Emes Ve-Emunah

Israeli MK, Rabbi Yisroel Eichler

I sometimes wonder if common sense died and went to heaven.

The issue at hand is whether reasonable requests for a seat change on an aircraft should be accommodated if possible. My answer to that (and a common sense answer) is, Yes! Of course it should. The question is, what is considered reasonable?

I think there is a common sense answer to that too. A passenger should be allowed to ask to have his or her seat changed for any legitimate reason. As long as it doesn’t inconvenience others it should be accommodated.

It happens all the time. Families that could not book seats together can ask if it would be possible to switch seats with another passenger if it doesn’t make any difference to them. Flight attendants do that all the time - when they can.

If it is done for religious reasons, that too is legitimate under the same guidelines. Even if the request is made by an individual whose religious requirements exceed the norms of the mainstream. We do not have to agree with the extremes of passengers requests in order to allow accommodation, if possible.

The problem occurs when they are refused. Most of the time if someone is refused a seat change it is for a good reason. It might be because no seat is available or because of time constraints – not willing to delay a flight while trying to find a willing passenger.

If a passenger is told ‘No’ – that should be the end of it. He needs to sit down. End of conversation.

What happened recently on an El Al flight is that four passengers who requested changing their seats so they would not have to sit next to a woman were denied and told to be seated. They refused to comply – delaying the flight for over an hour! And upsetting everybody on the flight including other religious passengers. Thereby making a huge Chilul HaShem!

Imagine how a secular Jew who has limited contact with observant Jews - never even have encountered a Chasidic looking Jew would feel about observant Judaism after witnessing and enduring this! Any thoughts they ever might have had about pursuing a more religious lifestyle would be dashed in an instant. If that isn’t a Chilul HaShem, I don’t know what is.

But those 4 extremists could not care less about what others thought of their behavior since in their minds they were creating a Kiddush HaShem by standing firm on their religious principles. I’m pretty sure they believed that God loved what they were doing. I’m also pretty sure that most of the rest of Orthodoxy does not see it their way.

El Al responded:

Following the incident and in light of intense public backlash, El Al CEO Gonen Usishkin said that in the future, any passenger who refuses seating “will be immediately removed from the flight.”

If I understand it correctly, I believe it is a reasonable reaction to what occurred. As long as they do not forbid a passenger from asking and allow the flight crew to use their discretion as to whether they can reasonable accommodate that passenger without inconveniencing others - they should be allowed to do that. What I believe El Al meant by ‘refuses seating’ is that once they are told ‘No’ they should sit down. If they refuse after that, they should indeed be removed. That is pure common sense.

But Charedi MK, Rabbi Yisroel Eichler had a different reaction:

(He) has threatened El Al with a consumer boycott should the airline remove ultra-Orthodox passengers unwilling to sit next to women from its flights, characterizing criticism of such passengers as “anti-Semitic” and “terrorism.”

United Torah Judaism MK Yisrael Eichler pushed back against the notion that the men’s behavior on the flight was illegitimate, saying Wednesday in the Knesset plenum that claims the women were in any way humiliated or excluded were “malicious… anti-Semitic libel.”

Eichler went on to threaten El Al with a massive boycott by his constituents should it make good on its vow.

“El Al shuttles hundreds of thousands of Haredi Jews every year,” he said. “The last thing I expect them to do is remove passengers who ask to change seats. I’m telling El Al that if you give in to the terrorism of Haredi-hating groups and remove a passenger who behaved properly and asked nicely to sit next to a man, we will remove hundreds of thousands of your passengers every year. Terror against terror.

Eichler went on to claim that flight attendants, often helpful in arranging new seating, were being intimidated into refusing such requests in a campaign of “fear-mongering and incitement.”

Once again, common sense has gone out the window. How he can say (or imply) that the behavior of the men that refused to be seated until they were accommodated was legitimate?!

I do not believe it was El Al’s intent to discriminate against religious passengers – even when they make religious request that go beyond the requirements of mainstream Orthodoxy. What they want (I think) is to make sure that the rest of the passengers are not inconvenienced because of them. Calling that antisemitic misses the whole point.

Rejecting the inconveniencing others by insisting on accommodating your own needs is something Rabbi Eichler should have easily agreed with. And yet he makes no mention of that and seems to be worried only about the rights of religious passengers no matter how much others are inconvenienced.

Is there any wonder why there is so much hatred of Charedim by so many secular Israelis? Isn’t generating hatred of observant Judaism the biggest Chilul HaShem of all?

Instead of calling for a boycott, he should be calling for the reasonable accommodation of all passenger requests - as long no passengers are inconvenienced - trusting the flight attendants to determine that. And that behavior like that of those four men never be allowed to happen again. That’s just plain old fashioned common sense. And that’s what is missing.

Beitar children - 60-70% of their families are tens of thousands of shekels in debt

Is ignorance really bliss? Is it true that what people don’t know may not actually hurt them? Those 2 cliché based questions may be actually be truer than I thought. I have always believed that knowledge is power. The more you know the better off you are.

But if one reads Jonathan Rosenblum’s column in Mishpacha Magazine this week, one might answer yes to both questions. At least as far as the Charedim in Israel are concerned, ignorance about how poor they actually are is in part why they seem so satisfied with their financial state. That was made clear at the annual conference the Haredi Institute for Public Affairs attended by Jonathan. How poor are they? From Jonathan’s column:

Poverty remains endemic in the chareidi community. The percentage of households living in poverty (defined as an average income per family member of less than half the national median) is 52% versus 8.7% for the non-chareidi Jewish population, according to government statistics. And the depth of the poverty is deeper in chareidi households, meaning that poor chareidi households are on average farther under the poverty line...

Fifteen percent of chareidim have had to forgo food at some point in the last year, and 28% of households experience some degree of food insecurity…

(An) estimated… 60–70% of families who live in Beitar, a chareidi Jerusalem suburb, have accumulated debts in the tens of thousands of shekels…

Chareidim are more likely to have forgone medical treatment due to financial considerations — 13% versus 8% — and dental care — 53% to 32%. Chareidi women over 40 are only two-thirds as likely to have had mammograms as women in the general Jewish population, and chareidi families are only about half as likely to have private medical insurance — 27% versus 51% in the general population.

Despite all of this only 7.7% consider themselves poor. And 71% are happy with their financial situation. And they have greater longevity despite their not being able to afford good health care.

Jonathan speculates why this is the case. A lot of it has to do with living in a community where everyone is in the same boat. If everyone is poor, then that is the norm. They don’t realize how poor they are. Their lifestyles include living extremely frugally because that is what everyone does. Same thing borrowing from all the Gemachim (free loan societies). Maxing out credit cards is a way of life. They are constantly in debt. They are Sameach B'Chelko - Happy with their lot.

Although I agree that being happy with what one has is important to one’s overall well being, what is happening to the Charedi world in Israel is a bit more complicated than that. It is not a prescription for a stable community. It is one thing to be happy with a modest income that allows one to support a family in a modest lifestyle. That is a laudable trait that all of us should have. But borrowing from one Gemach to pay another - means that they are always in debt.

Maxing out credit cards will end up getting them into financial trouble – including having their credit cards canceled. (There goes that source if income!) Then there are the 15% who have to forgo buying food and the 28% who have some sort of food anxiety. They cannot possibly be happy with their lot. Even if they always have a pleasant countenance and attitude in public.

The fact that the average Charedi seems to live longer than non Charedim is only half the story. Because their inability to afford proper heath care means that some of them will get sick and even die unnecessarily. That is not a positive situation.

I wonder how happy they really are in the long run considering all of the above? They may start out that way. But is it sustainable – even though everyone there is in the same boat and they don’t look at what others have? I think it might be an artificial happiness that is generated by their common predicament. It enables many of them to be able to survive in relative calm. But for how long?

On the bright side, there is this:

The official rate of male employment has shot up from 37% in 2004 to 52% today. Given the rapid growth of the community in that period, these numbers represent many tens of thousands of chareidi men entering the workforce.

But that still leaves a whopping 48% of the Charedi population that lives in poverty. A poverty that could be eliminated in a generation if only they would stop encouraging all of their men to learn Torah full time for as long as possible no matter what their capablity for that is - and no matter what other talents they may have. This is facilitated by eliminating the study of anything other than Torah. Which leaves then unprepared for the workforce that a majority of them opt for at some point.

Meanwhile Charedi women are educated and encouraged to get jobs and support their husbands . All while fulfilling their traditional roles as wives and mothers.

I’m glad that there has been a surge in working Charedim since 2004. And that a variety of training programs have arisen to enable them to meet the challenge of a workplace they had no clue about.

But that leaves out those who are unable to take advantage of it. They would have benefited by a secular education given to them along with their religious education in elementary school and high school.

Will the current happiness bubble burst when the financial realities come home to roost? Or when they realize that a disease a loved one had was preventable with the better health care they couldn't afford? I don’t know. What I do know is that they didn’t need to that poor to begin with.

If only the Charedi leadership would start treating their people like individuals each with their own strengths. Which should be pursued instead of convincing everyone to ignore those strengths in favor of learning Torah full time. That would make their lives better with a happiness that would be more realistic and more sustainable.

Image from Project Inspire

Kiruv. That is the term used by Orthodox Jews involved in trying to reach out to non observant Jews to help them become observant. This is based on a biblical command of Arvus. All Jews are responsible for one another. And since we believe that all Jews are required to follow God’s will as outlined in the Torah and interpreted by our sages throughout the generations, we would be remiss if we ignored them.

I belong to a Facebook group where OTDs and observant Jews dialogue. One of the observant participants there asked a question about how OTDs would feel about Kiruv. I started to think about that. The following includes some of my thoughts about 2 very distinct types of Kiruv. One is towards those that were never observant. The other towards those that once were - but no longer are.

In our day, most non observant Jews are not observant through no fault of their own. It is mostly out of sheer ignorance. Educating such Jews will sometimes generate a willingness to try observance out at some level. On the other hand most such Jews probably won’t - simply because they have been raised to see nothing wrong with their non observant lifestyle and are quite content to live they way they were raised. Which in our day has become slippery slope out of Judaism altogether.

It is also true that even for those non observant who are serious about their Judaism, it is difficult to change a lifestyle of complete freedom to one of many restrictions.

In some cases non observant Jews have been so strongly indoctrinated to believe in a Judaism that has been reformed for purposes of assimilating into the modern world, they will resent Kiruv. Once you reject any semblance of a particular Jewish identity and substitute an amorphous ideal like Tikun Olam - you have in effect rejected Judaism entirely.

Tikun Olam can apply to any human being that cares about others. Not just Jews. Why then why bother with the label ‘Jew’? Who cares about that when all that matters is social justice? This is the sad reality infecting an increasing number of the 90% of American Jews that are not Orthodox.

Be that as it may, that is what Kiruv is mostly about. The question is how do we go about it? How do we reach out to non observant Jews most of whom are ignorant of their heritage - giving them a chance to know what Judaism is really all about?

And what about a Shana U’ Pireish – someone that was raised to be observant but went of the path of observance - most commonly referred as OTD the acronym for Off the Derech? Derech is Hebrew for path. (I use the term OTD only as an easy way to identify them. Not because I particularly like the term and understand why they don’t.)

Reaching out to those with no background is what the vast majority of Kiruv groups do. Chabad and NCSY being 2 of the more successful among them although by far not the only successful ones. I am not personally involved with any Kiruv group. But I have seen them at ‘work’. The best way I can sum up their successes is in how they present the ‘product’ - observant Judaism.

The basic component of success is to focus on the positive side of observance - avoiding completely the ‘fire and brimstone’ approach. To show the beauty of living an observant lifestyle that by virtue of that observance. Where family values are stressed. For example by emphasizing the Mitzvah of getting married and having children – and the fact that family time is enhanced by the most identifiably observant Mitzvah in all of Judaism: Shmiras Shabbos (Sabbath observance).

Perhaps of greater importance is to become a role model. I believe that is the best way to promote an observant lifestyle. The idea is that if people like you and like what you’re ’selling’ they will want to be like you and want to buy your product. What about the ideology behind observance? That comes later.

While this is a bit of an oversimplification, I believe this is in essence how Kiruv works best. I should add that this is all done at a pace consistent with the ability for each individual to change his or her habits. In most cases this means incrementalism. Doing it all at once can and often does end with not doing it at all. New observance is best when initiated by the individual themselves and not by the person doing the outreach. One Mitzvah at a time done in the most lenient method possible.

But what about Kiruv for those who have gone OTD? Is that even possible? The fact is that most Jews who have gone OTD resent the term. They do not consider themselves to have gone of the right path. They have just chosen different path. One which to them is more legitimate than the one they left.

How do we convince them that they have made a mistake? They will surely say that we are the ones that are mistaken in our observance! Frankly, I’m not sure there is a good way to answer that question. The things that you are trying to convince them to do, they have done and rejected.

Let me suggest however that not all of them are lost to Judaism forever. A lot depends on why they left in the first place. And there are probably as many reasons or combinations of reasons as there are Jews that went OTD. I don’t think any of those reasons can’t be challenged. But some are more difficult to challange than others.

