Mishmar

No Shortcuts in Spirituality

2008-06-22T18:07:00.003-04:00

From an article in this week's Yated on the role of segulos in Judaism:

...In the past, we’ve mentioned the recitation of the parsha of the monn, which is clearly explained as effective only insofar as it strengthens our emunah, our faith, that it is G-d - and only G-d - Who provides for our sustenance. It is the same, explains the Mishnah Berurah (1:13), for the ‘segulah’ of reciting Ashrei, korbanos, the Akeidah, and more. The power and the segulah are in the way reciting these things will change our lives and bring us closer to Hashem - nothing more, and nothing less...

A ‘segulah’ which does none of these, but rather seems more like magic - independent of any religious growth - is far from a harmless ‘experiment.’ It brings us dangerously close to blurring the lines between believing solely in Hashem and in the power of our service to Him, and believing in copper snakes and in the power of Moshe Rabbeinu’s uplifted arms...

We are never alone or hopeless, so long as we can turn to Hashem. Doing the will of Hashem is the one and only real ‘segulah.’ All other segulos are a part of this greater segulah. This segulah may not always be easy, but it is equally available to every single one of us...

Towards a Torah Open-Mindedness

2008-05-26T17:33:00.006-04:00

To what extent can a person identify as "Open-Minded" and as a Torah Jew at the same time? Assuming that there is an appropriate Open-Mindedness, is that defined by an intellectual tolerance and openness up to specific points, or does the entire concept of "Open-Mindedness" need to be redefined?

An excerpt from a thoughtful post by Dr. William Kolbrener:

...To be open-minded in this sense means to be open to the energies which will transform me into the person I want to become. Without incorporating those energies, I will remain in silent battle with those part of myself I can't face, instead of using those energies as a means of personal transformation. This not only means acknowledging things about which I'd rather forget (or repress) about myself; it also may mean acknowledging a past from which I had hoped to distance myself, the stranger within.

My own thoughts are that there are two aspects to any appropriate “Torah Open-Mindedness”:

First, “intellectual empathy”, the ability to appropriately identify with another’s mindset. In conversation, this would mean when appropriate, listening to a person without agreeing with their point of view, but entering their mindset to make them feel genuinely understood, which could be included in some cases under nosei b’ol im chaveiro.

Second, there is honestly recognizing and accepting one’s own humanity, rather than disowning it. R. Yerucham Levovitz(Daas Torah, V’zos Haberacha)writes that the Chovos HaLevavos himself, may have gone through the challenges mentioned in Shaar Yichud Hama’aseh(including, I assume, the intellectual ones listed there), and successfully overcome them.

There are sources which go further and say that it is specifically the challenges or the “skeletons in the closet” which are the cause of growth in avodas Hashem (eg, the letter from R. Hutner where he says about gedolim, “but who knows about their struggles, their failures, their falls and their regressions”).

As far the application to “Torah Open-Mindedness” is concerned, if one realizes that one suffers, or had suffered, from the same or from a similar malady, it could lead to a greater understanding of another's mindset.

Growing Pains

2008-03-18T23:17:00.004-04:00

From a post by Rabbi Lazer Brody:

Linda, you ask the question, "Why have I changed? Who has changed me?" Here's a bombshell for your parents and teachers: Hashem is changing you. Hashem is using your bad decisions for your own good, because He loves you so much. He doesn't want you to be a shallow Jewish girl that discusses wigs and clothes styles all day long. Since you haven't developed a personal relationship with Hashem up until now, He wants you to do so by starting from scratch.

Along these lines, the Ramban indeed says that the purpose of a nisayon, a spiritual test, is to bring out the best in the person that passes it. Teshuva can also make bad decisions into something positive.

Of course, there can be nisyonos, teshuvah, and nekudas habechirah on different levels, no matter how frum one is. Indeed any growth needs reflection and challenge, rather than shallowness, as explained here.

No Perfection

2008-02-05T22:01:00.000-05:00

I am a rather lukewarm football fan, and was travelling in Manhattan, late Sunday night, during what must have been the final moments of the Super Bowl, or shortly thereafter. What alerted me that the Giants had won was when I heard jubilant cries when the subway pulled into three stations. Apparently, these New Yorker's disagree with the view advanced (see here) that "football is simply a bunch of men pummeling each other", as also was apparent with the parade which took place today in lower Manhattan.

What does interest me about Sunday's event was the concept of perfection. I am wondering if going into an important competition with a perfect record puts pressure on a team, and caused them not to win. Pressure can be an incentive, but perhaps this was a case of too much of it.

Today was also another "super day", namely Super Tuesday. While not as exciting as Super Sunday, it is much more significant in terms of current events, and I managed to vote this morning when the polls were relatively empty.

Pictures: A Time for Music XXI

2008-01-16T21:09:00.000-05:00

Pictures from Sunday night's HASC Concert are available here (the slide show view can be accessed by clicking the middle button on the lower right).

HASC XXI Concert

2008-01-14T22:41:00.000-05:00

Sometimes when you're feeling all alone, you need some happiness to call your own. Nothing is going the way it should, you're trying to do the best you could.

Lift up your eyes to the sky, your life's in His hand. Trust in Him - He will reply, guiding all your steps. Always at your side, you are His joy and pride.

And don't you know you're never alone, it doesn't matter where you are. There's nothing in His eyes more special than you, wherever you go Hashem goes with you.

The above, sung by Avroham Fried, was the accompanying music to the HASC video at last night's concert at Lincoln Center's Avery Fisher Hall(to sample, see Holyland's Greatest Hits, song # 1).

