Emes Ve-Emunah

YU's choice for its new president, Rabbi Dr. Ari Berman (Arutz 7)

I have never been a student at Yeshiva University (YU). But as an adherent of a Torah U’Mada my Hashkafos resemble those of YU. Which places a high value on a good secular studies education. Even now that my alma mater, HTC (Skokie Yeshiva), has become a part of Touro, I am still more at home with the Hashkafa of YU. HTC has morphed into a Torah U’Parnassa Yeshiva. Nothing wrong with that. But the YU Hashkafa is where my sympathies now lie.

It is because of its serious approach to both Limudei Kodesh (religious studies) and Limudei Chol (secular studies) that YU has been called the flagship institution of Modern Orthodoxy (MO). I still believe that is the case. Perhaps now more than ever because of competition for that title from the left. YCT is now claiming to represent Modern Orthodoxy saying that YU has moved significantly to the right and has abandoned its right to be called that.

As most people know, I strongly dispute that YCT represents Modern Orthodoxy. It in fact represents an entirely new faction called Open Orthodoxy (or Liberal Orthodoxy if you prefer). They may be modern. They may be liberal. But that does not make them representative of the mainstream Modern Orthodoxy that is YU.

They are in fact anything but mainstream. They are at best highly controversial and at worst, not accepted as Orthodox at all by other mainstream segments of Orthodoxy. While there are some people that agree with YCT’s Hashkafa and agree with them about YU, I am not one of them. And neither are my fellow Centrists. Or any other segments of Orthodoxy to their right. (There is no one calling themselves Orthodox to their left.)

Which brings me to Rabbi Ari Berman, the heir apparent to Richard Joel, president of YU. Mr. Joel is about to retire and YU has been searching for a candidate to replace him. They have apparently decided Rabbi Dr. Ari Berman. I had never heard of him before this. And had no knowledge about what he would bring to the table. A brief description in the Forward helped. I see that he is well versed in both religious and secular studies having earned Semicha from YU and a PhD from Hebrew University in Israel. But it still left me wanting. Would he pull the Yeshiva to the right or left? What is his Hashkafa? Will he be the next Norman Lamm? Or the next Richard Joel?

My guess is he will be the next Ari Berman. But based on what I read of him in the Forward and in a Cross Currents post, I believe he will be following more in the footsteps of Dr. Lamm. This is not to disparage Richerd Joel. I believe he has been unfairly accused of mismanaging YU’s finances - turning the surplus left by Dr. Lamm into a huge deficit under his tenure.

While I agree that he shares some of the responsibility for that, you can’t blame it all on him. He did, however (by his own admission) lack the intellectual heft of his predecessors, Drs. Lamm, Belkin, and Revel. Both in Limudei Kodesh and in Limudei Chol. What Richard Joel did have and what attracted him to YU’s board was the fund-raising abilities.

Many people questioned the wisdom of that at the time (including me). The response was that the most important thing was funding the school. The intellectualism of the president was secondary and not as important. So much for putting all your faith into one facet of his job!

It seems that this time they have changed course and sought someone more along Dr. Lamm’s lines. Although Rabbi Berman has no fundraising experience, the YU board feels that his connections will help him there.

I for one am happy to see this. After reading Rabbi Addlerstein’s excerpts from a 1998 Jewish Action article Rabbi Berman authored, I am even more pleased. Because it tells me that he has the same goals I have… of uniting the right wing Charedi world with the left wing Modern Orthodox world (Centrists are the new left since Open Orthodoxy has claimed those further to my left for themselves.). This is something I have been preaching as far back as I can remember. In that vein here is what Rabbi Berman said:

I had the opportunity to meet privately with one of the leading American roshei yeshivah in the Chareidi world. In the course of our conversation, I said to him that it would be wonderful if we could arrange a small learning program during the summer which would bring together the best talmidim from his yeshivah with those from Yeshiva University. This would give the next generation of Orthodox leaders and roshei yeshivah a chance to meet with one another, to talk to one another, and to learn Torah with and from one another.

If that sounds familiar, I have expressed thoughts like this many times in the past. What unites us far surpasses what divides us. But how that Rosh Yeshiva responded disappointed me – although it didn’t surprise me:

After hearing my proposal, this rosh yeshivah shook his head and said: “This is very difficult, this is very difficult….”

Why?! Why is it difficult? Do we not learn the same Torah and observe the same Mitzvos? Do we not share the same basic Mesorah? What is the right afraid of? Well it turns out that not all Charedi Roshei Yeshiva think the way this Rosh Yeshiva did:

Twenty years ago, (in the 70s) Rabbi Shlomo Berman, the son-in-law of the Steipler and then a rosh yeshivah in the Ponevez Yeshivah, suggested to Julius Berman (then the president of the Orthodox Union) that if the Union wanted to do something significant for Orthodoxy, it should arrange a Yom Iyun with shiurim delivered by roshei yeshivah identified with different groups within Orthodoxy, such as Agudas Yisrael and Mizrachi, lead by Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky and Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik.

When asked what would be the purpose of such a program, Rav Berman responded, “Tzu lernen der ‘olam az Torah iz umparteyish; es balangt nit nor tzu di Mizrachi uder di Agudah, nit nor tzu Chassidim uder Misnagdim; es balangt tzu Klal Yisrael.” (“To teach the community that Torah is non-partisan; it belongs not only to Mizrachi or to Agudah, not only to Chassidim or to Misnagdim; it belongs to Klal Yisrael.”

(What are the odds of a conversation like this happening where everyone involved is named Berman but not related? But I digress.) Why can’t there be more thinking along these lines in the Charedi like that of Rabbi Sholom Berman in the Charedi world ? There is so much we could learn form each other. What a wonderful and uniting thing that would be!

This is a President that I can really relate to. Someone that has his Hashkafos straight. Someone who has some heft in both Limudei Kodesh and Limudei Chol. Someone that hearkens back to the days of Drs. Lamm, Belkin, and Revel. And someone with the same vision I have. I look forward to bigger and better things from MO’s flagship Yeshiva, YU, in the future.

Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Arutz Sheva)

At an Agudah convention a few years ago, one of the themes was about the dangers of owning and using a smartphone. Accessing porn or anything else that is illicit is a lot easier to hide on one of those things. That’s because no one else has access to it but the owner/user. Unlike a desktop or laptop, whose screens are much larger and can be seen by others - a smartphone screen is very small and is generally under full control of the user at all times. This means that the fear of discovery that might be felt by a laptop or desktop user who accesses porn, is practically eliminated by use of a smartphone.

That smartphones were deemed a far greater danger than laptop and desktop computers is an understandable conclusion. If you are a curious teenager with a smart phone and a healthy sex drive… well you can figure out the rest.

This doesn’t mean that every teenager will go there. But it does mean that those that do will very likely not be discovered. And statistics show that the most accessed sites on the internet are porn sites. So, do the math.

Which is why I am opposed to giving teenagers a smartphone. Even if you trust them. You just never know and why take the chance? Unfortunately, a lot of parents seem to ignore this common sense advice and allow their children to have smart phones. Which can be accessed by friends without smartphones. How to deal with this is beyond the scope of this post. (Although I don’t really have a good answer for that). I mention all this to point out that the concerns of that the Agudah expressed that evening are quite valid.

But that doesn’t mean we should ban them from our lives. What about the porn and other taboo sites? Well, if one is a mature adult beyond their teenage years - hopefully the use of smartphones will be done responsibly. There are of course no guarantees. The fact that porn is so widely accessed tends to argue against even adults owning one.

However , a smartphone is just too valuable a tool to abandon from our lives. One might say we still should despite its value because you are otherwise playing with fire. But fire is too valuable an asset to our lives to abandon it. The same thing s true with smartphones. I am not going to go into detail. But those of us that own and use one know why this is true.

This was illustrated by one Agudah Executive Vice President, Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zweibel, one of the speakers at the above-mentioned Agudah convention. As he was talking about the dangers of smartphones, he pulled out his own smartphone to access something relevant to his speech… apologizing for it as he did it.

I found this to be quite humorous and contradictory to his message. But as I was told later by an official of Agudah that they require all of their officials and spokesman to have one.

If that doesn’t show how valuable it is even to the right, than nothing does. What about the possible porn that Rabbi Zweibel might access? (I am not accusing him of that. Just asking a hypothetical question.) Well, they trust him and I guess they realize, just like the rest of us do that the good outweighs the bad.

Then there is Israel There is a story today in Arutz Sheva that illustrates just how serious the smartphone ban is there. R’ Chaim Kanievsky declared that if a Kallah finds out that her Choson has a smartphone, the wedding should be canceled:

According to a report Tuesday morning in theKikar HaShabbat website, Rabbi Kanievsky explained his decision, saying that a person within the haredi community who ignored the directives not to possess such a device would not raise children devoted to the faith.

Such a person, the rabbi warned “would not have generations of kosher descendants.”
Rabbi Kanievsky has been at the forefront of efforts within the haredi community to ban cellular devices with internet and text message capability, as well as unfiltered internet connections. Phones without those capabilities and which can be used for calls only are known as "kosher phones."

This is quite a departure from even the Agudah position. To be fair, this is as much about breaking the rules as it is about using the smartphone. If you are part of a community that bans them, then you have shown that you disregard the rules set in place by people you see as your leaders. That may very well be an indicator of future violations along the lines R' Kanievsky speaks. So this is not as outrageous as it fist might appear.

But still, I have to wonder if R’ Kanievsky is more worried about smartphone misuse or breaking the rules. If it is about rules, what about other rules? Would he tell a Kallah to call off a wedding if her Choson doesn’t for example wear a hat and jacket for Davening? Or if he used non Chalav Yisroel products? Or decided to join the IDF (even Nachal Charedi) instead of Kollel? My guess is that he would not. Certainly not in the current ‘Shiddach crisis’ climate. At least I hope not.

If the 2 of them want to get married and they fully understand and accept the other’s shortcomings, there should be no ‘calling off’ the wedding.

I would apply this to smartphones too. If the Kallah knows that her Chsoson has a smartphone and accepts it, I would respectfully disagree with R’ Kanievsky. I don’t think the wedding should be called off. Unless he has a porn addiction for which there are probably cues in his behavior which signal something like that - breaking an engagement is a pretty serious consequence of smartphone ownership. In all likelihood, the Choson probably uses it the way the most of rest of us do – responsibly and for good purpose.

I would therefore hope that R’ Kanievsky reconsiders the consequences of breaking off a marriage because of that rule violation. And that he even rethinks his outright ban on smartphones. And instead just advises people not to have them rather than ban them outright. Hopefully he will understand why it is considered such an important tool that even the Agudah Moetzes requires its officials to own one.

If it were up to me, I would make cheeseburgers Kosher. If it were up to me I would change a lot of Halachos. I might even get rid of all of them and become a humanist. Or maybe a hedonist. Or both.

But of course I can’t do that. Because I am not God. I am a believing Jew whom God has commanded to lead his life a certain way. This is why I follow Halacha. Although I do love much of the Torah’s requirement of us - like Shabbos – I am not necessarily in love with every single detail of it. But I follow it because I believe that the ultimate good can only be defined by God. That I don’t like or understand a Godly directive, is irrelevant to my following it.

Those directives are what the Torah and its interpretation by the sages in the Mishna and Talmud is all about. As is the interpretation of those sages by Rishonim (medieval commentators) and Achronim (later commentators) all the way up to our day and going forward.

This and our belief system as outlined by Maimonides 13 fundamental principles of faith is what Orthodox Judaism is all about. (While there has been some recent discussion challenging some of Maimonides 13 principals for a variety of reasons, mainstream Orthodoxy considers them all important. Discussion of this is beyond the scope of this post.)

As an Orthodox Jew I am required to advocate for observance of Halacha to all Jews in all cases. This is based on the principle of Kol Yisroel Areivim Zeh LaZeh. Every Jew is responsible for the welfare (both material and spiritual) of his fellow Jew.

