Emes Ve-Emunah

A young married Charedi couple (Jewniverse)

Jonathan Rosenblum’s article in Mishpacha Magazine last week (available in full here) dealt with the ubiquitous topic of Shiduchim in the Charedi world. Which has come to be known as the ‘Shidduch Crisis’. There are a lot of young women that are being passed over and remain unmarried past their ‘prime’. Which in the Charedi world is about age 25.

(Although there is a similar problem in the modern Orthodox world, the reasons are entirely different for them and therefore so too are the solutions. Chasidim - on the other hand - don’t have this problem in their own system of Shiduchim. This post is based on Jonathan’s article that deals with the non Chasidic ‘Yeshiva’ world.)

Jonathan has an interesting spin (made subtlety) on the so-called ‘age gap theory’ as the reason for that ‘crisis’. For those that don’t recall - the theory is as follows. Women are ready for marriage at a much younger age. At 19 they are all generally dating for purposes of marriage. On the other hand men don’t usually start dating until they are a 22 or 23 years of age. Young men of that age prefer to date the 19 or 20 year olds rather than young women their own age. A three or four year age difference between married couples in this pool is probably the most common occurrence.

Those that have studied this phenomenon say that since the rate of reproduction in the Charedi world has been increasing substantially every year - that means there is an increase in the number of children each year. The pool of 23 year old men is therefore smaller than the pool of 19 year old women in any given year. And that results in an increasing numbers of ‘leftover’ single women each year.

One might respond and say that the ratio of boys to girls being born each year is about the same. There should be one boy for every one girl. The problem could be solves if young men could be convinced to date women their own age – or even older women. That is not going to happen as a general policy though. Another solution some rabbis have suggested is that young men should get married at a much younger age. Personally I think that’s a prescription for even bigger problems down the road. I have had my own suggestion about what could be done. But they are beyond the scope of this post. And no one is going to listen to me anyway.

The age gap is not the only thing that causes a Shidduch crisis. Not be a long shot. One of those reasons is one I have mentioned many times before. ‘Good boys’ are a lot harder to find than ‘good girls’. In the Chareddi world – a good boy means a ‘learning boy’ – someone that has a good reputation as serious student of Torah . If a ‘working boy’ – or one that has decided to attend a college or professional school in preparation for a career – is not considered a ‘good boy’ in the sense that I just described. And not marriage material.

That forces a lot of young Charedi men to stay in Yeshiva well past their actual desires and abilities call for them to do so. Which means that even among the pool of ‘learning boys’, there are few that are considered ‘good boys’.

On the other hand women in the Charedi world are not sought after for their learning abilities. A ‘good girl’ is considered ‘good’ if she seeks a ‘learning boy’ and is willing to support them. It is therefore a lot easier to become a ‘good girl’ than it is to become a ‘good boy’.

That is a problem I have not seen addressed. If it has – certainly not anywhere near the ‘age gap’ problem. But it is a fact that is clearly and significantly affecting Shiduchim in a negative way.

Interestingly Jonathan notes that the Charedi world is not alone as a population where ‘good girls’ outnumber ‘good boys’ which contributes to a higher ratio of women to men. One example he mentions is the Mormons. They have a 15 to 10 ratio. For every 100 available men there are 150 available women who for the most part will marry only a serious Mormon. That has led to some drastic measures among them. From Mishpacha:

(A)s a consequence of their religious idealism they find themselves turned into commodities, forced to compete fiercely for the attention of marriageable males on the basis of their physical appearance. As a consequence, even young Mormon women submit to plastic surgery and various forms of physical augmentation. Salt Lake City has 2.5 times the national average of plastic surgeons, and its residents spend almost 12 times as much on beauty products as those of Oklahoma City, which has a slightly larger population.

One may recall that a Shadchan had written an article a few years ago addressing the lopsided dating ratio of dating women to dating men in the Charedi world. As a realist she said that one has to live in the real world. Charedi men look for attractive women too. She therefore urged them to do whatever they could to look attractive including plastic surgery if necessary. For this she was severely criticized.

Although I disagreed with her then - she wasn’t that far off about looking as attractive as possible in a world where men seek beauty first and character second. This is not new. I know (and have known for decades going back to when I was dating) more than a few ‘good’ boys’ that will not date women whose dress size is over a certain very low number.

The fact is that young women instinctively know this. Even the Charedi ones. Which has proven to turn the Shidduch crisis also a health crisis:

(Y)oung women are driven to compete in physical attractiveness, as with the Mormons. Dr. Ira Sackler, an eating order specialist (noted that) in one Orthodox community that the rate of eating disorders was 50% higher than the national average.

I have not seen anyone address this problem either till now. 50% is of epidemic magnitude. (Not that I have a solution for it.)

Another problem is that in the Charedi world, Shidduchim have become business transactions. Where (to quote Gordon Gekko) ‘greed - for lack of a better word - is good’. Huge sums of money can be extracted from potential ‘buyers’ (a good girl’s father) by fathers of ‘good boys’ to support their son in a Kollel for extended periods time.

The better the reputation of the ‘learning boy’, the greater the sum. In fact many wealthy – and even not so wealthy - fathers of ‘good girls’ are throwing money at potential Shiddcuhim. If the ‘learning boy’ has a good reputation the sky might just very well be the limit! They know the market. It’s rough out there.

One father I spoke to in Israel last week put it this way: If there are 2 identical girls and one of them comes with a bigger check (from her father) It’s a no branier isn’t it? What is lost by taking the bigger check? It’s free enterprise at its best! The rich get what they want and the poor get the leftovers – if that.

Age gap? OK - that might be one reason for the Shidduch problem. But when a young man becomes a commodity to be sold to the highest bidder…. and where good looks seem to be the number one value sought - right after money, then something has gone is terribly wrong. And yet not only is nothing being done, things seem to be only getting worse!

This is what they protest! (Jerusalem Post)

These Jews of Ramat Bet Shemesh-B are not my people. Anyone that can behave the way this crowd did, cannot possibly be from the seed of Israel. One look at the video below will explain why. No words are necessary.

I realize that to consider fellow Jews not part of our people is an astonishing comment. Especially when these Jews are so meticulous in so many other aspects of Judaism.

There is not a doubt in my mind that most of them pay close attention to detail and go beyond the letter of the law in many of the Mitzvos. Whether it’s Shabbos or Kashrus; Tefilla, or Torah study… Or simply the idea of wearing clothing that is designed by Jews – for Jews. So as to avoid violating Chukas HaGoy – the prohibition in the Torah of emulating non Jews (as they interpret it). They look to their rabbinic leaders as icons. And follow their every directive – their every word!

One can admire their vigilance in going as far as they do – even if we disagree with their interpretation of Halacha and with the Chumros they have accepted upon themselves. They live that way because they believe their way of life is the most pristine way of observing the Torah. Living their lives in a higher state of holiness. We can and even should admire people that sacrifice so much in service of God. As long as they don’t impose that way of life on others. And by living isolated lives for the most part, they don’t.

So how can I say I don’t consider them part of my people- that they are not from the seed of Israel? Because of the behavior seen in that video. Behavior that keeps happening.

Degrading a fellow human being because he joined the army – especially in army units that are geared towards the Charedi way of life is not how Jews act. No matter how much you disagree with him. You can preach your disagreement from the mountaintops. I don’t care. And they have that right. But when you keep doing things like what this video shows. You are doing far more than expressing a view. You are ‘murdering’people by ‘whitening their faces’. The Gemarah compares embarrassing a fellow Jew to murder.

Even though I don’t agree with I understand their objections. But I do not understand how they express them. It isn’t just a few people that feel this way. It is all of them. Most of them do have the will to out and protest. But enough of them do and often! Which means they agree with their goals if not with their methods. (I’m not sure they don’t agree with their methods as well. They might just be too scared to do it themselves.)

They see a fellow like this as a traitor. And harass him a lot more than a non Charedi soldier. Who are they to make that decision? Who guides them in making these kinds of protests? It can’t be that their leaders are opposed to it – but they simply can’t control the mob. Or that these are just extremists and are not condoned.

They ARE condoned. If anyone of their rabbinic leaders have spoken up and condemned them (like any member of the Eida HaCharedis for example) I haven’t heard about it. But even if they did say something, I don’t believe them. This can’t keep happening without at least the tacit approval by their leadership. There are too many people doing it. Too many times.

That other more moderate Charedi leaders have not said or done enough to condemn – or more importantly to prevent any further protests like this is a good question. I think they should. But at the same time I don’t think it will change anything. Nor will it help to put participants in a protests like this in jail. (That is in fact what happened. This was apparently a sting operation according to Rafi’s blog, Life in Israel. But it doesn't matter. The protesters didn’t know that.) Putting the in jail will just make them mad. And generate even more protests perhaps even violent ones with more people attending them.

The only thing that will help is for their own leadership to act. They must put the same energy into stopping this kind of thing as they do exhorting their people into leading the kind of religious life they otherwise lead. the They clearly are not doing that. Inaction on their part is at least tacit approval. Even if they might pay lip-service objection to it.

This is why I say these are not my people. They may technically be Jews. They were born of a Jewish mother. But so too was Louis ‘Lepke’ Buchalter, founder of ‘Murder Incorporated’. Being born a Jew is not enough. One must act like one in order to be considered a part of the Tzibur of Klal Yisroel – the Klal. If one is Poresh from the Tzibur, then he is by definition not a part of it.

With the kind of constant behavior shown in this video they have removed themselves from the nation. Even though their Mitzvah observance is exemplary. And their Chesed towards like minded Jews is superlative (which I am told it is). It is not extended to those outside of their general religious worldview.

They do not behave in the manner of our patriarch Abraham who was renowned and is remembered for his kindness towards his fellow man. Even if they didn’t deserve it - as evidenced by his plea before God to spare the people of Sodom. Which is why I question whether they are actually descended from the seed of Israel.

I don’t think I will ever be able to go into these kinds of neighborhoods again and look at the people there the same way I have in the past: as exemplars of people going the extra mile in service of God.

I’m sorry but I can’t help the way I feel. I now have a sense of contempt for them as a group until such time things change. And the only chance of that happening, it seems, is never.

Robert S. Mueller - newly appointed special counsel to investigate the President

Once again, I find myself in the awkward position of defending a President that I wish would never have been nominated – let alone elected. I am not going t re-hash all of my issues with him. Been there and done that ad nauseam. But since I am in the ‘business’ of Emes (as I understand it) I feel the need to do it. This should not, however, be misconstrued as having changed my negative views of the President. It hasn't.

Yesterday, Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein announced his appointment of Robert S. Mueller III as special counsel to investigate the possible coordination with the Russians to influence the election.

The last time that happened was when Ken Starr was appointed to investigate President Clinton. Upon the completion of that investigation it was determined that Clinton lied under oath to congress. Who then voted to impeach him. They did not however vote to remove him from office.

The only other time in my own lifetime this happened was when President Nixon was investigated in the Watergate affair. He was in danger of being impeached because it was determined that he too obstructed justice. He decided to resign (in disgrace) rather than face impeachment.

Now it’s Trump’s turn. Or is it? My own view is that it is not. Trump will not be impeached. At least not for this. Let us review the series of events that led up to Mueller’s appointment.

It has been determined by US intelligence agencies that the Russians did indeed try to influence the election. Not by fixing votes. But by leaking some of Hillary Clinton’s private emails (sent to them by Wiki-leaks). That weakened her candidacy - thereby strengthening Trump. Upon discovery of these additional emails, (now ex) FBI Director James Comey said he would reopen the investigation of Clinton. This happened shortly before the election. Hillary Clinton blamed Comey for her loss to Trump.

Since the election Trump’s National Security Adviser Lt. General Michael Flynn was fired because he misled Vice President Mike Pence about contact with Russian officials during the election. He was later replaced by General H. R. McMaster. Who has been a staunch defender of Trump’s innocence in disclosing secret Israeli intelligence to the Russian foreign Minister.

