaps even hope) for that possibility. I believe that most Lubavitchers fall somewhere in between these extremes – with most leaning to the latter.

There are some that completely reject that idea the way the rest of Orthodoxy does. But I believe they are a relatively small percentage. And there are even less that go completely the other way and have referred to him as God – to be resurrected as the Messiah! (…sound familiar?) But they are even rarer and are completely rejected by all the Chabad leadership.

Why should we care what other people believe? We shouldn’t unless it affects the rest of us in significant ways. There are those like Rabbi Dr. David Berger who believe it does. He has done extensive research on Chabad and worries that these beliefs border on being (if not actual) Avodah Zarah (idol worship).

They worry bacause Lubavitchers are completely integrated into the world of Kashrus. And that could have a disastrous effect on the Kosher food industry. Meat or meat products derived of a Shechitah (ritual slaughtering) done by an idol worshiper is not considered Kosher. And the reality is that the Shochtim for Hashgacha agencies like the OU includes Lubavitchers. It may be true that they are carefully vetted. But who really knows what is on their minds. When there is reason to suspect a problem, shouldn’t that be a concern?

I am personally convinced that such beliefs are not Avodah Zara. As Rav Ahron Soloveichik put it – Their messianic beliefs are Shtus (nonsense) but nowhere near approaching Avodah Zara.

Even Rav Shach whose antipathy towards Chabad was well known did not reject them as observant Jews. An example of that was his support of Rabbi Adin Steinslatz outreach work in Russia. Rabbi Steinsaltz’s connection with Chabad and his admiration for the Rebbe as a foremost leader in Klal Yisroel was well known. Rav Shach also told his own supporters not to reject the legitimacy Lubavicth Chasidim – that his battles with Chabad were his own and not to be emulated by his followers.

Chabad’s messianic views are not talked about so much these days. Not even among Lubavitchers. Now - 24 years after his death, that talk has all but disappeared. At least in public. Except in Lubavitch headquarters in Crown Heights (770) and in Israel where it seem to be alive and well. Most mainstream Lubavitchers – at least outside of Israel - have resumed focus on the mandate created for them by their late Rebbe to reach out to fellow non observant Jews all over the world.

I’m told that there are more Lubavitch Shiluchim (emissaries) in more locations throughout the world then there were even when the Rebbe was alive. In some cases they can be found in the remotest of locations where few if any other Orthodox Jews would be willing to live and raise a family. They are virtually the only ones willing to do it. And they do it in spades!

Chabad is the shining example of outreach we should all try to emulate – albeit in our own way.

And now comes yet another thing they have done that should be emulated. In particular by the Charedi world in Israel. It is something I have been advocating for years now. From Arutz Sheva:

Leaders of the Chabad Lubavitch movement signed off on a deal with the IDF which would exempt 15 percent of their yeshiva students from the draft, according to Mendy Reisel of Kol Rama.

According to the agreement, 15 percent of Chabad students will get a complete exemption from military service, so they can focus on being emissaries of Chabad. Chabad rabbis and the IDF will jointly vet the students who would receive this exemption.

This means that 85% of all Lubavitchers will be drafted. The IDF has agreed to compromise with Chabad which can be seen in the details of this agreement. But the bottom line is that the vast majority will be doing their share of army service – just like the rest of Israel’s citizens.

This is how the rest of the Yeshiva world (...the Chasidic world is an entirely different conversation) should be dealing with this issue. Instead of demanding all yeshiva students be exempt. Especially now that the government has promised to accommodate Charedi Hashakafos. That the IDF has not completely lived up to those promises is a detail to worked out. But in theory they should be doing what Chabad just did. Which is all Yair Lapid was asking for when his party Yesh Atid was in the governing coalition in the least Keneset.

And yet they refuse to do it, vilifying those who support it as anti Torah. Even clearly Orthodox Jews like former Kenesset member, Rabbi Dov Lipman. Leaving aside the Meshichist issue (which is irrelevant) do they now think what Chabad did is anti Torah too? Neturei Karta now thinks so.

How great it would be if Charedim in Israel followed Chabad’s lead on this issue! That would go far in changing the hearts and minds of secular Jews about Charedim and foster a new climate of respect and cooperation for one another - which would do wonders for outreach.

