Emes Ve-Emunah

Challah - a cultural yet Halacha based item (Jewish Journal)

Professor Steven M. Cohen’s assessment of the future of American Jewry has generated responses by many people, myself included. If I had to sum up my response in a couple of sentences, it would be the following: The perpetuation of American Jewry will depend on those of us that observe of Halacha. And our numbers will depend on how many of us do that and transmit it to our children.

In her very thoughtful piece in the Jewish Journal, Professor Roberta Kwall elaborates on Professor Cohen’s remedy for the preservation of the greater non Orthodox community:

His recommendations include suggestions that non-Orthodox Jews marry younger, marry Jews, and “raise their children as Jews.” But the critical question is what does it mean to raise one’s children as Jews in a non-Orthodox context? The answer really is quite simple even if its execution raises complexities. American Jews interested in preservation and transmission need to become more sensitized to making a greater number of affirmative Jewish choices, including choices perceived as more religious than cultural. In short, they simply need to “do Jewish” more.

She later adds that many of the things that are ‘doing Jewish’ are based in Halacha. So that even if it is done for cultural reasons it should be encouraged since that is a way to perpetuate non Orthodox Jewry in America. The sad fact is that most American Jews do not define Judaism in terms of following Halacha. Even while many of them take pride in their Judaism.

Which begs the question, what is it exactly that they are proud of? Can it possibly be something like Yiddish theater? Is that what gives them Jewish pride? Or perhaps it’s their pursuit of social justice? But is that an exclusively Jewish value?

This being said, I agree with Professor Kwall’s suggestions for non O Jews to be more proactively Jewish in order to preserve their identity. But only as a means to an end... the end being becoming observant of Halacha, which in our day can best be described as Rabbinic Judaism. It is an inherently positive thing to do to follow Halacha – even if you don’t do it for the right reasons. The expression that captures that is ‘Mitoch SheLo LiShma, Bah Lishma’ . If one does a Mitzvah even for the wrong reason, eventually they will come to do it for the right reason. Which is - following the will of God.

As an Orthodox Jew, and based on my studies I believe that following Halacha is what Judaism is all about. What is Halacha today? Is it different now than it was 1000 or 2000 years ago? The answer is - it is and it isn’t. The basic laws are the same. But it is also very true that Halacha has evolved over the centuries into something that is largely unrecognizable from how it was practiced during the Temple era.

But it did not evolve randomly to be interpreted by the spirit of the times. It was interpreted by the greatest rabbis of each era. It stands to reason that only those rabbis with sufficient knowledge create new law based on their Torah knowledge as impacted by the issues of the times in which they lived.

This does not mean a rabbi like me. I was ordained. But there are tons of people like me that were ordained and yet not sufficiently knowledgeable to be able to create new law for our times. For that we need to look to those rabbis that have studied all of the Talmud many times as well as all the relevant responsa over the generations all the way down to our day. There are not too many people like that to say the least. But there are some.

But even that isn't enough. These rabbis must either know the technicalities of the subject at hand by either studying it themselves or relying experts in the field. If - for example - a rabbi doesn't know how a computer works he can't possibly tell us whether it is permissible to use it on Shabbos or not - no matter how much Torah he knows.

I should add that most Orthodox Jews have been raised in the home to follow Halacha as we know it today. We do not require asking the great rabbis of our generation what the Halacha is in most cases. And if you have a decent Jewish education, you’ve also studied enough basic Jewish law to know it and understand it instead of relying on rote behavior.

It is in creating new law relevant to new developments where the great rabbis of each generation come in. That there may be differences of opinion by various great rabbis allows us a choice about who we should listen to for Halachic guidance on these new issues.

Getting back to Professor Kwall’s suggestion about ‘doing Jewish’ - not all customs are based in Halacha. As mentioned some are strictly cultural. The strictly cultural items therefore have no bearing on one's Judaism. Even as there are people that see such things as quintessentially Jewish and hang their much of their Jewish identity on them.

For me the bottom line is - Yes! ...Jews should be encouraged to follow Jewish practices even if they do it for cultural reasons. (This is kind of the new Modus Operandi of Reform Judaism. They encourage but do not require Mitzvah observance now. Whereas in the past it was anathema to them, they now realize that without it, their identity as seekers of social justice are hardly any different than the way secular humanists identify. They understand that social justice is not strictly a Jewish value. A Jewish identity must have a uniqueness to it - or it isn't an identifying feature of their Judaism).

But that can only work if eventually they accept these traditions as binding and pass them on to future generations. If everything remains optional, there is little chance that one's children will accept all the traditions they saw in their home - on their own. Let alone their grandchildren. Especially if there is no formal Jewish education.

Finally, it is confusing to mix those traditions which are purely cultural (and in my view meaningless in defining Judaism) and those that are based in Halacha. It is therefore important when reaching out to fellow Jews that are not observant to clearly distinguish between them and to focus on those that are Halacha based – even if it observed as optional. Because ‘Mitoch SheLo LiShma, Bah Lishma’.

Granted. Modern Orthodox Jews that commit crimes are guilty of creating a Chilul HaShem. And it does happen. Sometimes to the tune of millions of dollars of illegally obtained government funds. I am often criticized for not discussing Modern Orthodox miscreants as much. Fair enough. There is plenty to criticize there. Big time unfortunately.

So why do I always choose to focus on the Chasidic world when it happens there? Partly because there are more stories about them in the media, than there are about Modern Orthodox miscreants. But mostly because in my view the Chilul HaShem is multiplied many times over by the fact that they claim to live on a much higher Torah standard than other Orthodox Jews… and look the part!

That is why I believe their founder, the Baal Shem Tov, chose the word ‘Chasidism’ as the name for his movement. The Gemarah uses the term Chasid about Jews that are the most pious among us. That is how the founder saw his movement. As a group of Jews living a more pious lifestyle than other even religious Jews - by taking upon themselves various stringencies.

This is why they look and live the way they do. With those sacrifices they feel more pious and that is how they describe themselves to the world. So successful are they at projecting that image, that I recall reading that former President Bill Clinton said he considered Chasidim to be the most authentic type of Jew. That may the reason why – at the end of his second term - he agreed to meet with the Skverer Rebbe, R’ David Twersky, who pleaded on behalf of some of his Chasidim. He asked for commutation of their prison sentence to ‘time served’. (They had been convicted of fraud against the government.) And he got it!

When Jews are so visibly religious and make claims to be the most religious and ethical people in the world - every action they do stands out. When they make a Kiddush HaShem that is magnified. But the flip-side of that is when they make a Chilul HaShem that too is magnified. That’s why I cannot condemn strongly enough what a Satmar Chasid (one of their leaders) was accused of doing. From dnainfo:

Yitzchok Iziel (Isaac) Sofer was arrested by the FBI Thursday morning for filing false claims under the federal food subsidy, SNAP, between 2012 and 2016. He claimed poverty while at the same time taking out a life insurance policy in which he reported making $100,000 per year and having $600,000 in assets, Brooklyn federal prosecutors charged.

Sofer collected $30,516 in food stamps during that period, according to the federal complaint.

For me this is the worst kind of fraud. Maybe not in terms of dollars. But in terms of what kind of example he sets for other Chasidim. It takes a certain amount of Chutzpah to claim poverty in order to supplement a 6 figure income. Surely that income is decent enough to live the life of sacrifice that Satmar’s leaders urge their Chasdim to live.

I’m sure (or at least I hope) that most Chasidim do not abuse the welfare system. Hopefully those that get welfare assistance actually need it and qualify for it. But I have heard too many stories about the type of Chasidic woman that drives up to her local kosher grocery store in a luxury vehicle wearing a fur coat and paying for her groceries with food stamps.

Now I’m also pretty sure most welfare abuse isn’t as brazen. But it would not surprise me if there is a lot more abuse by those that do not qualify but just don’t make enough money to make their ends meet - their expenses being so great. They might just fudge their actual income statements a bit in order to get that kind of financial help from the government.

How much of that goes on – I don’t know. But when a high profile Chasidic leader gets caught doing it, I can’t help but believe ‘there’s a lot more where that came from’. Not to mention the fact that most of these Chasidim live a lifestyle that would cost them a lot more than they claim they make – albeit still very modest by societal standards.

One need not look to deeply to see that. Chasdic enclaves like Kiryas Joel and New Square have some very nice homes and their children are very well taken care of. And yet these enclaves are known to be pretty impoverished. Their standard of living seems to indicate expenditures in excess of what statistics indicate they can afford. That lifestyle is being paid for somehow.

I suppose that part of their financial relief comes in the form of lower religious educational costs. Not having a secular studies program surely reduces tuition expenses. Which may also be due to the fact that their teachers are woefully underpaid. But I doubt the savings they get from that allow for them to pay for the lifestyles they lead. Their education may be cheaper. But it isn’t free. Which it would be if they were sending their children to public school. Not to mention the fact that Kosher food tends to be more expensive than non Kosher food… and they feed very large families with that.

So their needs are real. Their incomes are low and their expenses high. Seeking government relief is quite understandable. Even if it means hiding income to get it. Food stamps really help. So it wouldn’t surprise me if there are more than a few people that abuse the system just so they can make those ends meet. They do not live high on the hog. They still live relatively modest lifestyles. And most of those that get welfare probably deserve it and get it legally. But how many don’t? If one of their leaders that makes a 6 figure income does it so matter of factly, it isn’t too much of a stretch to believe a lot more are doing it – considering their needs.

The problem is that it is fraud and a Chilul HaShem of major proportions when the most religious looking Jews among us are caught supplementing an income with fraudulent claims of qualifying for government welfare.

I keep thinking that a lot of this could be avoided if their leaders would just allow their people to get the education they need to get better jobs. And yet they refuse to do so – telling them it’s better to sacrifice their material welfare than to be exposed to the secular world’s influences. ...all so that they can live the holier life of a Chasid. How ironic it is by living that way - desperation can lead to fraud. How holy is that?

Menorah lighting at the Kotel (which is on the West Bank)

I would have loved to say a clear and unequivocal thank you to President Obama for his service to this country as President for 8 years. He was an elegant world spokesman for liberal values. And a respected voice among nations. He has led this nation with a dignity that seems sorely lacking in the next President. He showed himself to be loving and devoted husband and father while in office. A great role model in that regard. He projected the kind of family values we should all have. Something that was missing in some of our past Presidents.

I have always defended his policies with respect to Israel primarily because a lot of the attacks against him were unfair and biased. In some cases they were just plain untrue. And let’s face it. In a few cases the criticism was thinly disguised racism. I still feel that way.

To say that he was anti Israel is pretty much the same as saying half of the Israeli people are anti Israel. Because Obama’s rhetoric is pretty much the narrative of the Israeli left. What about his supposed hatred of Israel Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu? Well, I for one don’t believe it’s personal. I believe it is strictly policy oriented. Besides - even if he does hate Netanyahu. So do a lot of Israelis – probably close to half of them. More than Obama does!

That he doesn’t hate Israel should be obvious even to the casual observer, unless they are just too blinded by hate to see it. Iron Dome being one example. That Obama approved American taxpayer funding of it is surely one thing to credit him for. Countless lives were saved during the last Gaza war that had Hamas shooting rockets indiscriminately into Israeli population centers. There is also the fact that under Obama - military/ intelligence cooperation between Israel and the US is at unprecedented levels. (I don’t think there would have been a ‘Jonathan Pollard’ under an Obama administration.)

And then there is the recently approved $38 billion aid package to Israel. The largest in history. A package that includes the sale of America’s most advanced jet fighter - the F-35. No other country was given access to these advanced weapons. If that’s anti Israel, I’ll take it. None of this is new. I just want to be fair to the outgoing President before I criticize him

The President has done the unthinkable in my mind. He has allowed Security Council of the UN to pass an anti Israel resolution condemning it for allowing settlement construction in the West Bank. He has done so knowing that in less than 3 weeks there will be a ‘new sheriff’ in town that would have clearly vetoed it.

Obama gained absolutely nothing with this parting shot. When asked about it, members of the administration defended it by saying that a resolution condemning Israeli settlements is in line with the bi-partisan American policy going back for decades in both Democratic and Republican administrations. Adding how supportive the US is in spite of allowing that vote to pass.