Last week, Trump suddenly fired Comey. Shortly after he was fired, Comey released a memo he had taken during a meeting with President Trump the day after Flynn was fired. That memo said the following:

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go” “He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

The media, Democrats, and even some Republicans seized on this as evidence that Trump tried to obstruct justice by telling the FBI director to stop the investigation of his ties to Russia. The assumption being that Trump's intent was to avoid being discovered show that he did conspire with them to influence the election.

That’s a great narrative if one believes that Trump is a scoundrel who had ulterior motives for becoming President and therefore used whatever means he could - including illegal ones - to get there. I’m convinced that many people think this is fact. I do not.

There has not been one shred of evidence produced to date that Trump had any ties with the Kremlin. Just a lot of speculation.

Why did he fire Comey? That’s an easy one. He didn’t want to be investigated. Not because he’s guilty of anything. But because you never know what they are going to find under some rock that will make him look guilty of something. And perhaps more importantly because he didn’t want to spend his time defending himself of false accusations. There has been a lot of speculation about such ties. Nothing has been produced that show that he is guilty of anything. I am certain that no effort has been spared in trying to find something to pin on him. So far, nothing.

What about Comey’s memo? Doesn’t that show that he tried to obstruct justice by telling him to stop the investigation? No, it doesn’t. All it shows is that Trump is a man of compassion who doesn’t like ‘good people’ like Flynn to get into any more trouble than he was already in.

He felt that Flynn had suffered enough because of this and just wanted to spare him and his family any more grief. Remember also that the meeting with Comey happened the day Flynn was fired. If one looks at the wording of the memo, it is obvious what his intent was. He didn’t threaten anyone. He didn't insist on shutting down the investigation. He just asked him to consider the consequences to a ‘good man’ if this were to proceed. The point being ‘intent’.

Obstruction of justice is all about intent. If one tries to end an investigation because he fears being caught in a crime, that would be obstruction of justice. If on the other hand he asks that perhaps the investigation into Flynn end for reasons of compassion, that does not show intent. He wasnit ryting to avoid being discovered of a crime since he didn't commit one. That is not obstruction. He did not threaten to fire him Comey if he didn’t. He just asked. From the way the memo was worded, it seemed Trump was just expressing a moment of compassion for a ‘good man’. And in that memo, Comey seemed to agree with that description of Flynn.

Trump may someday be impeached. But not from this. This is not like Nixon who was guilty of covering up the Watergate burglary and tried to obstruct justice - lying about his friends’ (Haldeman and Ehrlichman) involvement in it.

It is not like Bill Clinton who lied under oath about his sexual escapades with a young female intern.

I don’t see any lies here by Trump. Nor do I see any evidence of a Trump conspiracy with Russia to influence the election.

Which begs the question, why are so many others saying (or implying) that Trump did obstruct justice? One Republican, John McCain has even said that the investigation is now at Watergate levels. And what about the media? They are all but salivating at this news and have all but declared Trump guilty.

In order to understand why there is so much animosity towards Trump one does not have to be a rocket scientist. The one thing Trump has been consistently good at in spades is making enemies of the media. As he has been in alienating some of his natural Republican constituency. Trump has no idea how to react to criticism except to lash out (or hit back as he likes to put it) at his critics as harshly as he can with exaggerations and lies. His ‘diarrhea of the brain’ has resulted in insulting national heroes like John McCain. And his limited vocabulary doesn’t help him either.

Democrats are more than happy to paint him guilty. Because he wants to destroy a lot of their sacred cows – like Obamacare and taxing the rich. The media is making it easy for them. Republican congressman Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House oversight committee is a constant presence on the air whose dulcet tones make his characterization of Trump sound credible and fair.

But if one really pays attention one can see that Chaffetz is enjoying the party (and the limelight) - allowing others to do the dirty work. He thus sounds objective. Liberal Republicans like Susan Collins have been saying some of the same things their Democratic colleagues have been saying. Which gives Democrats cover by saying that this isn't partisan - and not a witch hunt at all. Just an attempt to get the facts.

I’m kind of glad that Mueller has been chosen as an independent counsel. I doubt he will find anything. I don’t believe there is anything there to find. Let them get on with it – and end it once and for all so that Trump can get on with his agenda, which is not all that bad. Unless you are a Democrat or liberal Republican.

Now if I’m wrong. And Trump is guilty, that will be a win for Conseratives. If Trump is impeached for obstructiong justice and removed from office, then he will be replaced by man that will bring honor back to the Oval Office.

I don’t however think that will happen. Trump will remain in office despite the best efforts of his political opponents and the media to paint him in the worst possible tones.

At the end of the day, Is this all just a witch hunt? I think it might be. It’s OK to hate the President. Free country. But it is not OK to view everything he does in negative tones. Because that’s just plain old fashioned prejudice at work.

RZ students in Merkaz Harav -They are exempt from army service (JP)

One might think that Modern Orthodox (MO) Jews are doomed after reading the somewhat shocking results of a survey in Israel. Well, not so much Modern Orthodox Jews, but Religious Zionist (National Religious) Jews. They are often seen as the Israeli equivalent of modern Orthodox.

The headline of a Jewish Press article says it all: ‘Only 46% of Next Generation National Religious Israelis Keep the Faith.’

With all of the talk about the record number of Charedim going OTD, what is happening in modern Orthodox circles along these lines seems to have been ignored. Until now. What gives? Why is this happening at such an alarming level? Are Charedi critics of modern Orthodoxy right? Do we – because of our engagement with the culture - suffer a higher rate of attrition? I honestly don’t know the answer to that. Suffice it to say that this problem exists in both worlds. I have discussed this phenomenon in the Charedi context. But as of yet I haven’t done much about it in the Modern Orthdodx context.

First, I think we need to separate Israelis from Americans. The experiences of these two groups are so radically different, that the two cannot be compared. Let us look at some of those differences.

Americans have one great disadvantage over Israelis. Aside from their homes and schools American influences are mostly secular. While most MO homes are generally religious Zionist (RZ), they do not live it the way Israelis do.

RZs in Israel are born and bred into this philosophy as a way of life. Which is constantly reinforced especially by their mandatory army service. Modern Orthodox American youth are weaned into an RZ mindset, but (except for the most idealistic) tend to focus on the American culture. True they mostly attend religious schools that whose orientation is RZ. They thurs learn to respect ‘everything Israel’. However their connection with the actual state might come during what’s called the ‘gap year’. Which is the year spent in Israel post high school - most likely at an American Religious Zionist Yeshiva.

After that they go on to college for career purposes. If motivated enough about their Judaism they might attend YU or HTC. But the focus is mostly on career even while Torah study is an important priority. There are of course exceptions that go 'right' and end up in places like Ner Israel or even Lakewood eventually. But they are the exception. What percentage of them keep the faith of their parents - I don't know. But their circumstance is different from the Israeli circumstance - which is the focus of the study.

RZ Israeli youth live their Religious Zionism every day. Most see army service as a sublime duty. While there are some that go into Hesder type programs… and even a few that might go into Nachal Charedi, I believe it is mostly the case that they serve in the regular IDF – often choosing highly specialized programs that lead them into dangerous assignments.

The regular army is not a good culture for the religious student. It is an army culture stringent about its rules without paying much atenttion to religiosity. This is not to say that the army is anti religious. But the culture that has evolved is at best agnostic about religion.

One can be entirely observant serving in the army. And I assume that is largely the case. But it is also quite easy to becomes entirely non observant. The peer group and friends one makes while serving can easily be fine people but not religious who expose these young students to an exiting and entirely different world from the one in which they are raised.

It is also a fact that the army is by definition the great equalizer. So that religious and secular recruits lead pretty much the same lives. They wear the same uniforms, eat the same food, live together in barracks and fight along side each other. This creates a bond unlike a simple friendship that might develop for Americans in a college environment. One that will surely impact greatly on ones religiosity.

I want to be clear. The army is not purposely disabusing their recruits of religious observance. I know a lot of RZs that have served in the IDF and came out unscathed. But it can’t be denied that the army experience weighs heavily on one’s religious observance. If one does not enter the army highly committed to it, it is can easily slip away.

This is my theory, although I admit it is anecdotal and based on my own personal observation. Nonetheless I think it might be one reason why (according to this study) the majority of RZ children do not live up to their parents religious standards.

I’m sure there additional factors. Or entirely different ones in many cases. But they may apply in both countries. The one thing that stands out that is different from Americans is that army service is required of all Israelis.

Which is a double edged sword. On the one hand, living one’s Judaism is far more likely in a Jewish country. Serving in the military should just be a extension of that. But the nature of the army may undermine observance. And observance is the epitome of Judaism.

While 46% is a large number of Religious Zionists that remain in their parents religious orbit, it is obvious that the 54% that don’t is a majority that doesn't. That is shocking and should not be ignored. I think it would be wise for religious Zionist leaders to face this reality and change the army dynamic.

Perhaps Nachal Charedi or a similar army program designed for RZ families should be implemented. It seems that parents cannot rely on the idealism that was instilled in their children. While that is wonderful when it happens and an idealistic soldier can easily maintain his religiosity in a secular army - it seems not to be working for the majority. Is this a acceptable condition for Religious Zionists in Israel as we move forward? Not in my book.

Rabbi Meir Mazuz - center of photo (Arutz Sheva)

Reform Jews are Jews in every sense of the word. I mention this in light of yet another tirade by Charedi rabbinic leader, Rabbi Meir Muzuz, head of the Sephardi Yeshivat Kashei Rachamim. He has joined the ranks of other rabbis who have said that Reform Jews are not Jews.

I believe that he knows better. Anyone born of a Jewish mother is a Jew. It doesn’t matter what movement they belong to. It doesn’t matter if they don’t follow Halacha at all. It doesn’t even matter if they are anti Torah. They are still Jews. What is true about Reform is that their movement has redefined what a Jew actually is. Their rejection of Halacha as a mandate for all Jews has spawned new laws of their own that contradict Halacha.

Like that of patralineal descent. Halacha does not accept a the child of a non Jewish mother as Jewish even if the father is Jewish. Even if he is the most observant man in the world, his offspring is still not Jewish if the mother is not. Additionally if I understand correctly they no longer require any kind of ritual conversion process. If a non Jew starts identifying as Jew and lives his life that way (whatever that means in the Reform movement),they are accepted as Jewish.

So why the tirade? He was expressing his overall views of the Reform movement citing examples of how callous they were to observing Halacha: citing their history and their failures. All in reaction to their current attempts to get ‘a piece of the Kotel’ for themselves. He is adamantly opposed to it and expressed it in a heated tirade.

Although I agree with him about the Reform movement’s failures, I don’t believe he advances the cause of the Judaism with that tirade. Most Reform Jews are simply ignorant of their own Judaism. Until recent times Reform Jews did not necessarily lead their lives in any way that is specifically Jewish. Those that were committed to the worthy goals of Tikun Olam and worked hard on those goals were not doing anything specifically Jewish. Tikun Olam is not specific to Jews. Non Jews believe in those same goals and work just as hard as Reform Jews do. (There are also plenty of Orthodox Jews that work towards Tikun Olam.) Tikun Olam is therefore not a distinctive identifier for a Jew.

With no identifying feature, A Reform Jew hardly needed to maintain any Jewish identity. What was the point? So a few years ago, the movement changed direction. Instead of discouraging the performance of Mitzvos as archaic and unnecessary, they started encouraging them (although not requiring them). As an example, many of their their rabbis started wearing Kipot and their temples started putting up Sukkos for that holiday on their premises. They finally realized that without a distinct way of life, there was nothing Jewish about how they lived their lives. and were therefore losing members.