How to go about that is a legitimate question. I am a believer in the honey approach over the vinegar approach. The one thing I oppose is what has come to be known in Israel as ‘shoving religion down people’s throats’. I am opposed to legislation that does that. Because instead of winning over the hearts and minds of the vast majority of Jews in Israel that are traditional to one extent or another (but not Orthodox) you end up alienating them. In some cases turning them into enemies!

‘The ways of the Torah are pleasant’. That should be the guiding principle when trying to show non observant Jews the beauty of a Torah observant lifestyle. If we want to convey this message we need to inspire them. Not hit them over the head with a hammer.

This is one of the reasons I oppose things like closing down all the streets or public parking lots in Jerusalem on Shabbos. Much as I would like to see the holiest city on the planet be fully Shomer Shabbos, forcing non observant Jews to do that is the wrong way to go about it.

But this approach has its limits. There are some areas of Halacha that may upset the majority of Israelis that nevertheless must be maintained in the public domain. One of those in the area of conversions to Judaism. If one is to be true to his beliefs one cannot allow those beliefs to be undermined because they are not popular. Even in a Democracy like Israel. Because Israel is not only a Democracy, it is Jewish State. Which brings me to a story in the Forward that reported on a recent poll taken of both Israelis and Americans:

A large majority of American and Israeli Jews say Israel should recognize marriages and conversions performed by Reform and Conservative rabbis.

A poll conducted by The Jerusalem Post and the American Jewish Committee found that 74 percent of American Jews and 62 percent of Israeli Jews believe the non-Orthodox rites should be recognized. The findings were released Tuesday.

In Israel, the Orthodox Chief Rabbinate controls all religious ceremonies — including marriage, divorce, conversion and burial — and those performed by non-Orthodox clergy are not recognized by the state.

The survey of 1,002 Americans and 500 Israelis also found that a plurality of American Jews, 48 percent, think Orthodox control of the Rabbinate weakens ties between their community and Israel. A similar portion of Israeli Jews, 54 percent, do not want Orthodox control over religious matters in their country.

While this poll was about marriages and pluralism at the Kotel as well as conversions, I want to focus on conversions. Which in my view is the most important of those issues.

I never had any doubt that non Orthodox Jews would favor allowing non Orthodox conversions. But as a public policy matter that affects the personal status of every Jew, recognizing conversions which are not considered valid by all denominations would create a Pandora ’s Box of who is and is not considered a Jew. Which among other things affects who a Jew can Halachicly marry.

It’s not that I don’t want to be fair to non Orthodox rabbis. I would love to be. But I can no more accept a non Halachic conversion than eat a cheeseburger, much as I would like to do both.

That said, if I saw a non observant Jew eating one at a McDonalds, I would never go in there and admonish them – embarrassing them in public. I wouldn’t even do it in private. Although I may be obligated to get them to stop admonishment is not the way to do it.

But when it comes to public policy that affects us all, I have to take a stand that is unpopular to the majority and oppose the Jewish State passing a law that would recognize non Orthodox conversions. There has to be a system in place that assures that every conversion done is recognized by all. Not just some. If not, you have chaos! Recognizing conversions by one denomination that are not recognized by another would make Israeli society more divided than ever!

This is not about rejecting fellow Jews. This isn’t about shoving anything down anyone’s throat. This is about making sure that when someone says he is a Ger Tzedek – a righteous convert, that he or she is accepted by all.

That being said, I do think there has been some heavy handedness in this department by the Chief Rabbinate. And some serious controversy about which Orthodox conversions are and are not accepted. That has to be corrected. I believe that people of good will can accomplish that. What cannot happen, however, is to abandon Halacha in favor of the public will.

*The original photo accompanying this post has been replaced. It was too easily linked to the post title by readers which made it seem like the title was message about the person in the photo. Although that was never my intent. I now see how that mistake can easily be made. I apologize for that. And specifically apologize to that individual, his family, and friends if it cost them any embarrassment.

Image from Shan and Toad - a high-end children’s clothing retailer (JTA)

“When you talk about Jews, especially Orthodox Jews… you’re talking about money.” “The money of ill gotten gains.” “Jews are a bunch of unethical crooks out to take financial advantage of their gentile neighbors.” “Who they see as a bunch of rubes - suckers begging to be swindled!”

I can’t think of too many antisemitic canards that are more stereotypically applied to the Jewish people than the above. Thankfully in this great country of ours, the vast majority of the American people know that this is a lie. Or do they? Read on.

The above sentiments are – and have been – the sentiments of antisemites throughout our history. The great playwright William Shakespeare utilized that stereotype in the character of Shylock, the subject of his play, The Merchant of Venice. Shylock was a moneylender that loaned money to his rival Antonio – using as security an actual pound of his flesh if he did not pay him back the loan. When Antonio defaulted on the loan, Shylock demanded his pound of flesh.

Many have defended Shakespeare on several grounds. One of which is by pointing to Shylock’s famous monologue ‘Hath not a Jew eyes?’ It shows that Shylock was created by the very antisemitism he experienced as a Jew living in the Christian Europe of his day. ‘The villainy you teach me I will execute’ says Shylock.

I am here not to bury Shakespeare, nor to praise him. I am merely pointing out that the stereotype of Jews financially abusing their gentile neighbors has been around for a long time.

That the American people mostly realize that the Jewish people are not like this is perhaps only by the grace of God. Because unfortunately, there have been too many incidents of this by people that are identifiably Orthodox Jews. Which gives the American people ample reason to judge us that way. Grace of God that they generally don’t!

It takes but a few very public religious Jews displaying illegal or unethical behavior for people to jump to the erroneous conclusion – that all Jews are like that. Which is why I – as an Orthodox Rabbi - so quickly condemn them when stories these are reported in the media. I am not going to name names. But if you have been reading this blog long enough, you know who they are. The list of names spans all Hashkafos: Charedi, Yeshivish, Chasidic, Sephardi, and Modern Orthodox.

Well now there is another reason to further that negative stereotype. And it involves more than one public figure. It seems there is a pattern of unethical – and even dishonest behavior on the part of entire Orthodox communities. Or at least enough people from those communities that may result in the most widespread Chilul HaShem (based on financial fraud) in my lifetime. From JTA:

On Wednesday, JTA reported that Shan and Toad, a high-end children’s clothing retailer, had a very specific return policy: Customers could return non-sale items for a full refund — except for residents of five communities in New York and New Jersey, all of which have a significant Orthodox population.

Those living in those zip codes, which include Brooklyn and Passaic, New Jersey, could exchange unworn items or return them for store credit only — a policy that some decried as discrimination against Orthodox Jews.

But in an e-mail to JTA sent Thursday, Shana Laub, the owner of the online shop, denied allegations that her company’s return policy was in any way discriminatory against Orthodox Jews.

“Thank you for the opportunity to explain my return policy and its genesis and hopefully repair both any damage done and my reputation,” the message read.

(Store owner Shana) Laub emphasized that her store accepted returns from all areas, and that residents of these five areas could still return unworn clothes for store credit. She said she implemented the more restrictive return policies because “the survival of the business had been threatened by abuse of its return policy among customers in a few concentrated areas,” she wrote.

She continued: “Those customers would place large orders and return all, or nearly all of the items they had purchased, often in poor condition, and only after a substantial delay.”

Taking advantage of a return policy is one thing. But using a purchased item and then returning it for a full refund is Geneiva! A violation of Jewish law. (As if anyone might think it isn’t!) People that do that are guilty of deception and theft. They are so careful to observe ritual laws like Shabbos and Yom Tov; keeping Kosher; fasting on Yom Kippur; keeping the very difficult laws of family purity; laws; praying daily... that they do all these things and more religiously - and yet feel absolutely no guilt stealing from non Jewish or non Orthodox Jewish merchants that are only trying to make a living - belies their actual religiosity.

Being a religious Jew does not mean only keeping Shabbos. It means not stealing! (As if that isn’t obvious!) It means not being deceptive by pretending to buy merchandise, use it, and then return it for a full refund!

I have known people that do this kind of thing. Suffice it to say that I didn’t think much of their ethics. But the fact that this practice seems to be so widespread is a shock to me. If I weren’t an Orthodox Jew - knowing that most Jews do not behave like this, I would draw the very same conclusions with which I began this post!

What kind of Jewish education have we Orthodox Jews had that allows so many of us to cheat others without an iota of guilt?! I suspect not a very good one!

Image for illustration purposes taken from YWN

Prejudice. An ugly word, in my view. Prejudging anything is unfair and unjust. Especially when it comes to people. Nonetheless we are all victims of it. Whether as recipients or as adherents. As recipients the Jewish people needs no commentary. But as holders of prejudicial views there is a lot that needs to be said.

Just a few days ago I was present at a conversation where a good friend of mine – an otherwise truly decent fellow – spoke in derogatory terms about a minority. Casting them as a group in a less than favorable light. Although I made a point of it being a prejudicial comment - the conversation proceeded without comment by anyone else - as though it was a commonly known fact.

I have been around a long time. And this kind of talk is common. Of course you will never hear anyone say it in public. But in private conversation it is almost a forgone conclusion – common knowledge about the inferiority of certain groups of people. ‘We all know it’s true.’ But we can’t say so publicly’... seems to be a common attitude. Not by all of us. Hopefully most of us would not feel that way. But certainly far too many of us do. I hear it all the time from otherwise fine and decent people. Good people that would give you the shirt off of their backs if they thought you needed it.

One can speculate why this is the case, There are a variety of reasons that this kind of prejudice exists. But the one thing that is common among them all, is that it is wrong! Judging someone unfavorably because of his skin color, ethnicity or religion is evil. There are no ‘ifs ands or buts’ about it!

What happens when these prejudices arise in institutional situations? What happens for example when a child is denied entry into a school because of such prejudice? A few years ago, there were serious attempts by some Charedi girls schools in Israel to bar Sephardi students. Officials at those schools denied the accusations of discrimination as the reason. (Don’t they always?) They claimed that new rules were instituted to assure compliance with certain religious standards. The problem was that for some ‘strange reason’ it only affected Sephardi girls. For some reason, only they did not live up to the new ‘religious standards’ of the school.

If I recall correctly both Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv - and later, Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman didn’t buy those arguments and insisted that those girls be admitted to the school. Arguments that these girls would lower the standards of the school if they were admitted fell on deaf ears. Because both of these religious leaders understood that the real impediment to their entry was ethnic prejudice against Sephardim.

Well a similar situation has now reared its ugly head again, it appears. Parents whose children were denied entry into Charedi school complained to Israeli officials this time. From YWN:

While the matter of discrimination in chareidi girl’s high schools (seminar) is not new, this administration, perhaps more than any preceding it, has announced it will not tolerate such policies and will act immediately and swiftly to prevent it. Previous governments have declared war and promised to end it, but this administration is actually taking the necessary steps, making good on threats to cut school funding.

In the latest incident, Director of the Education Ministry Chareidi District Itzik Zahavi has taken stern action against five high schools accused of continuing to discriminate against girls.

In a letter sent to the schools, it is explained that if they continue to refuse girls assigned to the schools by the ministry, they will face a harsh response including cutting their budget from the ministry. The schools that received the letter include Darchei Rachel (Mendelson), Netivot Chachma (Modi’in Illit), Bnos HaRama (Beit Shemesh), Ateret Rachel (Tiveria) and Einhorn.

Ministry Director-General Michal Cohen explains she has decided to accept the appeal filed by parents claiming discrimination.

Zahavi explains the schools have remained defiant despite earlier warnings and the ministry will not tolerate the discrimination, hence the budgets to the school will be cut.

These schools are not going to take this threat sitting down. From YWN:

As a result of “state involvement in chareidi education” an urgent gathering has been announced for principals of Beis Yaakov high schools, being held on Sunday night 15 Elul. The Union of Seminaries (frum girls’ high schools) is arranging the urgent assembly, reportedly at the behest of HaGaon HaRav Aharon Yehuda Leib Shteinman Shlita…. to discuss how to respond to the state’s involvement regarding who is and is not accepted to schools.