For me, the evening's highlight was the "Four Tenors" , who sang Mona Rosenblum's stirring "Moriah"(click on # 2 to sample) and "Shiyiboneh Beis Hamikdash"(see below). The four were Dudu Fisher, Ohad, Avroham Fried and Chazzan Yitzchok Meir Helfgot.

Incidentally, Chazan Benzion Miller had previously sung "Shyiboneh" at a Time for Music # 17(click on # 9 to sample), where the entire theme was Jerusalem. On the redemption theme last night, in addition to "Moriah" and "Shyiboneh", Avroham Fried began with his classic "No Jew Will Be Left Behind"(here), and also offered his powerful "Harachaman"("Nu Nu Nu"), in addition to other selections from his latest album (click on # 11 to sample).

Surprises this year included Wally Eastwood's comedic juggling(he juggles balls onto a keyboard to play songs), Dudu Fisher's parody of a Chazzon's audition, a comedic clip of Country Yossie interviews, and a guest appearance by Ohad.

Finally, I enjoyed Etan Katz's heartfelt "Lmaancha"(the title track from here), as well as his brother Shlomo's "Shabbos Kodesh"("Yismechu") and "Niggun Nevo"(#'s 5 and 6, here), the latter sung during the concert as well as during the finale.

See here for pictures.

Berdichever Philosophy

2007-12-30T15:35:00.000-05:00

From an article in Mishpacha Magazine by Rabbi Horowitz:

I do not profess to understand Hashem’s workings, but perhaps when the Jewish people are one day in need of forgiveness, the 2 of you and all others who unconditionally love and believe in their at-risk sons and daughters will become Klal Yisroel’s Reb Levi Yitzchok Bardichiver and advocate for all of Hashem’s children.

This is a beautiful thought. The Jewish people need zechusim(merits), and the above scenario may very well play a role in hashgacha(Divine providence).

I also remember reading a story regarding a Chasidic rabbi(I forget which) whose followers wanted him to drive away his wayward child. The rebbe refused to do so, and responded that his actions prevented heavenly accusations against his own followers, who deserved to be "driven away" as well, according to strict heavenly justice.

Similarly, Rachel's seeing to it that Leah would not be embarrassed and her allowing a competitor to remain in the same home, enabled her to be an advocate for the Jewish people many years down the line, when during the reign of Menashe, there was the sin of idolatry, specifically, bringing an image into the Beis Hamikdash(Rashi to Yirmeyah 31:14, mentioned in above article).

Of course, there is a time when it is best for all concerned for a child to move out of the house, but when the issue is simply one of "what will the neighbors say", then the above thought would be appropriate.

Plausibility Arguments

2007-12-19T21:09:00.000-05:00

From an article by Professor Aviezer in the latest Jewish Action:

"I shall challenge the above views and demonstrate that there are, in fact, striking similarities between knowledge in the realm of science and knowledge in the realm of religion. These similarities will be shown to form the basis for rational arguments supporting the Divinity of the Torah. A rational approach to belief in the Torah and the existence of God has been the subject of several recent books However, this analysis is quite different from those found in other accounts....

"The scientific discoveries listed above—and many others—correspond to the words of the Torah. The many areas of harmony between science and Torah constitute important plausibility arguments for religious belief. In the twenty-first century, the person of faith need not feel apologetic about his or her beliefs.

It should be emphasized, however, that the comprehensive agreement between science and Torah described above does not prove that the Torah is of Divine origin, and it certainly does not prove that God exists. Plausibility arguments are not a substitute for faith.

Faith (emunah) is the thread that weaves together our religious beliefs and our practices."

Note:
As with any post of this sort, my purpose is to bring to attention an article which I find of interest, and which others may as well. My intent is definitely not to create a hangout for skeptics--frum or otherwise-- who wish to attack ikkarie emunah(key principles of Jewish faith). There are other places for the latter, and in any event, my time is limited as far as editing and monitoring is concerned. For now, I am leaving moderation off, but if you wish to comment, please bear in mind that this is a frum blog.

Kosher Cheeseburgers?

2007-12-19T17:46:00.000-05:00

Although I do not have any particular urge to eat non-kosher cheeseburgers(although as in Rashi Vayikra 20:26, that is not the reason why to refrain from eating non-kosher food), I found this news blurb on Yeshiva World interesting.

This is the part of Talila's menu which discusses the item:

"Talia’s To Go offers something that customers observing a diary-free diet, due to religious or health reasons, are going to love - Kosher Parve Cheeseburger. Add a slice of American or Mozzarella flavored Tofu Cheese to your burger, sandwich, or wrap. Longing for a smear of dairy free cream cheese? We got it! All cheeses are made from Tofu. They are parve, 100% vegan, cholesterol and fat free. Best of all – they taste like the real thing!"

Is this simply a negative aspect of consumerism which drives up demand for additional exotic kosher products? Or can anyone find a positive aspect to availability of this food product(eg, helping someone non-frum abstain from actual cheeseburgers)? What is actually the difference between this and any imitation milk product ?

Relevant mareh mekomos could be the oft-quoted Ramban in Kedoshim, as well as the gemara in Chullin quoting Yalta(109b). There was a recent article in Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society( I believe by Rabbi Ari Z. Zivotofsky) which discussed just this question.

On a related note, here is a link to an article which discusses surimi(scroll down to "Kosher Lobster?!" in the CRC article) by Rabbi Zushe Blech, who parenthetically, I heard this past Motzoie Shabbos on the Zev Brenner show.