That is a positive development. And we Orthodox should not only take note of it, but encourage it. This is not the time to disengage with them. We should instead reach out to them – and enlighten the Reform Jew that wants to express their Judaism in the more concrete way of Mitzvah observance. Who better to show them how to do it than the Orthodox Jew? Which is why to this day I lament the kind of outreach attempted by Rabbi Yosef Reinman, a Charedi rabbi who befriend a Reform rabbi and then authored a book together with him. They had one appearance together on a book tour where Rabbi Reinman saw an unprecedented opportunity for outreach.

The people he addressed on that tour were unlikely to ever meet an Orthodox rabbi any other way. Imagine the potential… But he was told by the American Charedi leadership to cease and desist from doing that since appearing on the same stage with a Reform rabbi gave the appearance of tacit recognition of their movement. Even though they made clear that appearing together should not be construed as agreement, it didn’t matter to the rabbinic leaders who told him to stop. So he did and lost a tremendous opportunity to reach out to Reform Jews.

Back to Rabbi Mazuz. His tirade has done nothing except make matters worse. This does not mean that we should not oppose Reform attempts at getting recognition. We should. It is in fact not a legitimate expression of Judaism. In my view we are obligated to oppose all attempts at recognition by movements that we see as illegitimate. Which includes opposing Israel recognizing them. Yes, Israel must accept Reform Jews as full fledged Jews as they should. That is what Halacha requires provided they are born of a Jewish mother. But a Jewish country should not accept a movement as a legitimate expression of Judaism that denies the Torah’s requirement to follow Halacha.

At the same time, one should not say or do things that alienate them. Which Rabbi Mazuz’s tirade certainly contributed to.

His tirade against Reform was intended for the ears of the Charedi Kenesset members. He urged them to reject any attempt at giving then any portion of the Kotel. The fact that he felt the need to express it indicates that the Charedi parties are not necessarily on board with him. This is not to say they wouldn’t prefer not giving them anything. I’m sure they would. But at the same time, they realize that giving them a different part of the Kotel will end the controversy and constant conflict that takes place at the Kotel - allowing the Kotel to remain with their traditional Orthodox customs and practices without interference.

As long as doing that does not include any official recognition of their movements, I support the idea of giving them their own portion of the Kotel. Not only for the above mentioned reasons. But also for the outreach opportunities that will surely arise. There are many indications that a lot of non Orthodox Jews are ready for it. They are looking for a spirituality that has been missing from their lives and we Orthodox Jews can help them find it.

This is not to say that this will stem the tide of total assimilation that has been the hallmark of Reform Judaism since its founding. That is truer today than ever before. But that should not free us from the task of trying to preserve Judaism for as many Jews as we can. The one thing we should not do is what Rabbi Mazuz did. Because that will not only not help outreach, it will do exactly the opposite and chase them all as far away from us as possible.

President Trump at the Kotel - which is on the West Bank (Jewish Press/ABC)

I am a big fan of peace. Especially in my ancestral homeland, Israel. Which is why I support any reasonable plan that can be accepted by both sides. And why I supported Ehud Barak’s attempts to sign a peace treaty with the Palestinians at Camp David in 2000. It almost happened. Except that ‘almost’ only counts in horseshoes and hand-grenades.

Arafat could not bring himself to sign off on that treaty. President Clinton, who tried mightily to make it happen blamed Arafat for letting that golden opportunity slip by him.

One may ask how I could have supported a peace plan that gave up East Jerusalem? I didn’t like it. But for me a treaty that would bring acceptance by the Arab world of Israel as Jewish State; allow unfettered access to the Kotel; allow for larger border settlements like Maale Adumim to be retained by Israel in exchange for un-populated land swaps; bring about the end to the violence and bloodshed; and that would usher in a new era of peace and cooperation between Israel and her Arab neighbors - was worth the price. Are these parameters unreasonable? Not at all. They have already been agreed to by Israel and Palestinian leaders at Camp David in 2000 under the President Clinton.

What about giving up Jewish sovereignty on Har HaBayis (the Temple Mount where our holy temple once stood)? I don’t think we ever really had sovereignty there accept in name only. Muslim clerics did -and still do. In my view giving up East Jerusalem is a small price to pay for the kind of peace I just described.

I know that a lot of my friends will see me as some sort of traitor. Give up Har HaBayis? How dare I?! What kind of a Jew am I?! Well it isn’t me giving it up. It was the then Israeli Prime Minister (and current Defense Minister) Ehud Barak giving it up as head of state. Who had the right as the democratically elected head of state to do so. I merely supported it for the reasons I stated.

That was the ideal. But realty is elsewhere. Giving up Gaza has demonstrated that giving up any land for peace in a climate where terrorists like Hamas calls the shots - is a fool’s errand. And should not be done under any circumstances. So at the moment I wouldn’t even give up the West Bank even if they agreed to cede all of East Jerusalem to Israel.

Because that will not bring peace. It will only bring more bloodshed. As has proven to be the case after we gave them Gaza. Instead of showing what peaceful relations and cooperation could achieve, Hamas has doubled down on what they really have in mind: retaking by any means necessary - all of Palestine from the ‘Zionist Jews that (with the world’s complicity) stole it from them’.

I bring this all up now since we have a new President who is following in the footsteps of his predecessors in the belief that he can do what they could not: forge a real and lasting peace treaty between Israel and the Palestinians.

Many people are guffawing at that. Trump?! He is the least qualified of all to accomplish this task! What does he or any of ‘his men’(Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt, and David Friedman) know about the Middle Eastern mindset? They are novices whose expertise lies elsewhere. Others that actually are experts and familiar with the slightest minutia of that mindset have been working on this for decades. They have all failed! Trump thinks he can just walk in knowing next to nothing about the situation and pull off the impossible?! What can he possibly do differently that will allow him to do it?

To make matters worse, Trump did his level best to alienate every Muslim in the world, disparaging them during the campaign. And after... banning them from entering this country; treating them all like terrorists . Does he really think he’s going to have any sway with an Arabs in the Middle east, the vast majority of whom are Muslims?

With resumes like this, it is not too difficult to predict big time failure. Trump will accomplish nothing. World leaders already hate him. The Media hates him. The Democrats hate him. More than half of America hates him. How is he going to convince anyone to do anything, let alone change over 100 years of Jew hatred in the Middle East.

Well a funny thing has happened. He is currently on an overseas mission to Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Rome trying to unite the 3 major faiths to fight terrorism. Muslims not only do not hate him, they have given him honor like no other President in history. He managed to convene a conference in Saudi Arabia attended by leaders of fifty Muslim countries. And he spoke truth to them, telling them that they must rid their countries (and even the world) of the people in their midst that persecute Jews, murder Christians, and commit all kinds of terror in the name of Islam.

Not a single leader walked out on him.

He also scrapped the Obama ban on selling Saudi Arabia weapons. Which they will now use in the fight against terror. He spoke of the two biggest enemies of the Arabs in the region: ISIS and Iran. There is no doubt that this is true. It is also true that ISIS and Iran are the biggest threat to Israel. Which makes Arab nations like Saudi Arabia and Israel natural allies.

It appears that there is already behind the scenes cooperation between them. One of Trump’s goals is to make this cooperation more open. These circumstances did not exist a few short years ago. But they exist today and Trump is going to take advantage of them. And he will use the above mentioned people he put in place to accomplish it. Jason Greenblatt, for one has has already earned the respect of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas despite his well known support of Israel.

It should not be lost on anyone that Abbas has said about Trump that if anyone can achieve peace it’s him. He said he really thinks Trump can succeed where Obama has failed. If one thinks about Trump’s negative rhetoric about Muslims during the campaign, it should be shocking that any of this is happening. And yet – it is!

What about my fears that giving up the West Bank to Palestinians is a prescription for more bloodshed than ever? I still feel that way. But I also trust Israel’s leadership. If they are willing to accept a peace deal brokered by the Trump administration, it will not be at the expense of more violence and bloodshed. Whatever one thinks of Israel’s leadership, they are not stupid. Nor are they suicidal.

How will it all happen? I can’t answer that. I acknowledge that the chances for a peace deal are slim if history is any kind of teacher. But then again you never know. Trump seems to have made a peace deal between Israel and the Arabs his top foreign policy objective.

No matter how one feels about the President... even if you despise him and think he should be impeached, I believe we should all hope and pray that he succeeds. Because that will save Jewish lives. And for me, that’s what it’s all about.

Maharat ordainees at their 2013 graduation ceremony - idealistic but misguided

It appears that the OU (Orthodox Union) is following up on its directive to their member synagogues. Which was that they may not hire women to serve as rabbis. Last February, a group of distinguished rabbis released a Teshuva (reponsa) that outlined what a woman may – and may not do – in the broad spectrum of professional roles in a Shul.

The short version is that a woman may not be a rabbi in the traditional sense of the word. She may not lead a Shul in that capacity. However she may be heavily involved in many of the services usually reserved for a rabbi.

For example a woman may be a mentor, an educator, teach, give lectures, serve as a visiting scholar in residence, serve as a director of various synagogue programs, or serve as a spiritual or pastoral counselor. And although there was some disagreement about the legitimacy of Yoatzot – female Halachic advisers to women on matters of Taharas HaMishpacha - it was agreed that Yoetzet can be a valuable resource in furtherance of that Mitzvah… and that employing a woman trained as a Yoetzet would certainly not disqualify a Shul from membership in the OU.

At the time this responsa was released, I made note of the fact that virtually the entire Orthodox establishment had rejected the legitimacy of a woman as a rabbi. And yet some modern Orthodox Shuls that were otherwise members in good standing of the OU hired women to serve as rabbis or assistant rabbis. In some cases even using the title rabbi.

These women were ordained by Yeshivat Marahat – a seminary created by Rabbi Avi Weiss for that purpose of ordaining women. These women study the material traditionally studied by male students for the rabbinate, tested the same way, and if they pass the exams, they are awarded Semicha.

I have no problem with women studying the material and being tested on it. Nor do I have a problem rewarding them with some sort title recognizing their achievements. But I do have a problem with flouting the repsonsa of virtually all rabbinic authorities, from the Charedi authorities of organizations like Agudah; to the rabbinic authorities of Centrist organizations like the RCA and the OU; to the rabbinic authorities of the European rabbinate; to the Israeli rabbinate. All of whom all consider female rabbis to be violating tradition and possibly even Halacha.

I am not aware of a single recognized Posek from any Orthodox stream that approves of it. Those who are pushing it are nowhere near the stature of those who disapprove. But that hasn’t stopped some synagogue rabbis from asserting themselves in this regard. These rabbis may be pretty intelligent. and knowledgeable. And they may indeed have their heart in the right place – feeling that the time has come to recognize that women can do anything as well men. But that does not give them the right to overturn the Teshuvos of men far wiser than them who have rejected it.

Which is why the OU is now backing up its Teshuva with action. From VIN:

(T)he Orthodox Union is pressuring synagogues that have hired the women to change their titles… (They sent) a three-member delegation to meet with the four synagogues to discuss compliance with the ruling — including requesting that at least two of the women clergy change their titles.

The delegation met with Thomas-Newborn and Rabbi Yosef Kanefsky at Bnai David-Judea earlier this month…. But Herzfeld of Ohev Shalom told JTA that the delegation did not exclude the possibility of expulsion from the O.U. over the issue.

“It felt like a threat because they sent three men to our congregation and interrogated us about our practices,” he told JTA. “And they said everything is on the table, and they said we’re not in compliance. I took that as a threat, that there’s a possibility of expulsion from the O.U. They did not deny that.”

Both Friedman and Kanefsky said they would not compromise on the title.

It seems to be finally happening. There is going to be yet another split in Judaism. There will be Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionist, Orthodox, and this new (yet to be named) breakaway movement, that will no longer be considered part of Orthodoxy. Now it’s true that the OU has not yet decided whether these Shuls will be expelled. But based on the above I don’t think the OU will have a choice. If there is no change, these Shuls will no longer be able to call themselves Orthodox since they will no longer have the imprimatur of any Orthodox institutional body.