The hardest reason to disabuse OTD Jews of is when they question the very existence of God - the so called weak-atheist or agnostic. Not that it is impossible to reach out to them. But is extremely difficult.

Then there are those that may believe in God but question the truth of the Torah by virtue of its contradictions with science. And/or various disciplines that offer alternative explanations of the bible which are unacceptable to Judaism. Those too are difficult (but also not impossible) to reach out to because of the evidence they find which supports their doubts.

I believe that the vast majority of OTDs are those that have left for emotional reasons. In some cases they also become aware of those contradictions and/or alternative explanations making it difficult to reach out to them as well. Again, this doesn’t mean we should try. But I admit it is a very steep uphill road to climb – and beyond the scope of this post.

That leaves those who have left for emotional reasons mostly having to do with some sort of abuse, be it mental, physical, or sexual. Whether in the home or in school or by peers (as in the case of bullying). They have become so disillusioned by the pain and suffering they have experienced that they have stopped believing in a religion that would allow them to be treated this way.

We all know of tragedies that have happened to these kinds of OTDs. It ranges from turning towards a destructive life style (of sex, alcohol, and/or drugs) to suicide in some cases.

How do we reach out to them? I wish I had the perfect formula for that. Or any formula at all. I don’t. I will however suggest that they can reasonably be reached. It takes a lot of effort. And perhaps more importantly a lot of training in the field of mental health. And some overcome the trauma that led them to go OTD and eventually lead normal productive lives without being observant at all.

I think the key ingredient in reaching out to OTDs is to not be judgmental. To befriend and accept the individual for who he is now. And respect his views no matter how much you disagree with those views. Even if he is not observant at all. To be sympathetic to his issues. To not preach at them at all but instead to be a role model - demonstrating in a passive way that an observant religious lifestyle is still the best option for a Jew to live by… the best path to a meaningful and fulfilling life.

You may not succeed, but what have you got to lose versus what you will gain in fulfilling the Mitzvah of Arvus?

Just some of my thoughts.

By ‘Just a Guest’

Image for illustration purposes only (Forward)

As a followup to yesterday’s post I received the following submission from a prominent Charedi Rav who is knowledgeable on the subject of Kiruv. And who has experience in dealing with many individuals that were once observant and no longer are. He has posted here before and as always asked to remain anonymous – this time using the alias ‘Just a Guest’. I am happy to oblige. His words follow.

Time to weigh in. I agree with your points, and want to add a few. We are dealing with a discussion comparing and contrasting three phenomena, in an effort to understand the process better.

1. Non-observant from birth. Kiruv via the traditional kiruv movement.

2. Non-observant from birth. Kiruv via Chabad.

3. Frum from birth, now OTD.

Recognizing that the definitions here involve considerable generalization, let’s approach the subject. No one can be exact, but a shot at this may be informative.

Category #1 are involved in seeking something spiritual. They may be drawn by a family history, by exposure, by exploration, etc. They seek out the kiruv professional, who has probably engaged in some sort of marketing effort to insure that his activities and services are available. There are many venues for this, some by direct interaction, others online, etc.

Category #2 often does not involve the individual seeking anything. Chabad is far more proactive, and seldom wait for customers. They put themselves everywhere, and offer their services to anyone they find. Without moving into analysis how these two categories differ, they certainly disparate populations. We can each look at this and draw hypotheses about these distinctions.

Category #3 is very different. These individuals have been within the frum, observant community, and are somehow on the exit, not interested in entry at all. Offering them the intellectual material that can be enticing to those of Categories 1 & 2 is futile. They already know that. They are on the escape, not thirsting for information or understanding.

Countless efforts to find blame for this grace the pages of publications and websites. I personally find most of the theories way to shallow to be meaningful. They lack accuracy, and are based on conjecture, not experience or observation.

I have my own theory, and I have yet to find it disproven. Unanswered questions, yes. But not disproven.

I believe that every single OTD kid is escaping from a lifestyle because of rejection. This can occur in many ways, and I surmise that no two kids are the same. Rejection occurs in the home, the community, and the yeshiva/school. This carries a strong and specific message to all. Disagree, educate, raise your children. But NEVER reject them.

That’s tough when we, as the adults in the community, are obsessed with discipline. Listening to any parent, rebbe, or teacher interact with a child who is being a kid, we hear persistent threats of punishment, withholding of privileges, and far too often to stomach – shaming.

These all risk negative reactions. Even Shlomo Hamelech referred to discipline as a last resort, never a regular tool. A Gadol once quipped that the children who emerge from our system unscathed are the ones who did so despite the system. The system was busy with others and just didn’t get to them. Not sure I agree, but I hear his point.

Lastly, the approaches to OTD – Kiruv Kerovim and the non-observant – Kiruv Rechokim are almost diametrical opposites. This has been discussed in open forums at various conventions.

R' Chaim Kanievsky (VIN)

Once upon a time - I would have never thought it possible. There was a time where I actually thought that the religious Jewish world was united on virtually every issue. I believed that the Torah was seen by all observant Jews in the same way. But I have long ago been disabused of that notion (I was young and naïve.)

Different ideologies have developed over time based on how religious leaders view that same Torah. Which means different reactions to situations arising that challenge those Torah values. Ideologies are therefore a sure way of creating further divisions in Israel. (Not the country – the people.) Israel’s creation as a state in the modern era is a case in point. Whether to support or even recognize the state is one big challenge.

Even for those that recognize the state at some level, how to deal with religious issues arising in that state is another challenge where differing ideologies make a difference. One of the hottest issues being debated in Israel today is legislation dealing with the drafting Yeshiva students into the Israeli army, the IDF.

First a little bit of history about the religious parties in Israel. (My apologies in advance for the inaccuracies about details or timing – but I think the basic history is more or less accurate).

There was actually a time around the founding of the state where Charedim and Religious Zionists actually wanted to combine as one religious party. There was even a document signed by prominent Rabbonim of both sides endorsing a the new Zionist State. It included signatures of highly respected Charedi figures such as R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach.

That lasted about 5 minutes on the history clock - since the most respected Gadol of the time, the Chazon Ish rejected the idea of joining the Zionist government in any way. What happened then was that two parties were born. One was the National Religious Party (NRP) of religious Zionists (known as Mizrachi in the US). They heartily endorsed the State of Israel and its government. The other one was the Charedi Agudah party - whose mission was solely to protect the rights of religious Jews without endorsing the government in any way. The NRP was by far the larger of the two parties for quite sometime. It now no longer exists although there are parties that are seen as their ideological heirs on both the right and the left.

Early on Agudah had a break away party called Poalei Agudat Yisroel. They were Charedi but much more inclined to work the land as did the NRP. (It was kind of a cross between the Agudah and the Mizrachi). They no longer exist either.

Then there was a further split in the Charedi parties. The Chasidic factions disagreed with some of the decisions of the Lithuanian leadership. Two parties were created: Degel HaTorah - based on the Lithanian Yeshiva Hashkafos and Agudat Yisroel based on the Chasidic Hashkafos.

There was a reconciliation of sorts not long after the split - since there was so much overlap in the agendas of both. They operate under the banner of one political party called United Torah Judaism (UTJ). But the two factions seek counsel from different rabbinic leaders on government policy issues that impact the Charedi world.

Somewhere along the way Sephardic leaders decided they were under-represented in UTJ and decided to form their own party – Shas. The nature of the Sephardi community is that there are no denominations or divisions between observant and non observant Jews. Shas therefore had the support of virtually the entire Sephardi community. Making them the largest religious party in Israel. Its spiritual head was one of the last generation’s Gedolei HaDor, R’ Ovadia Yosef. He was the one that guided all of their policy decisions and was never disputed by any Sephardi individual whether observant or not.

Back to UTJ. A new split was underway based on the issue new laws with resoct to drafting Yeshiva students. It was a virtual war between the peaceful and pragmatic Gadol, R’Aharon Leib Steinman; and the uncompromising R’ Shmuel Auerbach.

The former believing that as long as Charedi students were allowed to continue studying in Yeshivios, they should follow the new law and register for the draft.

The latter did not let pragmatism and peace get in the way of his ideology of rejecting the draft in its entirety - refusing to register Yeshiva students for the draft even under penalty of prison time! That generated another break away party called Peleg. This has caused major discord in the Lithuanian Yeshiva world. Sometimes resulting in violent confrontation in the street between adherents of both factions

Now that both of these religious figures have passed on, the debate has not gone away or even softened. It is still being carried on as new proposals of a draft law are on the table. Proposals that are more challenging to the Charedi world than with previous versions of the draft law. R’ Chaim Kanievsky (who is seen as the by the mainstream Yeshiva world as the current Charedi leader after R’ Steinman’s passing) has weighed in. As have other rabbinic leaders in of the Yeshiva world. From the Jerusalem Post (and VIN):

Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky, told senior United Torah Judaism MK Moshe Gafni on Sunday that the recently proposed bill for haredi enlistment is acceptable and can be advanced through the Knesset.

The Jerusalem Post has learned that the rabbi described the bill as “the lesser of two evils,” that Degel Hatorah MKs – forming half of the UTJ Knesset faction – should not go to war over the legislation, and that it could be supported in general.

Gafni met with several other leading haredi rabbis on Sunday morning to discuss the issue, including Rabbi Gershon Edelstein, Rabbi Moshe Hillel Hirsch, Rabbi Baruch Mordechai Ezrahi and Rabbi Baruch Dov Povarsky.

The decision is highly significant since the bill includes financial sanctions from the state’s budget against haredi yeshivas if enlistment targets are not met, meaning that Kanievsky and the other rabbis have ostensibly given consent to the notion that there can be negative consequences if haredi men do not enlist to the IDF.

Kanievsky’s approval comes following opposition expressed to the bill on Thursday by the Council of Torah Sages of Agudat Yisrael, the hassidic half of UTJ.

The grand rabbis of the hassidic groups which make up Agudat Yisrael said that their MKs should quit the coalition if the bill is passed by the Knesset, although they seemingly left room for changes to be made to the legislation.

The Post article says that they are trying to iron out differences. But I have read recently (no longer recall the source) that those differences are irreconcilable. It appears that UTJ will once again split into 2 distinct parties as before. One for Lithuanian Yeshiva type Charedim and one for Chasidic Charedim.

All of this makes me wonder whether the growth of the Charedi world is being countered by the ideological differences that is causing them to break apart. How many times can a community divide itself before it becomes insignificant? Even as its constituent communities continue to multiply faster than any other Jewish demographic in Israel - will that growth outweigh the divisiveness? Or will the divisiveness outweigh the demographic growth? Time will tell.

The rabbis of the Council of the Chief Rabbinate. (Jerusalem Post)

I have never been reticent to criticize the Charedi world when I believe it is warranted. That has earned me continuous accusations of being a Charedi basher by certain people. I am not. But my constant denials fall on deaf ears all the time because of the frequency of posts criticizing them.

I mention this not to offer yet another explanation or defense of my criticism. It hasn’t helped till now and it won’t help in the future. I mention it, only to put into context what I am sure will be an unpopular view of what I am about to say. Especially to those that wrongly celebrate my criticism of Charedim.

Rabbi Shlomo Riskin has written an oped in the Jerusalem Post that I can best describe as an unfair and biased attack against the Chief Rabbaniate and the Charedi community in Israel. While his description of why there is a lack of popular support for the Rabbinate might be true, that does not mean that the Rabbinate is wrong in their decisions. And although he doesn’t say so outright - the subtext of his op-ed is that they are a selfish organization interested only in retaining and expanding their power for no other purpose than their own self interest.

Rabbi Riskin notes that the chief rabbinate has been taken over by the Charedi leadership. This is in essence true.That has resulted in what many – even religious Jews - see as a heavy handed and overly stringent rule over religious matters. Which, he says was not the case when the Religious Zionist rabbis controlled it.

Although I sympathize with his concerns, I must object to his characterization of the Chief Rabbinate and Charedi leaders. I do not see them as a self aggrandizing group of people on some sort of power trip. On the contrary. I truly believe that they act on what they believe is in the best interests of Klal Yisroel – the people of Israel. Despite the fact that some of their recent pronouncements have been very unpopular.

These are the issues Rabbi Riskin has problems with: The Chief Rabbinate monopoly over Kosher certification; and their full control of personal status issues such as marriage, divorce, conversions and Agunos (women whose husbands refuse to give them a Get – a Halachic divorce). He says that the rabbinate has been unnecessarily strict on these issues causing much pain to people seeking their help to resolve these matters. He then goes about demonstrating it.

The problem he cites with respect to poor Kosher supervision is something that should surely be addressed and thoroughly investigated by independent experts. And they should not have ties to either the rabbinate or their newly minted competition. Their recommendations for improving Kosher supervision should be followed. Be that as it may, my main concern is Rabbinate control over personal status issues. Rabbi Riskin’s characterization of the rabbinate in this area is unfair. Let me just take one issue to demonstrate why.

The Halachos that makes a woman an Agunah (as defined in our day) is one of the most difficult things to understand in Judaism. Briefly, a woman can only be divorced if her husband gives her a Get (a religious divorce document). If he refuses, she cannot give her husband a Get. She may not get remarried without committing biblical level adultery. She is stuck. There is no way out of the marriage that she has any control over.