What he didn’t say is that even though past administrations were opposed to settlements, they never allowed Israel to be condemned in one sided resolutions that did not place any blame on the other side. In fact that was the reason our representative to the UN, Samantha Powers, gave for abstaining rather than voting in favor of the resolution. She actually pointed out that resolutions like this have always been biased. Which is why they were vetoed despite the fact that the US might have agreed with the criticism those resolutions represented.

So why the change now? I heard one administration official ‘explain’ that since settlement construction has dramatically increased, the President felt the US had to make a statement.

Statement? What exactly did the President gain? He has antagonized America’s only democratic ally in the region and gained only Israel’s resolve to completely ignore it. Perhaps even encouraging more violence by Palestinian extremists.

With a new pro settlement administration about to be installed, I see nothing good coming out of this. What might instead happen is a world body proven to be biased against one country might now be motivated to sanction it somehow.

As I have said countless times, I too have opposed settlement construction. At least as far as outlying settlements are concerned. As much as I would love to see all of Eretz Yisroel settled by Jews, it is not worth the blood spent in gaining them. Nor was it worth antagonizing Israel’s closest ally, the US by building what are basically trailer parks deep into the West Bank and calling them settlements.

What does this resolution say about the Kotel? That is considered part of the West bank too. Should Jews be condemned for going to the Kotel? I agree with Ron Dermer, Israeli ambassador to the US, who reacted to this resolution on his Facebook page:

Friday, the UN shamefully declared the Western Wall occupied Palestinian territory. Last week, I sent this holiday gift and message: “If I forget thee O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither.” (Psalm 137)

He then promptly rebuffed this resolution by declaring that ‘tomorrow to a menorah lighting at the Western Wall (the Kotel) in our united capital, Jerusalem’. I wish I could be there to witness and support it.

Lest anyone think this is a partisan issue, there is bi-partisan criticism of the President. Including that of the upcoming Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer. Senator Lindsay Graham has actually called for reconsidering taxpayer funding of the UN.

I am not one of those that calls for the demise of the UN. It does serve as a forum for international debate and discussion as a deterrent to future wars. But I agree with UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon's assessment that the UN is biased against Israel. (As if that wasn’t obvious). To say that this undermines its credibility is an understatement. I can therefore surely understand why Senator Graham might consider withdrawing US financial support after this vote.

Thankfully, the new administration will have an entirely different approach to Israel. One that hasn’t been tried yet by any past administration. A lot of pundits have said that a right turn this sharp with respect to Israel will do more harm than good, undermining both Israeli and US interests. It might begin a new Intifada where more Jewish blood will be spilled.

On the other hand the opposite might happen. The violence that is being perpetrated against Israel now might cause the US to withdraw support of the Palestinians altogether. Including the hefty financial aid they get. Peace may come about through strength rather than compromise. Islam is not exactly the most popular religion in America right now. And the new administration has made no secret of how he feels about Islam’s part in the world’s problems

What about the current administrations point that settlements are to blame for the stalling peace process? As I have said countless times, the settlements may be an issue but they are not the real problem. I’m sure the outgoing administration knows this. Decades of hatred has been instilled in the minds of most Arabs - insisting that Israel’s existence is a contradiction to their faith. They see Israel as an illegal state founded by European Jews – with a goal of colonizing their land.

Holocaust? What Holocaust?! Even if it happened. It's not their fault. Jews ought to go back where they came from and make their claims to European leaders and stop usurping Arab land! To this end they preach and teach hatred to their people. Some of whom take action with violence against Jews living there. There is absolutely no acknowledgement by them of the Jewish claim to any part of Israel. Legitimate claims that are biblical, historic, and moral.

If the preaching of hatred doesn’t end - the violence won’t end. There cannot be a 2 state solution under these circumstances. And to his credit I think the President-elect realizes it.

So in light of the President's latest actions so close to the end of his administration, instead of saying ‘Thank you and Goodbye’, Mr. President, I say Thank you. But ‘Good riddance!’

Image from Cross Currents

I marvel at the apologetics of Rabbi Chaim Malinowitz. In last week’s Mishpacha Magazine he reacted to a cover story the week before. In that article they praised (with some caveats) the city of Ramat Bet Shemesh A (RSB-A) for the diversity it showed in Charedi education.

Rabbi Malinowitz defended that community’s American orientation. Meaning he felt there was nothing wrong with clinging to the culture one was brought up with. Even to the extent of finding social nourishment with like minded Americans; and to the extent of speaking English as the primary way of communication between friends; or in seeking English language lectures from their Shul rabbis.

While others lamented the fact that a place like RBS-A interfered with acculturation one needs to live in Israel, Rabbi Malinowitz felt that this was not as important as the spiritual lift one gets by moving to the holy land. Which is why he supported the Charedi schools there which have an American program of combined Limudei Kodesh (mornings) and Limudei Chol (afternoons). This is what American parents want for their children.

And yet he felt compelled to write a letter to the editor saying that as a general rule this type of school is not approved of for the general Charedi population. What’s wrong with it? He basically said it’s because the Gedolim of Eretz Yisroel said so. He offered no other explanation. What about Parnassa, that a good secular education can help you obtain? He answered that there are a lot of ‘catch up’ programs that the Charedi world can avail themselves of for that purpose. I find it telling that he could provide no other explanation other than it is his task as a rabbi to promote the wishes of the Gedolim - who forbid it.

What it tells me is that - deep down - Rabbi Malinowitz actually might believe as I do that it might not be such a bad idea for Charedim not to have to find ways to ‘catch up’ with Israelis that have had a good secular education. Even though he did not say so expressly. Whether that should be the case for all Charedim or just those that are not the elite (meaning most of them) is besides the point. I think that in his heart of hearts he might actually think that most Charedim should be better prepared via their elementary and high school education for their future material welfare.

Which brings me to an article in Cross Currents. I am a huge fan of the author of this article, Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein for many reasons. One of which is his understanding of the Christian mindset with respect to Israel and the Jewish people. At least as far as fundamentalist Christians are concerned. He is one of the very few that has ability express such an accurate view of that based on his job as the Director of Interfaith Relations for the Weisenthal Center. The only other legitimate view from an observant perspective is that of my friend Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein who has dedicated his life to bettering relations between Christians and Jews (albeit not without some pretty harsh criticism from the right).

Rabbi Adlerstein writes about his recent appearance on Pat Robertson’s 700 Club. In the course of his artilce he lauds the right wing rejection of television. Most Charedim both here and in Israel do not have a TV in their homes - although he admits that there are a lot of closet Charedi TV homes out there.

I am not here to argue the merits and faults of TV today. Although there is much to discuss on this issue it will have to wait for another time. I was struck by Rabbi Adlerstein’s joy at how his young Israeli grandchildren are being raised in an environment that is so sheltered from the outside world. Not that he approves of being overly sheltered. He clearly does not and indicates as much. But he does like the fact that his young grandchildren are not yet exposed to it. He says that they eventually will be as were his older grandchildren there… and that’s a good thing. But will they really be exposed? Or is it through Rabbi Adlerstein’s own efforts that gives them exposure?

As beloved grandfather he teaches... and they learn. I doubt that any of his Israeli grandchildren would have had any idea what a Christian is like without him. And I doubt that most Israeli Charedim have any clue about what’s ‘out there’ other than what they are taught by Mechanchim. Whose philosophy is to insulate their children as much as possible.

I also have to wonder why he is so complacent about the kind of education they will receive there. Rabbi Adlerstein is what I call a moderate Charedi. Unless I am mistaken his children are very likely a part of the Charedi world in Israel. There is very little that is moderate about the Charedi world there. Which means they will have little exposure as possible to the outside world. For as long as possible. That is the nature of Charedi education in Israel. They are all about insulating their children from the outside world. For example - they do not even allow them to participate in sports – let alone follow a professional sports teams.

I also have to wonder how happy he is with lack of any secular education his grandchildren will receive - assuming they will follow the path of mainstream Charedim there and end up in schools that have no secular studies. If they do choose one of the ‘American style’ Charedi Yeshivos - they can suffer socially. Which is why many American parents just suck it up and send their children to mainstream Charedi schools.

If they go mainstream - will he be happy that his grandchildren will have to ‘catch up’ with their Israeli peers in order to compete for jobs? Is living the life of a Charedi in Israel really more spiritually uplifting than living the life of a Charedi in America? Would R’ Moshe Feinstein have been a more spiritual person - had he made Aliyah?

This is not to disparage making Aliyah. It is just to question why a Charedi raised in America would think living in Israel under the conditions described is so much more spiritual than in America - that they are willing to give up their American values to do it.

I don’t know. Maybe it’s me. Maybe for some – making a Charedi style Aliyah and abandoning American values is worth the gain one gets in the spirituality of living in Israel. But I don’t get it.

Susan B. Anthony. Are her views compatible with Halacha?

We all had a good laugh when my Mechutan quoted this biblical passage to his ‘wife to be’ on their wedding day during the Badeken – the veiling of the bride. (Both had lost their first spouses to illness). He then went on to give a beautiful interpretation of it - which is beyond the scope of this post. I mention it in light of an article in Lehrhaus.

One of the most destructive forces in history is the misuse of Eve’s curse to control women . V’Hu Yimshol Bach’ – ‘and he shall rule over you’ God tells Eve as part of her punishment for violating His command not eat fruit from the ‘tree of knowledge’. More than a few women over the course of history were abused – both mentally and physically using this passage from the Torah as an excuse.

Beyond that - until the advent of modern day feminism most wives saw subservience to their husbands as a biblical obligation. Husbands were to have complete decision making authority over their wives in all matters.

If this is indeed God’s mandate, how do we reconcile this with modern concepts of equality of the sexes?

Rabbi Yosef Bronstein tackles this question in a thoughtful Lehrhaus article. He first quotes the Rambam on this issue who seems to take this curse literally and explains him to mean the following:

While on the interpersonal level marriage is defined by love and mutual respect, the decision-making authority remains with the husband. The wife is enjoined to act in accordance with her spouse’s will, even in instances where she disagrees.

This is clearly in complete contradiction to how the modern world sees marriage. In most cases husbands and wives discuss and debate an issue and try to come to a consensus. If that isn’t possible – then in some cases the husband prevails and in some cases the wife prevails. But according to the Rambam the husband should always have the last word.

Is that normative Halacha? Do we ignore modern concepts of equality between the sexes? It depends who you ask, it seems. Rabbi Bronstein discusses three views.

On the right - Rabbi Avarham Erlanger’s approach is in concert with the rejectionist approach to outside influences. While his book on the subject spends many pages on treating one’s wife with respect and taking her views into serious consideration - at the end of the day it is always the husband’s right to ‘rule over his wife’. The decision is halachicly his to make and is binding on his wife no matter how strongly she might object. He completely dismisses all outside influences as irrelevant to Halacha - no matter how compelling those influences might be to our modern sensibilities.

This approach helps explain why the right is so rejectionist of outside influences. It doesn’t matter what makes sense to us. It matters only what Halacha says which is not to be filtered through a contemporary lens. While this is technically true, not everything said by the sages has the same level of obligation. Nonetheless based on this approach one can understand why the right so strongly vilifies feminism .

Rabbi Mordechai Willig has a different interpretation. After a thorough analysis of the Rambam’s style of Halachic Psak he (and others) have determined that the Rambam did not mean all of his rulings to be binding – phrasing those differently than the ones that were binding. This is one instance of that. It was merely a suggestion of Chazal for a wife to be subservient to her husband. It is given in the form of advice and not binding. Contemporary sages are free to change it based on the circumstances of their own time.

In the era of equal rights for men and women the current model of an equal partnership between husband and wife is therefore as valid in our time as Chazal’s approach was theirs. This is a view that clearly departs from that of the right. In this view there is no conflict with Halacha in taking modern values into consideration when there is no clear directive not to do so. This is the view taken by Rav Aharon Lichtenstein who said in an excerpt cited by Rabbi Bronstein):

(Decisions) are subject to the discussion, predilection, and decision of individual couples…

Thus, the familiar description of an isha keshera as a wife who performs the will of her husband (retson ba’alah), in no way precludes a husband’s declaring that his ratson is precisely a desire for understanding and consensus.

There is a 3^rd approach mentioned by Rabbi Bronstein. That of Rabbi Yehoshua Shapira, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Ha-Hesder Ramat Gan. He says that as we approach the final redemption we will merit the removal of the curses mentioned in Bereishis. V’Hu Yimsol Bah will no longer apply.