Image taken from Aish

One of the most difficult things to accomplish in this world is to find the person you will marry. The Gemarah tells us that finding your life’s mate is more difficult than splitting the Red (Reed) Sea. (Sotah 2a) But then it goes on to explain that this is talking about a second marriage, The first marriage is decreed in Heaven 40 days before the formation of the embryo (Yitziras HaVlad). This is commonly referred to as finding your Bashert (predestined marriage partner).

I am of a mind to see the first interpretation being just as accurate. Because even though a match is surely made in Heaven, it is not so easy for two people predestined to marry each other to actually find each other. Sometimes they don’t. Sometimes people get married and get divorced right away. In no way was that marriage Bashert. I have seen it happen too many times. How is that possible? Because the mates that chose each other were not the actual ones made in Heaven.

I believe that the increasing numbers of divorce in our day – even among Orhtodox Jewish couples serves as an impediment to getting married. Even if only subconcioulsy. A lot of young people who are dating - simply do not want to ‘settle’.

Of course not. Why should they? Young people realize that the decision they make now is monumental and has life-long consequences. With so many people getting divorced – or even living in bad marriages, no one wants to take the chance on ending up like that. That is as it should be. One must be careful about whom they marry.

Most young people are looking for their soul-mates. That is what a match in heaven is supposed to be. Does that mean seeking perfection? No. It means seeking compatibility. Which in this case is a tall order - but a doable one. That is what the Hishtadlus (effort) should be all about when dating for marriage. I believe that if one finds a truly compatible mate - that is the one God intended for you to marry. That marriage will be a happy one.

But somehow ‘compatibale’ doesn’t sound like ‘soul-mate’. And therein lies one of the biggest impediments to marriage in my view. Too many young people think that a marriage made in Heaven is defined by perfection. Anything less will end up in a bad marriage. The problem with that is when someone seeks perfection, they will never get married. You will never find someone that has everything you seek in a mate. There will always be things that one will not be able check off on the list of attributes they seek. Especially if that list is pretty long.

I mention this in light of an advice column at the Aish website. An accomplished young lady expresses her frustration at not being able to find her soul-mate:

(W)hen it comes to dating, even though I try so hard and go on so many dates, I am still at square one in regards to finding my spouse. Why?

(W)hen I go on another date and another date, I don’t get any closer to finding my husband. I just go home, bummed out, and have to start all over again! It’s like I’m going full gas in neutral.

How do I keep going when all my efforts and heartache and exhaustion go unrewarded and show no progress?

I’ve been doing this for many years – walking blindly on this road to marriage which has no end in sight. I don’t see any results, any improvement, or any sign that I’m getting closer…

The answer given by the advice columnist was basically that she should keep trying. That she is not seeing any progress is the nature of the beast. Because there is no progress until the moment it happens. When it does she will know it right away. Problem immediately solved. She adds that there actually is progress in the sense that she gains experience and maturity along the way that will help her.

All well and good. But what she fails to mention, in my humble opinion is that she may need to shorten her list of requirements in a mate - if it is a long one. She should list only those attributes that are essential. Attributes that will make them truly compatible. And discard those that are relatively trivial.

What kind of things should one seek in a mate that are essential to a successful, happy marriage? That list is subjective. Everyone has their lines which cannot be crossed. So that if a date is seen to have crossed that line, they are off the table.

I do however believe that there are some things that are universal requirements for a successful marriage in all cases. I will list a few in no particular order. There may be more. But these are off the top of my head.

1. Religious observance. It is important for a couple to be on the same page with respect to Halacha. It would be very difficult for a couple to live together if for example one partner was Shomer Shabbbos and the other was not.

2. Hashkafos should be similar. If one partner is Charedi and the other MO, if each insist on maintaining their own Hashkafos, there will inevitably be fights. Especialy when it comes how to raise children (e.g. what kind of school will they be sent to).

3. Compatible levels of education. It is important to have more or less the same level of education in both religious and secular studies. If one spouse is far superior to the other, there can be embarrassing situations down the road. This does not mean that he education and knowledge have to be identical. Far from it. It just means that you can’t have disparity that is so wide that one spouse will be embarrassed by the lack of knowledge of the other. A feeling of inferiority will surely develop in the spouse whose knowledge is so greatly lacking. And perhaps a feeling of condescension by the konweldgeable spouse towards the unknowledgeable spouse.

4. Midos. The character of one’s life partner matters. One should be sure they are not marrying a selfish individual that cares only for him or herself. They need to know that their future spouses are caring people. They need to find out if they are patient or if they have short tempers. They need to see how they treat their own parents (and yours - should it go that far). They need to see how they treat people in general. That is one of the things you discover when dating. One will see the character of their date in the way they respond to these situations when they arise.