A man on the other can find a way to get remarried while still married to his first wife. Although it’s complicated it’s possible and has happened.

Meanwhile rabbis have been trying for centuries to find ways to convince the recalcitrant husband to give his wife a Get. But at the end of the day, it’s is still up to him. If he refuses – his wife remains an Agunah. There are Halachic devices that have been used in the past to help these women out of their predicament. But using them now is at best controversial and rare.

A non Rabbinate court in Haifa recently applied such a Halachic device to free an Agunah. The Rabbinate rejected it. Did they do this to be mean? Did they do it only to assert control over this issue? I do not believe that for a minute. That would make them beyond cruel. They are not.

They do not want to hurt Agunos. They actually believe that the method used by that court to free her might be illegitimate leaving her technically still married. Which means that if she re-marries she might be committing adultery. And that any children of that marriage would be Mamzerim.

They simply want to prevent that by being strict. That there are lenient opinions about what that court did does not make it OK – just because of the terrible state she –as an Agunah - is in.

Rabbi Riskin said they are not choosing the pleasant ways of the Torah by being so stringent. But the Rabbinate might respond by saying that by being strict they are being kind. They are preventing a situation that would cause a lifetime of hardship for their offspring. A leniency that might not be legitimate would end up being quite cruel.

Who is being more caring? The court that allows a woman to commit possible adultery or the court that tries to prevent it?

I am not here to impugn the motives of the court that tried to free an Agunah by those means. I’m 100% convinced that their intentions were to help her out of an impossible situation. I am here to defend the motives of the Rabbinate. And reject the notion that this is all about power and control.

The Rabbinate does not want to be cruel to Agunos. They do not want to prevent legitimate conversions. They do not want to monopolize Kosher certification as a matter of asserting their control for purposes of retaining unbridled power. They believe they are doing the right thing – despite it having negative consequences in some cases.

That popular opinion goes against the Rabbinate now should not matter to anyone. Judaism is not a popularity contest. Halacha cannot automatically follow the lenient path because of convenience or politics. It ought to be considered in the ideal. Which is to find out and follow the path that God wants His people to follow – wherever it may lead.

MK Yinon Azoulay speaking fro the Knesset podium (TOI)

There are few things that upset me more than people who think they can read God’s mind when there is an agenda attached. Even if it is one that I might support or at least understand if not fully support.

It happened again. This time by Shas Knesset member (MK) Yinon Azoulay. From the Times of Israel:

Lashing out at Reform and Conservative Jews, an ultra-Orthodox lawmaker said Wednesday that a minor earthquake in the north of the country may have been caused by their ongoing efforts to build a pluralistic prayer area at the Western Wall.

“Today we heard there was some sort of earthquake,” Shas party MK Yinon Azoulay told the Knesset plenum during a debate over the prayer area. “Perhaps we should consider that this earthquake was because someone is trying to get at what is holy to us.”

Adding insult to injury he has added his voice to those who made the outrageous claim that Reform and Conservative Jews – are not even Jews.

I do not suffer fools gladly. (Yes, I know the origins of this phrase – but it fits.) MK Azoulay has decided to open his mouth and confirm his what we might have otherwise just speculated about.

First of all the vast majority of Conservative Jews are Jewish. And I dare say that the vast majority of Reform Jews still are Jewish. (Although that may change in a generation or two for reasons beyond the scope of this post). What is true, however is that their movements are not legitimate by Orthodox standards. And the vast majority of them are for the most part - not observant.

That is the reason that I agree in principle that they should not be allowed to pray at the Kotel in non Halachic ways. I hasten to add that every Jew, indeed every human being should be allowed to pray at the Kotel. Provided they respect traditions that have been established and have been in place there for decades. This is in fact how the Kotel operates. Which is why the Pope was able to pray there with the full cooperation of the Orthodox rabbi charge.

Allowing Jews to pray as they wish in non Halachic ways is at the very least distracting if not upsetting to those who come there to pray in traditional Halachic ways.

The sad fact is that most non observant Jews in America don’t even visit the Kotel to pray there. They see it as a tourist attraction – an archaeological remnant of ancient Jewish history. The only people agitating for non Halachic prayer there are Conservative and Reform rabbis and some of the more left wing modern Orthodox rabbis.

And even they would have to admit that the vast majority of non observant Jews that are in any way affiliated with Conservative and Reform Judaism have never even been to Israel, let alone the Kotel. And even of those that have - most (as noted) saw it as a tourist attraction. The space already dedicated to non Halachic prayer remains virtually empty most of the time. How many times have I seen images from there showing it to be vacant on days where the Kotel is packed (like on Tisha B’Av)?!

The desire for a non Halachic prayer space at the Kotel is a thinly disguised attempt by Conservative and Reform leaders at getting official recognition. All their screaming and shouting about it is for purposes of getting support from their non observant members - casting their quest in terms of pluralism being denied. Making it sound like non Orthodox Jews are being denied the right to pray at the Kotel. Which - as noted - is a huge lie.

That said, I have nevertheless been supportive of a compromise that would give them a piece of the Kotel removed far enough away from the traditional site so that it would not be disruptive to those praying there in traditional ways. I support it because it would end the anger and divisiveness as well as the the angry protests and counter protests that are equally upsetting if not more so. That compromise has been delayed due to disputes over the details (also beyond the scope of this post) which are unacceptable to Orthodox legislators.

But none of the Orthodox legislators that I am aware of have made the kind of foolish statement MK Azoula did - suggestion that an earthquake that happened in the northern regions of Israel is a message from God. A message warning us that He is upset at Reform and Conservative Jews (and others that support their agenda) and wants us to prevent any attempt at giving those movements their own space at the Kotel.

Well... if he wants to play the game of trying to figure out the Godly message to us about a natural disaster let us see some of the other sins God might be addressing.

As in the number of sex abuse victims that have resulted from a culture of denial and cover-up still happening in some cases.

Or the advocacy of a way of life in certain Orthodox circles that has caused the vast majority to rely on government financial assistance making it ripe for committing fraud.

Or the number of Orhtodox Jews that have already been indicted and/or convicted of fraud.

Or the the creation of a cookie cutter school system that leaves far too many students falling through the cracks – which contributes to the increasing number of OTDs.

Or the increased incidence of divorce.

Or the increased number of suicides.

Or maybe even to warn us about people assuming to suggest Godly messages based on a particular agenda.

Maybe it’s God Himself that does not suffer fools gladly. Maybe that is what Azoulay should have thought before he opened his mouth.

Voter in Kiryas Joel casting ballot in 2010 (Ha'aretz)

Frimet Goldberger is an unusual expatriate Chasid. (Chasidah?) She left her former community of Satmar’s Kiryas Joel but has remained observant. Why she did that is irrelevant to the post. I mention it only to show that those who accuse expatriate Chasidm of having an anti religious agenda cannot say that bout her.

They do however say that about Naftuli Moster. They claim his efforts towards implementing a secular curriculum is done with an ulterior motive. One whose agenda is far a more nefarious anti religious vendetta attempting to ultimately destroy it.

I have seen no evidence of that. Nor do I even know whether he is still observant or not. Accusations about that come from people within his former community that say they know him. Hard to know whether they have any credibility about him since they endorse their current educational system, thereby opposing efforts to change it. But Frimet is observant. This is what she claims and no one has challenged her on this. (If I remember correctly she is modern Orthodox now.) I believe her criticism comes from the heart.

So now we have an observant former insider with family still living there - with warm feelings about it telling it like it is in an oped in Ha’aretz. Chasidim educated in places like Kiryas Joel are so illiterate that they can barely read a sentence in English. She is not the first one to make this claim nor will she be the last (unless things change).

Her op-ed was written as a response to Rabbi Avi Shafran’s own op-ed in Ha’aretz. Therein he defended the right of Chasidic enclaves to educate their children as they see fit. That we need not pity them even though they do not educate their children in anything but religious studies. That they do quite well without it.

Rabbi Shafran says that as an adherent of Torah Im Derech Ertetz, he would never educate his children in a school like that. But that - he says - doesn’t mean that they don’t have the right to educate their children that way. He then goes on to show that they live their religious values quite successfully and happily. They live financial modest lives and don’t measure success in terms of successful careers or money. Most have decent jobs mostly in the trades and not in the professions. For which they can find training when they need it. Is he right? More about that later.

I thought Frimet’s response to Rabbi Shafran was unnecessarily harsh. But her challenge to him resonated with me:

If this is what Rabbi Shafran believes in, how then does he justify his support of denying children a basic education?

There is no fine line to toe here, rabbi. You either believe that children should be kept cloistered or that, like you’ve done with your own, they deserve to be educated in the language and workings of the land they live in.

Rabbi Shafran might say that it isn’t about what he thinks is objectively right. It is about freedom to choose the education parents see fit for their children even if it is not something that one personally believes in. As long as they are happy; do not become a burden on society; and their educational choices have no ill effects on them or their future.

I agree that they seem to lead happy well adjusted lives. Frimet decribes the positive image she saw on a recent visit to her old community on Purim:

The streets were teeming with costumed children - clowns and cops, fancy ladies and doctors - and music blasted from loudspeakers. On that day, every year, the village turns into a festive, boisterous, almost-anything-goes circus; it’s a boozed-up Halloween of sorts.

Inside my parents’ home, crispy homemade challah was passed around on platters, then dipped into gelatin fish sauce and stuffed cabbage, followed by a bountiful spread of fish, kugels, elongated deli sandwiches, every kind of sweet and savory puffed-pastry turnover one could concoct, and enough wine and hamantaschen for days. The men danced around the table with a buoyant fervor, and the women gave the obligatory oohs and aahs for the children’s costumes.

Is Rabbi Shafran right? Perhaps he has a point. But I still disagree with him and communictaed that to him privately. Ironically it was very similar to Frimet’s response:

I have to disagree with you here. It isn't only about jobs... or the number of wealthy Chasidim that support the poor. It is about the total lack of - in fact opposition to - even the ability to write or even speak English properly - thereby severely limiting their opportunities in the job market.

The skills they learn in Limudei Kodesh are limited not sufficient - leaving out many of the study tools required in a secular educational environment like a college.

The few doctors and other professionals found among some Chasidic communities are not from environments like New square or Kiryas Joel or Williamsburg. Those Chasidim have probably attended one of the more mainstream Yeshivos like TvD (Torah VoDaath).

The programs you mention like COPE do offer training to these Chasidim. But how many actually take advantage of them? Most of these Chasidim have menial jobs with meager incomes that fall far short of their need to feed their large families. I have heard that a lot of these types of Chasidim quietly complain about not being given any secular studies but refrain from doing so publicly for fear of the repercussion.

And you can't dismiss the statistics that say that something like 77% of (..I think it was Kiryas Joel or Williamsburg) is on welfare - which lends itself to fraud (e.g. hiding income in order to qualify.)

You may be right about a community that chooses to remain isolated and ignorant about the world having the right to do that. But when it involves public funding and the possibility of fraud and Chilul HaShem, I think it trying to get them to offer a secular curriculum similar to most mainstream yeshivas in America is goal worth pursuing.

I have been critical of those that have tried to undermine attempts to improve the lives of my fellow Jews in Kiryas Joel. Defending the rights of people to choose ignorance may be wonderful for the first amendment. But it may not be so wonderful for the people choosing it. Are you really helping them by defending that right? Is ignorance really bliss?

And how far does this ignorance go? I saw this in a Facebook forum which dialogues between religious and OTD Jews. I realize the social media is notorious for ‘fake news’. But I trust the person who posted this:

A question to anyone brought up Chassidic: In an article I read today, someone said that in his Chassidic community (in Canada) kids were taught that secular Israelis cut up Sifrei Toah to make sandals. In addition, any mitza that a dati leumi person might do will leak out of the holes in his kippa srugah.

I can’t help but wonder whether this is an attitude that those children learn and then believe. Even if it isn't directly taught as in that excerpt. Even as they might deny it publicly. I don’t know, but I hope not. Because if it is, their Chinuch is far worse that I could have ever imagined. If true, is this what their defenders believe is worth defending?

Let me make one thing perfectly clear. I have no problem with any religious lifestyle that any Jew might choose. I have no particular animus toward Chasidism even though I believe in a different Hashkafa. My motives are based purely on improving the welfare of fellow Jews. That is it! I have no reason to otherwise change the lifestyles they choose.

The look of street gangs in Jerusalem (Ynet)

What is the matter with these people?! I know we’ve seen this many times before in a variety of different incarnations. But it still upsets me every time it happens.

Once again we have protesters spitting on and otherwise harassing people they don’t agree with. I don’t know if it is the same one doing it each time. But this has been going on for years. And it is almost always done by youth. Which indicates to me that there is a culture in Meah Shearim that promotes this kind of evil.

The question is, how wide is the support for this kind of thing? And how much of it is supported by their rabbinic leadership (e.g. the Eida HaCharedis). My guess is that those numbers are pretty big. And the Eida is not all that outraged by it. Because if that were the case there would have by now been some counter protests. Or at least one. I don’t recall anyone ever counter-protesting it. At least not from the Meah Shearim crowd.