I have no idea what Rav Ahron Leib Shteiman will say. But I hope he will continue to fight the discriminatory policies of these schools. That said, I understand why he might not. He may very well feel that any government interference in the Charedi educational system should be fought. (I’m sure this is the hope of those schools). R’ Shteinman may feel “Let’s get back control of our schools – and then deal with the discrimination issue - in house - later”.

Perhaps. I can understand it but I don’t agree with it and hope it doesn’t happen. If these schools haven’t listened to their own leaders - who have in the past condemned discrimination... or if they have somehow circumvented their leaders’ admonition with “rules” that somehow end up applying only to certain ethnic groups, then the government should step in. My hope is that R’ Shteinman will surprise them and stand his (anti discrimination) ground.

It may not be pleasant to have the government get involved but one has to consider the consequences if they don’t. Because as history seems to have shown - when it comes to discriminatory policies, they apparently don’t listen to what their leaders say. Which results in great hurt and an injustice for these young Jewish girls. When prejudice trumps rabbinic authority, maybe - just maybe - the government should step in.

Guest Contribution by RYS

Some members of the East Ramapo School Board as constructed last year

Just over a year ago, in June of 2015, I had written post about the optics of an Orthodox Jewish majority running the East Ramapo Central School District. They were democratically elected by an electorate that is predominantly Orthodox. At the time I said that they had done nothing wrong in executing their duty and that the problems of underfunded public schools in that district were probably sourced in a flawed state allocation formula.

But I also said that ever since the school board had come to consist predominantly of Orthodox Jews, the perception of a flourishing Jewish parochial school system versus an underfunded public school system just looked bad – even though there was nothing untoward going on. Which is why I chose the title of that post to read: Sometimes Being Right – is Wrong.

That post generated a heated exchange totaling a whopping 267 comments.

The following is a response to that post and many of the comments based on subsequent developments. It is authored by RYS, a frequent commenter here. RYS grew up in and is part of the Charedi community in the New York area; and attended traditional Yeshivos both in the US and Israel. He learned in Kollel for a number of years and has spent the last 30 years in a variety of positions in Jewish communal service. I know his identity and have had many email correspondences with him. He currently has an important communal position, and is a passionate defender of the Charedi world (albeit a bit over the top on occasion). Even though we occasionally disagree, I respect his views. His words follow:

First I would like to thank Rabbi Maryles for this opportunity. Full disclosure we have has a lengthy correspondence over this issue for the last few days, when he was kind enough to offer me a guest post to elaborate. Being how much pride Rabbi Maryles takes in his blog, taking great care that all posts both his own and guest ones are of the highest quality, I will do my best to live up to those standards.

For the last few years there has been lots of talk both in the general media, as well as here on Emes V’Emunah about the East Ramapo Central School District (ERCSD) in a suburb about 30 miles north of New York City in Rockland County. It is an issue that has aroused passions on each side, has been debated endlessly in the New York State Legislature, and was recently a major issue in a local election.

For a brief background, the village of Monsey, NY (which is part of the town of Ramapo) has been transformed from a sleepy hamlet 50 years ago, to a major Orthodox Jewish population center with Greater Monsey now including a number of surrounding towns including Spring Valley, Wesley Hills, New Hempstead, Concord, Forshay, Pomona and others. It is teeming with shuls , yeshivas, shopping and all other amenities, and includes two exclusive incorporated all Chasidic villages.

As with any group, these new residents began using their democratic rights and involved themselves in the political system. And this included the most local of all, elections to the local school board. And in due time the orthodox/Charedi representatives became a majority of the school board, which was roughly in proportion to their share of the population.

As the orthodox population grew, the Board was faced with a major dilemma. In NY State, schools are funded in two ways. One is through property taxes, which is why more affluent suburban areas generally have better schools, as their tax revenue is higher. Whatever is not covered by property taxes, the state makes up the shortfall. However the state formula is based on the number of children enrolled in the public schools in each district. This is what caused the dilemma in ERCSD. Although there are about 25,000 schoolchildren in the district, only about a third attend public schools, as the vast majority attend yeshivas and other private schools. This consequently caused major budget shortfalls.

At the same time there are certain services that are state mandated for every child whether they attend public or private schools, including special education, remedial services and others. And so the Board either had to deny children their state mandated services or cut back in non essential areas of public schools like music sports etc. The cuts also included selling unused buildings as the public school population dwindled. Some of these cuts were painful, but with perennial funding shortfalls the board had no choice.

It didn’t take long for ugliness to ensue. Parents of public school children accused the democratically elected board of favoring the yeshiva children over their own and unfortunately many of these accusations had anti Semitic innuendos. The ERSCD was hit with a lawsuit accusing the board of depriving their children of a proper education, and the local elected officials got involved. One Elllen Jaffee a local assemblywoman even questioned on the floor of the New York State assembly if the orthodox Jews were legitimate voters as seen in this video.

As a result of this vitriol, calls were raised for an independent monitor with veto power over the democratically elected board. Thankfully the State Senate had the good sense to realize that such a monitor would be a blatant violation of the will of the local voters.

This month New York State held primary elections for the state legislature. Ms. Jaffee was up for re-election and was opposed by many in the orthodox community due to her antagonism towards those voters to whom she questioned their legitimacy. At the same time in a neighboring district, Aron Wieder a former School Board president, and currently a member of the Rockland County legislator ran in the Democratic primary. If successful , Mr. Wider would be the first Chasidic member of the New York State Legislature.

Once again the election brought out the usual complaints against the orthodox community. In an op ed in a local publication called the Rockland Voice, one Jeff Gillies in responding to an exhortation by Mr. Chaskel Bennett, a trustee of Agudath Israel of America urging people to vote with the quote “If You don’t vote you don’t matter”, wrote:

The deeper problem in Rockland County is that the ultra-religious sects for whom Mr. Bennet is working seemingly hold a belief that the electoral victories of their community comes with a license to trample the rights of the minority. This belief is the antithesis of everything our founding fathers worked to achieve, but it is also the simple truth of the matter.

So according to Mr. Gillies, voting for what you believe and for your rights is the antithesis of the founding fathers. Pretty strong words. And in a video postedon a Facebook page, Ms . Jaffee’s opponent Tom Gulla was lampooned as a creation of the “bloc”, while Aron Wieder was viciously caricatured as a member of the Taliban.

For the record both Ms. Jaffee and Mr. Wieder prevailed, although Mr. Wieder still has a Republican opponent in November.

On a blog post here a year ago last June dealing with this topic, Daniel Schwartz, a frequent commenter here, and a former president of the school board (who is not Charedi) was harshly attacked in the comments section primarily by an avowed atheist, using the moniker Rational (sic) Thinker, one who voluntary refrained from commenting here when the moderator placed him on permanent moderation due to his inability to keep his atheistic opinions off the blog. To his credit Mr. Schwartz refused to engage in any substance, just simply stating that the matter is before the courts and he will fight his battles there.

Well…the courts have spoken. As reported in Hamodia last week a federal appeals court upheld the right of the ERCSB board to fund yeshiva programs and that there was no harm done to public school parents. It is particularly noteworthy that the judge in his decision recognized that the underlying problem stems from an underfunded system.

In addition the state, recognizing the issue here has allocated an additional $3 million specifically earmarked for the public schools which is greatly alleviating the underlying problem.

In light of the above, I believe a retraction and apology is in order for all those who questioned the veracity of this school board.

Captured!

The recent spate of exploding bombs in New York and New Jersey (and a series of stabbings by an Islamist radical in Minnesota - making sure that his victims were not Muslims) once again raises the question of how safe we are from terrorist attacks.

After 9/11 unprecedented steps were taken by the US government to protect us from the kind of savagery perpetrated by suicidal radical Islamists on that day in 2001. Including the creation of the new cabinet level Department of Homeland Security. For the most part this has kept us relatively safe. At least when compared to European countries. But being ‘relatively’ safe is not the same as being safe – as this weekend has shown.

Thankfully no one was killed or seriously injured from those bombs. But the same cannot be said about other attacks this country has experienced from radical Islam. Boston, Orlando, San Bernardino, among other locations have experienced terrible carnage at the hands of those ‘true believers’.

As much as security has been increased in this country ...and as much as we seem to be safer than Europe, we are not free from the terrorism that is Radical Islam.

One may ask, ‘How can we improve our security?’ What can we do to eliminate or at least significantly reduce the incidence of deadly terror that hasn’t been done yet? This brings me to the current Presidential race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

Most people know that I am voting for Clinton… or more precisely against Trump. The reason is quite simple. As bad as Clinton might be, Trump scares me. I don’t want his impetuous hand on the nuclear trigger. Nor do I like his seat of the pants decision making process. Or his waffling on the issues while denying his views have ever changed. Or the other blatant lies which he refuses to acknowledge. Or his penchant for insulting women, immigrants, and the handicapped among others. Or his support from racists, bigots, and antisemites like Louis Farrakhan and David Duke. Or his lack of any experience governing. Or his obvious lack of knowledge on many issues of the day. Any one of those reasons is enough to reject his candidacy, let alone all of them. But I’ve said all this before.

There is one area, however, where his rhetoric is far more appealing. It is his determination to more effectively deal with Radical Islam. While it is true that he has not revealed his plans about how to do that, I like his attitude. So does the electorate, apparently. Mrs. Clinton’s double digit lead in the polls over Trump has completely evaporated. (Although that's probably due as much to her e-mail troubles, her own penchant for lying, health issues, and some foolish statements about Trump voters - as it is to his anti terror rhetoric).This means that half of the voting public in this country prefers Trump over Clinton! And no... half of them are not ‘deplorables’.

I have said in the past that based strictly on what I believe to be a better attitude towards Israel and its current leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, I would vote for Trump enthusiastically. Add to that his greater determination to fight radical Islam, and it would otherwise be a no brainer.

But there are those other ‘little details’ I mentioned. So the ‘no brainer’ is to vote for Clinton. I just wish she would be a little more ‘Trump-like’ in her approach to radical Islam. The initial responses of the two candidates to the bombings in New York and New Jersey tells you the story.

Trump said that we have to get tougher. Clinton said we need to examine the facts before we make any conclusions. Well… of course we have to examine the facts. But I did not hear any determination in her voice. Not this time and not really ever. What I have heard is a lot of gobbledygook about how it isn’t Islam doing this. It is just Jihadists doing it… as though Islam had nothing to do with it.

First let me reiterate what I have said many times. Most Muslims abhor what is being done by Islamist radicals in the name of their religion. The vast majority of the mainstream Islamic community – both lay leaders and clerics - have forcefully condemned it each time it has happened.

I live among Muslims here in West Roger Park. There is not a day that goes by that I don’t see several women dressed in Burkas walking down the street. They do not bother me in the slightest. They are as peaceful as can be... and very polite on those occasions when I interact with them. In fact there is a Muslim owned and operated grocery store near my home that has a sign in its window saying they carry products bearing an OU, OK, or CRC kosher symbol!

But you cannot get away from the fact that in just about every single case of recent terror in Europe and in the US, the perpetrators were motivated by a version of Islam that is preached by numerous Islamist clerics all over the world. This is an Islamic problem despite protestation to the contrary by peaceful Muslims and political apologists like Hillary Clinton.

What can Clinton do? …one might ask. Even if she granted that the problem is sourced in a radical version of Islam (which she hasn’t done and probably never will)? Well for one thing she should be advocating for the kind of extreme vetting of Muslims entering this country that Trump is advocating - and not increasing the quota of Muslim refugees.

Still, my heart goes out to these refugees, the vast majority of whom are suffering the ravages of war and are not terrorists. Of course this Medina Shel Chesed – benevolent nation - should be taking in these refugees under normal circumstances. But these are extraordinary times that call for extraordinary measueres.