I suppose that the topic of food caught my interest just after the taanis, and I will conclude by stating the obvious, that this post is for discussion purposes only.

women rabbis, tefila groups and the conflict betweem moral sensibility and halacha

2007-12-17T11:35:00.000-05:00

Reading much of the blogging done last week about women rabbis brought to my mind a fascinating din in hilchos tumas tzara’as. Tzara’as must be declared impure by a kohein. A strange situation can occur where a talmid chacham sees a nega and knows exactly what the halacha is, but must go to a kohein, who might be an am ha’aretz, in order to have the proper declaration made (see Rashi VaYikra 14:35). While various achronim find this din perplexing (see the Parashas Derachim’s discussion), it would seem that some modern minds don’t quite grasp that there is a kashe to ask. Thus, it troubles them not that a women who might have spent years studying hilchos niddah (just as an example) and be fully proficient in its intricacies is expected to ask her shaylos to her local Rabbi who may be less knowledgeable than herself. It troubles them not that a highly trained professional is not entitled to dispense advice of a binding final-word nature, but must defer to someone else simply because she is of the wrong gender.

What is especially fascinating is the attitude of the MO camp (for lack of a better label) on this issue. Imagine a student who spends years in medical school studying, who passes his exams with flying colors, who shows all the capability of being a promising doctor and doing great good. What would we expect the reaction of such a person to be if when it came time for the residency program to begin and for all that study to be put into practice they were told that they cannot continue further and are barred from the practice of medicine; they were told to continue studying and doing research, but to expect no papers to be published, expect to not be taken seriously by peers in the field, expect to be accused of pursuing medicine for false motives and under questionable pretenses rather than for the goal of doing good? This is exactly the situation that has been created by those who will not question the heter of R' Soloveitchik to teach women gemara, as kvar horah zakein, but fail to provide any opportunity for women to use that learning for practical good or appreciate why they should want to do so.

The questions of women’s tefilah groups, rabbis, and what-not are matters of halacha and need poskim with insight and sensitivity to guide us to answers, answers which must be more than an exercise in seeking a "Rabbinic way"to arrive at some predetermined conclusion. I am not in this post tackling the halachic parameters of these issues. I am, though, questioning the attitude of those who dismiss these questions as trivial, question the motives of those who raise them, or who offer pat answers that read value statements into what may be the realm of gezeiras hakasuv. I doubt anyone would say that halacha takes a lesser view of talmud Torah or talmidei chachamim simply because the psak of nega must be made by a kohein and not a talmid chacham. Why then have some come to the conclusion that because women cannot be Rabbis it means the Torah rejects equality as a value?

What amazes me is hearing the argument by those who otherwise identity with MO that since certain feminist concerns originate in secular society and not Torah, they are automatically to be rejected. Doesn’t the whole concept of Torah u’Mada according to any of its definitions direct us to incorporate the positive values of the external world into our framework of Torah life? And what values are we speaking of? Feminism as a sociological and philosophical movement is multi-faceted, and to dismiss all its appects in one broad stroke is simply wrong. We certainly accept the value of kavod ha’adam and kavod habriyos as validating the worth of all people- these are not external values, but at the core of Torah itself. Is a woman’s quest for spirituality any less significant because of her gender?

Halachic answers must be followed whether or not they are in concert with our modern sensibilities of equality. But that being said, where answers do not conform to what we see as fair and just, it does not mean we must dismiss our questions, our groping for better answers, our discomfort at what we perceive to be a conflict. Halacha is perhaps unique in that religious rapture must be channeled through a precisely defined system, which may dampen those very feelings of religious exuberance which sustain commitment. Accepting the halachic answer does not make that challenge any less real or meaningful.

There is a pervasive sense that moral discomfort in the face of G-d’s command is itself a pgam in one’s religiosity. There is a smug, dismissive attitude toward those who raise these issues, a sense that their questions are indicative of a lesser commitment to avodas Hashem, their yiras shamayim is deficient, as sense that their motives must be tainted and impure. (Undoubtedly this post will be read by some in the same way). I cannot see how such an attitude can be reconciled with statements like these made by R’ Ahron Lichtenstein:

When there is a conflict between the tzav and the moral order, what do we do about it?...The message of the akeida is clear: God’s command takes precedence, in every respect, over our moral sensibility and our conscientious objections… On the other hand, as those who do seek to ingrain moral sensitivity in ourselves and in our children, we need not dismiss the ambivalences, the difficulties and contradictions (at the initial level, surely)....We need not dismiss the wrestling and grappling as being a reflection of poor yirat Shamayim, of spiritual shallowness, or of a lack of frumkeit. Inasmuch as goodness itself is an inherent component of frumkeit, the goodness which is at the root of the problems, struggles and tensions is itself part of yirat Shamayim—and a legitimate part. If the sense of moral goodness is legitimate, then the questing and the grappling are also legitimate.

Some have used the fact that women’s tefila groups lack the distinctive kedusha of a minyan as a reason to call for them to be disbanded. Strange that if a group calls itself an "Amein group" it can meet every morning for Shachris and is touted as a great thing, but call it a tefila group and it suddenly is wrong. But to address the point more directly, is not satisfying the needs of women not itself a worthy value? A gemara comes to mind: lo mipnei she'smicha b'nashim elah la'asos nachas ruach l'nashim. The act of smicha on a korban as no spiritual value whatsoever if done by women, but Chazal permitted it because it gave 'nachas ruach' (Chagiga 16b). Again, I am not suggesting a halachic conclusion, but simply noting that the issue needs study and we should not be quick to make value judgments.

The only agenda that religion should serve is avodas Hashem - not -isms of any sort. To a certain degree the Orthodox feminist movement has shot itself in the foot by allowing itself to be identified with a broad constituency that we would only be kidding ourselves to think has lishma and avodah at heart. But, there are those who do. Last week we read a lot about the response to those that don’t. Where is the response to the others? What opportunities can we extend to these women to inspire our communities? What role do we expect them to take, what role do we allow them to take? How can we show that we value and esteem their religious efforts? Telling people what can’t be done should be accompanied by some thoughtful answers to questions like these. But first you need to respect these concerns as real and legitimate, and I don't know if we have come that far yet.