From the leadership we have at best seen only tepid apologetic responses amounting to, ‘We disagree with their methods but agree with their goals’. Or... ‘These are the delinquents of our society and don’t judge us all by them’. Or... ‘They are just a tiny minority’.

Sorry. That doesn’t cut it. It happens too often to be responded to that way. Their leaders either support it clandestinely – or are they are the most inept leaders in the Torah world.

There is NEVER any excuse for this kind of behavior. To say it is uncivilized is an understatement. No innocent human being should ever be subjected to what this Charedi family was. Non Jews; Secular Jews; Religious Zionist Jews; or Charedi Jews. NEVER! None of that matters to these people as Tali Farkash reports in Ynet:

A Haredi family participating in a graduation ceremony was attacked Monday evening after leaving the Strauss Campus, the academic arm of the Hadassah Academic College for Haredi students, situated in the heart of Jerusalem's Haredi neighborhoods.

Protesters in the Mea Shearim neighborhood spat on, pushed and chased the family as they left the ceremony, after earlier one of them burst into the hall where the ceremony was taking place and disrupted proceedings.

David Ben Naim, one of the ceremony's attendees, told Ynet, "An extremist entered and started screaming that academia is bad and tried shutting the thing down. The college's people removed him and locked the doors.

"We thought it ended with that, but when the ceremony was over and we went outside, we found about 60 people standing there and shouting, with the police holding them back from getting into the hall."

"For some reason, they decided we were the event's organizers and the entire group just started chasing us and screaming,"

Protesters chased Ben Naim's entire family, including his mother...

Ben Naim… (in) describing the evening's events... wrote, "I was attacked, humiliated, swore at and received bone-chilling wishes...

"People who clearly had sons my age stood there, and wished me things I'm horrified to even repeat. An older man approached my father and told him, 'You wicked man, you'll be accompanying your son (on his funeral)…' God forbid! A puissant 14-year-old boy called out derogatory remarks to my father, who's 60."

Ben Naim said he and his family were called "Hitler" and "Nazis" by the rioters, but that those were "peanuts. These harsh words were uttered by people calling themselves Haredim...

There are no words. Although I tend to believe that these people are something other than just street gangs, let us for argument’s sake say that is what they are. Street gangs that are equivalent of the street gangs of New York or Chicago. Where is the outrage?! Why does the leadership do little more than give tepid responses?

Why aren't these gangs expelled from Meah Shearim?! Why are they allowed to masquerade as members of their society?! How can the leadership not fully cooperate with the police?! Why hasn’t at least one counter protest ever taken place by Meah-Shearimites together with their leaders?!

Enough with the lip service. Enough with ‘there is nothing we can do about it’. Enough with every community has its delinquents and gangs.

How many more times will this be allowed to happen? My guess is - it will never end. I’ve quoted Edmund Burke before. But I think it applies here as much as it ever has: ‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.’

Men in front; women in back - bus ride between Wlliamsburg and Boro Park

Like it or not, the ‘Frumkeit Train’ has left the station.

I have long lamented the fact that Orthodox Judaism has moved – and continues to move - to the right. I know I am not alone on this. Nor is it all bad. As a Centrist, I am glad to see those to my left move towards the center. Nor does it bother me that those to my right are moving even further to my right. The problem I have is the pressure that this has on the mainstream to move to the right too. And some of the collateral damage that has resulted. And some of that pretty extreme.

Let me be clear. Every Jew has the right to be as religious as they choose – and adopt any stringency they choose. But the phenomenon of the mainstream moving to the right is not necessarily a good thing. The best example of this is the disappearance of mixed seating at banquets and weddings.

I have written about this before. Without getting into too much detail my opposition to this is based on the fact that there is nothing Halachicly wrong with men and women sitting together in public at a dinner table. The society in which we live today considers this normal. Although this was at one time considered immodest behavior, that has long ago ceased to be the case.

I am not going to go into the Halachic sources for this. I will however say that it is easily demonstrated by the fact that the non Chasidic Gedolei HaDor in America of the 20^th century were not only happy to sit together with their wives at mixed tables in public – including wedding banquets – they were happy to introduce their wives to passersby they knew.

In the Chasidic world however - separation of the sexes is far more extensive and common. In some cases extreme (compared to the mainstream even by today’s standards). Separate seating has always been the case.

What changed? I believe that some mainstream rabbinic leaders (starting in about the mid 1960s) saw Chasidim who had arrived in great numbers after the Holocaust doing it and decided they would not allow themselves to be ‘outfrummed’ by them . So they started doing it too. The mainstream laity soon followed suit. It is now rare to find a mainstream wedding that has mixed seating. Except for modern Orthodox Jews and a few of us die-hards in the Center that still insist on it when we can.

The Frumkeit chase didn’t end there. It seems that the mainstream keeps looking to their right and finding other things to emulate. Such as the new phenomenon of not publishing pictures of women. Except for Lubavitch - the Chasidic world has never published pictures of women considering it immodest. This was not true in the rest of the mainstream Charedi world. That is evidenced by the two largest mainstream Charedi publishers, ArtScroll and Feldheim, publish pictures of women. And by the fact that the Gedolei HaDor that were on Agudah Moetzes clearly approved of that - which was evidenced by Agudah’s now defunct Magazine, the Jewish Observer which occasionally had women featured on their cover.

But then came the Charedi magazines. They decided to follow the Chasidic standard. No pictures of women.

Meanwhile certain communities have taken modesty to such extremes that they are causing a Chilul HaShem. As was the case recently on an El Al flight when Chasdim refused to be seated in their assigned seats because they would be sitting next to women. This and other such instances (of even worse behavior such as using physical force to remove women from the front section of a bus where men are seated) have become far more common.

It therefore seems to me that the move to the right is common in the area of modesty between the sexes. Of course not all instances of modesty considerations are the same. But the motives are the same: the exaltation of modesty well beyond Halacha as a means toward ‘Frumkeit’.

About 20 years ago Chasidic friend of mine asked me why one of my children’s weddings had mixed seating. I told him I saw nothing wrong with and that most of the people I knew - including those that were Charedi preferred sitting together with their wives. I also pointed out that many Gedolei HaDor of the past sat with their wives. His response was telling. He said that was then. Now our modesty standards have improved and sitting mixed is considered immodest. Adding that no Gadol today would sit mixed.

I had to admit that this was true. But I also thought how sad it was that we have gone backwards in time to a practice that had no longer had any Halachic significance – only because of the ongoing Frumkeit chase.

What, one may ask, is wrong with returning to a ‘higher standard of modesty’? Nothing except that it isn’t really a higher standard anymore. Most people prefer siting with their wives. and the custom of the society in which we now does not consider mixed seating the slightest bit immoral. Mixed seating is the norm. It’s only because the Frumkeit chase makes it seem less that moral. And that begets the slippery slope into extremism - beginning with not publishing pictures of women.

It doesn’t help matters when the concept of modesty has become over-emphasized in girls high schools and seminaries. I believe that modesty issues are the primary focus in these schools. Is it any wonder that modesty is what the Frumkeit chase is all about?

True, here has been some push-back. And there has been some positive results of that. In fact I noticed Mishpacha Magazine had a cartoon on the inside back cover featuring caricatures of women. But that is not anywhere near enough. I am afraid there is little we can do about it. The train has left the station. Frumkeit is here to stay. I do not expect any significant change in the mainstream any time soon.

Typical 70s ad for Virginia Slims

We’ve come a long way, baby! That was the slogan created by the tobacco industry’s product for women, Virginia Slims cigarettes. It was the acknowledgement that women have finally arrived - empowered by what was then known as the Women’s Liberation Movement – now better known as feminism. And they had their own brand of cigarettes to prove it!

Living in the 21^st century has its challenges. The issue of our time is indeed feminism. I don’t think there is a single issue that takes up more of the public discourse that does this subject. This is a subject I have dealt with many times in a variety of ways. But I don’t even think I’ve scratched the surface of its impact on society at large, and Orthodoxy in particular. It is a huge subject with many facets and opinions. It is a subject that has very positive and very negative aspects - depending on one’s perspective.

I recall hearing back in the 70s that Ner Israel’s Rosh HaYeshiva, R’ Yaakov Weinberg predicted that feminism will become the most difficult challenge to Orthodoxy for years to come. Bigger than any other challenge. How prescient was he!

Feminism has for the most part been vilified by the right wing of Orthodoxy as anathema to Torah values. But I have to disagree with them. Because as I said, there are some very positive things that feminism has done that benefit that very community. I would even say that without the advances spurred by feminism much of the Kollel lifestyle would not exist.

It was feminism that enabled Kollel wives to support their husbands in Kollel. The job market has expanded for women as has their financial compensation. Although there is a long way to go there is parity, there is not a doubt in my mind that without the struggle for equality between the sexes there would be few if any opportunities for women to make enough of an income to support their husbands in Kollel. Which would mean that a lot of men in Kollel now would be working instead of their wives.

It would be nice if the right wing would acknowledge that and express some gratitude to the movement for that.

It is also true that feminism has equalized societal attitudes about sexes. Both sexes are to be treated with equal dignity and respect. One sex is not superior to the other. Although that goal has yet to be fully realized even in the general culture.

Those are the positives of feminism that are fully compatible with Orthodox Judaism. And why I considered myself a feminist for supporting those goals. By today’s standards, I am no longer considered as such - it seems.

Tha’s because of the more controversial side of feminism as it is seen today. It goes far beyond equal pay for equal work and being treated with equal dignity. Feminism on this level wants to eliminate all differences between men and women except for the obvious biological differences. This has become an almost inviolable ‘religious’ tenet for them. Any other differences are seen as cultural and subject to bias. And therefore ought to be discredited and discarded.

I do not agree with that assessment. I believe that there are legitimate studies that show that there are differences between the sexes that go beyond the obvious physical ones. I also do not necessarily believe that all cultural differences are automatically bad and should be discarded. They should not be discarded just because society created them.

More importantly however is how religious values are to be seen in light of this new feminism. Should they always be discarded when they conflict with feminist values? And who makes those determinations? I believe these questions sum up the current struggle between feminism and religion – particularly as it impacts Judaism.

As an Orthodox Jew, the answer is relatively easy (although there are some grey areas). If one believes in God and that His will for the Jewish people is expressed in the Torah as interpreted by the sages and rabbinic authorities throughout Jewish history… then it cannot be trumped by anything. No matter how noble a cause might seem. When the 2 value systems conflict, God’s will must prevail. When they do not conflict then the feminist value of equality can be considered.

Who are the religious authorities that make determinations like this? This is where it gets tricky. As an Orthodox Jew I look at what the above mentioned Torah and tradition as interpreted by rabbinic authorities throughout Jewish history.

So an article in JTA that extols the advances feminism has made in the Conservative movement is completely meaningless to me. Apparently the Conservative movement considers equality of the sexes in all areas as the ultimate ideal that cannot in any way possibly contradict the will of God. Centuries of tradition is discredited as having been influenced by the misogynist culture of the past. We now know better and can see what happened. It was a misogynist culture that drove those rabbis decisions.

Our more educated and informed modern sensibilities have taught is that ‘truth’. And now we can ‘right the ship’ of Torah to conform to God’s true ideal: feminism. Orthodox rabbis they say are living in the past and ignorant of that ‘truth’. How could they not be ignorant cloistered up in the ivory towers of their Yeshivos!

Equality of the sexes is what God really wants in all spheres of Jewish life.including all religious spheres. As though God Himself is the ultimate feminist and never having intended the separate but equal roles that men and women traditionally had. It is only the rabbis of the past that were negatively influenced by the misogynist culture of the time that made it so. (As if Conservative rabbis are not culturally influenced today!)

Unfortunately a lot of that kind of thinking has filtered into the left wing of Orthodoxy where some its rabbis think that about all the mainstream Poskim. They have decided that feminist values are so just that they can effect drastic change to centuries old tradition and discard it.

What about those gray areas, mentioned above? Is it possible that there actually are misogynistic motives in some segments of Orthodoxy? Are women discriminated against that way there? If one views the trailer for an upcoming episode of PBS’s POV series entitled 93 Queen, (trailer below) one will see the great Ruchei Freier decrying that very misogyny.

The Chasidic community tried to ban her all female EMT group. A group founded ironically for women whose extreme sense of modesty makes them uncomfortable around men even when there is a medical necessity. Which sometimes requires uncovering parts of the female body that are otherwise covered for modesty reasons. While most Chasidc women know that Halacha requires it when there is a medical necessity, many might still feel uncomfortable when men do it. They will certainly feel more comfortable when women do it. Which is why Ruchie Freier rose to the occasion and founded her all female EMT group. For which she still gets opposition.

Hoe ironic that the extreme obsession with modesty that is so typical of the Chasidic community is exactly what created the need Ruchie Freier has filed with her all female ambulance corps. And yet it is being fought for exactly those reasons. It is considered immodest in the Chasidic world for a woman to be an EMT.