All it takes is one. All it takes is one radical Islamist to sneak into this country disguised as a refugee and perpetrate the kind of terror experienced last weekend in New York and New Jersey by an immigrant from Afghanistan.

In this regard, Trump is right. Much as we would like to live up to our reputation as a benevolent country, protecting our citizens comes first. Which is why many states (including my own - Illinois) have barred Muslim refugees from entering. There is a reason Europe has had so much terrorist carnage recently. They have allowed a virtual free flow of Muslim refugees into their country. It was therefore impossible to vet them all properly and Islamist radicals snuck in disguised as refugees. While extreme vetting may not be foolproof, it is a lot better than opening up the floodgates.

Would a Trump presidency improve our security? Will his polices more effectively deal with terror? Will his administration be more adept at ridding the world of ISIS and like minded radical Islamists? I don’t know. But I assume he would be listening a lot more to his hawkish advisers than to his dovish ones… as our current President does.

Hillary Clinton whose overly cautious approach combined with a political correctness - both of which mimics Barack Obama’s approach - will produce the same results we have had till now. The last thing we need is more of the same. Ask the families of the victims in Boston, Orlando, and San Bernardino.

It’s too bad Trump is so unqualified for the job (for all the reasons I mentioned above – and probably a lot more). Because on the issues of Israel and fighting terror, I like what he’s saying a lot more than what I hear Clinton saying.

Shabbos without mothers or daughters (TOI)

Shoshanna Keats Jaskoll is a friend. I met her on my last trip to Israel. She is an intelligent woman whose sense of fairness and justice I admire. I often agree with her view on how certain segments of Orthodoxy treat women. But sometimes I don’t. Her latest contribution to the public discourse is featured in the Times of Israel and demonstrates both.

Shoshanna discusses two entirely different aspects of how women are treated and asserts that in both cases, there are great injustices being done. I agree with her on the first and disagree on the second. I have discussed both issues in the past. She knows my views.

First there is the issue of erasing women entirely from the public square. I am with her on this 100%. Her point is that it has become increasingly popular in right wing circles to erase women from the public square.

In the more extreme right of certain Chasidic groups this has always been the case. But this idea has been slowly creeping into the mainstream. Orthodox publications that in the past have had no Halachic - or even Hashkafic - issue with publishing pictures of modestly dressed are now beginning to restrict them.

Not long ago, for example, Agudah published 2 pictures of a group of Agudah activists that were in Washington DC. One picture had all of the participants in it. And one had the women photo-shopped out of it. They did this to accommodate those who wanted to publish a picture but do not publish pictures of women.

The Agudah Moetzes apparently see nothing wrong with publishing pictures of women. And even though I disagree with them about photo-shopping women out of a picture, I understand why they did it. They did it out of respect. So that to those who will not publish such pictures they offered a photo-shopped version of it sans women. They simply want the publicity in as many Orthodox publications as they can get.

We are beginning to witness this type of censorship more than ever. It’s almost becoming the norm. 2 major Charedi magazines refuse to do it even though they know there is nothing wrong with it. Why? What possible reasons does even the extreme right have for not publishing pictures of women?

They will explain it a question of Shmiras Eynayim – guarding your eyes. Men are too easily enticed by the sight of a woman – even in a picture. To avoid being a Michshol – a stumbling block to their male readers they have simply avoided publishing any pictures, not matter how modestly a woman is dressed. That normal men are not enticed by the sight of a modestly dressed woman seems to be lost on them. In our day women are as much in the public square as men. We all encounter each other all the time in all places. Which kind of makes eliminating pictures of women for purposes of Michsol ridiculous. Shoshanna also notes another argument they make. That they do this as:

a direct response to the permissiveness and sexualization of women in contemporary society and a way to protect them from men’s inevitable attractions.

That one segment of Orthodoxy still feels this way is up to them. However, once other segments start doing it, it hurts all of us. How does it hurt? Shoshanna explains:

Erasing the female form objectifies women just as much as the secular world’s overexposure does. And removing all images of mothers and daughters implies that a normal nonsexual image is somehow lewd and improper. And so we end up with images of Shabbat tables with no mother or daughters.

I am in complete agreement with her on this. But then she touches on an entirely different subject. Which has been the source of much controversy: leadership positions (as in rabbis) for women in the realm of Orthodoxy.

There I am in total disagreement with her. But not for the reasons she suggests. She believes strongly that women should be able to do whatever a man does as long as they are physically and intellectually capable of doing it. In principle I agree with her. Outside of Orthodox Judaism, the only qualifications for any position in the world are the 2 things I mentioned: physical and intellectual capacity. Gender should not be a factor at all. But when it comes to leadership positions in Orthodoxy that is another story.

I have no personal issue with a female rabbi. I have mentioned this before. When I was a rabbinic student in the early 70’s I wrote an essay in a now defunct Chicago Jewish publication advocating the ordination of women. I saw no problem with it then. But I failed to consider the break with Mesorah (tradition) this would be. Although there are other reasons breaking with Mesorah is the one most frequently given by those opposed to it.

For me, the more important issue is the broad based opposition to it by virtually all of mainstream Orthodox leadership. The one thing my opposition is not based on is misogyny. To imply that there are misogynistic reasons for my opposition is insulting.

Like it or not, unless there is legitimate dissent among the Poskim - we do have to listen to the majority rabbinic leadership in cases where their agreement crosses Hashkafic lines. And that is the case here. Even if there is a legitimate opinion by a Daas Yachid – a rabbi of stature who can show them why they are wrong.

At the risk of citing an analogy to illustrate this point - there is a famous story of the Tanur Shel Achnoi in the Gemarah in Bava Metzia (59b). God gave man the rabbinic authority to do decide matters of Halacha using certain hermeneutic principles. When they arrive at a decision based on them – it is the law even if they are proven wrong by a rabbi of stature. The highly respected rabbi in the Gemarah that tried that was excommunicated!

The opposition to female leadership roles in Orthodoxy is just about universal except for the extreme left. You can’t assert your views against that kind of opposition no matter how knowledgeable you are or how righteous you view your cause.

This is not to say that women can’t have any public role in Orthodoxy. They can and they do. But there has to be a consensus… an acceptance by at least some legitimate rabbinic segment of Orthodoxy if not all of them. This is the case with Yoetzet Halacha - which I support. As it stands now, only the most extreme left wing of Orthodoxy accepts women as rabbis. (Some would argue that segment is no longer even Orthodox).

What about the prophetess Devorah? Was she not a leader? How could she as a woman do it while we say a woman today cannot? The answer is quite simple. She was a prophetess and accepted by all. Being a prophetess puts her into an entirely different category that even the brightest and most talented woman or man in our day! But perhaps more importantly - Devorah was accepted by all! She was the exception that proved the rule.

I cannot therefore support Shoshanna in this. It has nothing to do with my own personal views. It has to do with acceptance. If a woman is not going to be accepted by virtually all of the mainstream leadership, then she cannot be considered a leader in Klal Yisroel no matter how many laypeople or individual rabbis on the left do.

Rabbi Dr. Ari Berman superimposed on an image of YU (Forward)

“Two years ago, the school lost $83 million. Last year it lost another $84 million. And six months ago Moody’s reported that it expects the school’s financial condition to continue to deteriorate.” This excerpt from a Forward article by Josh Nathan-Kaziz in the Forward underscores the question he asks in the title: “Can New President Ari Berman Save Yeshiva University?”

Losing $167 million in two years ain’t beanbag. Institutions with major budgets like those of Yeshiva University cannot survive if things keep going in that direction. Which is what Moody expects to happen. Of course Josh is not the first one to publish these concerns. Forward columnist Bethany Mandel asked the same question in a previous Forward article – asserting that Rabbi Berman was the wrong man for the job. And that in order to avoid the school’s collapse, YU needs a money man rather than a scholar at its helm. I hear her point. But I cannot agree with her conclusions despite what seems to be the catastrophic financial crisis YU is in.

It’s true that the survival of YU supersedes the Centrist Hashkafa of Torah U’Mada it promotes. If there is no school, it can’t promote its Hashkafa. But the reverse is also true. If a President is hired based strictly on his fund raising ability – the Hashkafa of the school can easily be compromised. At the very least it will have no direction and no one at the helm to articulate its ideals. YU’s centerpiece – its essence - is Yeshiva (RIETS). From which all else flows. That could be reduced to just another program of the university. Which would in my view be a disaster.

It is true that both the Yeshiva and the University are essential to the core value of Torah U’Mada. But the primary function of a Yeshiva University should be the Yeshiva. Torah study is the primary value in Torah U’Mada. Mada (secular knowledge) is secondary, albeit of high value and to be studied diligently. It cannot be the reverse.

Current YU president Richard Joel’s immediate predecessor, Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm, knew that. He should be seen as the prototype for all future Presidents. That is the kind of President YU needs now. He articulated best YU’s mission and philosophy. He was the rabbi/scholar hired to replace another giant, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Belkin.

When Dr. Lamm took over, YU was in financial crisis as well. I don’t know if the crisis was of current magnitude, but YU was definitely in deficit mode. Yeshiva University’s directors could have gone the financial route then too. It may have been the prudent thing to do, considering that without funding, YU might have eventually closed its doors. And yet they chose a scholar. Not a fundraiser.

Dr.Lamm rose to the occasion. Under his tenure, YU’s financial fortunes were reversed. By the time of his retirement, they had a surplus instead of a deficit. At the same time YU’s philosophy was not only maintained but clarified and promoted by its president. He was not only a scholar but a Talmud Chacham. This is what the image of YU president should be.

What about the financial crisis? Ye of little faith! Being a scholar does not mean you cannot rise to meet the financial needs of the school. Dr. Lamm proved that. To the best of my knowledge he had little to no fundraising experience and yet was able to put YU on its financial feet – and then some! Torah and Mada are not mutually exclusive. And neither is Torah knowledge, scholarship, and fundraising ability.

In my view someone like Rabbi Ari Berman is the right man for this job. Like Dr. Lamm, he was a pulpit rabbi before he became YU’s president. And like Dr. Lamm he is both a scholar and a Talmud Chacham. Ironically both men served as rabbi at the same synagogue before coming to YU. Although Rabbi Berman had a bit of a detour – living in Israel where he received his PhD from Hebrew University, that just adds to his resume in my view.

We are at a pivotal time in Jewish History. There are many forces pulling us in opposite directions. The left is trying to pull us away from tradition while the right pursues an ever increasing type of insularity. There has to be a strong institution with a strong leader at its helm that resides in the center – living and loving Torah while engaging with the rest of the world without compromising our values. That will be to our benefit and to theirs.

That is what I believe YU’s mandate should be. It has been and still is considered the flagship institution of Modern Orthodoxy. Perhaps the only ‘ship’ of Modern Orthodoxy. YU should lead the way and be a light unto ourselves, the Jewish people, and to the world. At the helm of such an institution you cannot place a fundraiser. You need someone with a background and credentials that can articulate the mission of the school. That was Rabbi Dr. Lamm. And that is what I believe Rabbi Dr. Berman could be – given the chance.

What about the money? You have to have faith in quality people that they will to rise to the occasion. Based on what I have read about him, I believe Rabbi Berman is that man. I agree with his vision of Achdus. It is the right message for our time. I will end with an excerpt from the Forward the excerpted my own excerpt of a Cross Currents excerpt from Jewish Action magazine - to which I say Amen:

(Rabbi Berman’s Hashkafos published in old edition of) Jewish Action magazine, resurfaced this week in the widely read Orthodox blog Emes Ve-Emunah. In the 2-decades-old article, written while he was at The Jewish Center, Berman advocates solidarity between the Modern Orthodox and the ultra-Orthodox. “The more we emphasize this for ourselves and develop intra-Orthodox programs that focus on our common bond of Torah and mitzvot, the more likely it will be that we can develop into one united community,”

Havdalah ceremony at a Crown Heights campus outreach event (RNS)

What should the goal of Orthodox outreach be to non Orthodox Jews? At first blush one might be tempted to say to convince them to become observant. Obviously it would be an ideal scenario to be able to convince God’s chosen people to obey His directives. Which He set forth in His Torah as interpreted by rabbinic leaders throughout history.