Jewish Heroism

2007-12-09T22:34:00.000-05:00

There is an article by Rabbi Naphtali Hoff in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of heroism and Chanukah. There is a quote from Ariel Sharon regarding heroism and the Holocaust:

The heroism of the Jewish mother hugging her children close in their final hour, the heroism of the father who risked his life to find a lone piece of bread for his son, the heroism of those who helped their fellows in conditions of hard labor and freezing temperatures, the heroism of those who comforted a dying friend, the heroism of those who conquered despair in the death camps, the heroism of those who preserved Jewish tradition and held a Passover Seder while hiding in the ruins of the ghetto..

Rabbi Hoff concludes:

While we certainly acknowledge the Maccabees’ strength, courage and fortitude, it would be disgraceful to reduce their legacy to the fleeting glory of physical prowess and military might. Had Chanukah been about that alone, it would have soon faded far into our distant past, together with many other military successes in Jewish history.

What has secured Chanukah’s eternal place among our people is its emphasis on the Jews’ indomitable spirit.

May we see miracles "today, just as in those days". Happy Chanukah to all !

Learning from Lobsters

2007-12-03T21:06:00.000-05:00

I remember reading the lobster mashal in one of Rabbi Twerski's writings, and today came across it online.

The point to note is that the stimulus that enables the lobster to grow is discomfort. If not for the discomfort, the lobster would never expand its shell!... If criticism makes one feel uncomfortable (as it generally does), rather than feeling resentful, one should seize the opportunity to utilize it as a stimulus for growth.

Easier said than done, but definitely true!

Slifkin in the Jewish Press III

2007-11-29T18:54:00.000-05:00

For those who haven't tired of the issue, the Slifkin debate is again in the Jewish Press. What follows are mostly some general thoughts, beyond the topic of dinosaurs and evolution.For better or for worse, I have little interest in dinosaurs, the age of the universe, or in evolution. I understand of course, that there are others who are interested in these topics. My interest has rather been in the Science/Chazal issues, and I have always appreciated those who treat those topic separately from the former issues. To me, nuance and clarity of thought should be the name of the game, and separate topics deserve separate treatments, no matter what positions one takes.

I have quoted, positively, Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch Weinreb's forward to Challenge of Creation(and linked to a Jerusalem Post article discussing the issue), but noted clearly that that I was referring to the general points of intellectual inquiry, which have an application beyond the particular book. Similarly, one of the main reasons I attended the Challenge of Creation book launch was to hear Rabbi Weinreb, whose thoughts I enjoy hearing on many issues. Indeed, at the book launch, he mentioned the importance of the ability to think and to express a question, and that this could lead to strengthening, not weakening of emunah(based on my general recall of the speech).

I am still interested, though, in some aspects of the Jewish Press article linked above. For example, how does Rabbi Slifkin understand the following Moreh Nevuchim?

When we make Kiddush on Shabbos we recite the words of the fourth commandment stating that God rested (vayonach) on the seventh day. Chazal say that this means that creation came to halt on that day. The Rambam, in Moreh Nevuchim, explains this as follows: “On each day of the six day creation week, novel entities were formed outside of the system of nature currently in operation and, on the seventh day (Shabbos), the state of the world became lasting and established just as it is at present.”

In a more general sense, as I have commented recently on Hirhurim, I am more concerned with intellectual honesty in public discussion, and to an extent, less afraid where the chips fall on the Slifkin issue. In other words, each side should admit to any weakness or perceived weakness in its positions, and not be afraid of allowing time to the other's arguments. This goes beyond the Slifkin issue, and I think applies to explaining any issue of Torah hashkafa, Charedi policy, or even basic emunah(I realize that emunah al pi chakirah is not a simple issue, but I'm referring to those who benefit from the approach).

I am not saying that this blog is necessarily the place to discuss every single issue, and therefore I give thought to what I post. But there should be a place for rigorous back and forth, for allowing the same thought process that is used in learning gemarah. I believe that intellectual honesty, strengthens, not weakens the Torah, and in the spirit of attempting that, I see fit to allow a link on this blog to a contra-Slifkin view, as well.

Annapolis Peace Conference

2007-11-27T22:24:00.000-05:00

In reaction to the Annapolis Peace Conference, Orthodox Jewish groups are focusing not only on political advocacy, but also on generating awareness on what Yerushalayim means to Jews spiritually, and that it can not be taken for granted.

These topics were mentioned at the Agudah Convention, this past Motzoie Shabbos, which I attended. I also link to the OU's IPA website on the topic, and to The Gift of Jerusalem, from this past week's Jewish Press.

Third Ohel Benefit Concert

2007-11-27T21:52:00.000-05:00

From "Every Neshema Can Soar", a musical video presentation at the Ohel Concert, earlier this month, sung by Shlomie Dachs and Son, to the tune of his "Hamalach"(click on song # 4, here, to sample):

"Tatty, I wonder, I am so blessed,
But my friend-he's very different;he's not like the rest,
He's so shy and quiet, he can't really play,
Yet he's still one of the letters, so precious, each one Hashem made ..."

"It's true there are special ones,
But he will learn, my precious son,
For I know the people who work and who teach.
With their skills they will touch his mind,
He will never be left behind,
And his Torah will be within reach.

The theme of the concert was indeed one of a Sefer Torah, and an actual one was dedicated at the concert.

Also unique was the fact that the concert was held despite a Broadway theater strike, thanks to the intervention of local politicians, as well as the dedication of the stage hands, ticket-takers, etc., who worked free of charge when they found out about the worthiness of the cause!