This approach is quite apt for the head of a Religious Zionist Yeshiva. Religious Zionism teaches that with the return of Israel to the Jewish people - we are experiencing the first flowering of our messianic redemption. And thus we can once and for all eliminate Eve’s curse - the source used by mankind that has historically treated women as second class citizens. He bases this on the views of Rav Avraham Yehoshua Kook. Using Kabalah as his guide Rav Kook says that a positive spiritual change taking place with the advent of Zionism allows Halacha to deviate from ‘the values of earlier generations’. This phenomenon, says Rabbi Shapira obviates the original curse of Eve.

As one might expect from a Centrist like me, I view the middle approach of Rav Lichtenstein to be the most sensible. We can take positive values from the culture in some cases and apply them to ourselves without fear that one is contradicting Halacha – if there is a basis to see that the sages did not intend a particular view on a given issue to be binding. The only question to be resolved then is when to know what is and isn’t binding Halacha as recorded by medieval commentators. Upon which normative Halacha is based. Only those steeped in Torah can tell us when we are and are not permitted to do that.

Jason Greenblatt and Doanld Trump (Twitter)

I have spent a lot of time agonizing about our country’s choice for the next President. And with good reason. Even though I have tried to rationally explain the reason he won the election, I still can’t figure out how anyone that ran a campaign the way President-elect Trump did could be elected dog catcher… let alone President of the United States. I still keep asking myself, “How is this possible?” And he keeps reinforcing that question daily in my mind with his silly tweets. Which sound like they are coming out of the mind of a spoiled 12 year old!

Not to mention the fact that The President-elect is about as unpredictable as any President-elect has ever been. And the fact that many of his signature campaign promises were clearly un-doable. And will not be carried out. Certainly not in the verbatim way he kept promising they would be during the campaign. And no… Mexico will not pay for any of them.

The only saving grace for me (and it’s a big one) is that his strong support for Israel is genuine. Which he has proven by his choice of 2 key players that will carry out his Middle East policies. Polices largely based on the views expressed by the 2 people he appointed. Both of whom are Orthodox Jews. David Friedman will be the new US ambassador to Israel. He is more right wing than Netanyahu… kind of like Netanyahu’s current education minister, Naftali Bennett. Who rejects a two state solution as does Friedman. (Netanyahu has publicly accepted a 2-state solution in theory.)

It has just been announced that Jason Dov Greenblatt has just been named to head the newly created post of International Negotiator. Jason - an Orthodox Jew - is also to the right of Netanyahu.

One of the things Trump said during the campaign was that he was going to get involved with the peace process. As much he has indicated how pro Israel he is, there was some concern about that statement. That ‘process’ has always led to trouble when anyone tried it. And who got the blame? You guessed it. Israel. Settlements on the West Bank is the root of all Middle East evil. At least that’s what one would think by the constant refrain of past peace negotiators. (Until the truth finally came out after Arafat rejected Oslo. Clinton knew who to blame.) The concern I had is that the same thing might happen with Trump if he tries what other have failed at – and that he too would blame Israel if he failed. I thought - the last thing Israel needs is a vindictive Trump!

But that is not the way I see things panning out now. In light of the new position he created and the person he chose to head it I am convinced he will indeed try to negotiate a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians. There is little question in my mind that the man who wrote ‘The Art of the Deal’ won’t try and make the deal of his life. Nor is there any doubt about who he will blame if it doesn’t work out. He has already indicated that it is Palestinian violence against Israel that is to blame. Not the settlements – which he supports.

My fears have turned into hope. I hope he succeeds. What about the grievances Palestinians have against Israel’s harsh treatment of them? That Palestinian meme doesn’t play so well with Trump. Because of his advisers he knows why they get such harsh treatment. It is the decades of Jew hatred among them that has generated terror. Which Israel needs to secure itself against. In other words any oppression they feel is their own fault. Or more precisely, the fault of their leaders.

Trump knows this. And he knows that the real impediment to peace is their decades long and continuing indoctrination of Jew hatred. This is how the Trump administration policy towards Israel will operate under Jason Greenblatt. While the rest of the world will continue to blind itself to the real culprit. The most powerful nation on earth (by far - and which will get even stronger if Trump keeps his promise) will know the real problem and not fall prey to the Palestinian narrative that it’s all about the settlements. Which is what the rest of the world thinks.

Pressure will now be on the Palestinians to change their act. And not as much on Israelis. How anyone can blame Israel for protecting itself from terror knowing that it is sourced in Palestinian Jew hatred - is something I will never fully understand. Even though there might be some occasional abuses by Israeli forces, one has to see that in the context of history and not reflexively blame Israel every time a Palestinian is hurt in circumstances which are not clear.

I have always in theory supported the idea of settling all of Eretz Yisroel. That’s because that land is our land given to us by God. What serious Jew who believes in the Torah would not want to have the entire Land of Israel as a sovereign nation settled by Jews ? Nonetheless I opposed it in practice for two reasons. One as a matter of Pikuach Nefesh and two because it antagonized Israel’s closest ally, the US.

But now that Trump is about to be in office and clearly supports the settlers, it may be time to reassess my own approach to settlements. On the one hand the US will no longer be saying that the settlements are an obstacle to peace. The violence on the other hand may still go on or even increase in the short term. I will have to see how things progress under this new policy.

One thing seems sure. Every administration since at least Clinton has pursued peace by favoring the Palestinian narrative of opposing settlements and supporting a two state solution. And every administration has failed. Now for the first time Palestinians will not have a US partner in that view. Only European partners. None of whom will convince Israel to stop settlements in light of a US policy that endorses them.

I don’t know if even the guy who wrote the book on deal making can accomplish the peace deal of the century. But it will be interesting to see him try under this new policy.

A lot of pundits seem to think that novices like Greenblatt and Friedman who have no experience dealing with the situation there should not by trying to negotiate anything. It would be like me trying to negotiate a merger between Amazon and Ebay. They will point to seasoned experts who – after years of involvement – have determined the reality of the conflict there and know what can - and can’t be done. But there are a variety of experts on the Middle East that in some cases are poles apart from each other. Daniel Pipes comes to mind. My guess is that it will be people like Pipes that will be advising Trump’s team on the Middle East now. The policies of the past have not produced one iota of progress.

One may ask, “What about the State Department or some of Trump’s other advisers. Like Defense Secretary designate James Mattis?” Both oppose settlement activity.

If there is one thing that is clear, it is that Trump will be setting policy. He will not allow the failed policies of the past to influence him. Not the State Department he will inherit. And not Mattis. He listens to people that he trusts: His settlement supporting Orthodox son in law and the 2 Orthodox Jews he has appointed to do the job.

I am a peacenik. I want to see peace in Israel. A warm peace with a positive relationship developing between Jews and Arabs; Palestinains and Israelis. No more bloodshed. No more wars. That’s why I was supportive of Oslo. And that’s why I am supportive of Trump – Oslo’s polar opposite. Whatever it takes. It’s is time to step back and give him a chance.

Who knows. Maybe Palestinains can be ‘convinced’ to make a deal by force of a carrot (more US aid) and stick (withdrawing it) approach. Trump may very well fail. But what have we got to lose? What if he succeeds? Can anyone imagine the possibilities?

Secretary of State John Kerry and the President

I’m not going to say, ‘With friends like these...’ tempting though it may be.

It occurs to me that the similarities between the United States and Israel make it seem like Israel is just a smaller version of the it. I am talking about how divided public opinion is with respect to a whole host of issues. There are liberals and conservatives. A left and a right… just about equally divided among the populations of each country. This is especially true for issues affecting Israel itself.

Which is why I will first defend both President Obama and Secretary Kerry despite my profound differences with them on that issue. I believe them both when they say they are pro Israel. They are as pro Israel as half of Israel is. The left half. If one reads the media rection to both the UN vote that Obama refused to veto and John Kerry’s defense of it, one will see how left - and the right- of both countries spin it. The righthas categorically rejected it and the left thinks what Obama and Kerry did was actually very pro Israel

I think it’s obvious to fair minded people that both Obama and Kerry are pro Israel. As I keep saying the financial, military and intelligence support Israel has gotten during 8 years of the Obama administration is unprecedented. Anyone who see this as anti Israel – just isn’t being fair. And both the President and Kerry have explained the US refusal to veto the UN condemnation of Israel as pro Israel. They actually believe that a 2 state solution is the only viable path to peace… and that the current right wing coalition government in Israel is undermining that by their current settlement policy. Of course they are not alone in making this criticism. Half of Israel feels the same way. Which if you read the Israeli left wing media you will see.

That said. I have to agree with all the critics of the President and his Secretary of State. They are so married to the failed Middle East policies of the past that they can’t seem to break away from them. Towards that end they have minimized the real problem. Which is decades of Jew hatred indoctrinated among Arabs across the Middle East.

That is the real impediment to peace. An impediment that has resulted in the kind of violence against Israelis that puts Israel in it’s current position of harsh security measures. There is a reason that Netanyahu is the prime minister now. The majority of Israelis are more worried about their security than they are about making peace with the Palestinians. Had Palestinains not been so violent against Israelis over Israel’s entire existence, Ehud Barak would still be prime minister and there would already be 2 states.

By placing the primary blame on Israel, the United States has contributed to this mindset and has set the stage for a much longer reign of a Netanyahu type government than would normally be the case. Israel has more or less rotated between left and right wing governments ever since the Begin days. But now the right wing is not only I control now, but for the foreseeable future. Obama has guaranteed that by allowing the nations of the world to condemn Israel without at least an equivalent condemnation of Palestinian incitement to violence.

Kerry had to defend his President. He truly believes that Israel’s settlement policies are an impediment to peace. If you are married to the 2 state solution, that is a fair assessment. But even so -to practically ignore the Palestinian impediments to peace – by barely mentioning it at all and only in passing while the focus is on Israeli impediments is grossly unfair and puts the peace process in even greater jeopardy. Israel will not all of a sudden say, “You know what? Obama is right.” “What were we thinking?!” No. Israel will be defiant and go the other way. That is what happened. And the Palestinian will be encouraged to incite even more violence.

Is this the way a friend is treated? Even one you disagree with? According to Kerry it is. He claimed the United states wanted to make clear to Israel that unless there are 2 states, Israel cannot be both a Jewish and democratic country. I get what he’s saying. But Israel did not need the US to allow a condemnation by the UN to know what the US position is. It’s one thing to tell your friends that you believe they are wrong. It’s another to try and force them to change. Especially since that is the opposite of what will happen. Both Kerry and Obama should have known how Israel would react. And they did it anyway.

Fortunately for Israel and her supporters, the current animosity between our 2 countries won’t last. As President-elect Trump said yesterday. January 20^th is not that far away. I never thought I would say this. But I’m glad that we will have a President that will be far more supportive of our closest ally. Because I’m pretty sure that Mrs. Clinton would have just picked up where her predecessor left off. On the other hand here is President-elect Trump’s reaction to this whole debacle:

We cannot continue to let Israel be treated with such total disdain and disrespect. They used to have a great friend in the U.S., but....... not anymore. The beginning of the end was the horrible Iran deal, and now this (U.N.)! Stay strong Israel, January 20th is fast approaching!

My reaction to that is, ‘Thank you, Mr. President-elect!’ ‘I am eager to see the positive new direction in our relationship with Israel that we will take when you take office.’ ‘And I’m sure you will get the approval of the majority of congress in doing that. Support that will include many Democrats.’

Where does that leave my pro-Israel friends on the left – in both Israel and the US? I think better off in the long run – even though they don’t know it yet. At least I hope so.

Former Conservative Rabbi Seymour Rosenbloom performing an intermarriage

How sad that it’s come to this for American Jewry. We are now talking about a new definition of Jews that will include intermarried couples. Not just for Reform Judaism where that already exists. But for all non Orthodox denominations.

How far we have fallen from the tree called Judaism when rabbis are now calling non Jews – Jews. But that is what Reform Rabbi, Jeffrey Salkin seems to be saying in his Forward oped. He wants to change how we Jews are now identified denominationally boiling it down to two groups: Orthodox and Non Orthodox.

What happened to all of the denominations? Well, they’re still around. But as Rabbi Salkin freely admits they are shrinking. So he proposes consolidation. Adding that even the Conservative Movement seems to be heading in the direction of the Reform movement. Pointing to Conservative rabbis that are coming out of the closet in support of performing intermarriages.