In some cases that does happen. But as Lubavitch-Chabad will tell you a very tiny slice of non Orhtodox Jew that they reach out to, actually become fully observant. What Chabad will also tell you, somewhat surprisingly, is that full observance is not necessarily their goal. Or at least not their only goal.

‘Who is actually fully observant anyway?’ …they might ask. Every Jew sins. Some more. Some less. Even Moshe, the greatest prophet who ever lived – sinned, as the Torah quite explicitly tells us.

Their goal is to connect Jews to their Judaism enough so that they will want to do more. They start small and hope that Jews looking for truth will seek to constantly improve their level of observance – as we all should. The best way for someone to become fully observant is do it incrementally – at their own pace. Doing it all at once is often disastrous. Going from no observance at all to becoming fully observant all at once is a prescription for failure in many cases. The change is too drastic.

This is a lesson all outreach organizations must learn, if they don’t already know it. I believe the successful ones do.

Which brings me to an article by Menachem Wecker in Religion News Service about a study of 2,400 Jewish graduates and their interactions with Chabad. It was led by Mark Rosen, an associate professor at Brandeis University. It appears Menachem was surprised to find that so many of the Jews Chabad caters to, are not observant at all. And yet Chabad never harangues them for not making any progress towards further observance. Chabad believes that whatever progress they make – even if it is just instilling pride in their Jewishness where it wasn’t there before – is considered a success.

Only 15 of the 2,400 respondents said they joined ranks and identify as Chabad. About 88 percent of those who visited Chabad at least once do not identify as Orthodox.

According to the article, Chabad has 3500 centers in more than 85 countries! That is quite an accomplishment. If the percentages of Jews becoming observant through Chabad is the same as it is with the graduates of Brandeis, that is less than one percent! One might therefore question whether all that effort is worth it.

Well, of course it is. 1% is better than 0%. And that 1% adds up to a lot of Jews.Aside from that - their goal of just instilling pride in fellow Jews about their heritage is alone worth the effort. It is also true that any successful outreach first requires instilling pride in one's heritage. And even if they never become personally observant at all, they may be motivated to better educate their children Jewishly. If they don’t do that - at the very least they will appreciate their kindness and their not being judgmental thus in many cases becoming Chabad supporters for life.

There may be some that are turned off by Chabad and will go the other way. But my guess is that this is a very small percentage of those Chabad comes into contact with.

What many people don’t realize is that when Chabad sees a Jew becoming observant through their efforts, they consider that a milestone no matter which Hashkafa they choose. This does not mean they don’t prefer that Jew become a Lubavitcher. They do. And they work towards that goal, too.

To that end, their outreach is specifically designed toward Chabad Chasidism. Their outreach includes teaching Jews uneducated about their Judaism - customs specific to Chabad but not necessarily mainstream. Without making that distinction.

An example of that is their view that every woman in a household (even young girls under the age of 12) should light candles for Shabbos. Signs to that effect can be seen everywhere. However, the prevailing mainstream custom is that only the female head of the household (usually the mother) light candles. Chabad's approach steers their outreach prospects unwittingly to include Chabad customs without their realizing it is only a Chabad custom.

If I have any quibble with them (aside from the Messianism issue which is beyond the scope of this post) it is that. The vast majority of the Jews they have successfully convinced to become observant - become Lubavitchers. Chabad will argue that since they are doing the outreach, they have the right to persuade them to become Lubavitchers too.

I get that. But I just wish they would explain that not all the customs of Lubavitcjh are universal to all Orthodox Hashkafos – and show them all the options. This is what NCSY does in their outreach work. Those who become observant through NCSY can be found in just about all Hashkafic segments of Orthodoxy including Chabad. NCSY does not favor one Hashkafa over another. They favor only the ‘fit’ of an individual to a Hashkafa. In my view this is a better approach.

But you can’t argue with success. Nor can you argue with the kinds of religious goals they set. Nor the fact that they retain a positive relationship with every single Jew with they have had any interaction. Even if they do not become observant at all. Nor with the massive numbers of Jews that have become observant through them which probably outnumbers all the Jews that became observant through other outreach programs combined! On this level we all have a lot to learn from them.

Rav Gedaia Dov Schwartz

Israel needs a Chief Rabbinate. If we are going to have a Jewish country, it has to be Jewish in more than name only - or even as a culture. It has to based on the very thing that makes the Jewish people a distinct nation, the Torah. Without which we are not a distinct people at all. It is the Torah that separates us from the rest of the world and gives us the right to exist as an independent nation in the land of Israel. As I often heard Rav Ahron Soloveichik say, ‘Without the Torah, the Arabs would be right’. We have no more right to that land than the Arabs.

But there is a Torah that gave us the land of Israel.We therefore have every right to be there – as a Jewish State. And defining that is key. Without a body that can interpret what does and does not make us Jewish, we may as well just give up the title ‘Jewish State’.

So when the issue of conversion to Judaism came up, I supported the idea of a central governing authority that would assure that all conversions to Judaism are legitimate. To an Orthodox Jew there is no other legitimate expression of Judaism than Orthodoxy. Which is defined as full acceptance of fundamental principles of our faith and uncompromising fealty to Halacha as interpreted by the most learned rabbis of each generation.

In furtherance of that goal the Chief Rabbinate has strengthened its control over what is and is not an acceptable conversion and has fought all non Orthodox movements attempts to have their conversions recognized. They have further coordinated their efforts with the North American rabbis in both the right wing and Centrist camp. The latter of which is represented by the RCA.

The RCA for its part tightened up its own conversions by certifying which of their conversion courts’ converts would be considered legitimate. This needed to be done. I am personally aware of wholesale conversions in the past by certain Orthodox members of the American rabbinate that by most standards were sham conversions – done to satisfy parents who could not face the fact that their child was marrying out. This move has for the most part ended that practice.

Unfortunately the Chief Rabbinate has apparently not been the honest broker that these steps should have made them. There has been more than one instance where legitimate Orthodox converts have been rejected by them. In some cases there was some back-pedaling where those that had been rejected had later been deemed legitimate after all.

But that problem has not been solved. I don’t know what it is, but I suspect that there is a lot of incompetence in the rabbinate. Because in my view the unthinkable happened. If the story in Ha’aretz as reported in the Forward is true, one of America’s most Torah knowledgeable and ethical elder rabbis has been dishonored. Not just any rabbi, but the sitting head of the RCA Beis Din, Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz:

The haredi Orthodox-dominated rabbinate rejected the conversions approved by Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz, according to documents obtained by Haaretz…

Itamar Tubul, who heads the rabbinate’s conversion department, rejected three conversions approved by Schwartz. He accepted a fourth, but it was turned down by the rabbinate.

Ultimately, the four converts in question were not recognized as Jewish by the Chief Rabbinate, according to Haaretz.

All of the converts had approval letters signed by Schwartz, according to Itim, an organization that helps Israelis navigate religious bureaucracy.

I could not agree more with the reaction of the RCA:

Rabbi Shalom Bau, president of the RCA, said, “We have already begun an investigation into this latest disgrace and we demand a thorough report of how this could happen.”

To call this a disgrace is an understatement. In my view this casts the entire current enterprise of the Chief Rabbinate into question. They either have no clue what they are doing, or have let power go to their heads. Or both. I have been defending them albeit with some reservation because I believed they were acting in the best interests of the Jewish people. Even when they made some mistakes – which they clearly did. Some of which were corrected. Mistakes happen and as long as there is a good faith effort to correct them, I stood behind them. But this goes too far.

I hate to admit it, but all of the critics of the Rabbinate as currently constructed and empowered seem to have been right all along! If this is not corrected… if their decision is not reversed with a public apology to Rav Schwartz, they have lost all legitimacy in my eyes.

That said, I am still a strong believer in the need for a Chief Rabbinate for the reasons I mentioned above. But not this one. They are an embarrassment to the Jewish people! If they don’t change their ways, I call upon them to disband and be replaced by a new Chief Rabbinate - or at the very least I call for the resignation of those in leadership positions responsible for this kind of behavior to be replaced by rabbis that have a lot more integrity than they appear to have.

Thousands of Jews protesting Israel at the UN last week (Matzav)

There is a story about the Satmar Rebbe, R’ Yoel Teitelbaum that goes something like this:

When in 1968 Vice President Hubert Humphrey came to visit the Satmar Rebbe seeking his support for election to the Presidency, he asked the Rebbe what he could do for him. The Satmar Rebbe is purported to have said "Sell weapons to Israel!". People in attendance later asked the Rebbe, ‘How can you have advised Humphrey that way - when we know you are opposed to the State?’ The Rebbe supposedly answered that we have a disagreement with our family members but we don't want to see them hurt’. Supposedly the Rebbe added that when a Jew criticizes Israel it is anti Zionism. When a non Jew does that, it’s antisemitism.

One might admire the fact that the Rebbe did not let his antipathy to the State of Israel get in the way of protecting the people living there. And that he rightly labeled non Jewish critics of Israel – antisemites. One could admire that if it were true. But apparently it never happened. The true story went something like this:

Humphrey visited the Rebbe and was treated cordially as he spoke about his support for Israel. The Rebbe listened to him without saying much. After leaving, the Rebbe was asked why he didn’t tell Humphrey that he was opposed to Israel. His answer was rhetorical, “What should I do, tell him about the Shalosh Shevuous (the 3 oaths mentioned in the Gemara which form the theological basis for his opposition to the State)?”

Was Rav Kook an Ish Tzar V'Oyev?

When asked whether a non Jew’s anti Zionism was tantamount to antisemitism he said, ‘No’. The video below explains all this – debunking the urban legend about the difference between the Satmar Rebbe’s public versus private persona vis-à-vis Israel. If the Rebbe was anything, he was consistent in his vitriol for the state.

As I’ve pointed out many times, his published statement that Rav Avraham Yitzchok Kook was an Ish Tzar V’Oyev - which basically compares him to Hitler - underscores that vitriol.

I have always maintained that it is the Satmar Rebbe himself that inspired people from extremists groups like Neturei Karta. Some of whose members have embraced Holocaust denying antisemites like former Iranian President Ahmad Amadinijad who along with Iran’s current supreme leader Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei has called for the annihilation of the Jewish state.

But Neurei Karta is not the alone in harboring this attitude. It is the same as the current Satmar Rebbe of Williamsburg, R’ Zalman Leib Teitelbaum - and virtually all of his tens of thousands (if not more) Chasidim.

When I have made this accusation in the past, I was severely criticized for it. The claim was that even though they did not support the state, they would never make the kind of Chilul HaShem that those ‘Ahmadinijad kissing’ Neturei Kartaniks did! Well, apparently my critics have been proven wrong. Because as reported by Matzav - last Thursday in front of the United Nations at exactly the moment that Israel’s sitting prime minister spoke, the Satmar Rebbe of Williamsburg succeeded in hosting thousands of his Chasidim in public protest against Israel. The supposed purpose was to oppose the new draft laws – which have already been defanged to the point of irrelevance by the very person they protested against.

They are of course entitled to express their views in public no different than any antisemite would. It’s called free speech. But I am also free to condemn it in public as a massive Chilul HaShem with the potential to do great damage to the Jewish people. Not to mention the fact that it could end up endangering the lives of all of Israel’s residents, including the many Satmar Chasidim that live there.

That the US is now at its peak level of support to the Jewish State is based in large part (albeit not exclusively) on how the current politicians perceive American Jewish support of it. God in His infinite wisdom has given under 2% of the population tremendous influence on how their government treats Israel.