Featured at the concert were Yaakov Shwekey, Shlomo Simcha, Shloime Dachs, Chazzan Yechezkel Klang, Shalsheles Junior, and a child chazzan, Simcha Leveinstein.

Silence is Interpreted as Acquiescence

2007-11-21T17:25:00.000-05:00

Rabbi Eli Teitlebaum writes to the Jewish Press:

I would like to add my name to those who approve of Rabbi Yakov Horowitz’s Nov. 9 op-ed article “You Might End Up Dead.” While these crazies are fortunately few in number, they make a massive chillul Hashem, since the media do not differentiate between wild extremists and most other Orthodox Jews.

If we remain silent when women are attacked by misguided individuals, we are all guilty – as we learn from what happened when the holy shevet of Binyamin refused to take action when a woman was violated by a wild gang of youths in their midst. A tremendous number of Jews died in vain and the shevet of Binyamin was nearly wiped out.

One can resort to civil disobedience but never to violence. Often our Torah leaders are afraid to call mass protests against public Torah desecrations only because of the fear that some individuals will get out of hand and receive all the media attention, thereby causing a chillul Hashem instead of a kiddush shem shomayim.

All of us must protest such behavior lest our silence be interpreted as acquiescence. Unless we all clearly distance ourselves from such behavior we, too, are guilty.

Let us hope for the day when letters such as this one will no longer be necessary !

Respect for Torah Leaders

2007-11-04T21:22:00.000-05:00

Rabbi Avi Shafran has an important essay about the vital importance of according proper respect to the views of gedolie Torah(Torah leaders).

He quotes the chazal regarding "binyan yeladim stirah, v'stiras zekenim binyan":

Commenting on the decision made by the Judean King Rechavam (King Solomon’s son) to shun the advice of the elders of his father’s court and heed instead the advice of younger advisors (Kings I:12), the Talmud remarks: “[What might seem] constructive on the part of the young [can in fact be] destructive; and [what might seem] destructive on the part of elders [can in fact be] constructive” (Nedarim, 40a). Rechavam’s wrong choice brought schism to the Jewish kingdom, fanning the flames of rebellion.

I noted the balance, towards the end of the article, between having an opinion and respecting views of gedolim:

It’s not only the so-called “Law of Unintended Consequences” that can figure into weighty decisions. A host of factors can make the right decision seem the wrong one, puzzling observers, even outraging them. To be sure, we all have a right to our opinion, and much can be gained by sharing our perspectives with others.

But two vital commodities in all-too-short supply these days are humility and respect for elders. We do well to consider that our confidence—“evidence” and all—that we know what is best no more qualifies us to make the right decision than putting a ranger’s hat on a bear’s head and a shovel in his hand makes him an expert on forest conservation.

At times, I will meet a person who will tell me, or imply , that I am not permitted to even express an opinion because I do not have daas Torah. I believe that such views do harm to true kvod chachamim, by implying that we live in a communist society, where a person is not even allowed to express an opinion!

This is why I am happy that Rabbi Shafran writes "we all have a right to our opinion, and much can be gained by sharing our perspectives with others". Of course, there is an appropriate way to express an opinion, and how to discuss words of Torah leaders. Much depends on the forum and on the care one takes in choosing how one expresses himself.

Kavad hatorah is vital, yet it does not come naturally, given that we naturally value personal autonomy. We should not, however, make it harder than it actually is, by implying that daas Torah means that we are not permitted to think for ourselves.

Creating a Safe Atmosphere for Dialogue

2007-11-02T01:49:00.000-04:00

Rabbi Yaakov Horowitz has a very important article that discusses the importance of encouraging and allowing for the greatest degree of participation in public dialogue, as opposed to intimidating people, intentionally or otherwise, into silence. Chazal tell us that one can learn from everyone, even from the smallest person, so we should not intimidate people, but rather, encourage participation to the greatest extent possible.

This is a topic which is near to my heart, and I think that it is also the first such article I have seen which made this point in the Charedi press(I will stand corrected if I'm wrong). If so, I give a big yasher koach to Rabbi Horowitz !

First, a little humor:

In my hometown of Monsey, New York, there are several weekly newspapers that are mailed to the community free of charge. I never cease to be amazed when people decline to sign their names in letters to the editor about mundane matters. Here are the types of letters that appear week after week:

“I would like to thank the Town officials for doing such a wonderful job plowing the streets after last week's snowstorm” E.R.

“I really enjoy the Dvar Torah column every week.” Name Withheld.

Whenever I read one of those letters, my first reaction is, “Wow, you are really going out on a limb there! No wonder you didn’t want to post your name on that letter.”

The article continues:

What is most troubling is that the only voices that are being silenced are the moderate ones. The kanoim, those in our community with the most extremist views, comfortably thunder their macho’os, protestations, in very public forums with nary a concern, while those who have more mainstream views are intimidated to express them.

Rabbi Horowitz concludes:

We desperately need forums where these matters are candidly discussed in an environment of mutual respect with an eye towards generating solutions to these challenges; where all views are encouraged and appreciated and where those who care enough – and have the courage – to ask tough questions are venerated for their dedication to the future of our children.

I would just add that each community and publication will have it's own limits of acceptable tolerance, of the limits of elu velu . The specific focus of Rabbi Horowitz's article is regarding educational matters such as helping troubled teens, where there is indeed a greater leeway for discussion and different opinion. As opposed to certain social or educational issues, an idea on a more haskafically/theologically significant topic, such as on Science and Torah will obviously not get printed unless it is acceptable by the vaad ruchani(rabbinical board) of the particular publication. I can understand that.