How sad it is when one places an ideal – even one as worthy as egalitarianism – above the principles of the Torah as expressed by virtually all Poskim of stature. This is not about what I or anyone else thinks is fair or just. It’s not about any kind of hierarchical structure dictating policy from on high based on the misogyny of the past.

It’s about the right of virtually all contemporary Poskim… Poskim that are not in any way misogynistic… Poskim that have just as much compassion and sense of fairness as those supporting it - rejecting it for idealistic reasons based on their superior knowledge, understanding of the Halachic process. And respect for tradition which they believe should rarely be altered except in the most dire of circumstances. Of which this is not one.

As I’ve said many times in the past, none of this makes me happy. Because despite my profound disagreement with them, I realize that it is their own sense of idealism that motivates them (misguided though I believe it to be). I hate to lose bright, idealistic, and highly motivated Jews from Orthodoxy. Which these women and their supporters surely are.

Israeli paratroopers upon entering Jerusalem in ‘67 and seeing the Kotel

I can’t let this day go by without mention of Yom Yerushalayim. Today is the 50^th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem and the return of Har Habayis – the Temple mount into Jewish hands. The first time that has happened in the 2000 years since the destruction of the 2^nd Temple. There is not a Jew in the world whose Judaism means anything to them that does not understand the significance of this day. Or at least they should if they don’t.

Without getting to wordy, the Temple Mount was where the Beis HaMikdash – our Holy Temple was located. This is where God’s ‘presence’ (the Shechinah) rested. This is where the Kohanim - Jewish priests descendant of Aaron served God and offered sacrifices on the alter. Many of which were offered to atone for the sins of the people, without which says the Torah, there cannot be full atonement.

(How we deal with this issue today is beyond the scope of this post. Why we still cannot do so even though we are now proprietors of the sole area where sacrifices to God may be offered is also beyond the scope of this post. I mention it only to try and illustrate why this day is such a significant one to the Jewish people. I did not say Tachanun on this morining for this reason. As was the case with many Jews all over the world.)

I will never forget that day in June of 1967 - 50 years ago when the 6 day war broke out. It was a time that shocked the world. It was a time when just prior to it a lot of people were predicting the end of the Jewish State. Egypt’s President Gamal Abdel Nasser had been threatening for years that he would someday drive the Jews into the sea. He finally tried to implement that threat 19 years after Israel declared its independence - winning a war declared against her by all surrounding Arab nations upon the UN’s partition of Palestine.

Long story short, in 1967 Israel won a lightening war against her Arab neighbors in 6 days – retaking the entire West Bank of the Jordan River… an area that included East Jerusalem, the Kotel and the Temple Mount. I get a chill up and done my spine when I think of General Motta Gur’s declaration upon entering the old city saying ‘Har HaBayis B’yadenu’ (the temple mount is in our hands). As I do every time I see the iconic image (above) of those first soldiers entering the old city and looking up at the Kotel.

Those were heady days. Israelis were all of the sudden darlings of the media. Their military prowess was extolled by American generals with great admiration for their strategies and tactics. The image of the Israeli soldier was heroic. Israeli pilots were described as the best in the world. Religious Jews all over the world were talking about the miracles that happened during those 6 days of war.

To say I was proud is an understatement. Never was I so proud to be wearing a kipa in public!

It is now 50 years later. Instead of being the darlings of the media, Israel is now seen as occupiers of an indigenous population of Palestinians who under it’s thumb are being oppressed. Instead of talking about Israel’s military prowess, they are talking about Israel as an Apartheid state. The UN under the influence of Arab nations has condemned Israel a countless number of times and Europe has been their willing accomplices in that goal.

And what about Har Habayis? It’s hard to feel like it is ‘in our hands’ when it is controlled by Muslim clerics and only Muslims are allowed to pray there. Further complicating matters is the fact that Israel has already shown its hand about Jerusalem’s future. Despite current assurances by Israel’s leaders that Jerusalem will never be divided again - that all of it will forever remain in Jewish hands… Palestinians know that under the right governing coalition they will get East Jerusalem (which contains Har HaByis) as part of any peace deal.

I am a realist about this and would even support it - if it would truly end the bloodshed; with Israel remaining a Jewish state with secure borders; which are recognized by the entire world. I know this is not a popular view among many of my friends. But I stand by it.

If that does not turn out to be the case… and all of Jerusalem would somehow remain in Jewish hands as part of a final peace deal, no one will be happier than I would be about it. I hope that happens. But I doubt that it will.

It would not be a happy occasion for me if Jewish sovereignty over Har Habayis would be ceded to Palestinians. It would make me quite sad in fact. But if that’s the price of ending the bloodshed, my sadness comes second.

Until then, I choose to celebrate the return of Jerusalem into Jewish hands as I recall the glory of the past. Who knows? Maybe it will stay that way.

Manchester Arena after an Islamist suicide bombing Monday evening. (NYT)

First I want to make it abundantly clear that this is not an anti Islam rant. What I am about to discuss is not meant to bash Muslims in any way. To the best of my understanding, the vast majority of Muslims are fine law abiding people with strong religious values. Many of which align with Judaism. In fact I would say that as a people, there are far more Muslims that are observant of their religion than there are Jews observant of theirs (ours).

The Muslims that I have met in my life have all been are among the nicest and kindest people I have ever encountered. Most of them just want to be left alone to practice their faith and otherwise get along with their neighbors. They are just as fearful and upset by the terror committed in the name of Islam as I am - or as anyone else is. And condemn it equally with the rest of us. There has been an increase of hate crimes against Muslims because of these acts of terror. Many of them suffer a variety of indignities because of it. I can’t imagine what it’s like to be a Muslim in America now. If anything, we should have sympathy for what these people go through because of their Jihadist coreligionists.

So what’s my problem? It is simply this. It has been Islam that is the source of the ideology that motivates these terrorists. Which has made terrorism the scourge of our time. With rare exception the violence perpetrated against the civilized world (mostly in Europe but with many instances of it here) has been done in the name of Islam. The people doing it are motivated by their faith in a version of Islam that promotes Jihad - religious war. A faith so strong that they are willing to give up their lives in pursuit of their religious goals. While it is a small minority of the Muslim world that has this ideology, enough of them do to make the world a very unsafe place these days.

The latest terrorist attack in Manchester, England was only the latest example of this. The terrorist was a Muslim. A citizen of the UK that was radicalized by that theology. A radicalization that can easily be accessed online. A radicalization that glorifies martyrdom. So that disaffected young Muslims whose parents might be mainstream and peaceful will do what Salman Abedi did – put on a suicide belt and blow himself up along with as many people he can for the greater glory of Islam.

In this version of Islam there are no innocent victims. Or if there are, they are easily sacrificed for their Islamist cause. It should not be lost on observers that the targets of these people are not only places where maximum casualties will occur. They are often places that Islam considers sinful. It was not a coincidence that a secular concert by Ariana Grande was chosen as a target. Not any more that it was a coincidence that Pulse, a gay bar in Orlando was chosen as a target by another Islamist.

I know that there will be some that will say that Islam is not alone in producing extremists. Christianity has had its share of crusades throughout the ages where thousands of innocent people have been slaughtered in the name of the Church.

Judaism has produced a few extremists of its own. Baruch Goldstein comes to mind. But the Baruch Goldsteins of the world are not killing for Judaism. In their warped state of mind they believed they were defending their people with pre-emptive strikes. That does not excuse their behavior. But at the same time they do not have a mission to spread terror throughout the world by recruiting people to kill innocents in mass murders or suicide terrorist attacks.

There is no recruiting. There are no Jewish websites that are designed to radicalize the Jewish young. No Jewish websites that describe in detail how to make bombs that will maximize causalities and suffering when they are detonated. And for every Baruch Goldstein there have been hundreds of attacks by Islamists against innocent people for only one purpose. To strike terror into the hearts of the ‘infidel’ world in order to further the cause of Islam.

How many more ‘Mancheters’ will it take before the world realizes that these terrorists are a product of Islam? How many more times will we hear a world leader whose countrymen were slaughtered by an Islamist say almost reflexively that the perpetrator does not represent Islam? Or that Islam is a religion of peace? Muslim clerics that stand right alongside them in silent acknowledgement does not take away from the fact that at the core, Islam is what motivates these terrorists.

These terrorists didn’t make up the ideology. There is a strain of Islam that preaches what they are doing. While I agree that the vast majority of Muslims are not part of this strain and condemn it right along with the rest of the world - that does not mean that it doesn’t exist. It clearly does. Al Qaida and ISIS are 2 groups that believe in that kind of Islam. I’m sure they are not the only ones. They do not think of themselves as criminals. We might call them that. But in their minds they are agents of God doing His ‘holy’ work.

The sooner the world wakes up to this ‘plain as day’ fact, the sooner we might be able to be a bit more effective in preventing these kinds of attacks in the future. I know that this kind of thinking is politically incorrect. I also realize that most Muslims will not appreciate terrorism and Islam being cast together.I don’t blame them.

But the fact is that even though the Islamists are a relatively small number of the whole - they are part of the same religion. And it is that ‘small’ number that is perpetrating all the terrorism in the world. (Yes, there are some exceptions of terror that are not Islam based. But they are minuscule compared to Islamist based terror.)

What, one may ask, is accomplished by recognizing this clear fact, other than further stigmatizing them? The answer should be oblivious.

The security apparatus of the United States currently focuses on increased security measures that affect everyone. Every time there is an attack like the one in Manchester, we hear about stronger measures being taken at airports: better metal detectors; tighter control on what may be brought onto an aircraft; increasing the random number of ‘pat-downs’ at airports; more thorough searches of carry-on luggage; more restrictions on what may be brought aboard an aircraft; more scrutiny of electronic devices; removing shoes; going through x-ray machines… who know what’s next!

The one thing I have consistently noticed is that the security measures at Ben Gurion Airport are nowhere near as intrusive. Half of the things other airport’s require are not required by Israel. And yet Israel has not seen any kind of attack at their airports or on their aircraft. Considering that Israel is seen by them as Islam’s greatest enemy one would think it would be a prime target. How can this be?

The answer is quite simple. Israel profiles. They look at the individual. They interrogate each passenger to determine if they are who they say they are. And if they are there for the reason they say they are. If a passenger is Musilm they are going to get extra scrutiny. It may be unfair and politically incorrect. But in our world today, what choice do we have? We can no longer afford the luxury of closing our eyes to Islam as the source of the problem.

Law enforcement and Homeland Security needs to be more vigilant with a people whose religion harbors Jihadists. Not harassment. Not expelling Muslims or not barring them from entry. But a careful and watchful eye. Is profiling and extra scrutiny for Muslims unfair? Yes. But, as Israel might tell you - it’s necessary. This should be the unofficial policy if not the official one. Because in my view it will save many lives.

One may ask how I would feel if Jews were treated this way. My answer would be that I would feel the same way. If Jews were the ones blowing themselves up in mass crowds on a regular basis, I would expect – and even desire that we Jews are all carefully screened to assure the safety of the rest of all of us.

Rabbi Zvi Gluck - founder of Amudim

A few weeks ago, Pope Francis met with a Charedi Rabbi by the name of Edgar Gluck and his son Rabbi Zvi Gluck. That meeting raised a few eyebrows for a number of reasons. While some of the criticism may have been justified, I was one of those who saw it as an entirely positive meeting. Pope Francis is an exceptional man and we ought to be thankful that the Bishop of Rome - a man so widely admired by so many people of all faiths all over the world - has so much respect for Judaism.

But the Pope is not the subject of this post. Rabbi Zvi Gluck is. The Jewish Week named him one of this year’s 36 under 36. These are a group of millennials whom they describe as ‘a group uniquely dedicated to protecting the vulnerable and strengthening the defenseless’.

When I came across this article, I wondered if any of the people they chose are Orthodox. I noticed one that is: Rabbi Zvi Gluck.

This is a Charedi rabbi that turns on its head the notion that Orthodox rabbis simply don’t care about sexual abuse. That is not true and never has been. What is true however is how misguided all too many rabbis in leadership positions handled it. Which was in a word – terrible.