5. Physical attraction. There are some people that might will say that ‘looks’ aren’t important. But they are. That character matters more is true. But if you are not physically attracted to your potential mate, you should not marry them.

6. Parental approval. This is a tough one. If I recall correctly, the Gemarah tells us that it doesn’t matter what your parents think of their child’s Shidduch choice- as long as the two of you feel you are right for each other - they may not interfere. But if one is close to their parents, disapproval will cause a tremendous strain on the relationship. I know of two many divorces that have taken place by meddling parents that did not approve of a spouse. They would bad mouth them to the point that a child actually started believing it. Or to the point where they felt they had to make a choice between a spouse and a parent.

I’m not saying that parental approval should be a deal breaker. But it should definitely be a factor.

These are six important things to consider. Other things like insisting your spouse have a sense of humor or that they are a good tennis partner; or love the reading the same books as you - are nice. But not as important. And should not be deal breakers.

This is not ‘settling’ for something less than your soul-mate. If the above conditions are more or less fulfilled - then in my view you have found your soul-mate. And from that, your love for each other will grow to immeasurable bounds

Picture from TOI for illustrative purposes only

It’s that time of year. School has started and for the vast majority of Orthodox Jews with school age children ‘belt tightening is the order of the day. What I mean of course is that the cost of educating our children Jewishly is beyond the means of virtually all Orthodox Jewish families. Even those that have decent incomes - north of $100,000 per year. 5 children or more per family is not uncommon. And in the more Charedi families 10 children of more is not uncommon.

If one looks at the range of tuition one would have to pay per child, one might get sticker shock. Looking at just Chicago (and suburbs) as an example the range for Orthodox Jewish elementary day schools is anywhere from $10,500 to $17,500. It doesn’t take a genius in math to multiply those figures by 5 children. Full tuition at the least expensive school will cost those parents $52,000! And that doesn’t even factor in high school tuition which in Chicago - in most cases ranges well in to the $20 thousands! And then there is summer camp; the gap year in Israel... How many parents opt out of those experiences for their children? I don’t know what the typical cost of summer camp is… but it isn’t cheap. I also do not know what the gap year in Israel costs. But it is probably a lot more than high school tuition!

So if you’re making about $100,000 per year, which most people would say is a decent income, paying full tuition with after tax dollars will eat up most of it. And most Orthodox Jews do not make over $100,000 per year. (Although many do.)

Which is where scholarships come in. The vast majority of the parent body of religious schools are on at least a partial scholarship. But since these schools are forever running deficits, scholarship parents are carefully vetted before the tuition reduction is determined for them. They are still asked to pay as much as they can. Which many parents feel is more than they can afford. Which leads to the belt tightening.

There is pressure on both sides. Pressure on parents to pay as much of their income as possible and pressure on the school to make up the difference with fundraisers. Some schools do better than others. But few can coast. None of them are on easy street and are forever trying to come up with new ideas as sources of revenue. The bottom line is that a good education costs money. If you want good teachers – you are going to have to pay for them.

Issues about school waste are beyond the scope of this post. Suffice it to say that there will not be much savings to parents even if schools eliminated all of it. And as is often the case, waste is in the eyes of the beholder. What may seem like waste to a parent, may in fact be vital to the smooth operation of a school.

I bring all of this up in light of an article in the Forward that reports about the publication of spreadsheets that list tuition costs of thousands of religious schools in the US, Canada, and Israel. While the accuracy of these numbers is unclear this list gives a parent some idea about the cost of the options available in the various communities in which they live.

But is cost the best way to judge what kind of school you should send your child to? If for example there are 2 schools that have equivalent educations - and one is cheaper, should you send your child to the cheaper one? The truth is that it will not necessarily save you any money because it does not factor in scholarships. Which can be greater in the more expensive school. And thus ultimately cheaper.

Furthermore, what seems like an equivalent education to an outsider may not actually be the case to an insider. It is important to send your children to a school that will give them the best education based on your Hashkafos. Money should at best be a secondary consideration.

The disparity in the type of education and tuition costs offered between these schools can be profound.

A Chasidic school in Williamsburg might have a tuition cost per child of $5000. But they will offer no secular studies. Which of course saves them the cost of hiring secular studies teachers.

A Yeshivishe school that does offer secular studies may offer them minimally as a necessary concession to parents that want it, but devote the vast majority of their time and resources to religious studies.