I don’t think Rabbi Salkin gets it. He thinks the answer to the shrinkage of American Jewry is to combine forces under a new doctrine. And what would that be? Fealty to non observance?! You cannot change the definition of Judaism every time you think there is something wrong with it. I have to wonder how Conservative rabbis on the right, Like Professor Jack Werthemier see a suggestion like this? If I had to guess – based on many of his past writings, I’d say he would be laughing it.

You cannot keep changing the rules in the middle of the game – just to keep yourself in it.

As I’ve said in the past – on this subject, none of his makes me happy. Not the shrinkage of American Jewry and certainly not changing what it means to be a Jew. There is only one thing that will keep us Jewish into the future. Halacha. That is what has kept us going for generations ever since the 2^nd Temple era. Without Halacha we would have just blended in to the general populace and become one of them. There would be no Judaism today because there would be no Jews. Certainly not recognizable ones.

When will the left learn that chasing down values that are not particularly Jewish – even very noble ones - is not the way to stay Jewish. The only way to do that is the time tested way. By being different. Which in the case of Judaism means following Halacha. It is our differences from the rest of the world that define us. Our similarities – if it is the only thing focused upon will destroy us.

I therefore also reject his Rabbi Salkin’s groupings. He separates Charedi Jews from Modern Orthodox Jews. While we do have our differences. We have the one thing in common that will perpetuate us into the future. Halacha. We both follow it. Even though there may be some differences in how we follow some of these Halachos, the majority of them are pretty much the same for all. That we have different world views does not separate us as much as observance does from non observance.

Just to be clear. (…and I’ve said this before). Being separate by our observances doesn’t mean we can’t be close. It would be criminal for observant Jews to abandon non observant Jews. Every Jew is responsible for the welfare of every other Jew. Both the physical and spiritual welfare. To that end Every single Jew no whether observant or not is our brother or sister and we ought to treat them that way.

We are family and this is what family does. We do not abandon each other over matters of observance. Of course we should try and convince non observant Jews about the beauty and importance of observance. But only in the most pleasant of ways and certainly not by force, or intimidating harangues consisting of fire and brimstone speeches.

And even if they never become observant at all, they are still family and we should show it. The idea that some Jews think that these Jews are lost anyway and we should just ignore them and ourselves is a violation of the Torah itself: Kol Yisroel Areivim Zeh La’Zeh. Just because we need improvement in our own lives doesn’t mean we are free from seeing to the welfare of all of our people. And just because the chances of succeeding in keeping them and their offspring from intermarrying and assimilating out – does not free us from our task to try and prevent that.

If on the other hand one adopts the idea of creating yet another non Halachic and non valid denomination by combining all the current ones into something new. Well, in my book that is already a failure before it even starts. And eventually history will prove me right. Just as it always has with past ‘new’ denominations that veered away from Halacha.

Rachel (Ruchie) Freier - Brooklyn Civil Court Judge (Brooklyn Paper)

One of my favorite campaign slogans was the one Bobby (Robert F.) Kennedy used during his ill fated campaign for President back in 1968:

There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why... I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

If I had to characterize what I try to do here it might be summed up by that quote. Well… almost. It’s not that things in Judaism never were. It’s that things that were - have been discarded with the claim that they never were by certain segments of Orthodox Judaism. So in that context I dream of things that never were and say why not?

I mention this in light of an event that happened last week. It was a wonderful example of the way things could be. From VIN:

It was a historic moment tonight as Ruchie Freier, a Chasidic female lawyer and the founder of the all female Ezras Nashim volunteer ambulance corps, was inducted as a civil court judge at Brooklyn Borough Hall.

Freier was introduced by several speakers including Brooklyn’s acting district attorney Eric Gonzalez.

Surrounded by her parents, husband, children and grandchildren in Borough Hall’s ceremonial courtroom, Freier donned her black robe as she was inducted as a judge by her uncle, former Judge David Schmidt…

Unfortunately I don’t think they are celebrating this event in some of the more extreme enclaves of Chasidism. Nor would they celebrate this in Charedi Israel. It might even be anathema to them - as it goes completely counter to their isolationist worldview.

First, the idea that a woman can be in a position of such high visibility goes counter to their oft quoted passage from Tehilim (45:15): Kvudah Bas Melech Penima – the glory of the King’s daughter (i.e. all Jewish women) is on the inside. Which they basically interpret as a woman’s place is in the home. I can’t even count the number of times I’ve heard that famous quote used even to the point of erasing women completely from the public square – forget about becoming a judge in a secular court.

And yet as can be plainly seen from this video (below), Mrs. Freier’s Chasidic husband could not be prouder of his wife’s accomplishments – telling everyone attending the ceremony how supportive her family is.

I believe his pride is genuine. I also believe that the Chasidic community that he is a part of may very well be tolerant and even celebrate this kind of thing. They might be classified as moderate Chasidim which are part of the growing moderate mainstream majority of Charedi America. But this would never happen in places like Kiryas Joel and New Square. Nor would - even the non Chasidic rabbinic leaders in Israel be tolerant of it. One may recall some recent comments by some of those leaders forbidding women to study any academic subjects at all – even in schools designed by Charedim for Charedim.

So as happy as I am to see something like this take place, I wish I could say that it is the wave of the future for Chasidism or for the Charedi world in Israel. Or even that there is a ray of hope that things might turn somewhat in this direction. I tend to doubt it. I hope I’m wrong but my guess is that Ruchie Freier is the exception that will ultimately prove the rule. But I can dream...

One of the most discussed topics in Orthodoxy today is Tznius. Mainly as it applies to women. On that level I think we are now in uncharted territory. I am not talking about extremist enclaves where different sides of a public street are designated – one side for men and one side for women. To the vast majority of Orthodox Jews that make up the mainstream that is indeed extreme. But to the extremists of Orthodoxy – separate sides of the street is a normal expression of Tznius. Even if it means forcing husbands and wives to separate from each other.

The problem is that even in moderate circles some of these extremes have been adopted. It has become an obsession of the right.

There is no question about the requirement for Jews to be modest in our ways. As the prophet Micah tells us (6:8): ‘Tzne Haleches’ Walk modesty with God. But this term has been used primarily as a hammer by the right to apply almost exclusively to women. As a result, many books on Tznius have been written that have raised Chumros to the level of Halacha.

Avital Chizhik-Goldshmidt has written a very thoughtful article on this subject in Tablet Magazine. Although written a few years ago, it is still relavent today. I think we all should pay attention to it because it describes a mindset about Tznius that has taken hold in much of Orthodoxy. To demonstrate what I mean, here is her opening paragraph:

A friend asked me to serve as a match-reference—that is, to attest to the virtues of a prospective bride—for her older (Torah-learned, black-hat-wearing) brother. My friend, apparently, had discovered, through other references, that the young woman in question did not always wear appropriate hosiery.

“I’m just confused,” she told me. “Because I thought you even specifically mentioned that you thought she wears tights, and I would just be surprised if she didn’t wear some sort of socks or tights, based on the level of piety that I heard about her.”

“I must admit,” I said, “I don’t spend much time looking at ankles. I tend to look people in the eye.” Then, sensing my friend’s dissatisfaction with my answer, I added: “But I’m pretty sure she wears some sort of socks.”

This is where we have come to. In America and especially in Israel. Mrs. Chizhik-Goldschmidt describes her experience with a Chardal family. (Chardal is a contraction of the words Charedi and DL - Dati Leumi. It is a term used to describe a Dati Leumi/Religious Zionists that –except for their Zionism are as Charedi as the standard Charedi world.)

(D)uring a Shabbat spent in a Jerusalem suburb with a Chardal (Zionist ultra-Orthodox) family. In front of her guests, my hostess scolded her 16-year-old daughter, “I see your collarbone, Leah. If you wear that shirt one more time, I swear I’ll take it away from you.” The hostess then turned to me, glanced at my coincidentally floor-length skirt, and commented, “You see Avital’s skirt? Girls, you should wear something like that. It’s so tznius.”

I wish I could have shown her the shorter and tighter pencil skirts that I left behind in my closet. Instead I quipped, “Yes, have you seen the Ramat Bet Shemesh women? They’ve taken to wearing burqas. Now, those are really tznius.”

My sarcasm went undetected. “Yes, indeed,” the hostess said, taking her glasses off with a sigh. “Those women are so modest. We can’t judge them, they’re on a much higher level than we are.”

Mrs. Chizhik-Goldschmidt gave numerous examples of how far the extremes of Tznius have permeated the mainstream of the Charedi world even in America. So much so, that even the slightest infraction is seen as a near apocalyptic. When in truth they are at best minor or even just Chumros. Matters of Tznius which are beyond the prohibitions of Erva are relative to the times and the place in which one lives. But as demonstrated by the many examples Mrs. Chizhik-Goldschmidt gave we now see Tznius treated like Erva.

I have heard it explained that the Charedi world has adopted this attitude on purpose - to counter the prevailing exhibitionist general culture in which we live. They are bending the proverbial page back much further to the right – just to get it back to the center.

But I do not by that as a solution. Because when it comes to matters of modesty, there is no going back to the center. There is only moving to the right. Which is why there have been so many examples of extremism that have been defended by even moderate Charedim. Much like that Chardal woman who defended the Burka wearing women as being on such a high spiritual level.

The question is, what can we do about this? How do we change the current march towrad extremes in modesty in our world today?

As in most questions I ask here, I don’t know the answer to that. But one thing I would like to see, is more people like Mrs. Chizhik-Goldschmidt. She rebelled. Not against Judaism as did many Charedi women that became so disillusioned with the extremes in their lives that they left observance altogether. Mrs. Chizhik-Goldschmidt rebelled to the sociological center of Orthodoxy. Which is the world that I inhabit.

The center is also increasingly the world the mainstream inhabits. But there are powerful forces trying to influence that mainstream to the right with incremental adoption of increased modesty standards. I encourage the mainstream to resist those standards. And strengthen their Judaism where it really counts – in actual observance of Halacha. Not the absurd levels of Tznius we are coming to see so much more of these days. It is in the center where extremes meet to become the norm. And that’s where I believe Judaism best lives and ultimately where it thrives.

R' Y.H. Eichenstein and R' Asher Lopatin (in his pre YCT days)

I often talk about Achdus here. Achdus (or unity) takes many forms. While all Jews are brothers and unified as a people - there is a greater sense of Achdus among those of us that are observant. There is much more that unites observant Jews than what divides us. Belief in the fundamentals of our faith and observance of Halacha have a far greater degree of commonality than our lack of commonality in Hashkafa.

But the Achdus I am seeking has been an elusive goal for me. One that sometimes seems to be going in the wrong direction. While there is a growing sociological centrist community that consists of moderate Charedim and ideological Centrists. There is still a lack of brotherhood and unity among us by virtue of the lack of respect from the right towards fellow observant Jews that have a Centrist Hashkafa.

In that sense the Charedi world and the Modern Orthodox world seems to be growing further apart – even as we both are moving to the right.

It is not for the lack of trying to unite. At least on the part of those of us that comprise the majority of modern Orthodoxy – Centrists. We want Achdus. But the right keeps rejecting us or at best tolerating us but not by much. I can’t say that this rejection is universally true. But much of the rhetoric of the right is geared towards exhorting its members to reject much of what MO participates in. In their zeal to insulate itself from the general culture they constantly harp about avoiding it as much as possible.

So that if you are someone embraces any part of that culture – even it is not forbidden by Halacha - you are looked upon as ‘Nisht fun Unzera’ – a common expression meaning you are not one of us. What that ends up doing is creating a a prejudice that says if you participate in things we reject, then we reject you too. Adding to that rejection is a view of Modern Orthodoxy that violates those Halachos they focus on for themselves. Yesterday someone gave the following list of complaints about Modern Orthodox Jew from the right which emphasizes these points:

"You're not serious about observance. You look only for "kulos" all the time"
"You don't care about harchokos, shomer negia, and some of you don't even know what they are"
"You have no gedolim, and what's worse is you don't listen to them"
"Your following sports is childish. Grow up like us"
"You don't spend nearly as much as we do for arba minim"
"You don't accept everything the gedolim say, so you have no emunas chachomim"

As if they are all careful about every Halalcha. The truth is that there are plenty of members of the right that are guilty of the same thing they accuse Modern Orthodox Jews of. Only they hide it. I know plenty of Charedim like that. And they are more than just a few exceptions. Back in the 80s – there were tons of black hatted Charedim at the mixed pool at the hotel in Miami Beach where I used to spend my winter vacations.