However, within certain limits, one can try to have more tolerance even on hashkafa topics. The idea is not to extend the limits of elu v'elu on core issues, but rather to find more tolerance within them on the non-core issues. The problem becomes, of course, if every small topic turns into a core issue; however, Not Everything Is a Ten.

It is also important to distinguish between agreeing with an idea, versus merely hearing a person out, and trying to understand where they are coming from. Participants need to think with nuance, and to carefully distinguish between various ideas, and to ask for clarification. Obviously, not all forums lend themselves out to this to the same extent , but all discussion should see nuance as a value.

I indeed believe that the image of the Torah community would be improved, were we to take this to message to heart.

Finally, there are, recent, positive examples where more than one Charedi publication has made an effort to encourage a participation of a wider range of ideas. I believe in giving credit where it is due, and perhaps such an example will be a subject of a future posting on this blog.

Benefits of Public Self-Criticism

2007-10-25T21:17:00.000-04:00

There was a discussion on this thread about the issue of Ramat Beit Shemesh fringe-element zealotry. Someone termed such discussion "Charedi bashing".

The other side of the issue is that if there is silence, people might say that the Charedi world:

1) does not care about its own image

2) allows itself to be taken hostage by fringe elements

3) is not open to honest self-criticism

We would then have to apply the same standards to all other groups--Jewish or non-Jewish-- if and when they are defensive about discussing and responding to outside criticism. Yet most people, at least political conservatives, argue that all communities need to take responsibility with " the buck stops here " attitude, and that denying responsibility and shifting blame is no option.

It is true that there are distinctions between the Israeli situation and certainly some of the situations in the previous paragraph, and also that the Charedi community has strong and healthy points. There is also complexity to Ramat Beit Shemesh fringe zealotry, which includes factors such as different groups and the secular-religious kulturkampf, both of which I would guess, make a quick solution difficult.

But if the default Charedi response is to not take a strong public stance, then it becomes harder to argue any cogent pro-Charedi position. Without appropriate self-criticism, Charedi defenders wouldn't be able point to honest, public self-reflection as part of a larger position which they have staked out.

This is in addition to people within the Frum/Charedi world--children and adults-- who will question, saying, "what in the world is going on?".

Perhaps there could be an interactive session with rabbonim and lay leaders, where people can honestly debate, ask questions and offer suggestions without fear of criticism, given that the issue is as important as any other community issue to Klal Yisrael and Kvod Shomayim.

Americans can apply pressure, which will help those who wish to thwart the zealots, but there is a need to harness that collective power and work with the rabbonim in Israeli community.

Power of a Mitzvah

2007-10-18T19:37:00.000-04:00

There is beautiful and inspiring story about Migdal Ohr posted here:

While the scroll was carefully laid on the table next to a special pen and ink, Rabbi Grossman addressed the soldiers. "My holy ones! I am going to bestow upon you the merit of a holy mitzvah, which can be considered a once in a life time opportunity. Each one of you will complete a letter in the Torah scroll. While you are executing this holy task, each one of you should pray the prayer of his heart and request from G-d that the merit of the letter he has completed will protect him in battle. Holy sparks will emanate from these sacred letters and disperse around you, creating a protective shield which will keep you safe and bring you home safely.

"Mother!" cried one of the soldiers into his cell phone, "you wont believe what I have done! I have written a letter in a Torah scroll! Mother, are you there? Can you hear?! Me, a Shmutznik (a member of a non- religious Kibbutz), who can't differentiate between Shabbat and the rest of the week, who has not seen tzizit (ritual garment) in my life. Me, I wrote a letter in a Torah scroll! I can't believe it. I can't believe it. "

At the end, Rabbi Grossman concludes:

Two weeks later, around midnight, Rabbi Grossman received a phone call. "Rabbi, your blessing has come true!" exclaimed the commander over the phone. "Everyone is safe and we are on our way to you. We will be there by two 'o clock in the morning"....

"I felt as I had never felt before," recalls Rabbi Grossman. "Each one told me his personal miracle. "One soldier, a kibbutznik and a lawyer in civilian life, relayed an incredible miracle. A group of soldiers were gathered in an empty house in a Lebanese village when one of them forgetfully lit a cigarette. Hezbollah terrorists immediately noticed the light and fired an anti-tank missile at the house. Coincidentally, two horses from the village ran in front of the house and were hit and killed. The missile, deflected by the horses, veered away from the house, landing elsewhere. Incredibly, the horses miraculously saved the soldiers inside the house.

Accepting Criticism Gracefully

2007-10-17T18:43:00.000-04:00

Rabbi Yaakov Salomon has a very insightful article about books that he had written( I first read it in this book).

I quote in part:

I wrote a book.

I wish I could say that it doesn't matter to me if you buy it, read it, or like it. But I'd be lying. It does matter to me. A lot.

Am I proud that I feel that way? No. Does it mean that I am insecure, vulnerable and on wobbly terrain? No. It means I am normal (at least in this area of life). All of us, to varying degrees, are concerned with the opinions that others have of us, especially when we display and disclose our feelings, skills, beliefs, activities, and idiosyncrasies to the public eye. That's how we are wired.

He goes on to discuss the roller-coaster of emotions, and quotes the Kotzker about a dichotomy which is related to this area.

I thought of this yesterday as I was speaking to two people about my previous post. The first, an acquaintance of mine who I sometimes show my writings to, was unhappy with it, as he felt that it might be understood the wrong way. I then discussed this with another person who gave me the advice to extract the valid criticism, but he also asked me why I thought it had merit to be posted. I came to the conclusion that the core of what I've written does have at least some merit, but it could have been presented and framed differently.

There is a balance here, because a person who isn't open to other's advice and opinions, will never learn anything new and beneficial. On the other hand, one needs to know where one is correct, and this balance is an art which we hopefully all can learn and practice.