Some schools on the other side of the religious spectrum spend the vast majority of time on secular studies – preparing their students for entry into top universities. And treat religious studies as a formality. Some schools offer a lot of enrichment programs. Some have sports teams that compete with other schools spots teams. In short there are a lot of variables. Tuition costs are but one of them, and in my view, the least important one.

The one thing I believe all religious schools have in common is that they provide a religious environment for the child. In my view, the importance of this cannot be stressed enough. If you child is not set to a religious school, he will be influenced by the values of the school to which you send them. Outside the home - they will be subject to a culture practically devoid of any Jewish context. Spending 6 or more hours per day in such an environment can take its toll on religious observance. Even if the home environment is 100% observant.

One need not look any further than our own history in America prior to the advent of Jewish education as we know it today. When there were few religious schools, many observant Jews had little choice but to send their children to a public school. Although many stayed religious, many did not – absorbing the values of that school and seeing their own home environment as irrelevant to their eventual lives.

If on the other hand if you are in an environment where everyone is more or less on the same page religiously - the chances of that happening are substantially reduced. I therefore cannot stress enough the importance of a religious day school and high school education. If you want to assure that your children will be observant, that is the best way to assure it. (There are no guarantees of course. Many young people that have attended these schools have gone OTD for reasons that are beyond the scope of this post. But a religious school is still the best way to assure the continued observance by your children),

This finally brings me to a disappointing article by Forward columnist, Bethany Mandel. She and her husband have been dissuaded from sending their children to a religious school because of those oppressive tuition costs. Which she saw in that newly published spreadsheet. Here is how she put it:

When I became Orthodox I had every intention of doing so. But upon having children, we did the math and realized that for the number of children we want to have (I refuse to have fewer Jewish children for the sake of tuition payments) multiplied by the amount we would be on the hook to pay, even after financial aid, our bill would almost certainly exceed my likely take-home pay.

This has led her to a decision to home school her children. While it is true that they may not have the influences of the public school - her children will not have the influences of a peer group and educators of a religious school. Besides, I’m not convinced that the typical parent is capable of doing the job of highly trained professional educators - to teach their children the knowledge required to excel in both religious and secular studies.

Her children will also not get the positive reinforcement that interacting on a daily basis with a religious peer group and the variety of teachers they would have. I believe Ms. Mandel will be unwittingly shortchanging them by not allowing them to have the full measure of Jewish education that only a school flied with trained professionals can provide. Even with all of the possible flaws she might find in the one she chooses.

I would, therefore, urge Ms. Mandel and like minded parents that have been scared off by those high tuition figures – to reconsider. I cannot emphasize enough the importance of a peer group environment to a child’s religious future. Although that alone is not enough. I feel it is of vital importance as a added edge to an observant end. What about the cost? I am absolutely convinced that her financial concerns will be addressed by the scholarship assistance she will surely receive. No one is ever asked to pay more than they make.

Rabbi Osher Schapiro

What a contrast. In more ways than one. There is Rabbi Osher Shapiro, the son of the Chasidic Naroler Rebbe of Stamford Hill section of London - an area populated by Charedim (mostly Chasidim if I understand correctly).

And there is Rabbi Zechariah Wallerstein – a clean shaven Orthodox Jewish motivational speaker with a large following who is invited to speak to young people all over the country.

One might think that when speaking about the internet and items that can access it, that the bearded Chasidic Rabbi Schapiro would be haranguing against it urging people to follow the ban on such devices, While the more modern looking Zechariah Wallerstein would have a more sensible view about these devices… urging caution and education about how to properly use them. Well, if that is what you think, you would be wrong.

One may remember Rabbi Wallerstein from a couple of incidents. One was where he railed against Orthodox women exercising via the popular Zumba dance - claiming that by doing this religious women would end up pole dancing or worse! Even if they were doing Zumba in an all women’s exercise class.

More recently he told survivors of sexual abuse to just get over it, stop defining themselves that way and get on with their lives… oblivious to the hurt he caused so many survivors with such comments! He later apologizedfor hurting survivors which was not his intent - but still stood by his original message. (Which isn’t much of an apology – if you think about it.)

During the course of his original harangue to sex abusers, he mentioned in passing with apparent pride that he has no smart phone. That is a device that among other things can access the internet. That he has a websiteadvertising his school Ohr Nava (a website in which he extols his own perceived virtues) is a contradiction to that message did not occur to him.