It was so bad that survivors of abuse felt abandoned by their own religious community. In many cases opting out of observance or worse living lives of clinical depression, substance abuse and suicide was all too often serious options for them.

I don’t think it’s possible for anyone that hasn’t experienced abuse – including myself - to understand the mindset of a survivor. Only the survivor himself knows how it feels. And perhaps his immediate family (parents and siblings). The pain and emotional suffering, the stigma, the sense of abandonment ca stay with a survivor for the rest of their lives. Even in those instances where a survivor somehow manages to lead a normal life, it never fully goes away, I’m told.

The religious leadership in Orthodoxy (whether Charedi, Chasidic, or modern Orthodox) had in the past never risen to the occasion. Ironically their attitude came (and in some cases still comes) from a sincere sense of compassion. Not for the survivor. But for the accused. They tended to believe the denials of prominent people with good reputations over the accusations of their young victims. Treating the victims as Off the Derech (OTD) lairs and outcasts. They believed that the accusers were eliberately lying, thus casting aspersions on the reputations of fine people.Causing them and their families to suffer their own unearned and lifelong stigma.

The tide has changed somewhat as some rabbinic leaders have been educated to better understand the realities of sexual abuse. Unfortunately not all segments have made the same degree of progress and in some instance have made little to no progress.

I am not going to go into which segments seem to be doing better than others. But in at least the case of one Charedi organization there seems to have been a huge step forward. An organization founded by Rabbi Zvi Gluck called Amudim. In the 8 minute video below he spells it all out in plain language. I believe it is well worth watching – and listening to what he has to say. He was not reticent about pointing out the past shortcomings of the rabbinic leadership on this issue.

For a Charedi rabbi to go out on a limb like this says a lot about this young man. But it perhaps it says something about a Charedi world that respects what he is doing. I don’t know of any criticism he has received. I know only about the praise he has gotten. If I remember correctly, Rabbi Gluck had a very positive cover story in one of the Charedi magazines a while back. Well deserved in my view.

Perhaps the Charedi world is finally rising to the occasion. He is fully funded to the tune of a $2.5 million annual budget. Not an easy sum to raise. He must be doing something right. Probably a lot of ‘somethings’. It is no small wonder that he ended up in the Vatican speaking to Pope Francis on this issue.

I wonder though if the Charedi leadership generally supports him. How does this affect their position that one must first report credible suspicions of abuse to rabbis. Is that still their position? What is Amudim’s position on that?

Perhaps more importantly how do survivors and survivor advocates feel about what he is doing? Do they fully support him. Are there any reservations? If so what are they?

If there are any at all, I have to believe that he is doing a lot more good than bad. There is probably a lot more to praise than there is to criticize. I don’t think there is another organization like it in the Charedi world.

Rabbi Gluck is indeed an individual that is ‘uniquely dedicated to protecting the vulnerable and strengthening the defenseless.’ God bless him for that. And thank you, Jewish Week for finding him and including him in your 36 under 36.

Shalom Lamm at his development, Chestnut Ridge in Bloomingburg, (NYT)

In his latest article in Hamodia (republished on Cross Currents) Rabbi Avi Shafran asks the following question: ‘Does widespread voting fraud exist?’ Although the subject of his article is unrelated to the following discussion, I found it to be somewhat ironic in light of the admission of guilt by an Orthodox Jew of committing voter fraud.

The only thing that has somewhat of a bright spot to this sordid affair is that at least one of the people guilty of this crime, has taken ownership of it and has apologized. I am not going to discuss what his motives were for making saying he was sorry. A resident of the community where this crime took place is skeptical about his sincerity saying, ‘The fact that he apologized is insane…. Mr. Nakdimen is only sorry that he got caught.’

I can’t know what is in a person’s heart. But admitting guilt goes a long way towards preventing at least one person, Mr. Nakdimen, from ever doing it again. And hopefully it will act as a deterrent for others. Although other high profile cases of fraud by Orthodox Jews have failed to deter these gentleman, one can hope that others will take notice this time and think twice about breaking the law – even if in those circumstances where they don’t have the personal ethics to do so.

Kenneth Nakdimen was a partner, with Shalom Lamm in an ambitious development project in and around Bloomingburg, a village in New York. The idea was to build homes for the burgeoning population of places like Williamsburg and Monroe. The development was to be called ‘Chestnut Ridge’.

Predictably there was opposition from the local residents. The developers tried to prevent any organized opposition. Which could influence local officials to pass legislation that would prevent these developers from pursuing their plan. As elections were coming up they hatched a plan to insure that their project would go forward unhindered. From the Times Harold-Record:

In December, Lamm and Nakdimen, along with Volvy Smilowitz of Monroe, were charged with conspiracy to corrupt the electoral process, also known as voter fraud…

Federal prosecutors say they filed falsified voter registrations, paid for voter registrations and offered bribes for registrations and votes, all to swing the 2014 village election in an effort to seat a mayor and trustees who would be favorably disposed toward their project. On Thursday, Nakdimen admitted that was all true.

Lamm and Smilowitz have pled not guilty.

Once again we have the specter of Orthodox Jews putting greed in front of ethics. Which keeps the false image of ‘the greedy Jew that will do anything for money’ alive and well. These developers stood to make millions from the sales of these homes to Chasidic seeking refuge from the crowded circumstances of places like Williamsburg – moving into the tree-lined open spaced suburbs like this new project.

I wish I could believe that these developers were acting with altruistic motives – on behalf of these Chasidim. Although it would still be illegal and unethical, one might understand fighting for the right of people to live wherever they choose by not allowing prejudices to win the day. But I tend to doubt that this was their prime motivation. Someone very wise once said, ‘Follow the money’. The motive here was no doubt profit versus loss. They stood to make hundreds of millions upon completion of the project and stood to lose the millions they have already poured into it if prevented.

Now I have nothing against making lots of money, much less trying to avoid financial ruin. But not at the expense of flouting the law and committing fraud. There is not a doubt in my mind that they knew that what they were doing was wrong and an egregious violation of the law. But they did it anyway foolishly thinking they would never get caught. Probably rationalizing all the way that they were doing it for their fellow Jews.

I’m not buying it. Nor do I buy their claim of innocence. I believe Mr. Nakdimen. They conspired together to do it. If I were Mr. Lamm or Mr. Smilowitz, I would change my plea to guilty. It won’t help our image much. But it might reduce the sentence they will get and the suffering their families will experience. Something they ought to consider. Because if they don’t - they will no doubt get the proverbial ‘book’ thrown at them. As have others that decided to roll the dice and plead not guilty - when they were found guilty.

Illustration from JTA

I cannot believe how warped the thinking of this rabbi is. And yet that is exactly what Conservative Rabbi Adina Lewittes has done with a Midrash about the Luchos – the 2 tablets upon which the Ten Commandments were written. Now I’m sure that Rabbi Lewittes is a fine individual - an intelligent and compassionate human being with good values. But Jewish values they are not if this is how she interprets a Midrash in honor of Shavuos.

The Torah relates that when Moshe came down from Sinai carrying the Ten Commandments and saw the people reveling in their service to a golden calf, he threw down the Luchos (tablets) breaking them into pieces. From JTA, here is Rabbi Lewittes’ quote of a Midrash that describes that event in a bit more detail:

“Moses started to turn back, but the Elders saw him and ran after him. Moses held on to one side of the tablets, they held on to the other, but Moses was stronger. … He looked at the tablets and noticed that the writing had disappeared from them. ‘How can I give the Israelites blank tablets?’ he thought, and decided it would be better to break them instead.” (Avot D’Rabbi Natan, Ch. 2)

Rabbi Lewittes then goes off the rails with the most incredulous interpretation of this Midrash one can imagine. Which is that God erased the writing in those Tablets because they were written in a language that His people no longer speak or understand. She then further suggests (based on her own conjecture with absolutely no connection to what happened or why) that there is no value in Torah study for its own sake. And in what can only be described as a nod to Christian theology, she notes that observance of a perfect Torah is not achievable by an imperfect people.

In conclusion of this breathtaking leap of logic, she says that the laws written in the new Luchos were changed – disassembled from the original and reassembled so that we can better observe them. Taking this interpretation to an even more absurd extreme she says the following:

Individuals personally curate their own Jewish lives, drawing from an array of cultural, intellectual, social, political, ethnic, spiritual, sexual and gender affiliations within and beyond the Jewish community. Diverse sources of authority and inspiration abound, shaping multifaceted, multivocal Jewish expressions in the global conversation about meaning, connection and faith.

In this setting, what are we prepared to dismantle and reconfigure to help more Jews feel at home in Judaism and the Jewish community, and motivate them to stay and contribute to a shared vision of the future?

This is pretty shocking even for a Conservative rabbi. One must remember the reason that this movement chose that name ‘Conservative’ for themselves. It was to conserve Judaism. Not change it based on modern ‘realities’. That their rabbis erred in how to achieve that conservation doesn’t mean that they intended to abandon Torah law altogether if the times demanded it. But that is tantamount to what Rabbi Lewittes suggests based on her warped interpretation of that Midrash.

What she also fails to mention is that God dictated to Moshe that he rewrite those Ten commandments on the second Luchos - exactly the way He (God) wrote them on the first Luchos. There was no reconfiguration of the law at all.

If one believes that Judaism can be reconfigured based on the spirit of the times then one can abandon it all if the times demand it. In what way is this different from Reform ideology?

But I guess it should not be surprising that Rabbi Lewittes - someone that now officiates at intermarriages - has this attitude. And she is not the only Conservative rabbi officiating at intermarriages. Despite the fact that the movement doesn’t approve of it. Yet.

I don’t see the rabbis on their Committee on Jewish Law and Standards opposing it forever. The times – after all – demand that we do something about the high intermarriage rate. They have already proposed welcoming non Jews that are married to Jews to join their synagogues. I guess their philosophy is, ‘If you can’t lick em – join em’. That may be the easy way out. But it is not the Jewish way out. It is an ‘out’ however. One that takes them further than ever before - out of Judaism. And it helps to explain – what to me is perhaps the most ridiculous interpretation of a Midrash I have ever seen.

Shoshanna Keats Jaskoll

Tis the season. Invariably the discussion turns to the subject of conversions to Judaism this time of year. The reason for that should be obvious. It is on the Yom Tov of Shavuos that we read the Book of Ruth. Which is the story of the most famous convert in Jewish history. A convert that had the merit to be the mother of the Davidic dynasty beginning with King Davis all the way down to Moshiach. That is quite the reward for Ruth’s sincere conversion.

The details of Ruth’s conversion process are not recorded in bible. Nor is the even mentioned in the Torah. The procedure is based on the sages of the Talmud and its interpretation by the Rishonim. The procedure that is widely accepted today is as follows. A potential convert has to:

1. accept upon themselves the requirement to follow all of the Mitzvos

2. undergo circumcision (if a man), and

3. immerse in a Mikvah.

This is all mentioned in the Gemarah. It should noted that with respect to acceptance of the Mitzvos, the Gemarah does not require that they become fully educated about all of the Miztvos before they convert. They are the taught some of the basics (like keeping Shabbos and, keeping Kosher) and then convert immediately. Afterward they continue to learn more of the laws and follow them as they learn them. The Gemarah also tells us that if someone converts sincerely and then moments later they decide to purposely violate Halacha, they are nevertheless still a Jew- albeit a sinning Jew.

Because of past abuse of the conversion process in the past by unscrupulous religious courts (and for reasons having to do with the conversion of masses of non observant Russian immigrants to Israel that are beyond the scope of this post) the Israeli Chief Rabbinate in conjunction with the American rabbinate has standardized the procedure and created a list of acceptable religious courts in America that will follow those guidelines and whose converts will be accepted.

None of this is new. I've discussed it all before.