Is it really modesty that drives them? Or is it a form of misogyny? Or is it that anything that has the remotest connection to feminism is automatically seen as evil no matter what the benefits - even if they can be lifesaving in some cases.

It that is the case, it’s unfortunate that the extremes that 21^st century feminism have created this mindset. And a shame that in general, the good things about feminism have been set aside because of it.

OK. I’ll talk about it. Not because I think it what happened a couple of days ago makes much of a difference. But because so many people think it does.

There was a story widely reported in the media a couple of weeks ago about flight delay on El Al because of a couple of Charedim refused to be seated in their assigned seats. They were displeased with the seat they got because each of those seats were next to a woman.

They asked to be switched. Nothing wrong with that. It is when they insist on it and disrupt the flight until they get their way that it becomes a problem and in my view a huge Chilul HaShem!

In the case under the incident was reported inaccurately. The initial report was the flight was delayed over an hour to the great discomfort of all the passengers. But a Charedi passenger by the name of Katriel Shem-Tov who witnessed the whole thing informed a reporter for the Times ofIsrael that it never happened. The insistence to have their seats changed by those 2 Charedi passengers was accommodated in less than 5 minutes. The rest of that hour delay was for reasons unrelated to those 2 Charedim. The delay was already posted in the terminal before any of the passengers even boarded.

Everyone is jumping all over media reports and resultant outrage over this event believing those 2 Charedi passengers were responsible for over an hour delay which we now know is untrue.

But the fact is it did happen. It just didn’t take as long as was originally reported. There was therefore no unreasonable delay because of it. Which means that it would have never been reported let alone so widely condemned.

The fallout of the original report gave way to a lot of anger on both sides. El Al said it would remove any passengers that refused to sit in their assigned seats. A Charedi MK threatened a Charedi boycott of all EL AL flights because of this. I added my own tow cents as well. All because of a false account of it by the media.

Some people have asked me to retract what I originally wrote about this or at least correct it in a new post. I suppose that is a reasonable request. Which I am doing here. But my criticism is still valid. Even though in this particular case it did not lead to a Chilul HaShem it easily could have. Because it has happened before.

I have seen this kind of behavior first hand. There is a sense of entitlement that certain Chasidic passengers seem to have that ends up being a Chilul HaShem. I witnessed it personally on a flight to Israel when a large Chasidic family boarded the plane and started ordering the flight attendants around as though they were their personal servants! I’m not so sure the 2 Chasidim in this case wouldn’t have prolonged the flight had they not gotten their way.

It is not the time it takes to find passengers that are willing to exchange seats that is the problem. It is the insistence on it that is.

It’s one thing to have a religious issue with sitting next to a woman on a flight. Whether anyone agrees with it or not, people have the right to their own standards. Even if they are extreme. Provided they do not inconvenience others by insisting on them. They can ask politely if it is possible to switch seats. If they are told no, that should be the end of it.

The fact that in this case it didn’t take that long to accommodate them might have solved the problem here. But who knows whether that will be the case the next time someone insists on changing their seats for that reason. Here is what Mr. Shem-Tov, the Charedi passenger that witnessed the whole thing said:

My guess is that the whole business with the Haredim didn’t take more than five minutes. Of course, I am not justifying their behavior and one should not cause a delay of even one minute… I certainly do not intend this post to defend those two passengers.

That is exactly right. The outrage expressed at this particular incident may have been misplaced. But as the Charedi passenger indicated, it is not really defensible no matter how much time was spent on it.

Even though the amount of time a bad act does not exacerbate the situation, that does not turn it into a good – or even a justifiable one. As I told one individual who pointed out this media error to me (perhaps hoping that I would retract) - if a mass murder is reported to have taken an hour and it is later corrected by a witness who said that it didn’t take an hour at all - but less than 5 minutes… would that make any difference? The crime was still committed.

What does all this say about accuracy in the media? I think its says something we all already know. Sometimes they get it wrong. Which can have unfair negative repercussions and consequences that end up being unjust. Perhaps this happens more times than we realize. Does that me we just discard the free press as unreliable? Hardly. Most of the time they do get it right. It is a free press that protects us all. Knowledge is power. What we don’t know CAN hurt us.

The lesson here is that the media should be a lot more careful about accuracy in the reporting. It may not end these kinds of errors. Reporters and editors are only human. And can make mistakes no matter how careful they are. But hopefully it will reduce these kinds of errors in the future.

Democratic Party nominee for Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Axios)

It’s becoming increasingly difficult to be both a political liberal and an Orthodox Jew these days. Not because of the ideal itself. There is much to admire about a liberal political philosophy. I am in fact liberal on some issues myself although I tend lean towards a more conservative approach on most issues.

My political views are completely informed by my religious views. Which are based on the Torah. The Torah is neither liberal or conservative. But on most issues the Torah is better served by a conservative approach. Which is why Evangelicals tend to be politically conservative. They too see the values of the Torah (what they call the old testament) better served that way.

I’m sure that my liberal friends will challenge me on this with an analysis of their own. And that’s fine. But I stand by my view. Being a liberal does not in and of itself make one anti religion or anti Torah. Clearly there are some very religious Jews – even some Charedim that describe themselves as liberal or hard core Democrats. The party of their choice in the 2 party system of American politics.

But liberal political parties are being taken over of late by a form antisemitism disguised as legitimate criticism of Israel. For liberal Jews - that comes in the form of bashing its current Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. While some of their grievances with him might be legitimate, liberal criticism does not stop with Netanyahu. The more liberal one is the less likely they will be to support Israel regardless of who the Prime Minister is. They will more likely support the critics of Israel. And although this is not an absolute - the reality is that as far as liberalism goes - the less religious one is (whether Jewish or not) the more likely they will be anti Zionist. (Unless they are of the Satmar mentality who are anti Israel for reasons beyond the scope of this post).

This is what came to mind as I saw a protest of President Trump during his visit to England on this morning’s newscast. As the cameras were focusing on the protesters carrying anti Trump placards I saw at least one that was anti Israel - Pro Palestine. It seems as though those signs were as welcome there as any of the others.

Unfortunately that didn’t surprise me. Since England’s 2 party system has its own version of Democrats called The Labour Party. Whose leader, Jeremy Corbyn has been called an antisemite by Jonathan Arkush, the outgoing leader of the Jewish Board of Deputies in England. And for good reason! Of course he vehemently denies it. But ‘denial’ in his case is nothing more than a river in Egypt.

This is reflected by the fact that there is a internal dispute among Labour Party members to get Corbyn to more fully reject all forms of antisemitism which has has thus far resisted.

Furthermore… as the New York Times recently noted:

In Britain, the once center-left Labour Party has become so infused with anti-Zionist sentiment that Jews recently took to the streets of London to protest a drift in the party toward anti-Semitism.

I think this clearly indicates where liberal-left thinking and the political parties identifying with them lies.You will not see anything remotely close to that among conservative parties.

One might counter by saying that this is England… and the Unites States is different. Because here there has always been 2 party support for Israel.Democrat and Republican alike. That was true. Until it wasn’t. Which is not that long ago.

Liberal Jews - even very religious ones might take umbrage at this. Claiming that the 2 party support has been weakened by the Prime Minister of Israel who has cast his lot with Republicans thus alienating Democrats that otherwise support Israel. I don’t think Netanyahu can be blamed for this. Although he may have contributed to it.

It is true that the Democratic leadership still strongly supports Israel. Both the Senate and House minority leaders (Chuck Shummer and Nancy Pelosi) are ardent supporters.

But the same cannot be said for some of the other party leaders like the Deputy Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Keith Ellison - a onetime supporter of Louis Farrakahn. And it is certainly not true for 28 year old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who challenged the Democratic Party’s establishment and won by a huge margin - ending the 20 year career of her opponent, Congressman Joseph Crowley - who was seen as a possible successor to Nancy Pelosi.

Is Ocasio-Cortez an antisemite? I doubt it since she supported a Jew (Bernie Sanders) for President. But she is clearly anti Israel whose narrative is right out of the BDS handbook. Hard to be pro Israel and pro BDS at the same time.

It seems pretty clear where the young liberal-left blood of the Democratic Party is going. And it isn’t Israel. Nor is it going in any kind of a religious direction. It is going the way of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. And I don’t think the old Democratic guard can stop it.

Blaming Netnayahu for all this is a bit naïve. Since much of criticism of Israel by the liberal-left is for things Neatnyahu did that were supported by the political opponents to his left. Such as Ocasio-Cortez calling Israel’s defensive measure at the recent border clash with Gaza terrorists posing as protesters - a massacre. It wasn’t a massacre . Israel’s defensive measures at the Gaza border were supported by Israel’s main opposition parties.

The lament by some of my liberal friends about losing 2 party support for Israel is something I sympathize with. I’d love to still see that. And as noted think it’s technically still there. But the handwriting is on the wall. I don’t see it lasting in light of what I believe is a reasonable analysis of the increasing move to the left by mainstream liberal parties. Who see humanism as the highest ideal of all, trumping religion considering it to be an ancient and archaic value system countering the higher values of humanism. And in the process seeing a conservative Orthodox friendly Israel the same way. They otherwise see Israel only as a Nazi-like occupier of an indigenous people.

This is why I am glad that at least the political conservative parties (Republicans in the US and the Conservative Party in the UK) are in power now.

As a religious Jew it is also quite gratifying to see that conservative justices will now become the majority on the Supreme Court. Thus stopping the swing away from religious freedom. And if Republicans can retain the executive branch for the full 2 terms - possibly adding more conservative Justices to the Supreme Court as the current aging liberal ones retire. God bless America.

An increasingly ubiquitous sight

A few years ago at the height of the anti internet campaign by the right, I asked a young Charedi Avreich why he didn’t have the internet in his home. I knew this fellow quite well since he grew up in my community. He was not one to parrot the harangue against it by so many of his Rabbinic leaders. He was someone who actually thought for himself and knew the benefits of the internet quite well. He understood what he was missing. Which is why I asked him that question in the first place.

His answer made a lot more sense to me than the reasons constantly given by Charedi rabbinic leaders. They kept pointing to porn addiction as the primary reason for forbidding it. His reason had nothing to do with porn addiction. He said he knew himself and if he had it, he would become addicted to it. Even if it was all in a good way - it would take time away from his learning and other responsibilities. He did not believe that porn addiction was the main culprit (although he agreed that it was a problem for some). He understood then what we all know now. It is the addiction that is the real enemy.

Studies show that internet addiction may very well be the most serious issue of our time outpacing any other issue in terms of the overall harm it is doing to the human race. And now that smartphones latterly place the entire world in the palm of your hand, the problems is exacerbated exponentially.

Pew Research made the following observation:

The vast majority of Americans – 95% – now own a cellphone of some kind. The share of Americans that own smartphones is now 77%, up from just 35% in Pew Research Center’s first survey of smartphone ownership conducted in 2011.

When it comes to teenagers the numbers are even scarier:

(S)martphone ownership has become a nearly ubiquitous element of teen life: 95% of teens now report they have a smartphone or access to one. These mobile connections are in turn fueling more-persistent online activities: 45% of teens now say they are online on a near-constant basis.

There seems to be agreement among mental health professionals about the harm this causes:

The effects of internet addiction can also cause real damage to a person’s mental and physical health.

Off the top of my head - included among the more serious problems generated by this phenomenon are: spending enormous amounts of time taking away from ones responsibilities to work and family; disrupting the education of young people; decreased attention spans; reductions person interpersonal social skills, increased numbers of people suffering from clinical depression; increased bullying; increased numbers of suicides…

Porn addiction is way down the list of negative consequences. Although it is definitely an extremely serious issue for those that access it that can destroy marriages and families, my guess is that the majority of people that avail themselves of internet technology do not access porn. At least not on purpose.

I’m sure that all this just scratches the surface of the problems this phenomenon has generated. The real problem is the addiction itself. If we are to be honest, my guess is that we all know people that are addicted at one level or another. Some of whom might be us!

So what’s the solution to this problem? Do we throw out the technology as some rabbinic leaders on the right insist we do? Even though we may not agree on the reasons to do so, clearly the seriousness of the issue is not in dispute.

My answer is an unequivocal no. The technology is way to valuable to throw out. Furthermore, it would be futile to even attempt it. Although some people will follow their leaders directive - forbidding it is a sure fire way to get more people to use it. ‘Mayim Genuvim Yimatku’ say Chazal – stolen waters are sweet.

It is rather well known that the Chasidic community whose rabbis are the fiercest in their opposition to internet use nevertheless finds a significant minority of Chasidim (if not the majority) owning or using smartphones.

I need not go into the benefits of the internet. If you are reading this, you already know. Suffice it to say that the benefits are huge. Accessing the internet is becoming increasingly indispensable in our day. There is nothing going to stop that.

What about the obvious downside that this post has clearly acknowledged? Indeed! …perhaps the downside worth abandoning the technology after all no matter what the consequences?

The solution is not that clear cut. The addictive power of the internet and the increased ease of accessing it is something we all have to deal with.

Nevertheless, I think key to beating this scourge is something we all already know. It is something we should all strive to achieve: Self control.