But that support is not automatic. There are plenty of politicians in office that could easily turn on us. Some because they are closet antisemites, and some because they see the Arab world as a far more important strategic partner because of their oil and their exponentially greater numbers. When these people see that many Jews – Jews that appear and claim to be the most religious among us protesting the state, that might turn the tide of support. Or at least lessen it to the point of reduced aid or elimination of aid altogether. It might also embolden more of those those politicians to support BDS which is increasingly becoming exposed as a purely anti Israel movement - and not just anti ‘West Bank settlement’ movement.

I can’t blame the Chasidim themselves. They have been indoctrinated to see Israel only in the way the Satmar Rebbe sees it. In the rare circumstance that any of their Chasidim might see things differently, such dissent is not tolerated. That is the nature of relying on a supreme religious leader – whose views they see as Godly. If the Rebbe says it’s so, it is so. Period! End of discussion! Which is why so many Chasidim showed up for that protest.

What makes this protest so worse than those Neturei Karta protests is that Satmar is one of the fastest growing Jewish demographics in the world. They are multiplying exponentially with each succeeding generation - hating the Jewish state as much as their founder did. And becoming more public about it in greater numbers than ever. True - what Neturei Karta has done by raising he Palestinain flag, or attending pro Palestinians rallies, or by going to Iran to support their anti Israel views - are by themselves much worse acts. But they can be chalked up to a few crazies. When thousands of people show up to protest Israel at the UN during the prime minister’s speech - it is mainstream Chasidim doing it.

I therefore cannot condemn what they have done here enough. Unfortunately I am just a lone voice. And I’m sure there will be those that somehow find ways to defend them – adding to the Chilul HaShem – and the danger it may bring!

I only wish other more prominent voices in the Jewish world would join me. It is time to once and for all sever any ties to this community and let the world know that Satmar does not speak for the Jewish people. Not even the Orthodox ones.

Israeli Chief Rabbis Yaakov Yosef and David Lau

A few days ago I strongly criticized the Israeli Chief Rabbinate’s treatment of converts to Judaism. Converts whose legitimacy was certified by no less a Posek than Rav Gedalia Dov Schwartz, Av Beis Din of the Rabbinical Council of America (RCA).

This was (and still is) reprehensible on 2 counts. One - it violated the Torah’s prohibition against mistreating legitimate converts to Judaism. And two – it dishonored a Zaken. Rav Schwartz is an elder – a rabbinic leader who is a major Talmud Chacham and a widely respected Posek.

It was this act that caused me to re-examine my support for that religious body as it exists now. I had concluded that unless there was a retraction of its invalidation of Rabbi Schwartz’s certification, and a public apology was made to the converts and to Rav Schwartz, it is the Chief rabbinate themselves that has lost its legitimacy as the rabbinic authority of religious matters in Israel.

There has however been a development about who in the Chief Rabbinate hierarchy is responsible for that deplorable behavior. I have been informed through an intermediary that a high ranking official at the RCA explained the situation as one of incompetence. Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef, the Sephardi Chief Rabbi has rejected the protocols set by his predecessor, Rav Shlomo Amar whose knowledge about the American rabbinate enabled him to decide who to trust - and who not to trust - to certify the legitimacy of a conversion.

This was in addition to the agreement made between the RCA and the Chief Rabbinate about standardizing conversions standards. Back in 2008, the RCA had set up the Geirus Policies and Standards conversion system (GPS). They certified only those conversion courts that followed these standards. The GPS protocals were acceptable to the Chief Rabbinate. On that basis all converts certified by the RCA after the GPS was set up would be automatically accepted as legitimate by them.

What about those that were converted prior to that? Since there had been abuses by some RCA members that performed questionable conversions, the Chief Rabbinate had made provisions that trustworthy rabbis could certify which of them were are legitimate.

Rabbi Amar knew which rabbis could be trusted to do that. Chief among them, Rav Gedalia Dov Schwartz. Rabbi Amar’s successor, Rav Yosef, had no such knowledge and decided to no longer grant automatic recognition to such conversion no matter who certified them, thus reneging on the agreement made with the RCA.

It has now come to light that Rabbi Yosef’s counterpart, Asheknazi Chief Rabbi David Lau disagrees with him. He was quoted in the Jerusalem Post* saying the following:

“approvals issued by the Beth Din of America and signed by Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz should be recognized, …and should be relied upon for the purposes of approving [conversion] certificates which are received from the US.”

The Department of Marriage and Conversion is under R’ Yosef’s jurisdiction and is run by Rabbi Itamar Tubul. The Post reports that sources in the Chief Rabbinate are saying that R’ Yosef instructed Rabbi Tubal to follow his directive:

On Sunday, a spokesperson for the Chief Rabbinate said that every case requiring conversion verification from the US “is examined on an individual basis,” and that “there are no all-inclusive approvals or rejections,” indicating that the Chief Rabbinate, under Yosef’s direction, no longer considers the 2008 agreement to be binding.

This does help explain what’s behind this outrage. But it does not make matters much better. It’s nice to know that there are more reasoned leaders there. But if the two top rabbis are in dispute over such a fundamental issue it serves no one. Least of all those Jews whose legitimacy has been put into question.

I applaud Rabbi Lau’s position. But unless he can convince his Sephardi counterpart, R’ Yosef to restore the agreement with the RCA made by his predecessor, the rabbinate remains in a state of uncertainty and ineffectiveness.

Rabbis are certainly allowed to disagree. But when that disagreement is on an issue that is so fundamental to the very nature of the state - who is and isn’t a Jew - it diminishes the confidence its citizens have in it in all other matters.

The Rabbinate must restore that agreement, and apologizes to those hurt by R’ Yosef’s apparent willful ignorance. If this does not happen, I remain skeptical of it as the ultimate religious authority in the Jewish State. Anything they may say or do in the future should in my view - be completely ignored. And a new Chief Rabbinate should be established that does not have the kind of hubris that one of its leaders appears to have. A house divided against itself cannot stand.

*I have not linked to that article in the Jerusalem Post. I believe it may be infected by a virus.

Shimon Peres and Barack Obama at a 2014 meeting in DC (JTA/Getty Images)

I will miss him.

It is a sad day for the Jewish people. With the passing of Shimon Peres, we find ourselves bereft of all the original pioneers of the State of Israel. Ben Gurion, Weitzman, Meir, Begin, Rabin, Dayan… all gone.

A generation leaves and a new generation arises. Rarely replacing the greatness of the previous generation. Peres was a member of what has been called the greatest generation. They were people that were called upon for great sacrifice and rose to the occasion unlike anyone in our day.

I often speak about the last generation of Gedolim – rabbinic leaders of the past that have no equals in our day. In the realm of nation building, sacrifice, and dedication, Peres has no equals in our day either.

Many know him from his long political life in Israel serving in government in many capacities. Including as Prime Minister and President. Others will remember him as the architect of Israel’s nuclear program. Still others will remember him for winning the Noble Peace Prize along with Itzhak Rabin and Yassir Arafat. Or they might remember him for being honored in America with the American Presidential Medal of Honor. And there are those who will remember him for his pursuit for peace which generated his participation in the Oslo Accords. Which outlined a plan for peace intended to end decades of conflict with the Arabs. All true and worthy of note.

For me, the warm relationship he had with the Yeshiva world is just as memorable. I do not believe he was observant. At least not in the Orthodox sense of the word. But that did not diminish his respect and even admiration for those that were and dedicated their lives to Torah study. Matzav - in their tribute to Peres put it this way:

Peres had a special connection with the chareidi public. The gedolei Yisroel, both today and those of the previous generation, will never forget his status as the patron of the yeshiva world. Peres was responsible for the original arrangement that allowed yeshiva bochurim to be exempt from the draft, an arrangement that is still in place today. Whenever the status quo was challenged by various voices in the country – usually on the grounds that there were only 400 yeshiva students when Ben-Gurion agreed to the arrangement, while there are now tens of thousands of bochurim,kein yirbu – it was always Peres who spoke out in favor of it.

After his recent stroke, his illness did not go unnoticed. He was visited in the hospital by politicians (even those that were his political opponents) and rabbis. There is no doubt about his contributions to Judaism, to Israel and to peace. That the peace he sought was so elusive can in no way be attributed to him. He was a man of principle who fought just as hard for peace as he did for the right of Israel to exist, to be strong, and to be a home for all of the Jewish people.

Peres surely had his critics on the right. But agree or disagree - no one can deny his genuine contributions and sincere pursuit of peace. Although I no longer consider it possible as things stand now, I for one supported his pursuit of peace. Even if it meant implementing the Oslo Accords - if it would have produced a true and lasting peace. With no more violence between us and no more wars.

It won’t happen. But one can dream. One can dream the dream of a Shimon Peres that a true and lasting peace would be a boon to Israel, the Jewish people, the entire Middle East and even the world. Alas, it’s a dream. A very elusive one. We will probably have to wait for Moshiach for that dream to come true.

The tributes are coming in from around the world including the Vatican. Even from Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas had some nice things to say about him. One of the most impassioned tributes is from President Obama as reported in JTA:

“Shimon was the essence of Israel itself — the courage of Israel’s fight for independence, the optimism he shared with his wife Sonya as they helped make the desert bloom, and the perseverance that led him to serve his nation in virtually every position in government across the entire life of the State of Israel,” he said.

“Perhaps because he had seen Israel surmount overwhelming odds, Shimon never gave up on the possibility of peace between Israelis, Palestinians and Israel’s neighbors — not even after the heartbreak of the night in Tel Aviv that took Yitzhak Rabin,” referring to the 1995 assassination of Israel’s prime minister by a Jewish extremist.

“A light has gone out, but the hope he gave us will burn forever,” Obama said in the concluding paragraph. “Shimon Peres was a soldier for Israel, for the Jewish people, for justice, for peace, and for the belief that we can be true to our best selves — to the very end of our time on Earth, and in the legacy that we leave to others. For the gift of his friendship and the example of his leadership, todah rabah, Shimon.”

It is relatively rare that a sitting President attends the funeral of a foreign leader. Especially one that has been out of office for a while. That honor usually goes to the Vice President. But President Obama will be personally attending that funeral to be held this Friday along with many other world leaders, including Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and England’s Prince Charles.

Shimon Peres surely had his critics. Mostly on the right side of Israel’s political spectrum. But I believe that there is not a responsible politician in the world that didn’t respect him and his lifetime of contributions to the Jewish people. May His memory be a blessing.

Is this our new image?

I am not a member of Agudah. Nor do I always side with the views and pronouncements of their rabbinic leadership. I am in fact occasionally disappointed at some of what they say and do. And when that happens I generally say so, publicly. However, I never thought – nor do I think now that Agudah’s leadership is anything but L’Shma.

I am not one of those people that sees evil in everything they do. Just the opposite is true. Agudah’s lay leadership (which has the approval of its rabbinic leadership for everything they undertake) has done a lot for Jews of all stripes in this country. They are one of the most effective lobbying agencies in Washington… as they are in a number of state legislatures where a lot of Jews live. Again I don’t agree with every position they ever promoted, But I do agree with most of them.

One of my criticisms in the past has been that Agudah has not focused enough on how Jews should interact with the non Jewish culture in which we live. The way they have treated this subject in the past was to try and avoid that culture as much as possible… treating it like evil incarnate! Contact with that culture should be limited as much as possible - they would say - so as to avoid those evils which could end up infiltrating our own culture.

The problem with constantly characterizing the culture as evil, is that it gives the impression since they are such an evil culture we can cheat their government in financial matters as long as we can get away with it. They come to feel that their ethics are not our ethics and can be ignored. Which can lead to fraudulent conduct by all too many of us.

While the vast majority of Orthodox Jewry does not behave in that manner, unfortunately there has been an increase in the number of us that do. Making matters worse is when religious leaders get caught doing it and then apologize for making a Chilul HaShem. That strengthens the perception that getting caught was the only real problem. Otherwise they would not have done it in the first place. What kind of religious leader would deliberately violate Halacha for purposes of money – even if it is only to fund his religious and charitable institutions? It therefore must be OK from a Halachic standpoint. Because it is only the Chilul HaShem that we have to worry about, Not our behavior towards people and governments whose culture is so evil.