And yet Modern Orthodox Jews are not accepted. Some of those complaints against us may be valid. But they do not make the same complaints about those among their own that do the same thing.

Additionally, some of their complaints are just differences in Hashkafa. Or a misunderstanding about what our Hashkafa actually is. The primary identifiers of observance have always been what I call the big three: Shabbos, Kashrus, and Tahara Mishpacha (Mikva). Those three Mitzvos are what makes us unique. And it is what we share completely with them.

And yet even while they rail against with those complaints - they do accept us in a tacit way. This is evidenced in the trust they give Kashrus Agencies that are run by Centrist organizations like the OU. The vast majority of Charedim in America trust the OU symbol. I know of no rabbinic leader that has ever said you can’t trust them. And yet they refuse to respect us beyond that tacit way. I have never understood for example why a Rosh Yeshiva from YU has not been invited to address an Agudah convention.

My quest for Achdus has been interpreted as seeking the approval of the right. That is not correct. I don’t need the right to validate everything I do – or my Hashkafa. I just need them to respect my Hashkafa even if they don’t agree with it. And to not constantly harp on differences that do not define us as observant Jews. And using them to form a wedge between us.

In truth, there are many prominent Charedim that agree with me on this. And even with some of the criticisms I’ve made of the right in the past. They have told me so privately. But they refuse to go public. That perpetuates the lack of respect too many of their members have for us.

There are some who say that we ought to ignore the right and just be ourselves – proud of who we are and in what we believe. I reject that. Yes, we should be proud of who we are. But it isn’t that we ‘pine for acceptance and validation’ from the Charedi right – as someone suggested yesterday. It’s that we don’t like rejection. As someone else said yesterday:

Rejection by others is unpleasant to some degree in all human beings.

This is especially true when those that are rejected actually respect those that are rejecting you. Instead of rejection we seek unity with our fellow observant Jews. Being proud of who we are does not preclude wanting unity with those that disagree with us. Unity means having a common (not identical – but common…) set of values and respecting each other’s Hashkafos. Not necessarily agreeing with them.

What about unity with the left? I am constantly accused of only wanting unity with the right. That is incorrect. I have always thought we need a vibrant left that can appeal to those of us that see that as the only viable way to continue being observant. Liberal Orthodox Jews that in my view are unduly influenced by the winds of cultural change – still need a place to call home if they wish to remain observant. Even if I personally disagree with some of those influences.

This is why I have in the past supported people like Rabbi Avi Weiss. He managed to appeal to these groups without crossing any serious lines. But when that happened, I had to part company with him. He has crossed several lines that have traditionally never been crossed and should not have been. Which make it difficult to have Achdus with his new version of Orthodoxy – Open Orthodoxy. It is one thing to reside in the left wing of Orthodoxy. It’s another to cross lines that virtually all other segments of Orthodoxy said should never have been crossed. No matter how well intentioned they are in crossing them.

I hope this clarifies things.

Zvi Gluck - head of the Orthodox social service group Amudim

65. That’s the number of suicides that took place among Orthodox Jews in the year 2016. Many of those by a drug overdose. I have no clue whether that number as a percentage of the whole of the Orthodox world is the same, more, or less than the percentage of suicides in the general public. But in my view 65 souls that could not face life to such an extent that they saw ending their lives as the only way out – is an epidemic. Certainly to the families of those people.

65 is the anecdotal number of Orthodox suicides given by Zvi Gluck, a Charedi Jew involved in trying to help these people. God bless this man.

Josh Nathan-Kazis reports in a Forward article that most of these suicides are the result of rejection by their home communities for stepping out of their ultra Orthodox way if life. As well as the result of not being able to adjust in the outside world. Which I believe in most cases means dropping observance altogether.

I am not going to speculate about the variety of causes of dropping out of observance. There are many reasons why one decides to drop out. Nor am I going to assess blame. The point is that it happens. And that often leads to depression so severe that suicide is often contemplated and sometimes acted upon. In the course of 2016, that happened at least 65 times in the Orthodox community.

There is one cause for dropping observance that is rather well known. Sexual abuse. Not necessarily from the abuse itself. But from the reaction to the victim by his community. Instead of compassion, a survivor often feels rejection. Especially when they accuse prominent and popular people. Abusers are often found to be among the most generous and contributing members of their community. (I recall reading one case where an abuser was purposely generous with both his time and money so he could feed his sickness. Should he be accused of sex abuse - no one would believe he could do what he was accused of.)

That feeling is understandable. Most people will say it isn’t possible that such a generous and giving man of so much accomplishment – a family man with wonderful children could do such a thing. So the victim is victimized again, this time by his entire community. Nobody believes him and instead considers him some sort of vindictive human piece of garbage out to destroy good people with accusations that will destroy their reputations.

Is there any wonder why survivors of sex abuse drop out of observance altogether? And so often contemplate suicide?! Their community has disappointed them. Their expectations about justice from the Torah world has been destroyed.

This is why there is so much anger at those rabbis that insist that any suspicions of sex abuse must first be reported to them – to see if there is any ‘Raglayim L’Davar’ - seeing those suspicions as reasonable. The problem is that rabbis are human. They see the accused in the same positive light the rest of the community does. They see his family and his children that need Shiduchim, and realize that if reported, it will become public knowledge. So that even if claims about abuse are proven false, that man’s reputation will quite possibly be ruined for life. And their children will be tainted by it - harming their Shiduch prospects.

So they want to be sure. But there is no getting around the natural bias they have - having experienced the positive contributions the accused has made to his community.

And then there are issues of Mesirah which are treated very harshly in Halacha. One is not allowed to inform on a fellow Jew to the authorities. The Shulchan Aruch states that one loses their Olam HaBah for doing so! There are a variety interpretations of this Halacha in our day. But even according to the most stringent view - there are circumstances where Mesirah is actually a Chiuv - a Halachic requirement to report a Jew to the authorities! The question remains about whether these instances qualify for any of those exceptions.

Suspicions of sexual abuse are clearly an exception requiring it to be reported to the authorities.They do not have the bias members of that community have. They can therefore judge accusations more objectively. Not to mention the fact that police at sex abuse divisions are trained to do this

I’ve discussed all this before. Let me repeat. There is not a question in my mind that suspicions of abuse must be directly reported to the police under all circumstances. The damage done to a victim of abuse by not reporting it directly to the police or even delaying it, is incalculable. The cost of which may end up being his death… let alone his dropping observance.

I was sent a video (below) of a Shiur given by the Gateshead Rav, R’ Shraga Feivel Zimmerman. In a clear and straight forward fashion he explains the importance of dealing with sex abuse the right way. It is a tour de force Halacha Shiur using sources.

What makes this Shiur unique is that it is geared to the Charedi world of which he is a respected member. But we can all learn from it. From Modern Orthodox to Charedi. At almost 55 minutes in length, it is well worth watching.

Rav Zimmerman is a man of great insight, compassion, and courage. The best of the best of what the Charedi world has to offer. A true hero and a role model of leadership. We need a lot more like him.

Mordechai Ben David (Forward)

I don’t know which is greater. My anger or my sadness. I feel both emotions competing with each other for dominance.

I have come to the conclusion that there are wide swaths of Orthodox Jews that are racist. That’s right. You read that correctly. Wide swaths! When a popular Jewish singer that is clearly religious can refer to a fellow human being with a racial epithet - to a cheering crowd full of religious Jews - that tells me something. And it isn’t good. I don’t think the term Chilul HaShem would be misplaced as a description of that. Which is too bad because I have been a fan of this pioneer of Jewish music for decades.

The Forward reports that Mordechai Ben David used such a slur about our President during a recent concert in Jerusalem. There is no doubt that he did. He can be heard saying it in the video below. He called him a ‘Kushi’ which is commonly used to slur black people among Hebrew speakers. Kushi means black man. Much the same way the word ‘Shvartze’ does in Yiddish.

There is no explaining this away. You cannot say he was just matter of factly referring to him by his color in a non pejorative way. Jewish racists that use the word Shvartze try to explain it the same way. That will not work. He used that term deliberately as a pejorative to the cheer of his adoring fans. He may as well used the ‘N’ word. He would have gotten the same cheer. Just because you say it in Hebrew or Yiddish does not make it any better.

It also doesn’t matter that one doesn’t agree with the President’s policies… even with respect to Israel. Nor does it matter that he is now viewed by many Jews, including me, as stabbing Israel in the back by allowing the UN to pass a resolution condemning it. One can criticize his policies. I certainly have – especially on this issue. But there is never any excuse to call someone by a racial epithet.

Unfortunately I see this all the time. Even among some of my own friends. In an unguarded moment they will refer to the President as ‘that Shvartze in office’. I’ve heard that - or something akin to it - more than once. By more than one person. And from religious Jews of all Hashkafos. From Charedi to Religious Zionist. They may pay lip-service to not being racist. But they are. Or else they would never refer to the President in racist terms no matter how much they hate his polices.

I have also come to the conclusion of late that it is very likely true that the problems a lot of religious Jews have with the President are motivated by racism. At least subliminally. Obama never had a chance with them. They will vigorously deny that and and say that just because you disagree with the President doesn’t mean you are a racist. Fair enough. I disagree with him too. But that does not explain the venomous - almost irrational hatred I have seen expressed by people from the full spectrum of Orthodox Jewry. To these people even the things he’s said or done that they would normally support are spun into an irrational explanation – denying him any credit. They accept nothing less than he’s an antisemite. No evidence to the contrary will convince them. Refusing to be rational about the man is the greatest proof of that racism.

In my humble opinion this all stems from a racism that is inherent in far too many of us.

To the best of my knowledge no one has protested what Mordechai said. As if to say they agree with him. The only thing I agree with - is that the President is leaving office - soon to be replaced by someone far more sympathetic to Israel’s current democratically elected leadership than has been the case for the last 8 years. But with one word, he has negated any support I might have expressed. It is racism pure and simple and it seems to be in the DNA of far too many religious Jews. That was made clear by the cheering crowd.

Why are there so many racist Orthodox Jews? Some of it seeps in from the general culture. There is still a lot of racism out there. Some of it is taken from bad experiences they or their parents and grandparents have had living in dangerous neighborhoods where black gangs thrive. Where muggings and the like have happened to them.

The truth is that there is a lot of black crime out there, too. But there is a lot more white crime. That there may be more black crime as a percentage of the whole has many explanations… none of which have to do with the color of their skin. It’s just too bad that so many people fear encountering a black man in a dark alley than they do encountering a white man. That fear extends to black people. Ask Jesse Jackson. Why? Because statistics show that there is more black on black crime than there is white on black crime. But there is absolutely no genetic predisposition to evil or violence just because someone’s skin is black.

And yet that is exactly what Mordechai’s statement said by referring to the President as a Kushi. He is saying that the President is evil because of the color of his skin. He can deny it all he wants. But that is the only real explanation for what he said. The cheering crowd can deny it all they want too. Had he not used that word, the cheering may have been acceptable. I may have cheered right along with him by a statement of ‘good riddance’. But the use of that word should have gotten boos. Not cheers.

I am embarrassed, sad, and angry at this state of affairs – and have no clue what to do about it.

"We never abandon soldiers" say protesters of the guilty verdict (TOI)

First let me say that I could not be happier that Abdel Fattah al-Sharif is dead. He was a Palestinian terrorist that stabbed an Israeli soldier in an attempt to murder him.

Al-Sharif was shot, wounded and neutralized by Israeli soldiers. A few minutes later another Israeli soldier, 19 year old Sgt. Elor Azaria, approached the incapacitated al-Sharif as he lay wounded on the ground and shot him in the head. (see graphic video below) Al-Sharif died of his wounds. Azaria was arrested and ultimately charged with manslaughter. (Not murder because the both Israeli and Palestinian pathologists found that the bullet that actually killed al-Sharif was from the original shots fired that wounded him.). On January 4^th 2017, Azaria was convicted of manslaughter by a military panel of three judges.

As much as I am glad that Israel has one less terrorist to worry about, I am also quite comfortable with the verdict. Shooting a subdued human being in the head who is not a danger to anyone is murder (in this case manslaughter). While I don’t know all the specifics of the case, I trust that the 3 military judges heard every word of testimony and came to a just conclusion.

There are 2 separate issues here. The death of a terrorist and the rule of law. I favor both. I respect any democracy that has set up a system of justice that attempts to be fair and equitable for all. Certainly Israel’s system of justice qualifies. So I am not going to second guess this judicial panel. Justice has been served.