It is imperative to learn how to limit its use. Some of us can do it easily. I for one do not spend a lot of time on my smart phone. I do not need to text all of my thoughts to a friend or group of friends. I do not feel the need to immediately respond to every text I get. I rarely initiate conversations via text.

I would, however, never go back to a time where I did not have the world in my hands. When I want to get information on any subject, I get it instantly in most cases. Which saves a lot of valuable time I might otherwise spend trying to get in the old fashioned way.

When used in this way, it is used the way it was intended to be used, It is when it becomes your whole life that it becomes a serious problem.

The problem is in getting everyone to use it that way, instead of being attached – even enslaved to it 24/7.

Once you get into a habit, it is hard to change. This is the problem lies in my view. If you can’t do it on your own, then therapy might be necessary. Because the alternative of continued addiction can ruin your life.

Is recognition of Reform Judaism in Israel's future? (Arutz Sheva)

Israel is a Jewish State. Israel is a democracy. Are these two statements contradictory? I don’t think there can be any real question about that. You cannot be an exclusively Jewish state if you are a democracy. Because the very definition of a democracy means that you cannot limit the rights of an indigenous people. A Jewish state by definition does that. Because it mandates that no matter how the majority of the population chooses to be recognized, it won’t matter. The primary consideration of a Jewish state is to keep it Jewish.

Which begs the obvious question. How can Israel and her friends constantly refer to itself as ‘the only true democracy in the Middle East?’ I guess one can say that Israel is not a democracy in the purest sense. But that it is a democracy within its definition as a Jewish state. Which means that the populace can vote and choose between a variety of political parties that span the political spectrum -left to right. The only proviso is that the State remains Jewish.

This of course means leaving out the possibility that Israel can ever become a Muslim state - even if a majority votes for Muslim party rule. I do not believe there is a single party in Israel sans that Arab parties that would ever let that happen.

That being said, Arab citizens of Israel have the right to vote. Which is why Israel has vibrant Arab political party members serving in the Keneset. But this is also why Israel rightly worries about a possible single state solution if the West Bank were annexed – giving the Palestinians living there voting rights.

Current demographic trends favor an ultimate Arab majority in the not too distant future which could vote Israel out of existence. That is why Ariel Sharon - a hard line hawk who was considered the father of the settlement movement - came to realize that we do indeed need a 2 state solution. That, he believed, would be the only way to keep the state both Jewish and a democracy. And it is why he gave Palestinians the Gaza Strip.

There are those who believe that we should annex the West bank giving Palestinians full civil rights but not voting rights. But that would in my view be a denial of one of the most fundamental rights guaranteed by a democracy. Palestinians would never accept a denial of that right in a one state solution.

We are at an impasse now. There is no possible way to create a 2 state solution under current conditions. If Gaza is the model for what happens when you give land to Palestinians, then the last few weeks of terror from Gaza shows what a 2 state solution would look like. It would mean national suicide. And a bloody one at that!

This pretty much sums up the conundrum facing Israel right now. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Which for me means that Israel must retain the status quo until such time it can be determined with a relative degree of certainty that a peace treaty would be honored.

In pursuit of cementing its identity as a Jewish state, Israel is proposing the Nationality Law. From ArutzSheva:

The bill enshrines the status of the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people and the right of the Jewish people to self-determination in its homeland as a unique right for the Jewish people, the symbols of the state, Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and the Hebrew language as the official language.

In addition, the proposal anchors Israel's connection with Diaspora Jewry and the right to preserve a heritage for all residents of Israel, regardless of religion or nationality. The bill establishes the Hebrew calendar as the state's official calendar and the commemoration of Israel's Independence Day, the Jewish holidays, and the days of remembrance in the Basic Law.

For me this is a no brainer. If we are going to be a Jewish State, we need to define what that means. But to the Reform Movement this is an outrage. They are oppose it. Why? Here is what they say:

According to a document seen by Hadashot, the movement plans on fighting the legislation in a multi-stage battle. The first stage will be opposing the bill itself under the contention that "the Nationality Law is an improper and distorted law that undermines the democratic character of the state and the status of non-Jewish citizens of Israel."

As part of its effort to torpedo the bill, the movement says it will rally diaspora Jewry to oppose the law by claiming that the legislation is discriminatory towards Israel's non-Jewish citizens. The Union for Reform Judaism has already put out a statement blasting the bill as "a grave threat to Israeli democracy".

They have a point. But as noted this was true before this bill was even considered. Formalizing it hardly makes that much of a difference. Which is why some of Israel’s left wing opposes the bill. Why antagonize Diaspora Jews with an unnecessary bill that will change nothing?

And since Israel is not fully a democracy anyway - and can’t be while remaining a Jewish State, why complain now? Reform leaders have basically conceded that this bill will probably pass and have made plans to challenge it after the fact:

(They plan) on utilizing a clause allowing all Jews to immigrate to Israel as a legal argument against any future decision refusing to recognize Reform conversions.

They have) lobbied the Israeli government for decades for official recognition and state funding – a move which would violate Israel’s decades-old status quo on religion and state.

(They have) pushed for use of state mikveh’s – ritual baths needed in conversion ceremonies – funding for Reform community rabbis, and autonomy at the Western Wall.

That last item was a ploy for official state recognition. That became clear during the negotiation for the expansion of the area by the Kotel already provided for them. A clause in the plan would have required Orthodox coordination with the Reform Movement. Which Orthodox rabbinic leaders saw as tantamount to recognizing their legitimacy. Something Orthodox leaders would never do. It would also have also been a violation of the status quo agreement.

Not only has the Reform Movement NOT denied this, That has clearly been their goal all along:

Union for Reform Judaism President Rick Jacobs (said they have) been explicit in its pursuit of that goal for years.

Considering that this movement has so few adherents in Israel, I find changing the definition of Judaism to include how Reform defines it - to be a huge Chutzpah.

If Israel is going to be a Jewish State, it has to be defined in ways that are acceptable to all. Clearly the majority of religious Jews in Israel are Orthodox. They would NEVER accept a non Orthodox definition of a Jewish state. Furthermore there was agreement at the very founding of Israel (in something called the status quo) that Orthodoxy will define all matters religious.

Even though the majority of Jews in Israel are secular, they are not Reform or Conservative. They may not be fully observant by Orthodox standards, but many are traditional and do not see heterodoxy defining their Judaism for them.

Israelis may not like what the rabbinate (which is Orthodox) is doing in many areas. But they do not look elsewhere for religious guidance. Reform rabbis want to change all that. They want to shoehorn themselves in so that they can do to Judaism in Israel what they have done to it in America believing they have a natural constituency in the secular population.

That cannot be allowed to happen. Reform Judaism is about as Jewish as Humanism is… having more in common with that than they do with traditional Judaism. Which is why they should never be given any form of legitimacy in a Jewish state.

US Senator from Kentucky, Republican Rand Paul (VIN)

‘The lady doth protest too much, methinks’. This famous line from Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’ occurred to me yesterday after a barrage of criticism against President Trump’s comments during a joint press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin. It was almost ‘knee jerk’ on both sides of the political aisle. Although the Democratic criticism was much harsher than the Republican criticism, he was not spared it even by members of his own party. I don’t recall this level of criticism against Trump on any other matter.

You would think that the President had initialed World War III just by the sheer volume of his critics. Let alone the degree of their criticism.

What was all that criticism about? Is it legitimate? And why are Democrats more critical? Another phrase comes to mind. ‘V’hanafechu’. This is a phrase commonalty associated with Purim. It refers to the idea that we are supposed to become so intoxicated that we end up confusing the hero, Mordechai, with the evil Haman. It has traditionally been Republicans that saw Russia as the ‘Evil Empire’. But now the Democrats are tripping all over each other to see who can condemn the ‘Evil Empire’ more. What ever happened to the ‘Reset Button’?

It was Democrat Hillary Clinton Clinton who coined that phrase trying to reset the US relationship with Russia by making it more positive. I guess the ‘Evil Empire’ has returned because of who the President is.

The issue all the criticism is based on is Russian tampering with our democracy via a cyber attack undermining the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. It has been determined by the intelligence community that not only have they done that, it was at the behest of Putin himself. Putin has vehemently denied this. What has outraged so many of Trump’s critics is that the President seems to believe Putin over his own intelligence establishment. Even in the face of the recent indictments of 12 Russian nationals for their sustained effort at hacking Democratic Party e-mails and computer networks.

This criticism comes shortly after the President’s attack against our NATO allies (Canada, the UK, France and Germany, among others). The President wanted these countries to pay their fair share of the NATO budget - which they have never done. The US has carried the lion’s share of that. Trump’s critics were heard saying things like, ‘Is this how we treat our friends?’ ‘It is unheard of!’ ‘The US benefits greatly by NATO’. ‘Any threat to dissolve NATO would be a blow to world peace’. ‘How dare he threaten to leave it over money?’

And then there are the trade wars with friend and foe alike. The President’s greatest achievement is a vastly improved US economy with the lowest unemployment numbers in decades. That is being undermined by tariffs on imported goods that has not only raised consumer prices on many goods it has caused some companies to establish manufacturing branches in those countries to avoid the tariffs on material form those countries used in manufacturing. That has also impacted negatively on jobs in the US. Free trades is the cornerstone of a free market economy. Tariffs stifle that.

Is all this criticism fair? I think it is. But I also think it is overblown because of who the President is. It is no secret that he is one of the most hated Presidents in American history. Mostly by the liberal side of the political spectrum. He has a 90% approval rating among Republican voters. But the current criticism is from both sides of the political aisle. While it is legitimate, I believe the intensity of that criticism is more about his character and personality then it is about his policies.

The President is not one to mince words. To say he is not a politician is an understatement. As it is an understatement to say that he is politically incorrect. It is also no secret that he thinks a lot of himself. So why is he doing and saying those things? And why the harsh reactions even from members pf his own party?

Let us examine some possibilities.

Why did he so strongly criticize our allies while fawning over perhaps our greatest adversary? I think its because he knew that we can be frank with our friends and tell them if we think they are taking advantage of us. His point being that just because you are a friend doesn’t mean you take advantage of us. The president pointed this out in 2 ways.

One is in the unfair trade practices that have been completely ignored by past administrations. American made products are taxed in foreign countries to discourage their citizens from buying them. So that they will instead buy products manufactured in their own country. The US hadn’t done that. This benefited consumers enabling theme to buy foreign products a lot cheaper than comparable American made products. Products made more cheaply in foreign countries because of much lower labor costs.

That hurt American companies. The President wanted simply to equalize the playing field by doing to them what they have been doing to us all along.

While I believe that doing this was counterproductive since it. would ultimately hurt the consumer and thereby the economy, I don’t think the President was all that wrong. I believe that he should have ‘left well enough alone’. But that would not make it right. The President proposed that all countries drop all taxes on American exports and the US would drop tariffs on theirs. So far - no takers. They have been completely deaf to that proposal and instead continue their trade war with the US. How this ends up – no one knows. I oppose the tariffs. But I get Trump’s logic here.

What about his complaints about NATO? Did his rhetoric endanger the most successful military alliance since World War II? I doubt it, although I’m sure that is what he wanted our NATO allies to believe. What the President really wanted was for them to pay their fair share. He has mostly gotten them to do that by instilling that fear into their hearts. NATO protects them as much - or more - than it does us. They are after all in closer proximity to potential adversaries than we are. If anything they should be paying more, not less than us.

The strategy there worked. We are in no more danger of alienating out allies than we were before. Only now they are no longer taking advantage of us.

What about all the fawning praise of Putin? Shouldn’t the President be treating our adversaries with at least the same contempt he seems to have had for our allies? Is he not doing the opposite?

The answer is yes, he is. But as he said, having a good relationship with an adversary is far better than having a bad one. That is why he is bending over backwards to show Putin that we are his friend, not his enemy. Trump simply wants to push his own restart button on US/Russia relations. That reduces the possibility of conflict with a the world second biggest superpower that has nuclear weapons on par with the US. And it increases economic cooperation that will better serve both countries.

Does that mean that he should fawn all over Putin as though he was some kind of superstar? No. I agree that the President has been duped by Putin. The smirk on Putin’s face during the joint press conference spoke louder than any words.

But antagonizing Putin was not the right response either. We know what he did. We have indicted Russian nationals. Calling Putin a liar to his face serves no one. Increasing sanctions might better convince them to stop than calling him a liar to his face.

In my view Trump should have trusted his intelligence community and not fawned all over Putin. But Trump’s outsize ego got the better of him. As it always does. He truly believes that he can size up an individual better than any intelligence report can. He net with Putin for 2 hours and believes that Putin was telling the truth when he vehemently denied any Russian involvement with our political system. He may be a good judge of character. But he is way out of his league when it comes to sizing up practiced liars like Putin.

It should also be noted than the Russian people support Putin by a very wide margin. Antagonizing him would not put the US in good stead with the Russian people. They love Putin there. They support his takeover of Crimea. Even though it violated international law and was condemned by the entire world.

Putin, his nation, and the vast majority people living in Crimea see things differently. That Trump did not complain to Putin about this - does not mean Putin will start attacking other countries. I doubt very strongly that he will. He knows how we and the rest of the world feel about what he did. He also knows that Trump is an unpredictable President who might start world war III if he felt like it.