Unfortunately these new standards have created unforeseen difficulties for sincere converts. For reasons that do not fully understand the Chief Rabbinate has been accused of throwing huge obstacles before a potential convert that have never before been used. There have been some horror stories about how potential converts are treated. In their zeal to assure that every conversion is a valid one, it seems that many of these courts have done their level best do dissuade every potential convert from converting. While it has always been an important feature of the conversion process to explain how difficult it is to be a Jew, and thereby try to talk a convert out of it – in some cases the lines of human decency seem to have been crossed - if the stories I’ve heard are true.

Which is why Tzohar was created. A group of religious nationalist rabbis have formed a religious conversion court that is kinder and gentler to potential converts . Unfortunately their converts are not recognized by the Rabbinate, no matter how sincere they were or how Halachic the conversion.

That’s where things stand now. The question arises, what should a person do if they want to convert to Judaism? Should they go through the rabbinate? Or Should they spare themselves the grief of jumping through all kinds of hoops the Chief Rabbinate throws in front of them?

Much as I would like it to be otherwise, I would advise the sincere convert to go through the rabbinate. Not because their conversions are necessarily better Halachicly than Tzohar conversions. But because if they want to avoid future emotional pain in their lives - it is surely wise to get a conversion that is universally accepted. Which brings me to a very poignant article by Shoshanna Keats Jaskoll in the Times of Israel.

She tells the story of ‘Ruthie’ (not her real name). She was a sincere convert. Mrs. Keats Jaskoll was involved in her conversion (If only all converts were as sincere as this woman was!) Towards that end, ‘Ruthie’ went to Rabbi Chuck Davidson. Mrs. Keats Jaskoll described him as follows:

Rabbi Davidson has been promoting Orthodox conversion in Israel outside of the Chief Rabbinate for nearly a decade. He converts those who are fed up with the Rabbinate’s difficult and drawn-out conversion procedure, those who don’t want to be affiliated with the Rabbinate for political reasons, or those who want a friendlier yet still halachic conversion.

I don’t know anything about Rabbi Davidson. But he sounds like a good man trying to help converts. A man with the best of intentions. But is he really doing his converts any favors with is unrecognized conversions – sincere and Halachic though they may be?

In my view he does not. If there is no universal acceptance - then his good intentions will only come back to haunt his converts later in life. That he realizes this is not a question. He actually warns his converts about it as Mrs. Jaskoll describes:

Rabbi Davidson looked at her quite earnestly and said, “Once you convert, the people that you leave behind will no longer be your people, and the people you want to join may not accept you. Especially because this conversion won’t be recognized by the Beit Din of [Ruthie’s hometown] nor will it be recognized here in Israel. You will be a Jew, but I cannot guarantee who will recognize your status.”

His convert took the plunge anyway. Her desire to be a Jew was so strong that she was willing to put up with the rejection she would get from her home town religious court and the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. I would have advised her to go through the rabbinate. Even though that would have created more hardships now, her future would be a lot brighter. These were my thoughts as I read Mrs. Keats Jaskoll’s thoughts about it:

At that moment, I feared for her. I felt that she was putting her faith in people who may never let her in and I felt, maybe she shouldn’t do this.

I too would have feared for her and would have put those feelings into action – long before she got to this point. Which is why I don’t blame Mrs. Jaskoll for her reaction to this convert’s resolve to finish the process under Rabbi Davidson:

But Ruthie didn’t flinch. She affirmed that she wanted to be Jewish and that she was committed to this course, no matter what came later. She stood and recited the affirmation and then we went to the mikveh room. I don’t know about her, but I was shaking.

If I had been involved in this and was unsuccessful in trying to convince her undergo a conversion at a universally accepted court, I’d be shaking too.

Getty images via NYT

Climate change is one of those issues that is surrounded by controversy. While I don’t think anyone of any intelligence doubts that the climate is changing (as is evidenced by melting glaciers at or near the North and South Pole) there is some debate about how much human endeavor has contributed to it. I realize that it’s not politically correct to not automatically blame humanity for this climate change. But I am not entirely convinced that only man is at fault. I believe the larger share of the blame can be placed on natural phenomena.

That said I do believe that mankind has an obligation to do its part to reduce whatever role we have in climate change. The only question is how far we have to go in pursuit of that goal. Do we go all out and eliminate every vestige of activity that might even remotely affect the climate? Even if it means changing the way we live in drastic ways?

There are some environmentalists that actually believe we should. Eco-terrorists have actually committed terror in that goal – believing that we should all return to an age where we lived in primitive conditions that would totally remove any vestige of a carbon footprint.

Equally ridiculous are those that deny there is any climate change at all – believing that those say there is any change at all are a bunch of communists whose goal is to destroy our way of life.

I am one of those that falls in the middle of all those extremes. (Big surprise!) I believe we need to be as prudent as possible about reducing our part in climate change without undue hardships being foisted upon the public. I therefore support things like reducing dependence on fossil fuels and developing renewable-clean energy whenever we can. But I am opposed to placing undue hardships o the public. And that a includes retaining the use of clean coal in the short term so that people whose livelihoods depend on coal mining can continue to do so until such time they can be trained to do jobs that do not leave as much of a carbon footprint.

I mention all of this in light of the President’s opting out of the Paris Agreement. Which was agreed to by every major country with the exception Nicaragua and Syria. Not exactly countries with which we otherwise aligned with.

The President has been criticized for that by nearly every world leader (including China – the world’s biggest polluter). His closest advisers and family members, Ivanka and Jared Kushner opposed opting out of it too. Which begs the question, who exactly was he doing this for?!

I think the answer is obvious. He was doing it for his base… the people that got him elected and who he promised to do this for in the first place. They are no doubt cheering his decision – keeping his promise to them.

I for one think that a lot of this criticism is overblown. First of all if I understand correctly the agreement only said that each country will voluntarily reduce carbon emissions. Which leaves each country to its own devices. No country is bound to any particular goal nor are there sanctions for not complying. Furthermore, opting out of this agreement does not mean that individual states, counties, cities, and private enterprise can’t do it on their own. In fact many sitting governors, mayors and business people have already stated that they will live up to the spirit of the Paris agreement on their own.

If that’s the case, why all the fuss about this? I believe a lot of it is political. The fact is that a lot of people simply do not like Trump and just love to pile onto him when he appears to makes a bad decision. The truth is that the optics here are really bad. Trump is being painted as an ignorant fool by nearly everyone. And that by this act he is participating in destroying the planet.

The US image will indeed suffer. His base – that believes he has done something heroic here are being myopic. Even if this withdrawal won’t change a thing about the environment – it hurts our image.

Why did he do it? Trump said that it is that he felt the Paris Agreements unfairly harmed the US economy. But I’m not sure he has advanced that cause. But as I said earlier, he did it to keep a promise made to his base.

I don’t think he should have opted out of it –even if it is only a case of optics. We should not be harming the American brand even though I question how much actual damage is being done. Even though substance if more important than image - image matters. As much as I don’t think much of Europe, I don’t think it is wise to alienate ourselves from them. It is true that they need us a lot more than we need them. But that doesn’t mean we continue to exacerbate tensions between us. They are after all our trading partners and American businesses that deal with them might suffer because of it.

On a separate but related issue, it was nice to see the Presidents top advisers spending yesterday morning in their Chabad Shul instead of the Rose Garden where their boss (and father/father-in-law) was announcing his withdrawal from the Pairs agreement. It was not because (as was suggested by at least one reporter) they disagreed with his decision. Which they did. It was because yesterday was the 2nd day of Shavuos.

Charedi Protesters (illustration) Arutz Sheva

Once again extremist Charedim have struck. I am so sick of these people. As I am of the lack of the authorities - both rabbinic and municipal to address the problem. - In essence blaming the victim.

I received an e-mail today from a resident in the Bet Shemesh area that included a couple of Facebook posts. Those posts described the latest outrage.

A group of teenagers were escorted by adults through a street that accesses Ramat Bet Shemesh Bet – where Meah Shearim type Charedim reside in major numbers. Probably 90% of the residents.

As I have said countless times before, most of those people do not get involved in the kinds of protests that occurred there. But as I have also said countless times, they clearly support their philosophy and their goals. And I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them actually support their actions privately. Although they would not say so publicly, some actually do.

What is it exactly that they were protesting – and why?

The above mentioned teenagers did not live up to the town’s standards of Tznius. Now it may be true that some of the female teens may have been in technical violation of Tznius, I don't know. But surely they were dressed modestly by most standards. I doubt that there was anything all that provocative being worn by those teens. But even if there was - it certainly did not warrant the kind of protest that these young people experienced. ‘Torah terrorists’ - as one Facebook poster described them - were screaming at them; calling them vile names; and throwing projectiles at them.

The local police actually came by twice and did nothing. They didn’t even leave their cars. Those protesters also blocked the road going uphill to Ramat Bet Shemesh with garbage to prevent cars – including police vehicles and ambulances – from going through.

A second Facebook poster said that at a meeting with the municipality, the mayor actually blamed the victims! He said that the parents were acting irresponsibly – trying to make political points at the expense of their children by allowing them to walk there. The mayor spoke to those extremist protesters and they ‘explained’ that the girls walking down that street were not dressed Tzanua (modestly).I suppose he meant that these parents did this to taunt the Ramat Bet Shemsh Bet residents hoping there would be an incident that would ‘prove’ how evil this town was.

Is that how the mayor deals with this outrage?! By implying it’s their own fault? There is no excuse for what happened there. Even if they were right about these teens not being modest enough, the response by that community to it was vile! Evil beyond all proportion. It is not enough for the mayor to say (as he did) that he had nothing to do with it. Nor is he right to blame the victims for being victimized. It is outrageous and it is wrong.

As I have said countless numbers of times, the people responsible for the vile protest ought to have the book thrown at them. They ought to be arrested, tried, and when convicted sentenced to the maximum sentence allowed by law.

If further protests erupt because of that let them protest and if there is a repeat of this behavior or worse - let more arrests be made. Fill the prisons with these people if necessary until they finally understand that their behavior will have seriious and disruptive consequences for them and their families. Let them once and for all get the message that uncivilized behavior and will no longer be tolerated.

Furthermore let the moderate rabbis of Ramat Bet Shemesh Aleph be right there, in the courts cheering on those maximum sentences. Let them pay more than lipservice condemnation. They cannot afford to keep looking the other way while things like this keep happening.

They cannot say as one of them said a while back that they don’t need to protests the obvious. They ought not only protest loudly and firmly but make sure things change. There is absolutely no excuse for not doing so. Because their reticence will only encourage more of the same. Especially since the police don’t do anything - probably because of the attitude expressed by the mayor.

What about the accusation of the mayor? ...that the parents brought this upon themselves in order to make political points? I have no clue whether that’s true or not. But it doesn’t matter. When people react to the slightest provocation the way they did – even if it was an intentional provocation, they are the ones that deserve to be punished. Thus far they have not, it seems. This needs to change. Or else things like this will not only keep happening, but may increase.

And it is all such a shame. I have often noted how kind and generous the more moderate Charedim of Ramat Bet Shemesh Aleph are. They are nothing like the residents of Bet. They do not assault any female resident of their city that does not dress according to accepted Tznius protocols. They are as nice to others as can be.

But because of actions and attitudes of people of Ramat Bet Shemesh Bet, the Charedi philosophy itself is blamed. I reject this entirely. Although I have some profound differences with the Israeli version of Charedism - there is nothing inherently evil about them.

But if the rabbis of the moderate faction keep looking the other way, there should not be any surprise that a conclusion like that might be made by those outside of the Charedi world. What will it take for the moderate Charedi leadership to act?

Why not cut off the people that is behave that way or approve of it in any way? Wouldn’t it serve us all better if the vast majority of Charedim that are moderate would join hands with the Dati world and form the kind of unity that Klal Yiroael needs so desperately these days? Maybe then, the mayor would not accuse the Datim that were attacked of fomenting that protest for political purposes. Because even if that were true - there would no longer be any need to do so.