Although I admit I don’t know all the facts, from what is known the basic facts seem rather clear. Which means that from an ethical perspective the decision was correct. Killing someone while he is subdued is murder according to Halacha. It doesn’t matter if the victim is Jewish or not. It’s still murder. Nor does it matter what the goals of that victim were. Even if it was to murder someone. As long as he is unable to carry that out by virtue of his incapacitation, no one has a right to kill him.

If on the other hand had al-Sharif been a threat, then it would not only would it be permitted to kill him, it would be a Chiuv - a Mitzvah to do so. Even if the assailant had been a Jew. You cannot stand idly by while your brother’s blood is being spilled. Not doing so would be a serious violation of Halacha. But this was not case here.

There has been a public outcry about this verdict. One that encompasses the entire spectrum of politicians including Israel’s sitting Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu who at first condemned the killing. It seems the country is divided. Half of it asking that Sgt. Elor be pardoned by Israel’s sitting President, Ruvein Rivlin, in whose lap pardons lay. He has said that he will weigh that option should Sgt. Elor request it.

One may ask, what is the justification for pardoning Sgt. Elor? Why do so many people across the political spectrum in Israel support that? One answer I have heard mentioned is that the morale of the IDF is at stake. Soldiers do not want to be second guessed about their reactions to terror situations that suddenly arise. The fear might be that this will create hesitations about killing terrorists where seconds count and lives would be saved. I hear that. Another reason might be because of the feeling that killing a terrorist is just no matter what the circumstances are. I hear that too. There may be other reasons that there is such a public outcry. Like I said - I am not sorry that al-Sharif is dead.

But you cannot get away from the fundamental ethics of killing someone that is subdued and not a threat to anyone – no matter how clear the evil of his intent was. The point is he couldn’t carry out that intent in his condition. And that makes it murder. That is how the 3 judge military panel saw it. And since they know all the facts of the case, I trust them.

What about the pardon? Justice will not be served if this ‘public service murderer’ will be allowed to go free. That said I’m not sure I would sentence the man who killed a terrorist to the maximum sentence allowed by law either. I wasn’t there. I was not in his shoes – watching a companion being attacked by a knife wielding terrorist. Knowing that he will live to tell the tale and be released from prison one day even if convicted. He will then once again be free to try it again and maybe next time - succeed. I cannot imagine what Sgt. Elor was feeling at that moment. Sgt. Elor may very well be an otherwise good person. But no one should ever get away with murder. Thankfully I am not the one that has to decide. I will leave it up to the judges to determine a just sentence.

Keneset Building in Jerusalem - the seat of Israel’s government

On June 8th of 2015 the Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision denied petitioner Rabbi Ari Zivotovsky registering the birth of his son as having taken place in Israel. Even though he was born in Israel’s capital, Jerusalem. The basis for the claim is somewhat irrelevant to this post. Suffice it to say that it seems pretty ridiculous to say that a Jew born in Jerusalem cannot be registered as being born in Israel.

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. I say this with pride as a Jew. That should be obvious to anyone with the slightest knowledge about the bible, Israel, Jewish history, and the current facts on the ground. Jerusalem has always been considered part of Israel by the 2 of the major faiths: Christianity and Judaism. Even without that, the seat of government in Israel is in Jerusalem.

The American embassy should therefore be in Jerusalem. And an American citizen born in Jerusalem - was also born in Israel. But things are not always as simple as they might seem. There are a lot of forces out there working to deny recognition of that fact.

That said, Jerusalem has been recognized as Israel’s capital by every candidate running for President... promising to move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. And yet once in office they all refused to do so. Even though congress who funds the State Department has overwhelmingly passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act in 1995 requiring the State Department to move its embassy to Jerusalem.

How did these Presidents get around this act? There is a loophole that every President has used allowing them to keep the embassy in Tel Aviv - thereby not recognizing Jerusalem as even part of Israel - let alone its capital.

On the face of it this seems pretty outrageous - given all of the above - that the embassy is not located in Jerusalem and that someone born there cannot be considered born in Israel. And yet that is the way things stand now.

As most people know by now, candidate Trump had done what his predecessor candidates have done: Promise to move the US embassy to Jerusalem. What’s different about Trump’s promise is that now as President-elect he says he intends to keep that promise – saying it is a high priority for him. His top advisers on Israel many of whom will be serving him in an official capacity (while others unofficially so) support him doing that. It therefore seems like a virtual certainty that the US embassy will be relocated Jerusalem where it belongs.

This has generated an unprecedented warning from outgoing Secretary of State, John Kerry:

“You’d have an explosion, an absolute explosion in the region, not just in the West Bank, and perhaps even in Israel itself, but throughout the region,” Kerry said in an interview with CBS.

Not to be outdone, in the ‘dire warning’ department, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and the government of Jordan said the following:

(Abbas) noted that moving the embassy would have “irreversible” consequences, and warned that if Trump did relocate it, the PA would “take steps” in response.
A government spokesman in Amman warned that moving the embassy may have “catastrophic” repercussions. Such a move could affect relations between the US and regional allies, including Jordan, Information Minister Mohamed Momani told The Associated Press.

This brings me to this morning’s news out of Jerusalem:

Four IDF soldiers were killed and 13 wounded after an industrial truck driven by a terrorist, rammed into a group of people adjacent to the Armon Hanatziv promenade in Jerusalem on Sunday afternoon.

Among the fatalities were three female soldiers and one male in their 20s. The terrorist was shot dead by security personnel at the scene…

The question is, ‘Is moving the embassy worth it?’ Is it the right thing to do? What indeed will the actual repercussions be of such a move? Is moving the embassy to Jerusalem worth the ‘price’ of doing that?

I have mixed feelings about it. As I said, there is no question in my mind that the capital of Israel is Jerusalem. Even in the event that a 2 state solution is implemented - at least the western part of it of it where the Keneset is located will be a part of Israel. That was already conceded to Israel by Arafat at the Camp David peace conference under Clinton that almost produced a Palestinian State.

That there is so much opposition to it shows the irrationality that dominates the thinking on this issue. And yet I am not sure it is worth the terrible price we might have to pay if it happens. If this morning’s event is a precursor to the type of response from Palestinians we should expect, then it might just be a mistake. I’m not even sure what tangible benefit we would get out of it. How will it better anyone’s life if the US embassy is moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem? What is gained versus what is lost must be considered when making a decision that could explode in our faces where God forbid much blood may be spilled.

That a response like that from the Palestinians is irrational is besides the point. They don’t need much of an excuse to attack Jews in Israel. I doubt that the fellow that plowed his truck into a crowd of innocent Jews in Jerusalem this morning had the American embassy in mind.

On the other hand, why shouldn’t a country have the right to call the place of its choice – their capital? One that has been its capital since its founding? And why hasn’t the United States placed its embassy there from the start? Had this been the case, we wouldn’t be having this discussion now.

I guess it’s all up to the President-elect when he takes office. If he does move that embassy, I will take pride in that. I just hope it isn’t short-lived by the explosive reaction that so many are predicting. My pride is not worth what may follow.

I hope President-elect Trump has a plan to follow it up that will assure that peace is maintained; that security measures are put in place both in Israel and the US to protect their citizens from any possible reprisal type violence that might accrue. And to have serious consequences to those that would perpetrate or condone violence in its wake. So that an American Jew born in Jerusalem can say with pride that he was born in Israel and have it recognized by his country.

Typical Shabbos scene in Ramapo (Lohud)

I agree with Monsey resident, Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer. The Lohud article on the problems of Ramapo is balanced and fair – just as he said it is.

Ramapo is a town in Rockland County, New York that includes the hamlet of Monsey. Based on this article, it is about the last place I would ever want to live.

I have been to Monsey a few times and was impressed at the ‘country life’ flavor of that village which gave religious Jews an opportunity for the suburban lifestyle combined with the Orthodox amenities that make it possible for a religious Jew to live there. Those primarily being Shuls within walking distance, religious schools, Kosher food stores, and Kosher restaurants.

It was interesting to me that the Chasidim that first came there and were used to (and I thought preferred) the city life of Brooklyn actually chose to abandon it for life in suburbia. Brooklyn concrete was traded in for tree lined streets; sprawling front lawns and backyards; and homes with attached garages.

One of my close friends from Chicago that moved to New York back in the 80s sought to live in a place that would not be the stereotypical concrete jungle for which Brooklyn is famous (infamous?) He found Monsey to be ideal. He bought a home located at the time in a growing Modern Orthodox Community near Rabbi Moshe Tendler’s Shul. That is no longer the case, he tells me. The Modern Orthodox are being squeezed out by the rapidly growing Chasidic community. It is that rapid growth that is causing some major problems and conflicts.

This is not news. The conflict came to a head a few years ago when the religious Jews who had been elected to the East Ramapo Board of Education were accused of biasing their decisions to favor their religious schools – thus short-changing the public schools whose student base was diminishing. I am not here to discuss that sad event. Suffice it to say that each side has its own version of what caused their particular problem. I mention it only in the context of the strife that now seems to exist in this part of the world.

The exponential and relatively rapid population growth (both internal and external) of Ramapo is a problem with many facets.

Growth requires housing. In many cases housing that can accommodate large families. So there has been an explosion of housing developments toward that goal that have ignored the needed infrastructure to make living in those communities anywhere near as pleasant as it once was. Far from it.

I recall this exact complaint being made by a Charedi individual who lives in a community like that and who published his thoughts in the Charedi media. This is more than corroborated by the Lohud article. Multi unit buildings are going up where existing streets cannot possibly accommodate the additional traffic that the increased numbers of residents present.

And as if that weren’t enough, there have been more than a few building permit violations where limitations imposed by those permits are completely ignored by developers – without sanction.

There are the houses that are purchased and converted to Yeshivos which are unsafe and against zoning laws.

These issues are not only upsetting to the non Jews of Monsey. They are upsetting to some of the religious Jews living there too. In one case a Modern Orthodox Jew who is a long time resident of Monsey is suing a Shul that is responsible for one such conversion. And he has the support of his Orthodox rabbi!

And then there is the uncontrolled sprawl of growing populations that need to go beyond the borders of the pre-existing neighborhoods. They seek new areas to eventually become the new ‘Frum’ area.

That causes the existing non Jewish residents to react – fearing their hamlets being turned into the chaos that now exists in places like Monsey. But even without the chaos, they don’t want to see their neighborhood shops closing or being converted into shops that serve only the religious community. Even of those shops that they might frequent - they would be closed on Shabbos – a big shopping day for non Jews or non religious Jews. They don’t want to see all of their restaurants disappearing and replaced by Kosher ones. They don’t want to see less churches and more Shuls.

She wants to preserve the secular nature of her neighborhood

Most of these people are not antisemites. They have had no particular animus to religious Jews. They are people who fear major changes to the character of their secular neighborhoods. They see religious Jews coming in converting their town into a Chasidic enclave whose culture is radically different from that which they are used to. And they don’t want to move out of a home they have been living in for decades. Can anyone blame them for being upset?

What about the right of people to live wherever they choose regardless of their religion? Don’t they have the right and to buy a home in any neighborhood they choose and to build institutions in those neighborhoods designed to accommodate their needs?

Of course they do. And with their exponential growth that right is accompanied by need. Does that give them the right to take over a town even by legal means? Perhaps. But doing that does not win any friends.

When combining all these factors, you get a breaking point. Which the Lohud article says Ramapo is in.

This is not to impugn everyone. But there are a few guilty parties here that deserve to be highlighted. Even though it isn’t entirely their fault, they have in my view contributed the most to the problem.

There are the unscrupulous developers that skirt the law by violating the terms of their building permits.

There are those that buy homes for purposes of creating a yeshiva or other religious institution and violate the zoning laws.

There are those who build without considering the infrastructure requirements – like wider roads and more parking availability.

There are those that build structures adding on to homes that block access to emergency vehicles.

I believe that these individuals deserve the lion’s share of the blame. But even good people that do not do anything wrong - looking only to accommodate their legitimate housing needs contribute to the problem. We are talking about rights versus rights.

That is exacerbated by a perceptions of bias (whether true or not) on the part of a school board dominated by religious Jews elected by a town full of people that do not use the public school system that board is primarily designed for.

The problem is that when 2 sides are competing for their rights in way that will drastically affect their lives a lot of acrimony is built up. What to do about it – I don’t know.