One final thought. I am sure that I will be attacked for defending the President when virtually everyone else has strongly criticized him. But I am not really defending him as much as I am trying to understand where he is coming from. His goals are not all that unreasonable. And perhaps some of his methods aren’t all that unreasonable either. This view was articulated more or less by another critic frequent critic of Trump, Senator Rand Paul. I think he got it right when he said the following about Trump’s meeting with Putin:

(I)t’s important for the U.S. to keep an open dialogue with its adversaries, especially if it hopes to motivate them to change their behavior.

Paul tells The Associated Press, “We should look for ways to make the dialogue better.”

He says lawmakers and former intelligence officials criticizing Trump include those from both parties who are opposed to his presidency. He calls it “Trump derangement syndrome.”

Paul says, “I think these people are mistaken.”

Is the Charedi school in Israel the new model for American schools? (Reuters)

What kind of Jewish education do you want for your children? This is a question every parent should ask him or herself before their oldest child is old enough to be enrolled in a school. Even before pre-nursery.

While this should be obvious to most of us, I am convinced that a lot of parents don’t even think about it. Even among those that do, they might seek an opinion from a rabbi whose Hashkafos do not necessarily match their own. This happens a lot in mainstream Orthodoxy. If you are a member of a Shul whose rabbi is a beloved charismatic figure, he might be asked by a member with young children where he thought you should send your child.

If he is Charedi (which is becoming more prevalent in Orthodox Shuls) his answer will be sincere but might not have anything to do with your Hashkafos or what kind of Jewish education you believe is best for your child. He could easily just tell you send to a School where his own Charedi Hashkafos are taught. Not that he is doing anything wrong, underhanded, or nefarious. It is just that he really believes his values to be the truest to the Torah.

It has been my experience that this choice whether it made without too much thought or based on advice from a beloved rabbi has led to a lot of children not following in the footsteps of their parents. No matter what kind of values they want to instill in their children, the majority of their day will be spent in a school whose values are not the same as yours.

In cases where the Rebbeim (Torah teachers) are all Charedi and teaching our children year after year in elementary school - that is almost a guarantee that it will be those values that will eventually be adopted by a child. Not because they are old enough to make those decisions. But because the schools they attend beyond elementary school will have the same Hashkafos and will continue until they are old enough. That is clearly the most likely outcome.

Most parents will accept those results even though they may not fully agree with them. The trend in Orthodoxy is in that direction anyway. And a lot of the parents (most probably) in those schools actually have those Hashkafos in the first place. For those that don’t, they just learn to live with it. They still love their children very much. I believe there re a lot of parents like that. Parents that would have been happier to see their children have a Jewish education more in line with their Hashkafos and the values based on them.

But they chose a school by believing that it is better to send them to a school that is to their right than too their left,or because of the influence of their rabbi - despite his having values different than their own.

What are these Charedi values? In short they are based on something called Daas Torah. Which literally means the wisdom of the Torah. The fact is that the wisdom of the Torah is what we all must follow. The question is how we determine what that really is. In our day that term has been co-opted by the Charedi world and interpreted as following a group of rabbinic leaders they call the Gedolim. Rabbis universally recognized as highly knowledgeable in Torah.

The problem with that is that not all rabbinic leaders agree on what Daas Torah really is. Especially when it comes to educating our young. What exactly does that means in our day? It does not matter to the Charedi world what anyone but what their own as Gedolim say. Making matters worse there is a phenomenon we all all familiar with called ‘moving to the right’. This phenomenon is most extant in the Charedi world.

If a school is oriented that way, and they see others schools adopting certain values, they will often adopt them too. Not necessarily because there is any intrinsic Torah values in it. But because other schools to their right have adopted them. Values that on the surface make sense to their Hashkafos. Like spending more of their day - and their year - studying Torah. So if a school wants to maintain their credentials as Charedi, they will follow suit and do what other schools have done.

What about their parent body? Does their opinion matter? Not really. Why? I have heard this dismissive common response made many times rabbinic and lay leaders of such schools: ‘What does a parent know about Daas Torah?!’ ‘It doesn’t really matter what they think.’ ‘All that matters is Daas Torah.’ Which they see as the ultimate will of God. If a parent doesn’t agree they can send their kids to one of the other non Charedi schools (which they look down upon as inferior or Krum - meaning that they have a warped Hashkafa).

The problem with that ‘opition’ is that it is totally unrealistic. You can’t pull out a child from a school where all of their friends are; a school they are familiar with in all its facets... and send them to a place they won’t recognize; whose curriculum environment that is so different than what they are used to and whose students are unfamiliar to them. that it can severely traumatize to a child, hinder his progress, and even go OTD. Besides, why would they want to send their child to a school they have been indoctrinated to believe their Hashkafos are Krum?

For those parents that are Charedi and believe in the concept of Charedi DaasTorah... they might just object to some of the particulars added to those schools for very good reasons. The would never consider a non Charedi school. They are bascialy told to love it or leave it. But they will neither love it or leave it. too are told to love it or leave it.

What a wide disparity between the Hashkafos of the home and the Hashkafos of the school can easily produce is an increase in a child going OTD. When new and difficult rules are implemented over the already difficult old ones - it is not stretch to believe this can be a result.

The long school day for boys is very long and very intense. The trend is towards increasing both not only the expansion of the school day – but the school year too. The current thinking in the Charedi world is that Torah study should be maximized as much as humanly possible. Free time or vacations should be minimized since it is otherwise considered Bitul Torah (a waste of orah study time). l

The belief is that the boys can handle it – just like so many other boys in schools like that where these new conditions have already implemented. They look not only to their right. They look Eastward as well. Seeing the Israeli Charedi model as the ideal. This means the ultimate abandonment of Limudei Chol (secular studies) - seen as a form of Bitul Torah. This is the direction the Charedi world is going. And Charedi Israel is their model. I am not talking about Chasidic schools. I am talking about many mainstream Charedi schools of the Lithuanian variety.

Is this what parents looking into a school for their child want? Even if they are Charedi? I suppose that some do, But I’ll bet that a lot of them don’t and still prefer what was once considered the norm for a Yeshiva education – even a Charedi one.

My guess is that a lot of parents don’t even realize this trend is happening. But they should.

I believe that Charedi parents ought to start thinking for themselves and look to other schools with a more traditional approach to a religious education. This does not mean going to the left or sending a child to a coed school – even if it is Orthodox. But that is not the only other choice.

There are schools that actually have the values that many parents in those schools have and yet still send their children to a school to their religious right. They may eventually be happy with their choice. But not because their children have adopted their values. But because those children are loved and still love their family. Those values have not changed. They are good people that have become well adjusted to their life choices.

Meanwhile there are children that simply cannot hack it in those schools. Because the very trend towards excellence in Torah studies is the same trend that a lot of young students are not capable of handling. They are the ones that fall though the cracks. And this new trend will surely increase that.

Parents need to consider all of that and not just look to their right…or rely on rabbis whose views mirror those of the right wing schools.

What about a parent that want their children to be Charedi - but would also like them to have a decent secular education and a more ore less normal school day and school year? And do not believe in the long extended hours spent daily in the classroom or the extend school year?

I believe they too can be happy in a school that caters to both the right and the left. A school whose philosophy is “Chanoch L’Naar Al Pi Darko’ educate the child according to his personal ability.

A child can go to a school like that and remain influenced primarily by their parents’ values. The school will not contradict them. If they want their children to be Charedi – they probably will be. Such schools have Charedi role models as well as non Charedi ones.The values they learn in the home plus those they learn in school will help them make moire informed choices in life. Sometimes those choices will be to the right of a parent and sometimes to the left. But they informed choices.

I therefore urge parents not to follow the crowd and instead to choose a school wisely based mostly on how your values will be treated by the school. Will they be ignored or will they be considered? That is the question that should be uppermost in the mind of a parent before deciding which school to send a child to. Because once the decision is made. It might be too difficult to change upon the experiencing disappointing results

Mob scene in Bet Shemesh (JTA)

People accuse me all the time of rejecting anyone to the religious right or left of me. They think I believe that only my own Centrist Hashkafa is the only acceptable one - and that everything else is not. That those to my religious right or left are wrong. If they are not exactly like me, they are rejected.

That is so far from the truth that I am hard pressed to even address it. That others see me as intolerant is disappointing to say the least. I can’t even count the number of times I have gone out of my way to use the phrase Elu V’Elu - Divrei Elokim Chaim. These and those – the words of the living God.

Which basically means that when there is disagreement between sincere and knowledgeable Jews about what God wants from us, both views are considered valid. Even when those views are incompatible.

This is why I have no real issue with the Hashkafos of Chasidim, Charedim, Religious Zionists or the left wing of Modern Orthodoxy. I believe that their views are all L’Shem Shomyim – for the sake of Heaven. My issues are only with extremism with any of those camps. When I complain about it, I get attacked as seeing only my own point of view to be legitimate.

By coincidence two polar opposite groups of Jews whose Hashkafos are legitimate have been in the news lately. In ways that I reject as an illegitimate expression of their valid Hashkafos: The Chasidic extremists of Bet Shemesh (Ramat Bet Shemesh B) ...and the Religious Zionist extremists of the settller movement. I can’t think of too many groups within Judaism that are more divided on Hashkafic issues that these two groups are.

Not every Chasid feels this way -but a huge number of Chasidim view the Satmar Rebbe as the ultimate authority on anything Jewish - and certainly see his views on the State of Israel that way. He saw the existence of State a violation of God’s will. Those who follow his views believe Israel should be dismantled (at least in theory) and that Palestinians (or any other non Jews) should take over. Any attempt to retain any land is sinful. And any supposed miracle that happened in taking back our land in the past is seen as the work of the devil. (Sitra Achara). Even getting the Kotel back is seen that way.

Seeing Israel as illegitimate has spurred on some of the more radical elements among them (such as Neturie Karta) towards violent activity, caring nothing about legal niceties. If they don’t like something, they attack it, sometimes causing physical harm to innocent people. Which They could care less about since they do not see them as innocent. This happened again in Bet Shemesh. From JTA:

A haredi Orthodox mob chased a teenage girl down a main thoroughfare in the Jerusalem suburb of Beit Shemesh due to her “immodest” attire…

In a video of Monday’s incident, the girl can be seen running down Nahar Hayarden Street, chased by what appears to be dozens of screaming men in haredi Orthodox garb.

Yes, this was disgusting behavior. Very un-Jewish. This is not about rejecting their Hashkafos. It is about extremist reactions to something they don’t like. True, the girl they chased down was not dressed modestly by religious standards. I even understand why residents in a neighborhood like that would object to that. They do not want their children to be exposed to women who dress immodesty. I get it. I have no problem with their feeling like that.

My problem is in how they reacted. Sure - it was just a few that reacted this way. And perhaps most of them wouldn’t. But it is the mentality of the whole that generates the behavior of the few. I’m sure that most residents of Bet Shemesh did not approve of what happened. But they surely had the same degree of anger about it. They surely have been taught how terrible immodest dress like this is. That some will react with violence should not surprise anyone.

This is what I reject. Not the Hashkafa that sees people dressed that way as immodest. I have no problem with how ‘Frum’ anyone is. Only when their Frumkeit results in this kind of behavior.

Stone throwing settler arrested (Ynet)

And then there are the Religious Zionists. They not only believe we have a biblical right to rule the land of Israel, we have an obligation to do so. And that giving any of Israel’s land to the Arabs is a violation of God’s will. They also believe that returning to our land after 2000 years of exile is the beginning of our redemption that will usher in messianic times.

I am not a religious Zionist. I do not believe that this is the first flowering of our final redemption. But I otherwise do lean in their direction. And I certainly believe in their right to believe as they do. My only real objection is their settlement activity deep into the West Bank. I believe it is both counterproductive and dangerous. Which can lead to serious problems when taken to an extreme. Such as sparking terrorist activity that hurts innocent people. From Ynet:

A group of settlers attacked a force made up of Border Police and Civil Administration personnel near the settlement of Yitzhar in the West Bank on Wednesday, lightly wounding two of the force.

Several masked teens began throwing stones at the force, which was conducting a routine patrol.

A Border Policeman was hit in the head and a Civil Administration member was hit in the back with stones.

Unfortunately there are Religious Zionists that don’t care about safety of ohers. They will cause harm to anyone they see getting in their way. True, most settlers are not like that. They want to live in peace with their neighbors – even as they settle parts of Israel deep into the West Bank. They do try and get along. I understand the Hashkafa even as I disagree with their doing it.

But when innocent people get hurt by the extremists among them, my support ends. I reject the extremists. They exhibit an extremism based on their desire to settle the land. This is their Frumkiet. And it has caused them to react violently to anyone that opposes it – including their own government.

I see no real difference the extremes of these two groups. Their behavior is an illegitimate expression of a Hashkafa taken to an extreme. There is no ‘Elu V’Elu. There is only shame and disgust. Shame because of how they make religious Jews look – and disgust at the harm they do to innocent Jews they don’t like or get in their way.