Dayan Yonason Abraham, London Beth Din

I found Jonathan Rosenblum’s Mishpacha column on London’s Charedi Dayan Yonanson Abraham, the new head of Shuvu rather enlightening. Not so much about Rabbi Abraham. But about Shuvu.

Shuvu which means ‘return’ is a network of schools created after Rav Avrohom Pam’s passionate appeal at a 1989 Agudah convention. It was about the need to educate the masses of Jews that were immigrating to Israel from the Former Soviet Union (FSU). Shuvu’s purpose was to try and ‘return’ as many of these Jews as possible to the Judaism of their forefathers.

But since its founding, 40% of the students are either native Israelis or immigrant students that are not from the FSU. While Kiruv was the purpose of its founders, it is not the only purpose says Jonathan. Three-quarters of the students described themselves as secular. Over 90% do not observe Shabbos.

What intrigued me is that even though this project was created by Charedim to serve Jews in Israel, it does not have the one major shortcoming that mainstream Charedi schools in Israel have. Which for me means that it should serve as a model for all of Charedi Jewry there. What Shuvu has that the Charedi schools don’t is a secular studies program.

This kind of proves a point I constantly make there that there is nothing wrong with studying secular subjects even according to the Charedi leadership. Since that is indeed the case – that option should be extended to mainstream Charedi schools.

One may ask, is Shuvu just offering secular studies as an enticement for parents that would never send their children to the typical Charedi school? Well, yes, that is exactly the reason. But that does not explain the quality of the secular studies that are offered there. Which is apparently very high.Why would a secular parent send their chld to Shuvu?

Jonathan cites some eye-opening statistics in a Shuvu commissioned study by one of Israel’s leading polsters, Rafi Smith.

Of those dissatisfied with the state system 60% complained about the level of core studies and 59% complain about the high levels of violence and disciplinary problems . About 50% complain about the level of teaching. Shuvu schools teach 20-25% more math material per year and they begin teaching both English and computer skills at a younger age. Professor Tamar Horowitz of Ben Gurion University has written that Shuvu has the highest level of teacher accountability of any other school system.

What about Jewish studies? Is that part of Shuvu’s draw as well? Based on the results of the study it was determined that just short of 50% of the secular parents in Israel would prefer an intensified Jewish studies program.Jonathan notes that the Beis Yaakov teachers there also bring a level of enthusiasm that is largely absent at the state run schools.

All of this tells mes that if they had the will, Charedim could easily do the same thing for their mainstream students. Why give only secular students the tools to function in the real world while ignoring those very same needs for their own children?

Their typical answer to that is Talmud Torah K'neged Kulam - no type of study outweighs Torah study. Any time taken away from it is Bitul Torah - a waste of precious time that could be used for Torah study. And yet this is not the message Shuvu teaches.

Is there a double standard? Or is it that they have no choice since that is the only way they can get secular parents to send their children? I think the latter is true. But in the process the Shuvu students come out with a far greater educational advantage. That enables them to better function in the real world.

What about their claim of secular studies being Bitul Torah? Well, if its not Bitul Torah in Shuvu – it shoudn’t be Bitul Torah for the mainstream either.While there are some truly elite students that are geared for a lifetime of full time Torah study, it is hardly a secret that most students are not equipped for that. At some point many of them realize that they will have to start supporting their large families. And will be ill equipped to do so. While some may be able to catch up, others will not. and they will end up in impoverished circumstances.

Nor is it a secret that some of Charedi students in the mainstream system go OTD precisely because they do not fit into that particular mold and end up feeling left out. It is not too much of a stretch to see what this does to the psyche of that kind of Charedi student. Wouldn’t a Shuvu type system that offers options other than full time Torah study help stem that tide? Wouldn’t it also give the majority of Charedi students that are not geared to full time Torah study the means to find a better way to serve God and family?

I've said all this before. But the model I have always used was the American Charedi school model. I now know that even Charedi Israel has such a model in Shuvu. I know I’m talking to the wall. But I can dream, can’t I?

First let me reiterate what I have said countless times on the subject of homosexuality. There is absolutely no sin in being attracted to members of the same sex. That is nobody’s business and the Torah is not concerned with it. What the Torah is concerned with is the act that usually accompanies that. Which the Torah puts this way:

A man may not lie with a man as with women - it is an abomination (Vayikra 18:22) and… A man that lies with a man – in the manner of women, both have committed an abomination - they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. (Vayikra 20:13)

In other words it’s the act. Not the inclination. We therefore have an obligation to treat all people – no matter who they are attracted to with human dignity. Mental health professionals have determined that one’s sexual preferences are ‘hard-wired’ so to speak. Whether this is because of nature or nurture; or both is immaterial. The consensus among professionals is that sexual orientation cannot be changed.

If that’s the case, how can we reconcile that with the Torah attitude? I can’t answer that question fully except to say that Torah law stands immutable. We cannot say that something is permitted when it is expressly prohibited. No matter how much some people have tried to do that.

For a gay Jew that accepts the Divine nature of the Torah, this presents a major challenge. If one is attracted only to members of the same sex - that doesn’t mean he can simply abandon God’s expressed will in the Torah. But that doesn’t change the desire. So if someone is gay and refrains from the Torah’s prohibitive act, he is praiseworthy. If he tries to refrain but succumbs to his normal (for him) desires - he is no different that any of the rest of us that succumb to desires which are forbidden by the Torah. It’s all about attitude. One must acknowledge what the will of God is and try to follow it. If we fail, it is because we are human. And it is why the concept of Teshuva (repentance) exists.

How should the Torah world treat homosexual Jews? The short answer (which I’ve mentioned many times) is ‘love the sinner- hate the sin’.

I wish we could end the discussion there. Unfortunately the times in which we live insists on a different response. Society now demands we not only ‘love the sinner’ it demands ‘we love the sin’ too. For those of us that believe that Torah law is the Divine word of God, that is unacceptable. Even as prejudice against gay people is unacceptable. Orthodox Judaism stands firm on these principles.

An article in the Forward discusses how the Conservative Movement is grappling with all of this. And for a movement that claims to be Halachic, the attitude of some of their leaders is quite astonishing.

They now permit their rabbis to perform same sex marriages. That in essence gives homosexuals ‘permission’ to violate the Torah. Marriage in Jewish law is what permits (and even encourages) a man and woman to engage in sex. Gay marriage should do the same. Obviously that’s impossible.

And yet they do seem to at least give a nod to the Torah prohibition. From the Forward:

The problem is that even while Conservative life is inclusive of LGBTQ people, it still places limits on their most intimate lives. It instructs gay men to avoid anal sex precisely because of the verse (in the Torah forbidding it) and urged bisexual people to pursue relationships with those of the opposite sex. It also cited heterosexuality as the ideal sexual orientation.

But that attitude is now under attack. More from the Forward:

(Conservative gay Rabbi Amichai) Lau-Lavie and other Conservative rabbis believe those rules should be abandoned. Forty-nine-year-old Rabbi Adina Lewittes, who identifies as a lesbian, is leading the charge...

(Rabbi Elliot Dorff supports) Lewittes’s proposal to erase the anal sex ban and the language on bisexuality, and holds the right position to advance it, as head of the (Conservative) movement’s lawmaking body, the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards...

It is unclear whether Conservative Judaism will actually abandon the Torah mandate completely. As the Forward article notes: ‘a majority of the committee’s 25 voting members, all of them rabbis, would have to approve it.’ There are still some members of the Conservative leadership that value the Torah’s clear demands.

But I think the trend is to move away from that kind of thinking. Torah law is being set aside in order to serve modern sensibilities. Treating gay and straight sex the same being one is very understandable. You want your fellow man to be treated as an equal in every respect. But for Orthodox Jews as much as modern sensibilities must be considered, if they contradict the Torah, those sensibilities are set aside.

If there is any question about whether Conservative Judaism is Halachic or not, what happens here should settle it.

Tznius sign in Bet Shemesh (Kikar HaShabbat)

A few years ago, a sect arose among Orthodox Jewish women that decided that they were going to observe modesty in dress to the highest level possible. Toward that end, they started wearing clothing modeled after the strictest Muslim modesty standards. Which takes the form of covering up the entire body including the face with a loose fitting cloak – leaving only the eyes exposed (for obvious reasons). These women came to be known as Burka ladies.

While the response by the vast majority of even Charedi Poskim - including the Eida HaCharedis - was highly critical of these women - some Poskim actually praised them for their sensitivity to Tznius even while being critical of what they were actually doing.

I mention this in light of how things seem to be progressing in the modesty department among Orthodox Jews. Which in my view is not progressing well at all. In fact I would call it regressing.

There are 2 incidents of recent vintage that illustrate this. One in Israel and one in the US.

1) From Rafi’s blog, Life in Israel:

The courts in Jerusalem have warned Iryat Bet Shemesh to remove the "tzniyus signs" from the streets within 30 days or else be fined to the tune of 10,000nis PER DAY!

The courts have already ruled that City Hall must remove the signs and this ruling comes as a result of City Hall Bet Shemesh not doing so. They are in contempt of court, according to the judges, and must remove them or be fined like this.

City Hall claims they cannot remove the signs due to the threat of violence that would be a result of their removal, but the judges reject that and said that leaving the signs up gives them legitimacy and puts women in danger.

2) From JTA:

The Chabad school Bnos Menachem in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, sent a letter last week to parents inform parents of the code, which bans denim, tight clothes and leggings, and requires nail polish to be in “conservative/soft colors,” wigs to not go past the shoulder blades, skirts to be mid-calf length, and elbows, feet and the neckline to be completely covered…

“Parents who adhere to these rules will be welcomed in Bnos Menachem School,” the letter later continues. It asks parents to sign a contract agreeing to follow the dress code.

There is not a doubt in my mind that all three of these things are related. We are living in an unfortunate time with respect to modesty issues. In the ever increasing Chumra chase of the right, modesty issues seem to be leading the way. The Burka ladies were only the most extreme manifestation of it. It should have been a wake up call. But it wasn’t as these 2 stories illustrate.

The modesty chase didn’t begin yesterday. It has been going on for some time now. How does a phenomenon like this happen? I can only guess at the answer. But I attribute it to the shrinking world in which we now live. No longer are we separated by boundaries. Although there are still enclaves that isolate and insulate themselves from the rest of the world it’s not like t used to be.

There has been a general integration of both worlds. We all live together in one big submarine. We encounter each other all the time in public and in private. We know what the lives of others are like. So that if one segment feels it is the most observant – and yet sees another segment being ‘more’ observant, the only thing to do is adopt the stringencies of the ‘more observant sector’. There is no longer a Chasidic community that is separate and apart from the non Chasidic world as was the case in Europe just a few generations ago.

This is how separate seating at weddings in the US began. A custom that used to be almost solely in the province of Chasidim is - now de rigueur in the Yeshiva world. The shrinking world has led to a whole series of other Chumros that have been adopted most of which have to do assuring that women are dealt with in the most modest fashion possible. Which is a grossly unfair burden to our women and hurts all of the observant world!

There are some Charedi ‘pundits’ that explain this as a reaction to the lowering of societal standards. They feel that they must counteract it by ‘going the other way’. That is a very poor excuse. You don’t correct one wrong by engaging in another.

Why, one may ask, is wrong with adopting the practises that are acceptable to all? Plenty. It has resulted in creating an environment where women are seen only as sex objects – temptresses for all men by merely showing up anywhere in public whether real or in an image. There may be a lot of denial by the right about that. But the facts speak for themselves. Here are a few examples of those facts – all of which have been discussed here before:

*Buses in certain neighborhoods are now segregated: men in front – women in back. Violators can find themselves verbally and/or physically abused.

*Pictures of women that used to be common in many Charedi publications are increasingly disappearing in mainstream Charedi publications.

*Illustrations of families in books published in the Charedi world do not include mothers or wives at a Shabbos table.