Unfortunately that has caused an explosion of fraudulent behavior among Orthodox Jews.

I was sent a video by Avi Schick, an attorney who is a lay leader in Agudah. It was of his address at an Agudah 'Yom Iyun - Emes and the Law' which he titled ‘Yashrus and Kashrus’.

It was a well attended event. And it was recorded for as wide a distribution as possible. His address was eye opening on several accounts. It was frank and it addressed the specific concern of fraudulent behavior by Orthodox Jews. The goal was to change the culture from one that tolerates such behavior to one that abhors it!

The primary point Avi made was one that I have made here before. More than once. That all too often Jews that are meticulous about ritual behavior are cavalier about dealing with their non Jewish neighbors, or government. Jews that are careful to be stringent about things like Shabbos and Kashrus. Like not opening a bottle of pop (that’s soda - for all you New Yorkers out there) because you may be creating a Keli (vessel) out of the cap on Shabbos. Or using only Chalav Yisroel products and not relying on the Heter of Rav Moshe Feinstein with respect to Chalav Stam - milk produced by this country’s non Jewish dairies.

But when it comes to dealing with the government, the opposite attitude can be found in those same people. They will look for any loophole in the law to take advantage of. No being stringent there. Why? The rationale is that we are dealing with an evil culture anyway - and why not if you can get away with it?

Avi said that his law practice has seen a substantial increase in the number of ‘Frumme Yidden’ that are being investigated by the government. When he started his practice he had none! …no Frum clients at all.. Today, a very large percentage of his practice are Frum Jews and Mosdos (Orthodox institutions)! His non Jewish employees are now used to seeing Jews that are meticulous about things like Kashrus coming into the office because they are being investigated by the government! So common are such meetings that they are used to a routine that accommodates Frum Jews.

Avi suspects that on the minds of these non Jewish employees who see this parade of Orthodox Jewish clients is the question about why this religion of ours that has so many rules and regulations - doesn’t have anything to say about the conduct that brought the client there in the first place!

The video below is about 25 minutes long. It is well worth watching for several reasons. Among them is to realize that there are a lot more problems like this in the Orthodox world than most of us might think there are; to understand why such behavior is wrong; to try and change the culture from one that tolerates such behavior to one that abhors it; and to see that Agudah realizes that things like this in the Frum world is so bad that they felt moved to address it in such a public way.

Yom Iyun Emes and the Law Avi Schick from Agudath Israel on Vimeo.

Written message is unclear. Does the Hebrew match the English translation?

In just a few days, the new year will be upon us. As most religious Jews know, this is a time of reflection and prayer. The sages tell us that on the first day of the year, the heavenly decree with respect to the future of every single human being is written. The new year s also called the Yom HaDin - the day of judgment. We are judged in Heaven by God on how we have lived our lives over the past year. Our future depends on that. 10 days later, on Yom Kippur, the ‘written’ decree is sealed. These 10 days are called the Aseres Yemei Teshuva – the ten days of repentance.

We appeal to God for mercy in judging us. Both individually and collectively. It is in fact God’s infinite mercy upon which we rely. Which is why in preparation for the new year we begin saying Selichos – prayers and supplications asking God not to judge us on our merit but to show us Divine mercy. This is why most of us increase the amount of Selichos we say in the period between Rosh Hashanna and Yom Kippur. Usually in the morning before Shacharis – our daily morning prayers

Needless to say, for those of us serious about our Judaism this is a somber time. Not a time to celebrate with frivolity as is the case for most of the rest of the world on January first.

Our sages tell us that prayer is one of the three elements that we use to supplicate God for forgiving our transgressions and hopefully granting us a good year. Another element is actual repentance - expressing regret and committing not to transgress them anymore. The third element is Tzedaka – giving charity.

Unfortunately there are unscrupulous people that take advantage of the latter. Which at this time of year seems to be particularly egregious. In what is probably the widest misuse of tactics for funding an otherwise a very worthy Tzedaka, Kupat Ha’ir seems to stop at nothing to generate funds.

What they have done now, just few days before the new year is send out an ad (including a video) with a message that Rav Chaim Kanievsky will pray for you – IF– you give them money. (They have also said in his name that preferably people should give $180 per month to them.) From an ad on YWN:

If you give to this important cause, imagine the Rosh Hashanah that you will have, knowing that the gadol Rav Chaim Kanievsky shlit”a is davening on your behalf...

What is well known about R’ Chaim and other rabbinic leaders is that they have said to never believe anything that is said in their name if they did not hear it directly from them. People lie or twist the words of a rabbinic leader to fit their agenda. They assume that since their agenda is supported by the people they lie about, anyway – why not tell a little white lie to enhance that support?

For me a lie is never acceptable just to raise funds – even for a worthy cause. Now they might rationalize this – knowing that R’ Chaim is an enthusiastic supporter of this charity who urges people to donate money to it – therefore justifying their means. But has he actually promised to specifically pray only for a list of people that have donated to Kupat Ha’ir? - I cannot believe this is the case. But even if it is, is that the way you raise money for charity?! By selling the side benefits?!

You cannot justify a tactic that will cause others to give money they might not be able to afford; or might otherwise give to a different charity - by using deceptive practices as leverage.

If you have a worthy cause - which I am told Kupat Ha’ir is - they should be urging people to support it based on its own merit only. Not by preying on religious people’s personal problems, fears or desires with promises to have great rabbis pray for you – IF - you give them money.

This is not the first time Kupat Ha’ir has used the questionable fundraising tactic of preying on people’s fears. They have used versions of it for years. Decades perhaps! And have done much worse.

Like promising young couples with infertility problems that a great rabbi or group of rabbis will pray for them. Or to promise Shiduchim to unmarried young women or their parents, that giving them money will help their cause. Each time with a different twist. Like getting the ‘Gedolei HaDor’ to say Tehilim at the Kotel for 40 straight days. Or using some archaic ‘Segulah’ by some 18^th century Chasidic Rebbe which requires a certain amount of money be given specifically to a charity like theirs for his Segulah to work.

Why do they keep doing it? The answer must be that it works. People keep giving them money – not necessarily for the sake of the charity itself but for the side benefits promised by it. Side benefits that are deceptively shown to work in ads by using testimonials from the few people that say it worked for them.

I am not the only one to note this disgusting tactic. People much greater than I have noted it and condemned it. And yet it continues unabated.

How can this kind of thing be allowed to continue? True, the Tzedaka needs are great and money is in short supply. But does this justify deception? With all the bans coming out from rabbinic leaders in Israel, how can they not clearly and specifically ban the type of deception used by this charity?

This does not mean you should refuse to give them your charity dollars - or stop giving it to them if you have been doing so in the past. But it should be for the right reasons and because that is where you want your charity dollars to go. Not because you have been promised prayer on your behalf by a great rabbi if you do.

As we are about to begin the new year, I wish to offer my best wishes for a sweet year of good health, prosperity, and happiness for all.

One of the customs at the beginning of the secular new year on January first is to make a new year’s resolution. With all the frivolity that takes place at that time of year, there is at least one serious aspect to it, the idea of self improvement in some area. This custom did not originate with the secular world. I can’t help but believe that it is taken from how Judaism looks at the new year. For us, resolving to improve is not only the primary concern, it is the only concern. Not kind of the afterthought it is on January first.

Self improvement is very hard. It requires change. Most people fail at their new years resolutions even though they are seriously undertaken. This is true both in general a society and in our own. We try and commit to no longer transgress the precepts of the Torah. And most of us do not succeed. One may ask, “What’s the point?” If we know we are going to fail, based on the fact that we do this every year asking forgiveness for transgressions we tried to avoid but failed to accomplish?

One of the great Jewish Baalei Mussar (ethicists) of recent times (I believe it was R’ Shlomo Wolbe) was asked this very question. His answer was that as long as we are sincere in trying to change – even if we never do, that sincerity is meaningful enough to gain God’s mercy and forgiveness.

The point is that we should not be discouraged by the feeling of certain failure. It should not lessen our resolve to keep our new year’s resolution. As long as we mean it. As long as we realize that we were wrong in violating any transgressions, and truly regret them. The Teshuva is real and meaningful even knowing that we will mostly likely fail.

In addition to resolving to not transgress God’s law we should also try to be more meticulous in those observances we do keep. Not by observing every Chumra. But by trying to fulfill the basics correctly. When most people think of observance – they think of ritual observance: Shabbos, Kashrus, Taharas HaMishpacha and the like. Those are obviously Miztvos Bein Adam L’Makom and keeping them correctly is of paramount importance. But of equal importance are the Mitzvos Bein Adam L’Chavero. Those Mitzvos that apply to interpersonal relationships.

One cannot be meticulous in only one of those two categories and think he is satisfying the will of God. And yet when it comes to buying an Esrog (which is obviously a Bein Adam L’Makom Mitzvah) many Jews will spend a great deal of time, effort, and money choosing the nicest one they can find.

Is not our fellow man at least as valuable as an Esrog? How about we try and treat our fellow man the same way? How about spending the time, effort, and money to treat each other with respect, dignity, and kindness? How about we give our fellow man the benefit of the doubt? How about we look out for the welfare of our fellow, man? How about we do more charitable acts? How about we try and increase the amount of charity we give? And when I say “we” I of course include myself!

Have we been less than successful doing that over the year? Should we not resolve to be more meticulous in that just as we resolve to be more meticulous in ritual observance? Of course we should!

We should reflect as much on how we treated our fellow man as we do on how we performed any ritual and realize that if we are lacking in either realm - resolve to do better. Because the truth is the requirement of Bein Adam L’Chavero is as much a Godly mandate as is Bein Adam L’Makom. In fact if one’s interpersonal relationships are not sourced in our Godly mandate to do them, they are not considered a fulfillment of those Mitzvos. The bottom line for the Jewish people is that every thing we do should be God centered. Serving God is how we should look at everything we do.

It is with this thought that I leave you and wish everyone Ksiva V’Chasima Tova - Shana Tova U’Mesuka.

Israeli Health Minister Rabbi Yaakov Litzman (AP/TOI)

I have always said the Charedi model of full time Torah study for all men is an unsustainable one. And yet this ideal has been instilled in all Charedi children in Israel since at least the founding of the state.

That has resulted in a society where their educational curriculum had virtually no secular studies and no preparation at all for the workplace. Their curriculum in Israel is – and always has been – devoted to full time Torah study. Which has resulted in a community of very bright people most of whom live in poverty or near poverty unable to support themselves or their families.

That poverty should not be taken lightly. Far too many Charedim in Israel get by on a combination of factors that include reliance on government subsidies, free loan societies, and working but underpaid wives. There is a constant struggle to just make ends meet. Many are forever in debt.

When the last Keneset tried to impose financial sanctions to Yeshivos that did not offer the core curriculum required by law - it was fiercely and successfully opposed. The current Keneset has basically restored the old status quo. Thus perpetuating the system and the poverty it generates.

As I have said many times in the past, I believe that full time Torah study for everyone is not the ideal for every male. It should only be for the most elite of students. Even they should be better prepared in secular studies. But for purposes of argument – let us leave that out of the equation and grant that they could be exempt from any studies other than Torah. Everyone else should study Torah as the primary focus but not as the only focus. And certainly not at the expense of ignoring their future as breadwinners.

I believe emphatically that their curriculum should mimic the model of Charedi education in America where until recently every top level Charedi Yeshiva high school devoted a good portion of their afternoons to a relatively decent secular education. Which enabled many American Charedim to pursue advanced educations for career purposes when they were ready to leave the Beis HaMedrash. I believe that the Charedim in Amercia that have chosen this path make up the majority of the Charedi world in America. I have called them moderate Charedim.