I am happy to see that the Religious Zionist settlers suspected of throwing stones and injuring people have been arrested. I don’t know if the Charedi extremists in RBS B were arrested – but they should be. And if in both cases they are convicted, they should be put together in a cell and have them fight it out. If they want to harm people in their cause, this would be a good way to do it. Let them harm each other! It will be a win/win for everybody!

Conservative Rabbi Dov Haiyun (Times of Israel)

It did seem a bit like Gestapo tactics. The arrest of Conservative Rabbi Dov Haiyun at 5 O’clock in the morning was clearly not necessary. The optics alone made made the Chief Rabbinate look like the Gestapo. And made the police look like his SS henchmen. Not to mention the fact that this was overkill in the extreme, despite the law that generated it. Rabbi Haiyun should not have been put through this humiliating experience. It has exacerbated the anger – and even hatred of the Rabbinate as well as current Israeli leadership.

Israel is not a theocracy. Its laws are not for the most part governed by Torah law. It is a Jewish Democracy that allows non observant Jews to stay non observant with impunity.

That’s how the original status quo agreement at the founding of the State was structured. The Chazon Ish agreed to the religious conditions that existed at the time. Which – as I understand it - basically protected Yeshiva students from the draft and allowed the state to cater to both the religious and non religious communities. Laws relating to that which were in place at the time would remain so.

One of the things agreed upon in this vein was that all religious matters would be in the hands of the Chief Rabbinate. No exception.

That worked pretty well until a few years ago. After the FSU desolved and Jews were allowed to immigrate to Israel - tons of them did. But many of those were not Halachcly Jewish. (Even though they considered themselves such and were well integrated into the culture). That created a demographic time bomb for the Jewish state. The solution by Religious Zionist rabbis was to convert them as quickly and expediently as possible – using long ago abandoned lenient Halachic opinions that allowed them to remain unobservant. The right wing protested saying those conversions were illegitimate and creating a genealogical nightmare. They managed to get some of their own people involved in the Rabbinate who then sided with them.

Fast forward to today. The esteem of rabbinate has deteriorated rapidly since that time. In most cases undeservedly so. Although some of the criticism may have been deserved a lot of it was political. At least from an Orthodox perspective. If the rabbinate was given control over all matters religious they have a right to implement that mandate in any way they choose. No matter who objects or why. The Rabbinate is Orthodox. Always was from day one. There was never any question about that.

It is their assertion of that very Orthodoxy that is causing so much angst - and even anger among Heterodoxy. Which is what is going on with planned extension of the egalitarian portion of the Kotel.

Heterodox rabbis will have none of this. They see themselves as equals to Orthodoxy. Which is anathema to Orthodoxy and therefore to the Rabbinate.

Which brings me back to Rabbi Haiyun. The State of Israel has – in the spirit of the status quo agreement – passed a law that any marriage ceremony not done under the auspices of the Chief Rabbinate is not only illegitimate and not recognized... it is illegal and punishable by a 2 year jail sentence.

I happen to disagree with this law. It will only make martyrs of heterodox rabbis that violate and it will create a massive backlash. Not only by heterodox rabbis but by the entire world that will say that Israel is turning into another Iran.

But as I said, although I disagree with the law I agree with its intent. Which is to eliminate illegitimate weddings from Klal Yisroel. Rabbis like Rabbi Hiyun generally do the kind of weddings that the rabbinate will not do for Halachic reasons. They will for example marry a divorcee to a Kohen, which is forbidden by Halacha. Why should the Rabbinate allow that to happen if they can prevent it?! Although in some cases Chief Rabbinate has used their authority in questionable ways, I believe that in most instances they were acting on behalf of Halacha.

The arrest of Rabbi Haiyun has generated a huge outcry by Heterodox rabbis and secular Jewish organizations that support them. They are fuming over this! From an article in the the Times of Israel here are some of the reactions :

“Today’s actions against Rabbi Haiyun marks a new and dangerous step in the ongoing attack on religious freedom and civil liberties in Israel,” read a statement from the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism released late Thursday, expressing “outrage” over the move.

USCJ head Rabbi Steven Wernick sent a sharp letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to protest the detention, Haaretz reported.

“Bet you didn’t know that performing a non Orthodox wedding in Israel is punishable by 2 years in prison? And now with new nation law, why wouldn’t we be worried about Israel’s direction as a democratic State? This is OUR @RabbiAssembly colleague,” Wernick wrote on Twitter.

“We are deeply concerned by the disturbing reports” of Haiyun’s detention, said a statement from US Jewry’s umbrella group, the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations.

The United Jewish Appeal-Federation of New York also said it was “disturbed” by the incident.

“Today’s action is dramatically inconsistent with Israel’s promise as the home of the entire Jewish people, and its commitment to equality and respect for all its citizens,” said Eric S. Goldstein, CEO of UJA-Federation of New York.

In a separate statement, the Jewish Federations of North America said it was “deeply disturbed” by the detention.

“We have high expectations and hopes for Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people. It is meant to be a home for all Jews and a reflection of Jewish values,” the statement read.

The US-based Rabbinical Assembly, which represents Conservative rabbis worlwide, also said it was “outraged” by the detention of Haiyun, a former president of RA-Israel, describing the incident as “shocking.”

“Today’s detention of a respected former President of the Israel RA gravely undermines the integrity of government institutions and is contrary to the values of Israel and the Jewish people,” said RA CEO Rabbi Julie Schonfeld…

I’m not surprised by any of this. And I do believe it could have been avoided. But what is missing from all these reactions is any comment at all anyone or group representing Orthodoxy. For obvious reasons, in my view. Although they too might object to the heavy handedness of this - and the terrible optics, I’m sure they agree with their objectives. There is no possible way any Orthodox rabbi worthy of the title would consider violations of Halacha an acceptable practice in Israel – no matter what the intentions of the violators would be.

What about the loss of Diaspora support this might generate? There could be substantial financial consequences if that support is lost. The vast majority of Jews in the Diaspora are in fact not Orthodox. That is an indisputable fact.

It is true that this event will not help matters. But it is really only a matter of time before any of this matters anyway. As is rather well known by now, intermarriage among non Orthodox Jews in the Diaspora is at a 70% right now. I do not see that percentage going down. If anything it will increase. In fact some very prominent Jews actually advocate intermarriage preferring it over in-marriage – seeing that as racist. And creating a ghetto of 2!

There is little if anything that can be done about this trend. Which has been accelerated by a Heterodoxy that either ignored it or accepted it. As did Reform who considers the non Jewish partner in such a marriage if they live their lives Jewishly (whatever that may mean to them). And a Conservative movement that already has some of of their rabbis performing intermarriages.

Sadly, it’s only a matter of time before the great tragedy of losing millions of Jews will happen. I don’t see any way out of this – even as Orthodox outreach intensifies and has become more successful than ever. It is still a drop in the bucket compared to the millions of Jews that will intermarry out of Judaism.

Back to the issue at hand. True, all the screaming and anger could have been avoided. But the handwriting is on the wall. There is no way that Israel should in any way legitimize heterodoxy, because that will not only NOT help our continuity as a people - it will hinder it by creating the same conditions in Israel that exist in America. That should never be allowed to happen.

I know this is an unpopular view among many of my Orthodox friends to my religious left. But that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

I will surely consume them, says the Lord; there are no grapes on the vine, nor figs on the fig tree, and the leaf will fade; and what I gave them will pass away from them. (Yirmiyahu - 8:13)

Eicha? How could it happen? That’s the ultimate question about the tragedy of losing the Beis HaMikdash. It is asked every year on this day of Tisha B’Av. I ask it about the Holocaust. Not just on Tisha B’Av but every time I see Holocaust era images.

Images like Kristallnacht - where Jewish business were vandalized and all manner of antisemitic behavior was the norm. Where Jews were blamed for all the troubles in Germany - and even the world.

Images of Jews being forced into cramped ghettos where disease was rampant, and people were starving and dying in the streets.

Images of slave labor where Jews were worked and starved to death.

Images of groups of Jews being forced to dig their own graves, stripped and shot into them – their naked bodies left to rot.

Images of Jews herded into ‘showers’ en masse day after day; stripped naked as they entered; doors locked; and then gassed to death. After which their bodies were cremated.

Images where Jew turned against Jew just to survive.

Images of little babies smothered to death in an effort to keep them quiet so the Jews in hiding would not be discovered.

Images of Jews selected for torturous and often deadly medical experiments.

What exactly was it that motivated the barbarism of so many of the German people? ...where the majority who saw it happening just shrugged it off? ...or actually believed that the Jews had it coming? True there were some heroes that helped some Jews escape the deadly fate of their brethren. Some even risking not only their own lives but those of their families. But they were exceedingly rare compared to the vast number of people all over Europe that just stood by and watched it happen.

The entire world was closed off to Jews that tried to escape Europe during the Holocaust. Jews got slaughtered while good men did nothing. There was no way out.

If there was a manner of torture that existed, it was used against Jews by Nazis and their collaborators and sympathizing Eurpeoan antisemites during the Holocaust.

What evil could anyone possibly see with German Jewry? Religious leaders and lay people. Jews with beards and Peyos. Observant Jews that were well integrated into the culture and even non observant Jews who lived their lives no differently then their gentile neighbors. Jews that were as patriotic as their next door neighbors; Jews that fought gallantly for Germany in previous wars. Jews with medals for bravery; Jews that gave so much to Germany in every facet of life becoming doctors, lawyers, accountants, bankers, builders, and all manner of successful business people. Jews who were prouder of being German than they were of being Jewish! Not a single Jew was spared!

Why did both of my parents and my brothers have to suffer? Why did my father have to experience the loss of his first wife, two of his sons, and 2 twins baby daughters? (Which my two surviving brothers experienced with him.) Why did they have to suffer the indignities of running and hiding in underground bunkers - fearing for their lives if they were caught - until they were liberated by the Russians?

Why did my mother have to hide in a forest, hunting down food at night, usually scraps of food discarded by Poles. Why did she have to see her mother step on a land mine while running from Nazi soldiers chasing her down? And then telling my mother to keep running.That was the last time my mother saw her mother. I know of no gentler soul than my mother. Why was she subjected to this horrible fate along with the rest of European Jewry?

Jews were a despized ‘race’ in Germany despite their high level of integration. For some reason Jews were blamed for everything. So despised were they that Germany’s leadership thought they should be eradicated from the face of the earth. So strong was that belief that even when they knew they were going to lose the war, they accelerated their ‘death machine’ to kill as many Jews as they could before being totally defeated. As though it was a religious mission!

How could it be that the Chosen people of God were subjected to this in ways that were for the most part inescapable? I ask this question all the time.

Survivors were traumatized for life. Some were mentally impaired beyond help. But most readjusted quiclkly to their freedom and made new lives for themselves in new countries. Especially Israel where – after declaring its independence - opened it’s borders to all Jewish refugees from the holocaust who were no longer welcome in their former homes in Europe. Many surviving in Displaced Persons (DP) camps until a country was found that would take them. But even as they readjusted to their new lives, the horrors of what they lived through never fully left them.

This was the utlmate Tzadik V’Ra Lo. The ultimate question of why bad things happen to good people. Many survivors lost their faith because of this experience. It’s not too difficult to understand why. The Satmar Rebbe is puported to have said that any Jew that lived through the Holocaust had paid his dues and would be granted Olalm Habah even if they stopped being observant because of it.

But many survivors retained their faith and returned to a fully observant life. This was the case with my parents. But that doesn’t answer the question. Clearly the hand of God was in this. It could not have happened if God did not will it so. The question is, why?

Some people have tried to provide answers to that question. But I believe they are all foolish for trying. It is impossible to know the mind of God under the conditions of Hester Panim. God’s face is hidden from us now. For His own reasons. We no longer have Nevi’im - prophets with whom God directly communicates. Speculating about His motives only causes pain to the survivors and their families. There is no rational explanation for the Jewish people having experienced the virtual Tochecha the Torah describes. But experience it our people did.

If not for the Holocaust, I would not be here today. The fact that my father lost his first wife caused him to marry my mother. Had it not been for the Holocaust, all of my children, my grandchildren and I would not exist.

I am perplexed by this whole situation and remain with those questions as I ask the ultimate why? Why am I spared anything remotely like this? Why do I get to live in complete freedom and great comfort? Never having suffered a tiny fraction of what my parents and brothers suffered? Why do I even exist? Why do my children exist? By what sense of Divine Justice does any of this make sense?

I have no answers. Only questions even as I remain a believing Jew.

Wrong Answer!

Charedi Poverty in Israel is Endemic

Bringing Jews Home

The Three Categories of Kiruv

Growth and Divisiveness in the Charedi World

Power Trip? I Don't Think So

A Message From God

Defending the Indefensible

The Triumph of Evil

The 'Frumkeit Train"

The Good, Bad, and Grey of Feminism

Never Happened! (Or Did It?)

Liberals, Conservatives, and Orthodox Judaism

The Best/Worst Technological Advance of Our Time

Can Israel be a Jewish State and a Democracy?

The Trump Derangement Syndrome.

The Right Education for My Child

When Elu V'Eu Does Not Apply

The Right Goal -The Wrong Method

Why?