*Working women in Bet Shemesh may not use pictures of themselves in advertisements. Men are permitted to do so – and do.

*Words like ‘breast’ cannot be used even in discussions of breast cancer. Some modesty zealots even erased the word ‘woman’ from a sign over a women’s health clinic.

*Some neighborhoods do not allow men and women to walk on the same side of the street.

*Tznius patrols are now becoming the norm in certain neighborhoods. A shop in religious shopping area in Jerusalem (Geula) was torched a few years ago by one of these patrols for selling clothing they deemed immodest – even though the proprietor was the wife of a respected Rosh Yeshiva.

*Acid was spilled in the face of a girl jogging through an extremist Charedi neighborhood for wearing a jogging suit.

Women are being erased from society – all in the name of modesty.

There has to be a happy medium. Modesty in dress is clearly a positive value. But there is such a thing as being too modest! I think we are seeing more and more of it these days.

What would be the optimum level of modesty in our world day? In my view it should not exceed the bare minimum Halachic level. While some segments that have stricter standards, they should understand that not every Posek agrees with them.

In their own communities they may dress the way they choose. But they should never be allowed to intimidate those that wander into heir neighborhoods but don’t have their standards. Or even those that may not dress according to the minimum Halachic standards as long as they are modestly dressed by conservative standards. If for example a woman comes into their neighborhood wearing pants or a short sleeve shirt they ought to just ignore her.

The kind of thing that the extreme suburb of Bet Shemesh is doing should not be allowed to continue. They want to observe that standards themselves? Fine. They certainly have that right. But when it comes to imposing it on others. That’s plain wrong and it results in the kind of thing I described I a recent post.

It’s time to say no! We ought not to give in to the temptation to just go with the flow. It might be easier to just dress as modestly as possible in order to respect the sensibility of everyone. But easy is not always right. And that is surely the case here.

Former FBI Director, James Comey

The word ‘Watergate’ is increasingly coming up in punditry about the Trump Presidency. I find this both funny and sad at the same time. I also find it ironic that I have to keep ‘defending’ a man that does not deserve to be defended. I can think of very few people that have been more embarrassing to this country than Donald J. Trump. And yet because he is so reviled by the media, Democrats, liberal Republicans (like Susan Collins) and even a few mainstream Repubilcans (Like John McCain), the reportage about this man’s Presidency is among the most obviously biased reporting I have ever seen. I understand why he is so disliked. But that does not translate into ‘Watergate’.

I have defended the media against bias many times. That’s because most of the time I gave them the benefit of the doubt. I often felt that accusations of bias were based on the bias of the accuser. But in the case of Donald Trump, media bias is very obvious. It is dripping with sarcasm. The presumption of Trump’s guilt is evident in the way they present every story about him. The not so subtle ridicule... the occasional smirks… the rolling eyes...– all dead giveaways of the bias.

That Democrats are biased is not surprising. They are political animals that will use any advantage to make their political opponents look bad while they make themselves look righteous.

The media pretending to be objective cannot help themselves from appearing to salivate at the prospect of a new ‘Watergate’. Every reporter wants to be the next ‘Woodward and Bernstein’. They each want to have that kind of legacy. They care less about the facts than what this story will do for their careers if it turns out the way they hope it does.

One may ask, What about the Republicans? Are they not the same political animals? Do they not have the same agenda – to get reelected and perhaps one day run as a credible candidate for President? Sure they do. They are no different than the Democrats in that respect.

The difference is that the media bias is on the side of the sensationalism that a Watergate type of event would bring them. So they bolster the Democrat argument while hardly noting the more restrained view that most Republicans are taking.

I don’t even think that most members of the media are aware they are doing it. I am convinced that they think are being objective. If only they could see themselves through a truly objective lens.

Watching the media is like watching birds of prey ready to pounce on its victims. They are salivating at the possibility that Comey will somehow show that Trump obstructed Justice. For which he (Trump) could be impeached and possibly removed from office.

James Comey will testify before Congress today. A lot of people are pinning their hopes on his testimony. But he has already stated that he does not believe that Trump tried to obstruct justice. He is not going to change his views during testimony under oath. If anyone has a reason to be anti Trump it’s James Comey. But he has basically already vindicated Trump. There will be no Comey bombshell. It will not happen.Watergate - which can make the careers of both the politicians and the media - it is not.

Here is what I believe to be the facts based on my own observations. Trump did not collude with the Russia to sway the election in his favor. Whether members of his campaign did or not is immaterial if Trump was not aware they were doing it at the time or is trying to cover it up now. And I’m not at all convinced that any Trump surrogate colluded with the Russians.

Did Russia try to interfere in the election? That seems to be the consensus of the entire intelligence community. But neither Trump nor any of his surrogates had anything to do with it.

Nor did Trump try to obstruct justice in a conversation he had with Comey about former National Security Adviser, Michael Flynn. Comey has already made that very clear. He said he was never directed by the President to stop the investigation of Flynn or the investigation of Russia’s tampering with the election. And that Trump was never personally a subject of that investigation.

Former FBI director Comey is surely knowledgeable about what is and isn’t obstruction. If he - as the man in the center of this investigation is to be believed (as I believe he should be) that should end all the talk about obstruction of justice. This is no more ‘Watergate’ than Hillary Clinton hiding her emails was.

That doesn’t absolve Trump of unethical behavior. Asking Comey for loyalty; firing him shortly after that; attacking his enemies on twitter, tweeting insults and lies about people he dislikes including world leaders is stupid and disgusting behavior that is counterproductive to the well being of this country. It disturbs me and should disturb anyone with any sense of humanity. Which is in large part why I believe he continues to be an embarrassment. But none of that rises to being an obstruction of justice. Or an impeachable offense.

That will not stop most of the punditry from spinning it that way. They may characterize Comey’s testimony as a bombshell. But I don’t think it is anywhere near that. Much as Democrats, the media, and the ‘Not my President’ liberals are trying to make it be.

One final word for all the politically liberal Trump haters. Be careful what you wish for. If you hate Trump because of his policies, you will come to regret his removal from office if it ever gets that far. His his successor, Mike Pence, will make Trump look like a liberal.

Why Orthodox Jews succeed where other fail: Education

There is more evidence of Jewish population decline among non Orthodox Jews. A 2013 Pew Research study has shown that there is a high rate of attrition from heterodox movements. More Jews than ever identify as unaffiliated. Conservative Judaism - the once dominant movement in Judaism has dropped to second place and slipping down that scale with a bullet.

Intermarriage is at all time high – affecting mostly non Orthodox denominations. Where ‘marrying in’ was once considered the sine non qua of one’s Judaism by Jews of virtually all denominations, it has become so commonplace that there are an increasing number of Conservative rabbis performing them. Which means that if the mother is the non Jewish partner, their children are not Halalchicly Jewish.

There is yet another reason for the demise. One that seems to be accelerating it. From the Jewish Press:

A study published by the Jewish People Policy Institute (JPPI) this week shows that the non-Orthodox American Jews including atheists, Conservative and Reform, who in years past were the foundation of American Jewry, have been in significant decline in recent decades. That’s not news to most of us, but the rate of decline, according to JPPI, is alarming.

The study, conducted by Sylvia Barack Fishman of Brandeis University and Steven M. Cohen of Hebrew Union College and Stanford University, analyzes the data in the landmark 2013 Pew Research Institute survey of American Jewry.

The analysis shows that more than 65 percent of Jewish children 18 or younger are raised Orthodox, mainly ultra-Orthodox. Also, more than 27% of Jewish children today are Orthodox – while only 12% of US Jewry, at most, is Orthodox. Obviously, the discrepancy here is the result of the much higher birthrates in Orthodox families, which means that this trend is bound to increase in a decade.

Otherwise, according to the study, “considerable disturbing evidence points to deeply challenging trends in America’s Jewish families — late marriage, intermarriage, reduced child-bearing and non-Jewish child-rearing.”

I don’t care how you couch this analysis. The lifestyles of non observant Jews contribute to their demise while the lifestyles of Orthodox Jews who are by definition observant insure that in the vast majority of cases, their children will continue that heritage. And their increased birthrate will insure that the population will increase exponentially. All while the lifestyles of the non Orthodox tend towards the general cultural values of marrying late (if at all) and having less children (if any) later in life. Children that in many cases will not be educated to be committed Jews –ending up with secular humanistic values rather than Jewish ones.

I’ve discussed the responses to this crisis (and yes, it’s a crisis) by the Reform and Conservative movements – the 2 dominant Jewish denominations in America.

Breifly, Reform’s answer is to simply change the rules of what defines a Jew. Thereby adding to their numbers by making Jews out people that Halacha does not consider Jewish. The Conservative Movement has done a variety of things to make Conservative Judaism more attractive and user friendly. And both denominations have tried to make inroads to secular Israelis in Israel – pinning their hopes on the fact that at least in Israel – being a Jew means something even if you are secular. (While in America, that is increasingly becoming less the case.) That will not help them in the long run – even of helps them in the short run. Which at best is questionable.

The authors of this study have it right. As do some of the Conservative Movement’s brighter lights like Professor Jack Wertheimer and Rabbi Daniel Gordis. It isn’t about making your denomination more attractive – or user friendly – or easier to observe. Orthodox Jew are not observant because Orthodoxy makes practicing Judaism easier. Adherence to Halacha makes it harder. And yet we are growing exponentially while other denominations are shrinking . And fast according to this latest analysis.

One might be perplexed at this phenomenon. It is counter intuitive at first blush. The harder something is to do, the less likely people will do it - one might think. But that is clearly not the case with Orthodox Jewry. We are observant - difficult though that may be. And we perpetuate our ideals generationally. We have been doing what these pollsters and the above-mentioned Conservative rabbis advocate for their own denomination. We educate our children Jewish – mostly through our educational system and by practicing what we preach. Our children are not only taught how to observe, but they see it in action in their homes by their parents. And generally speaking there is no better role model for a child than a parent.

As I often say about this subject when I talk about it, I take no joy in reporting these statistics or commenting on them. They are just the facts as laid out by professional pollsters and sociologists. Facts which I take note of and consider a serious problem not only for heterodox denominations but for all of Jewry. Losing Jews to assimilation and because of a low birth rate is not anything to celebrate. It is something to lament.

Outreach is one way we can deal with this problem. But it is a drop in the bucket. If current statistics tell us anything, the trend is that there will increasingly be more Jews dropping out of any semblance of Judaism than there are those dropping in. This should make us redouble our Kiruv efforts. But it will still not be enough to address the problem. I have no answers. Just reporting the sad facts.

A word of caution to our own Orthodox members. Along with our increasing numbers; larger families; and the trend away from educating our children in secular subjects - comes increasing numbers of our own dropouts (OTDs). While the majority of our children will remain loyal to our traditions and practices, the increasing number of those that don’t should alarm us.

The only way to at least reduce this trend among our own is to practice the ancient educational ideal that is as valid today as it was when it was recorded in Proverbs: Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko. We ought to rethink the ‘cookie cutter’ approach to Jewish education that dominates the Charedi world and educate each child according to his or her own talents and abilities. We need to reevaluate how subjects other than Torah study are treated. That will surely have a beneficial impact on us all and hopefully reduce the OTD rate significantly.

Learning, Money, and Good Looks - the Business of Shidduchim

A People Extremely Apart

Is it a Witch Hunt?

Can Religious Zionism Survive?

Why Rabbi Mazuz's Tirade Against Reform Judaism is Wrong

Trump’s Trip

Misguided Ideals - Opting Out of Orthodoxy

Jerusalem Day

The Elephant in the Room is Islam

Protecting the Vulnerable; Strengthening the Defenseless

Wise Guys - Not Wise Jews

A Warped Interpretation

Ruthie’s Conversion

Withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and Shavuos

Blaming the Victims

Shuvu - A Model for Maintsream Charedim

Conservative Judaism, Homosexuality, and Halacha

The Modesty Chase

The Next Watergate?

The Rate of Jewish Population Decline