Israel’s Charedi educational system did not pursue this model. The opposite is happening. The American Charedi educational system is shifting towards the Israeli model by decreasing or completely eliminating secular studies. That is in and of itself a huge problem but beyond the scope of this post.

As I said, the Israeli model is not sustainable despite protestations to the contrary by Charedi politicians. I have also said that at some point there will be a revolt that would change the model. It seems that it is already happening. Significant changes are quietly taking place. There is a moderate Charedi faction in Israel that seeks better opportunities by taking advantage of career programs designed specifically for them. From the Times of Israel:

(The established Charedi paradigm) is increasingly being challenged by a new generation of ultra-Orthodox Jews who are demanding academic degrees, satisfying professions, a bigger role for women and greater immersion in Israeli society.

She said the ultra-Orthodox leadership’s aversion to progress and integration is mostly about maintaining political power rather than serving their constituents. Until recently, such open criticism was unheard of, but it is gaining traction as people like Karlinsky try to change their world from within…

Gilad Malach, a researcher who specializes in the community, said reform was already underway. He said a majority of haredi men now work, compared to just a third in 2003. Women continue to be the primary breadwinners, and their employment rates of close to 75% are comparable to the general public, he said.

This is welcome news. It’s just too bad that the ‘party line’ of the Charedi politicians is to insist on their status quo. That Torah study is to be pursued by all men to the exclusion of everything else. That they may quietly approve of this new trend is to say one thing publicly and to say another privately. Which to me is dishonest and counterproductive.

Why not just admit that the goals of their spiritual mentor, the Chazon Ish, to rebuild the Torah world lost in Europe because of the Holocaust was long ago achieved. And that full time Torah study for every single male was never intended. That there are other ways to serve God and that not everyone has to be doing exactly the same thing.

Unfortunately the party line has not changed. Form the Timesof Israel:

As the senior representative of ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel’s government, Health Minister Yaakov Litzman is unapologetic about the insular lifestyle he advocates, despite irking mainstream Israel and endangering its long-term economic prospects.

He insists that shirking compulsory military service, rejecting secular education and raising large families on state subsidies all serve the noblest of purposes: a life devoted to the study of scripture that has preserved Jewish traditions over centuries and will ultimately bring about the coming of the Messiah.

“To sit and learn is a mitzvah,” or commandment from God, he told The Associated Press. “It is the most important thing.”

“There is always new ways and new things which we have to get used to and check out if we can live with it, but there is no change in halacha,” or Jewish law, he said. “Until the Messiah will come, it will stay like that.”

What Rabbi Litzman fails to understand - it seems - is that no one is saying Torah study should be abandoned. Nor is anyone saying that there shouldn’t be a cadre of Torah scholars involved in full time Torah study. The only question is whether it should be full time for everyone to the exclusion of everything else.

It seems that in increasing numbers - the Charedi public is beginning to understand this themselves. And doing something about it. It’s just too bad that there is not more positive reinforcement – or even better – a change in their own educational model instead of insisting on – and promoting an unsustainable status quo as the ideal for everyone to pursue.

Is this what it takes to remain observant in college campuses?

One of the things I love about Jonathan Rosenblum is the pride he takes in his secular education. For those who may not know, Jonathan attended the University of Chicago for undergraduate school and then Yale Law School.

Jonathan has written quite extensively defending Charedi values in a variety of publications. When the last Keneset decided to enforce the Education Ministry’s requirement for schools to teach its core curriculum in order to be publicly funded, he defended the Charedi opposition to it.

After reading several of his columns on this subject I contacted him and asked him if he had somehow devalued his education at Yale. He responded that he valued it very much as he did his education at U of C. I then asked him why he supported the Charedi position of completely avoiding a basic secular education for their children.

If I recall correctly, he responded that he too felt they should have one. But that he was opposed to the government imposing it – saying that force was counter-productive. Left alone, the situation will take care of itself, he said. The unwritten message being that as it stood now he too felt that the situation in the Charedi world was unsustainable. As noted yesterday, things do seem to be self correcting to a more sustainable situation.

A column in Mishpacha Magazine a few weeks ago featured yet another moment of ‘swelling pride’ by Jonathan in his Alma Mater, the U of C. This is highly unusual in a community that thinks so little of secular studies - even in elementary school, let alone college… let alone a top tier university like U of C. Pride in a college is not what one usually sees by columnists in magazines like Mishpacha.

What generated that column was U of C’s Dean of Students, John (Jay) Ellison’s recent letter reiterating the university’s long standing policy of not taking positions on the major social issues of the day. Taking positions would have the effect of ‘inhibiting the full freedom of dissent on which it thrives’.

That sets U of C apart from many other universities that tend to take politically correct positions on the issues of the day. A 2015 survey cited by Jonathan said that about 50% of today’s college students feel unsafe expressing unpopular opinions.

For example opposing same sex marriage is anathema in some college circles. If you are so opposed you will be treated like a pariah.And then there is the radical left. They have permeated much of Academia today. Supporting outrageous movements like BDS and referring to Israel as an Apartheid State is their clarion call. They all too often easily influence young minds to take those same positions with venomous rhetoric. Which sometimes results in antisemitic violence against Jewish students. It’s nice to know that at least one top tier school will have none of it! Here is how Jonathan closes that column:

Even for the Jew I have become, the University of Chicago’s stance remains relevant. The Torah is not politically correct, and Torah Jews are a small and increasingly vulnerable minority. On many campuses today, it is easy to imagine bans on reading Vayikra. Unless we want Jewish students to have to become Marranos in the higher echelons of academia, we should pray that more universities follow the University of Chicago’s lead.

I could not agree more. But then comes Eytan Kobre in last week’s Mishpacha and throws cold water on Jonathan’s prayer. Why is Eytan so uncomfortable with this development? He thinks it will increase assimilation out of Judaism for the Orthodox students attending those colleges. Better he says that Jews should be uncomfortable in those schools. That will increase the likelihood that they will not assimilate out. By forcing observant Jews to choose schools more conducive to their values.

Making Jews uncomfortable in colleges is not a good thing. Because that means Orthodox Jews will continue to be persecuted. If that argument is taken to its logical conclusion we should all be praying that Jews in this country should be persecuted. It’s hard to assimilate into a society that hates you. It may keep you Frum. But it also might make you dead. As was the case with the ultimate persecution of the Jews – the Holocaust!

Scaring people into submission is the worst way to stay loyal to religious values in any case. That kind of loyalty is superficial. If you are only ‘Frum’ because you are forced into a ghetto by neighbors that persecute you, what kind of commitment is that anyway?

A far better approach is to be positive. To instill pride in the Jewish values with which you were raised. To instill the beauty of Judaism by parents and teachers as a core value. By parents setting the example in living those values at home. To see the attractions of an anti religious culture as anathema to your values. To see the vanity of a non Torah guided life. To see the values of the Torah as the preeminent values of mankind. To appreciate a heritage that has been transmitted to you by your parents. A heritage transmitted over millennia from parent to child since the Torah was received at Sinai.

While it’s true that on occasion the pull of a lifestyle of hedonism found on many college campuses will overwhelm even those that have had Torah values instilled, hopefully the vast majority of Jews raised this way will realize just what they have been given and resist the temptation to assimilate out.

That being said, I agree that campus life in a secular college where there are no authentic Jewish influences should be avoided if possible. The best option is to enroll in a University like YU or Touro. Or to attend a college where you can commute daily and live at home in the same environment you always have. Or to attend a secular university like Penn where campus life has a substantial Orthodox Jewish presence and facilitates an observant lifestyle. But please do not wish that Universities should be hostile to Jews. Because that is just a bad idea.

(Image of a Shofar from My Jewish Learning)

Listening to the Shofar is the only Torah level requirement on the day of Rosh Hashana. The Kolos (types of sounds) that should be heard consist of various combinations of 3 types of blasts: Tekiya (Long blast); Shevarim (3 or 6 medium length blasts); and Teruah (a series of at least 9 very short blasts). In order to assist the Baal Tokeya (the person that actually blows the Shofar), the Makri who stands at his side reads each type of blast out loud so that the Baal Tokeya will not make any mistakes. This is usually done by one of the honored men in the Shul – often the rabbi himself.

How many people felt they were missing out as a Jew by not being the Makri for Tekiyas Shofar? Raise you hands. I don’t see any hands raised… Oh wait. I do see one hand raised. It’s Dr. Bat Sheva Marcus. But worry not. She had her chance. Form an article on an article entitled: One Small Sound for Women, One Large Blast for Womankind published in My Jewish Learning:

On the first day of Rosh Hashana I was invited to call the kolot (sounds) for the shofar.

She goes on to say that she never thought about it. It was never a big deal for her. But her rabbi studied the sources to make sure that there was nothing technically wrong with a woman doing it, and then offered it to her. She was asked to be the Makri on the woman’s side of the Mechitza for half of the Shofar blasts.

Let us understand what is going on here. This is an Orthodox Jewish feminist who admittedly had no interest in doing it… even as a feminist breaking yet another glass ceiling. It just never occurred to her, until her rabbi asked her to. It was only then that she became inspired by the idea. So inspired that she actually teared while or after performing her duty:

I’ll admit, tears were blurring my vision, but when they cleared and I looked up and saw a young boy, maybe 7 years old, standing next to the ba’al tokea and looking at me quizzically, I couldn’t help but smile at him. Yes. This would be his new reality. This shul has made space for women to be part of this mitzvah.

I know that a lot of people will insist that there is nothing Halachicly wrong with her doing this. Although I’m not entirely convinced that is true - let us even grant for purposes of argument say that there is no Halachic barrier to it. It is entirely fair to ask what exactly was the purpose of doing this. Was is it to further or enhance one’s service to God? Or was it really just to break yet another glass ceiling? I think the answer should be obvious. But in case it isn’t, let us see what Dr. Marcus said about it:

Throughout history we have been blowing the shofar. And throughout history men have been taking ownership of the process. Women don’t have the same chiyuv (obligation) as men in hearing the shofar, but this is clearly a case where we have taken the mitzvah (commandment) upon ourselves as a community in a serious way and, as a result, the mitzvah has resounding depth to women as well as men. And now, a woman’s voice could be heard as an integral part of the process.

Really? Is this what women mean when they say a woman’s voice should be heard? Because I had always thought it meant as listening to what a woman has to say about a Jewish issue. I thought it was about getting a feminine perspective on things that affect us all. Men and women alike.

On this, I am 100% agreement! We have an obligation to hear what half the population of Jewry has to say on any issue that affects us. But listening to a feminine voice as the Makri has nothing to do with that. It is just a ‘victory’ for Orthodox feminists. And a pretty hollow one for Judaism if you consider what was accomplished by it.

For someone to have not cared about it to be convinced to care enough to break tradition is not the kind of accomplishment we should be seeking at this time of year, in my very humble opinion. So the larger share of the blame goes to the rabbi that initiated this!

I have to wonder how many people (men or women) even on the left wing of Orthodoxy really ever cared about this – other than breaking yet another ‘barrier’ of tradition if they are feminists. By characterizing this as a victory for women (see title), well of course it will bring tears of joy to feminist eyes. For them it is about bringing a new reality to Judaism. The reality of yet another feminist victory.

Returning YU’s Leadership to its Former Glory

Should a Wedding be Called Off Because of a Smartphone?

You Can’t Make a Cheeseburger Kosher

Antisemitism or a Chilul HaShem?

When Prejudice Trumps Rabbinic Authority

East Ramapo – Revisited

Who Will Be More Effective Against Terror?

Objectifying Women and Women as Rabbis

The Right Choice

The Chabad Outreach Model

The Chief Rabbinate's Folly

A Condemnable Act

A House Divided

Shimon Peres of Blessed Memory

A Holy People or a Bunch of Criminals?

A Legitimate Charity's Deceptive Practices

New Year’s Resolutions

Status Quo? Or a Quiet Revolution?

Persecution as the Means to an Observant Lifestyle

A Victory for Womankind?