The "Neo Haskalah" and the Need for an Individualized Response

2007-10-15T19:40:00.000-04:00

The purpose of this post is neither to give support to any specific books of Rabbi Slifkin(as I made clear in the actual post), and certainly not to support a movement of "Neo-Haskalah", if such indeed exists. My own inclination, is a rational and a thoughtful one(at least I try on that end), and my response to the topic raised by the Jewish Observer was to further examine the question of "Adults at Risk" in a psychological, historical and intellectual context. The points could be developed further, and other people probably will respond with their own ideas elsewhere ; I hope that those will indeed be printed in the Jewish Observer.

Following up on part of the focus of the Jewish Observer, which was that there are thoughtful people who think about issues fundamental to Jewish belief, I wrote of a need for them to have an individualized approach which Rav Dessler spoke about. I also hoped that people would get chizuk and inspiration from this current posting.

The general point of an individualized approach which could help people, and which includes previously acceptable opinions of Gedolim, should not have anything to do with to do with ideology--Centrist, Charedi, etc. Be that is it may, I do not make decisions for the tzibbur or for individuals, and obviously the post is merely to stimulate thought. If anyone has other ideas about what an "individualized approach" for Science/Torah issues should consist of, or if it indeed it should exist at all, please share that in the comments.

A commentor by the name of "Frum Guy" wrote the following(see link) about the Jewish Observer article titled "Adults at Risk" , which I quote from in part:

..We may be on the verge of a Neo-Haskalah. I'm not even sure what it would entail, but it's going to be something. The cover story of this month's Jewish Observer is about this Neo-Haskalah; they just call it "Adults at Risk" ...

"Frum Guy" raises an interesting historical comparison between Volozhin and the contemporary Charedi milieu. Perhaps history works in cycles, and there is a comparison(and differences, of course) between the European Haskalah and today, both in terms of the issues themselves, as well as the social milieu which cause vulnerability, like a risk to a disease.

At least some "Adults at Risk" need an individual approach. According to Rav Dessler(Michtav M'Eliyahu, IV, page 354) the Rambam wrote the Moreh Nevuchim for people who needed an individual approach. Rav Dessler says that this approach was acceptable for them as long as it was not against the Halacha. What is the equivalent of such an "individual approach today" ?

The approach of publicly stating that previously acceptable opinions are kefirah, while it would benefit many people, would not seem to help someone struggling with questions. Such people, indeed, need an individualized approach which is different that that which the multitudes require. I think that such calculations, indeed partially depend upon how one understands the causes of "Kids/Adults at Risk".

Two views are presented towards the end of the following Jerusalem Post article about what is bothering contemporary Frum youth:

"Some Jews will be scared away from Orthodoxy," said the anonymous rabbi. "I believe people should be allowed to retain their individuality. They should not be asked to behave like robots. I don't expect books like Slifkin's or Nadel's to become part of normative haredi Judaism. But these ideas should be made available to those who ask the questions."

The educator at Machon Lev agrees that answers should be provided, but believes the apparent contradiction between science and religion is not a burning issue for most religious youth.

"A century ago the contradiction destroyed the spirituality of thousands of Jews. But today there are many religious scientists and professors who have refuted supposed inconsistencies.

"I think what truly bothers contemporary religious youth is a much more personal, existential question. The real thinkers are concerned with why they were put on this earth and what they are supposed to do here."

I have no idea about what the numbers are, but one should not downplay the intellectual factor. And if indeed there are people who are questioning, they would need an individual approach, just as in the Rambam's time. While not answering every question, having a shittah such as Rav Avroham ben HaRambam, while eschewed for the multitudes as a result of some statements connected with the Slifkin ban, can be invaluable for the "individual approach".

Rabbi Dr . Aron Hirsch Fried(page 62) writes about the value of intellectual inquiry in education :

There is an unwritten but whispered rule amongst Bais Yaakov girls that, “If you have some really serious questions, whatever you do, don’t ask your teacher, not unless you don’t care what it does to your shidduch chances!” This attitude towards thinking and questioning drives away some of our brightest and most honest young people. It also flies in the face of Rishonim like the Mabit who insist that it is imperative that we learn to think and to and to question and to chase down answers on our own.

Rabbi Fried quoted the Mabit that:

"It is not fitting for a person, a human being, to neglect to research anything that is within his ability to grasp. For example: A person is told a novel phenomenon, and he believes it because it was told to him by a good and trustworthy person. If he has the ability to comprehend and know that phenomenon and he makes no effort to do so on his own, it is considered as slovenly laziness"

I don’t think I need to elaborate on the dangers of such an anti-intellectual atmosphere in our society and in our schools.

I also remember hearing Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hirsch Weinreb saying at the Slifkin book launch, to the effect, that we need to encourage questions and the exercise of the intellect. While I do not necessarily agree with the particular book, I do think favorably of Rabbi Weinreb's general point made below, and that anything which was acceptable by previous generations of Gedolim, should be preserved today as well:

Many of our Sages and leaders through the generations have had the luxury of “preaching to the choir.” Their constituents, followers, disciples, and students lived in the same intellectual world as they did, were willing to accept the teachings of their mentors without serious question, and indeed lived lives in which they were not exposed to ideological frameworks at odds with those of their master. However, throughout the ages, some of our leaders have had to cope with constituencies which did question them. These constituencies were exposed to different cultural and philosophical influences, often at odds with the core teachings of these great men. And so these men stepped forward courageously and often at the risk of their own reputations, to provide direction for those who were lost and answers to those who were puzzled, and even guidance and words of gentle rebuke to those who were rebellious and hostile.