He recently made an appearance at a girls high school where he had yet another one of his harangues. Instead of inspiring them, he scolded them. He apparently told the young students there to get rid of their smart phones. And if they did, he promised them they would get Shiduchim. If they didn’t, he implied they wouldn’t.

I don’t know how this guy survives let alone has any kind of following. But he does. He has an entire school full of them. If my daughter were in that school, I would pull her out faster than a speeding bullet! If there is anything that will turn young people away from their Yiddishkeit, it’s telling them how bad they are for having this technology. And practically promising them life as a spinster if they don’t change.

I know that smartphones are a problem. Not just for teenagers. But even for adults much older. They are addictive to many people regardless of age or religious affiliation. And they can be abused in a variety of inappropriate ways. Not the least of which is porn addiction. That’s why the Charedi world - especially the Chasidic world with its all or nothing approach to everything - has banned these devices. I was recently reminded of that ban while attending a Mincha Minyan during my short visit to New York last week. I entered a Chasidic Shul for Mincha, couldn’t find a Siddur so I used my I-phone siddur app.

As I was sitting waiting for the Shaliach Tzibur (cantor) to begin, I noticed a sign on the wall which read (in Yiddish) that people with smartphones will not be allowed into the Shul! I didn’t know if I was going to be asked to leave or not. But I decided to take a chance and Daven there. In the end I wasn’t asked to leave. But that event demonstrated to me that the ban is alive and well in these circles.

My approach to these things is that indeed these devices could be misused and could be detrimental. But at the same time – as those of us that have them know – they are very useful and can enhance our lives in many ways. It is for example an instant resource for information that could prove to be vital. Banning such a device is therefore not a solution to its dangers. Nor is disposing them if you already have them ala Zechariah Wallerstein. Here is what Rabbi Osher Shapiro says about banning internet use. From YWN:

In short, the rav feels that based on his vast experience, the all-inclusive bans on the internet have made it more appealing to many and he feels this has contributed to youths defying the ban and beginning the path to a different lifestyle. Rabbi Shapiro explains the matter of youths off the derech is not a new concept and not one unique to this generation, a problem that was in existence before the internet and WhatsApp.

In a recent interview with Kikar Shabbos News, Rabbi Shapiro explains that instead of investing resources in love and affection towards these youths, we are busying ourselves with bans and prohibitions, which are not going to save them...

(T)he idea is not an all-inclusive ban but to rather educate the young as to how one properly uses the internet, which is an integral part of today’s world…

“This generation should be embraced and loved and that is what is missing. I mean anyone who uses the internet with supervision or filter can bring a great deal of good into the world and spread spirituality”

You hear that, Zechariah Wallerstein?

What makes Zechariah Wallerstein’s message so grievous is not only that he urged these young women to get rid of those devices. The truth is that I would be reluctant give my own daughters such a device at such a young age. The potential for misuse at that age is too great. What makes it so grievous is that he threatened those that already have smartphones with a heavenly punishment if they don’t give them up.

What kind of motivational speaker does this?! How does this communicate the pleasant ways of the Torah? How can this make any student at that school feel good about themselves? How can it not make them feel guilty if they don’t give up their smartphones? I doubt that there will be that many (if any) young women in that school that will be following his advice. So what has he accomplished? How does he have the gall to tell them what their heavenly punishment will be if they don’t! Is he now a Navi too? Is God talking to him?

I have to wonder what it is that people see in Zechariah Wallerstein that motivates them to send their daughters to his school… and what it is the young women that attend it see in him. They obviously see something. But I see someone with an ego identity that is hugely out of proportion to who he actually is.

A Satmar Chinuch Lesson

The Destruction of the Charedi World?

Prioritizing the Trivial

The Truth about YCT

YCT: Open? Or Modern?

YCT head, Rabbi Asher Loaptin

The Bilitzer Rebbe

Where Are You, Agudah?

The Trump-Clinton Saga Continues

You Can’t be Too Frum, Can You?

Sex Education in Religious Schools

Sex Education in Judaism: An Educator Responds.

I’m Not Sure – I’m Not Sure

The Way Things Could Be

Another Perspective on Yeshivat Chovevei Torah

Alienating the Secular Jew

Mr. Stoll: There is a Difference

Messianism, Outreach, and the Army

A Match Made in Heaven

Cost/Benefit - An Analysis of a Jewish Education

Get Rid of Your Smartphones – or Else!