I wonder how many people that live there agree with Yehuda Weissmandl. The following excerpt that gives his take on the issue – I think - sums things up pretty well:

“I’ve watched (the Hamlet of) Monsey evolve into a little city,” lifelong resident Yehuda Weissmandl said during a recent speech to the national convention of Agudath Israel of America, a leadership and policy organization of ultra-religious Jews.

“Explosive growth of these proportions triggers explosive backlash,” said Weissmandl, a Hasidic Jew who is president of the East Ramapo Board of Education, a developer and a landlord.

The tension sometimes erupts into acts of hatred. News stories on Ramapo and Rockland frequently attract thinly veiled anti-Semitic comments. Critics of developments for Hasidic and other ultra-Orthodox Jews are compared to Nazis. Ugly rhetoric about Jews in Rockland is common on social media. In some instances, street graffiti declaring “No Jews” or similar words have defaced property for-sale signs. Powerful fireworks have been exploded outside the homes of rabbis in New City.

“Is it only hate? Absolutely not,” Weissmandl said in his speech to Jewish leaders. He said those who have lived in the area their entire lives are afraid of change. “They used the schools, used the shopping, and (now) the stores are closing down, neighbors are changing," he said. "They’re petrified, and they’re reacting to it.”

Rabbi David Twersky; President and Mrs. Clinton

Former President Bill Clinton once commented that someone who looks like Rabbi David Twersky, the controversial Skverer Rebbe, seemed to him to be the most authentic type of Jew. This is one reason why he met with him about commuting a prison sentence of a few of his Chasidim that were convicted of defrauding the government. Which he did.

It is because of this type of thinking that I am so hard in my criticism of right when someone from that community does wrong. Because Clinton is not the only one who thinks like that. People who look like the Skvever Rebbe are clearly seen as the most religious, Torah observant Jews among us. Which is why the Chillul HaShem is so magnified when a Jew like that is involved. I think it is a truism to say that the more observant one is - or looks like - the greater the Chilul HaShem.

But that is not the reason I bring this up now. There is a logic to Bill Clinton’s type of thinking. If you are going to represent the ‘People of the Book’ you should know what that book requires of you and act like it. As I have said many times. It is Halacha – which is derived of that Book that defines who we are.

This may not sit well with non observant Jews who will say they are just as Jewish as Orthodox Jews. This is true. They are. It is also true that many non observant Jews are among the finest among us - people that do a lot of good things.

But they mostly don’t follow the rules set forth in the Torah as interpreted by the sages and rabbinic leaders throughout the generations. And thus cannot possibly represent themselves in the definitive way the People of the Book must. I say this not a pejorative. Just as a fact. Observant Jews believe in following all the Laws of the Torah. Even though we fall short in many cases (some more – some less) we try to keep them all acknowledging their mandatory nature.

Jared Kushner, his wife, Ivanka, and Donald Trump

I believe that Donald Trump may very well feel the same way about Jews as Clinton does. Three of his top advisers will be observant Jews. The latest of which will be his son in law, Jared Kushner. This is unprecedented in US history. While there have been observant Jews in previous administrations, none of them (and certainly not as many) have been placed so high on an administration totem pole.

That Trump is a Judeophile – especially as it pertains to observant Jews should be obvious by now. Not only has his daughter converted to Judaism with his full approval, she is still one of his closest advisers and will no doubt be the 4^th observant Jew to be placed in a position of power next to the President. The President-elect has also donated sizable sums from his charitable foundation to Orthodox institutions. Like Chabad.

Which kind of makes all of the accusations that the President-elect will be influenced by other of his advisers accused of antisemitism ridiculous. One of those mentioned in that context is Steve Bannon. He has been accused of antisemitism because as former head of Brietbart News he allowed it to be used as a platform for the Alt-right. They have been accused of antisemitism.

I have no real clue how true that is. But it doesn’t matter. I am absolutely convinced that Trump would never choose an adviser that was an antisemite even in the slightest. He must therefore know that Bannon is not an antisemite at all. Not to mention the fact that one of Bannon’s high ranking employees at Brightbart was Joel Pollak, an observant Jew.

Even though I am still shocked and dismayed that Trump was elected President… (He was probably just as shocked himself) - I can’t help having a sense of pride in the fact that observant Jews will be having a major impact on the future of this nation. The future of Israel; and even the world! Can Moshiach be far behind?

Meryl Streep

Which brings me to one of the more troubling aspects of the current news cycle. Like many of those that are disappointed at Trump’s election, I can’t help thinking about how all this came about. I am not going to go into details. They have been discussed to death – and still are by an all too eager media. Although I can’t really blame them. Trump has diarrhea of the brain and cannot seem to help himself from making foolish comments on twitter. On an almost daily basis. Which happened again when renowned actress Meryl Streep who was honored by the Foreign Press Association at their annual Golden Globe Awards event. She spoke from her heart about what many people are essentially still thinking: How can anyone be elected that ridiculed a disabled reporter as part of his campaign strategy?

And yet, I believe she was just as wrong to make these comments now as Trump was to respond to them. Let me address that last point first. If I were to give any advice to Mr. Trump now, it would be the following: ‘Stop tweeting!’ ‘Ignore what celebrities are saying about you no matter how negative.’ ‘Your responses only make things worse.’ Let him be a little more presidential. Let him stop talking; wait till he’s in office; and then start doing! Let his actions speak louder than his very loud and juvenile words. You never know. He may actually make America great again.

Why was it wrong for Ms. Streep to criticize him now? Because the election is over and she said nothing that hasn’t already been said. She is only making it worse. Surely she knew that Trump would respond. How does that improve things? Her comments do not change anything.

Ms. Streep is of course not alone. The news and entertainment media are relentless in going after him. In some cases the ridicule and vitriol goes way too far. Here is my message to the Steven Colberts of the world: Give the President-elect a chance. Like it or not - he is going to be the President. Of us all! Duly elected in a democratic fashion. Nearly half the people that voted - voted for Trump. You cannot ridicule the President-elect without ridiculing half the country.

Rabbi Haskell Lookstein

And yet there are still a lot of people that just can’t let go - blinded by antipathy to Trump so strong that they can only see a dire result for the country and the world once he takes office. They are so disappointed that their candidate lost that they are trying to undermine him at every turn. Instead of giving him the same chance that every newly elected official deserves. Thankfully the outgoing President feels otherwise. As does his opponent in the general election, Hillary Clinton. She will be at the inauguration and has advocated giving Trump the chance to fulfill his campaign promises. Sure, it’s a free country. But where is that quintessential American sense of respecting the will of the people?

But there are some people so married to their political point of view that they cannot get themselves to do that. They therefore try and undermine the results of the election by literally boycotting him and asking others to join them.

Rabbi Marvin Hier

This was done during the campaign. Foolishly in my view because there is no way of knowing for sure that Trump would lose. (Which of course he didn’t.) Rabbi Haskell Lookstein, Ivanka Trump’s Orthodox rabbi, had accepted an invitation to give an invocation and the Republican National Convention. But he later backed out at the insistence of some of his Shul’s membership - and some of the graduates of the day school he formerly headed before retiring. They said that speaking at the convention would be seen as endorsement of Trump’s ‘racist’ views.

And now, Rabbi Marvin Hier, head of the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Museum of Tolerance, was invited to offer his blessings at the President’s inauguration. He too is being pressured to back out of that!

Thankfully, this pioneer of fighting antisemitism and all kinds of prejudice has not succumbed to this pressure. He rightly accepted it as an honor. This Orthodox rabbi will be giving his blessing to the President for a successful Presidency that will benefit Americans, Israelis, and the entire world. I think we should all just shut-up and do the same.

Images like this feed the resistance to the Torah perspective on homosexuality

Rabbi Ari Segal is right. At least mostly. But so is Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein. The issue is how the subject of homosexuality is viewed by our youth today in the modern orthodox world. They have difficulty reconciling the Torah’s perspective with what many people feel is a sexual orientation that is in direct opposition to it. An orientation homosexuals have through no fault of their own.

Rabbi Segal, who is Head of School at Shalhevet, a modern Orthodox high school in Los Angeles, has written a heartfelt essay on the subject that addresses this issue. A conflict he says causes many students to abandon the Torah’s perspective in favor of what they believe to be a more compassionate modern attitude. Rabbi Segal believes this is the greatest challenge of our day and has asked that today’s rabbinic leaders address it lest the floodgates open completley to the abandonment of the Torah.

I agree that this is a huge challenge. Rabbi Segal is sounding the alarm and although not sure what the ultimate solution is, he suggests a number of ways to better deal with it. And proposes several suggestions along those lines. Rabbi Adlerstein has a different approach. But in my view this too does not do enough to solve the problem.

First let me re-iterate my views on this subject. Which in perhaps overly simplistic terms boils down to ‘hate the sin, love the sinner.’ The devil is of course in the details. We must accept the Torah’s directives and at the same time we must accept the reality of homosexuality in the Orthodox world. How should we treat people with this orientation? To what extent does that acceptance go? This is where it gets dicey.

Briefly my view is that we must accept homosexual people completely as human beings and treat them with the same dignity we treat anyone else… judging all human beings on the content of their character and not on their sexual orientation. It is not the orientation that is forbidden. It is acting upon it in ways the Torah forbids that is. This should be a given to an observant Jew.

But there are additional questions. What is a homosexual individual supposed to do if he is attracted only to members of the same sex? Do we have a right to expect him to be celibate? Is there some way he can deal with his orientation that would satisfy his desires - which is permitted and has a basis in Halacha? I am not qualified to answer these questions.

What if a homosexual does violate the Torah’s prohibitive act - and chooses not hide it? Do we shun him? Do we embrace him? Somewhere in-between?

My view is that as long as he does not promote a lifestyle filled with sin, then we treat him like anyone else who sins… as we all do. We are not God’s accountants. It is for Him to be the ultimate judge. Not us.

This does not mean we abandon the Torah’s prohibitions. We must still speak out forcefully about the Torah’s requirements of us - and not shy away from them because they are no longer politically correct. That said, if a homosexual does not flaunt what he does in the privacy of his bedroom we should treat him the same way we treat any other human being that does not flaunt what he does in the privacy of his bedroom.

Which leads me to one of Rabbi Segal’s suggestions which I see as problemtic. I do not believe we should tolerate any organization or group that identifies as a gay rights organization. Like LGBT. That’s because I believe they have an agenda that goes beyond human rights. I support human rights. But I do not support an agenda to normalize what the Torah forbids. Which I believe is part of the LGBT community’s goal.

Advocacy groups like LGBT see the Torah’s prohibitions as archaic, unenlightened, irrelevant to the modern mind, and even unethical.

For an Orthodox Jew societal attitudes – no matter how enlightened they appear to be to the modern mind - cannot and do not trump the Torah. One cannot look at what general society accepts and call it ethical and just while looking at the Torah and say that by default it is neither.

Rabbi Adlerstein frames the issue the following way:

Essentially, we’re asking why Torah chinuch in some parts of the community – certainly no stranger to their own problems – nonetheless is more successful in this area. What does it take to produce loyal Jews rather than emunah-challenged socially orthodox ones?

Rabbi Adlerstein then posits his own theory of the problem. He says that what is missing in the modern Orthodox world is something that is ever present in the world of the right: Kabolas Ole (accepting the ‘yoke’ of Halacha) and Avodas HaShem (serving God as our primary purpose in life). These terms are not heard in the lexicon of modern Orthodoxy.

I can see his point. If those terms are never heard then they are never used in defining an important part of our mission here on earth. I agree that there ought to be a lot more emphasis on this if there is even any at all. But that is not enough.

The constant barrage of societal ethicists of ersatz quality on the subject - one hears and sees in virtually every corner of American culture is the reason that so many young people lean away from the Torah’s point of view and toward the cultural one. The entertainment and news media in all of its forms have promoted the idea that every possible type of sexual behavior is to be celebrated. Gay – straight it doesn’t matter. As long as there are consenting adults, anything goes. This is the constant message in our culture reinforced in a plethora of ways.

How can a young person whose developing mind is flooded with this type of thinking on a daily basis – not believe it? Especially when there are so many respected or popular news and entertainment figures saying it? All the time.

It is not hard to see why so many young people question a Torah that the the rest of the world sees as an obsolete man made object that is not in touch with the times. Those that give any reverence to the biblical directives are often ridiculed.

Add to this that some rabbis on the extreme left of Orthodoxy have twisted Halacha to such an extent, that for all practical purposes, the Torah’s prohibition against Homosexuality no longer exists. They have applied Talmudic rationales like ‘Oness Rachmana Patri’ (The Torah absolves us of any guilt when sinful acts are forced upon us.) The claim being that homosexuals are forced by their nature to act sinfully. Thus scrubbing the sin away from the act.

I find this untenable. This is not to say that a person’s psychological makeup is not a factor in ameliorating sin. But clearly the Torah’s serious prohibition against homosexuality cannot be so easily wiped away.

Is isolation from the culture which is the right wing approach the solution? No. As an advocate of participating in the culture, I am loathe to advocate that approach. It is also my firm belief that this does not always work. The culture we live in is pervasive. But even though I am an advocate of cultural participation we must at the same time be aware of its negative influences in many cases. And this is clearly one of them.

So instead of trying to isolate ourselves from something which is nearly impossible to do in our day, we need instead to face it head on. I agree with Rabbi Adlerstein that modern Orthodox schools could do a better job of teaching their young about Kabolas Ole and Ovodas HaShem. But that is not enough. It is important for educators, and perhaps more importantly parents to know the kind of influences their children are involved with. And to make sure that they teach their young to evaluate everything in the light of Torah.

Children must be taught that the Torah is the ultimate ethical and moral document – and not the prevailing cultural attitudes. They must be taught to respect their fellow man no matter what their sexual orientation. But to reject the sin no matter how society looks at it. It would be a far better world for all if we did that. Both in the eyes of man and in the eyes of God.

Rabbi Riskin and one of his recently ordained female rabbis (YWN)

One of the most troubling developments in recent years is the creation of yet another movement in Judaism. I wish we could all just be Jews. Some more observant. Some Less. Some not at all. Our beliefs formed mostly by our Jewish educators who have traditionally relied on what was handed down to them from their teachers and parents - going all the way back to Sinai. When the Torah was given at Sinai, it was given to the entire nation. All of us. We were all one standing there K’Ish Echad B’Lev Echad - as one person with one heart listening to the word of God as transmitted through His greatest servant - the ultimate Eved HaShem, Moshe.

There were no denominations or even Hashkafos. No Reform. No Conservative, No Orthodox. There were no Chasidim. No Sefardim. No Ashekenazim, No Modern Orthodox. No left. No right. We were one people, united. In short there was Achdus. Something that is becoming increasingly out of reach.

The truth is that there have been movements in ancient Israel in the past. Going as far back as Temple era times and continuing to arise throughout Jewish history. But it is also true that only those movements that followed the Torah as interpreted by the sages and rabbinic leaders throughout the generations has survived, and even thrived despite adversity.

Recent history has also give us not only denominational differences but Hashkafic ones. But there is a qualitative difference between a denomination and a Hashkafa. A denomination is a break from one group whose differences are so fundamental that they can not be accepted as legitimate by the parent group. There can be no reconciliation between the two because their fundamental principles contradict each other.

A Hashkafa is simply a way of looking at Rabbinic Judaism while not departing from it. It is a world view of the same fundamentals that other Hashkafos have. So a Yeshiva, a Chasidic, and a modern Orthodox mentality are all part of the same Orthodox Judaism. Derived of the same traditional beliefs as their forefathers transmitted to them via their parents and teachers. Differing Hashkafos only mean that we have differing world views. But we still have the same basic traditions and follow the same basic Halacha that is Rabbinic Judaism.

That should not create divisions. Unfortunately it does. There are far too many Orthodox Jews on the right that want to separate from Orthodox Jews to their left. And there are far too many Orthodox Jews on the left that have the same feelings about anyone to their right. Thankfully there are also many Jews in both camps that do embrace each other. Which gives me hope that some form of Achdus still exists within Orthodoxy.

Rav Hershel Shachter and former British Chief Rabbi, Lord Jonathan Sacks

To that end (in part) a new group has been created called TORA. It consists of a group of rabbis from both the right and the left (or more technically –the center) that have joined forces. It was formed to counter yet another new movements that call themselves Orthodox even though they have departed from the teachings of their forefathers by entering new territory against the rulings of today’s rabbinic leaders. They have been rejected on those grounds by rabbinic leaders across the spectrum of Orthodoxy. More about them later.

They might believe that their differences are only Hashkafic – since they do follow Halacha meticulously. But when they rebel without a single rabbinic leader supporting them, they have in essence created a new denomination. A group of lower tier rabbis cannot depart from the great traditions of the past without support of even their own rabbinic leaders. No matter how learned they may be at their own level. And no matter how much sense those departures may make to them.

But this is what is increasingly happening – thus causing yet a further divisions in Klal Yisroel. They will of course argue that they still remain within the Orthodox fold because of their meticulous observance. But that isn’t enough if your all your mentors rejects them. You can’t define yourself belonging to a group it that group’s leadership rejects you.

One might ask, why get so exercised over this? Let them go. Who cares if there is yet another illegitimate movement in Israel? They will eventually go the way of all illegitimate movements. Besides they are minuscule in number. They are not big enough to impact Orthodoxy. Just ignore them!

I can’t. The people doing this are good people. I know and admire some of them. And I admire others among them I don’t know. Even though I might disagree with their Hashkafos - there is not a doubt in my mind that they have accomplished much for Judaism in the past. Even now they have the best of intentions. They are trying appeal to the broadest cross-section of Jewry they can. Something we should all be trying to do. By creating innovations to accommodate the spirit of the times they are able to appeal to people that are strongly influenced by that.

No one can argue with their motives. They are noble. But it is the steps they have taken to achieve it that is so problematic. One cannot rebel against all rabbinic opinion in order to reach a goal no matter how noble. Because that takes you out of the very goal of inclusion you are trying to accomplish.

Instead of making Judaism more inclusive, you have made it more divisive. It isn’t the rabbinic leadership that is dividing Jewry in this instance. They are just ‘sticking to the rules’ as handed down by their own teachers. It is the innovators that are causing the divisions. Even though they have good intentions in doing so.

Which is why I agree with a recent statement that has come out by TORA. They have criticized the latest ordination of women by a man that I have truly admired in the past, (and still do in many ways) Rabbi Shlomo Riskin. This phenomenon is increasing and it seems that Orthodox Shuls are increasingly hiring them. As much as I understand Rabbi Riskin’s motives I cannot agree with that kind of rebellion. Rabbi Riskin is a highly educated rabbi. But he is not in a category of rabbinic leader.

This is not a Charedi versus Modern Orthodox battle. While it is true that most rabbinic leaders are Charedi, there are some, like Rabbi Hershel Shachter that are not. They too have rejected the ordination of women. Which is why the RCA, a body that has thousands of Modern Orthodox rabbis as members has rejected it. Nor to the best of my knowledge have any of the elder religious Zionist rabbinic leaders in Israel accepted it. This cannot be ignored!

There are many people on the left who feel that this phenomenon will grow. That it is organic. That it serves the greater good of creating a much bigger Halachic tent within Orthodoxy. But that is a mistake. Because while they may believe they are still under that tent, they are not. Whether they realize it or not their actions have removed them from it. As long as there is universal rejection, there will never be reconciliation. And yet another division in Judaism has been created at the hands of good people with good intentions.

Ex MI-6 spy, Christopher Steele - currently in hiding

Attorney Mike Godwin made an interesting observation a few years ago about conversations on the internet. He noted that if a conversation goes on long enough, eventually someone will at some point compare someone or something to Hitler. This has come to be known as Godwin’s Law.

Godwin correctly maintained that any comparison to Hitler made even as hyperbole is inappropriate and asked people to think about the Holocaust before using that word.

I mention this in light of the fact that many people on the left have used this kind of terminology when describing Donald Trump. No matter what anyone thinks of the man, that kind of terminology is inappropriate.

But the shoe has recently been placed on the oher foot. President-elect Trump accused America’s intelligence agencies of Nazi-like tactics in leaking a damaging report that claimed Russia had compiled a dossier filled with embarrassing material that could be used to blackmail him during his Presidency. He was wrong in saying that. The CIA, FBI, NSA, and any other security agencies are never to be compared to Nazis. The people that work there are patriots that are only doing their jobs

So why the outrage by the President-elect? What brought him to make this comparison? In denying the events related in that dossier he compared it to what was done by Nazi Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels to the Jewish people during the Holocaust. He created scandalous lies about us and used the media to spread them – famously saying that if you repeat a lie enough times, people will start believing it. He used Julius Streicher’s antisemtic propaganda rag, ‘Der Sturmer’ to further that end.

While Trump was out of line in making that comparison, the similar elements of it should not be over-looked. Who was actually behind that leak is unclear. But it did happen and someone somewhere with access to it is responsible.

A 35 page dossier was published by a sensationalist ‘news’ outlet containing wold be damaging and information about Trump’s relationship with Russia – as a spy no less! …and stories salacious stories about sex parties there in which he allegedly participated. As well as other disgusting things that dossier contained.

This list was compiled by a former British MI-6 spy by the name of Christopher Steele. He was hired to get ‘dirt’ on Trump but an unidentified individual. He found a Russian ‘source’ that told him about all of these things. None of which was substantiated.

So that all of this was based on the report of one individual who admitted that it could not be proven. And actually had the gall to say that all witnesses to these events had been paid off. So none of them would talk. Nonetheless, Steele put it all down on 25 sheets of paper which eventually made is way over to American intelligences agencies. They proceeded to reduce it to a 2 page classified summary given to the President and the President-elect.

To say that all of this sounds a bit suspicious is to put it mildly. Not an iota of proof. Not a single witness. And yet US intelligence agencies thought it worthwhile to attach it to a legitimate file containing information about Russian hacking of the DNC. And someone else thought it would be a good idea to make it all public.

This story has been repeated so many times in so much of the media that it has the makings of ‘the Big Lie’. Although most of the mainstream media was responsible and did not report on it for lack of verification, some, like Buzzfeed and CNN did.

So quickly did the news spread, that in just a few hours it was all over the internet, including some of the people that comment here. Even though the subject under discussion that day had nothing to do with the President-elect.

What is even more troubling is how many people believed it. Their bias actually led them to beleive that if the CIA thought it worthy of a 2 page summary, there might be some truth to it. I’m not surprised by the reaction. The Trump haters hate him so much that they will grasp at straws to try and discredit him. They choose to believe a report made in such a mysterious if not nefarious way just because they are blinded by hate. No matter how that story came about or unsustainable the facts of the story are. Anything to destroy this man so that he will not be left to govern.

As I keep saying. I did not support the man and voted for his opponent. I was just as shocked and dismayed that he won as anyone else. I still believe he is a embarrassment to this country. His rhetoric is unacceptable as are some of his policies. Even to someone that leans conservative like me. But this does not mean that the American voter should be denied the man they selected to be their leader for the next 4 years. Because that would change our form of government from democracy into a dictatorship.

Just because one does not agree with him on some dearly held principles does not give anyone the right to force him out of office by ‘any means necessary’. Those ends do not justify those means. Half the country (that voted for Trump) might actually agree with Trump and not them. Those on the left claim their liberal views to be the more moral and ethical ones. But those on the right would say that the morals of the left are immoral.

Objective morality is in the hands of the beholder, I guess. Making morality very subjective. But I digress.

Back to the leaked dossier. Of course anything is possible. But I do not believe that story for a moment. And whoever leaked it deserves the strongest of rebukes. I can’t imagine how any human being would feel if a false story like that came out about them that was so damning! Multiply that tenfold to someone in the middle of putting together a team that will help him govern in just a few short days as the leader of the free world. It is a grossly unfair distraction based on what is almost certainly a lie. One that was no doubt orchestrated by someone who wants to destroy his Presidency before it even begins.

So I can’t blame Trump for reacting the way he did. His comparison to Nazi propaganda is way out of line. It goes too far. But one can certainly understand why he made it

Jewish Culture and Halacha

Yet Another Government Fraud

Good Riddance, Mr. President

An American Charedi in Israel

And He Shall Rule Over You

What if…

Parting Shots from Some Friends

A Change that Will Not Work

What Is… and What Could Be

The Right Kind of Rebellion

Achdus – Where I Stand

A Charedi Response to Sex Abuse

Are Orthodox Jews Racist?

Is a Public Service Murder Justified?

On Moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem

A Religious Community in Crisis

Pride and Prejudice

The Threat to Modern Orthodoxy

A House Divided

Of Godwin, Goebbels, and Trump