The heroes of the latter category include Saadia Gaon and Rambam. In the post enlightenment era, the need for approaches modeled by Rabbeinu Saadia and Rambam, approaches which dealt head-on with
challenges from outside normative Judaism, increased many times over….

Today, too, there are leaders among us who are blessed with constituencies that are not exposed to ideologies alien to traditional Judaism, or who are oblivious, intentionally or otherwise, to the challenges of these alien systems. Fortunate are these leaders, for they can continue to teach and preach what they see as the unadulterated and pure message of the Torah. However, there are those among us who are confronted daily with Jews whose exposure to the culture and philosophy of our times stimulate probing and consuming questions about Judaism. Some of these Jews come from the ranks of the non-observant who wish to draw closer to Torah and mitzvos but who find it difficult to integrate the thought system with which they have grown up with the teachings of the Torah to which they are newly introduced. But also among these individuals are those who have been steeped from birth in a traditional education and in a traditional understanding of Torah but who are now confronted, either through formal secular education, general reading, or discussions with those in their everyday environment, with new challenges of doubtand perplexity.

I also wish to emphasize that the Jewish Observer article and Dr. Fried's point about validating and encouraging questions are unrelated to the merits of the Slifkin Ban or even the different opinions which were acceptable previously. Rather I am merely pointing out that according to Rav Dessler, many individuals may need special guidance, and assuming that such individuals exist within the FFB world, then having opinions which in previous generations were acceptable might be helpful.

Finally, it is interesting to note that the Chovos Halevovos in Shaar Yichud Hamaaseh discusses internal conflicts, including intellectual ones, that could turn a person away from Avodas Hashem; questions and doubts, are a human, and age old issue. Rav Yeruchem Levovitz(Daas Torah, V'Zos Haberacha) writes that it's possible that the Chovos Halevavos himself overcame such conflicts(similar to Rav Hutner's famous letter about the Chafetz Chaim and Shmiras Halashon), and therefore wrote about them. If it is true that the best of our people can, or need to, go through such a process in their spiritual growth, than their needs, at least in private, need to be taken into account.

I think that "it's the best of times, and the worst of times". In some ways the Charedi community is in a better position vis- a -vis 19th century Volozhin, but in some ways it is worse off. The historical comparison and contrast is probably a topic in of itself.

May we see the day when " the world will be filled with the knowledge of Hashem as water covers the bed of the sea".

Frum Grass Root-Level Discussion

2007-10-12T02:14:00.000-04:00

I was very happy that Rabbi Horowitz opened for discussion on his website, the topic of the correct balance of open discussion in the charedi world. The following are my thoughts stimulated by two of his questions:

What percentage of the members in our community would feel “safe” to sign their name in a letter to the editor if they are writing about a subject that they feel passionately about?

Part of that issue is that we live in a close-knit community, and perhaps people do wish to be stopped on the street with questions about their personal views. But I think to an extent, it is a reflection of a fear of being criticized. What can be done about that fear, to the extent that it is based on reality?

When speaking about creating a "safe" environment for people to express themselves, whether in the media or in person, the difficulty is that one needs to satisfy people with different needs. Different communities have their own boundaries of what's "elu v'elu", who are Gedolim, and what's part of the Mesorah. Whatever differences(and of course there are similarities) exist within Orthodox groups, a given publication will need to create a line representing what's no longer acceptable, and one needs to accept that line, just as one needs to allow new publications to cater to those who don't find a voice within the given publications.

Nevertheless, within a certain acceptable range of "eleu v'elu" there can be room for more tolerance. It is not that I disagree with someone who may have a "frummer" opinion than me, but rather I think that there is sometimes room for the disagreement to be expressed with more tolerance. I am speaking now of disagreements even within what we call the "Charedi World".

"Are discussions of matters that affect our community helpful even if they do not result in swift, obvious positive change?"

The key is to be as positive as possible, whether of the community, or it's leaders. Even when discussing a problem, one can do it in a way which is not totally negative. Besides protecting oneself from criticism which will detract from one's message, it is also a correct thing, in of itself.

R. Yisrael Salanter says that an individual needs to know his strengths, which are the means to accomplish in this world, and similarly, a community's strengths can help it overcome its weaknesses. The problem becomes when one thinks that a given community, or a hashkafa, has only strengths or only weaknesses.

Adults at Risk: The FFB/BT Symbiotic Relationship

2007-10-11T21:03:00.000-04:00

Rabbi Yaakov Horowitz posts an interesting and important article written by Rabbis Mordechai Becher and Chanon Gordon, that appeared in the past month's Jewish Observer. I quote from the end of the article, in a section titled "F.F.Bs and B.Ts - A Symbiotic Relationship" :

Much has been written about the importance of ensuring that people from a secular background who have turned to Torah and have committed themselves to Yiddishkeit should aim to become integrated into the mainstream Orthodox community. To that end, the F.F.B community plays a significant function as role models and mentors.

Paradoxically in the case of the Adult at Risk, which occurs almost exclusively within the F.F.B. camp, Baalei Teshuvah can serve as the spark that rekindles the flame of inspiration in the established frum community. Recordings of shiurim by “kiruv” lecturers, reading materials that address questions F.F.B’s so often feel too embarrassed to ask, and the popularity of kiruv type seminars in the heart of frum communities are now common sights …

If there is any positive fall-out from the looming Adult at Risk crisis it seems to be the fact that as the kiruv and teshuvah movements mature and expand, the newly observant and the traditionally observant worlds are becoming more intertwined in a positive and mutually beneficial way … After all, at the end of the day, we all report to the same Boss!

The phenonenon of Adults at Risk has always existed--al t'aamin b'atzmacha ad yom mascha-- but it has different applications in different times.

As far as the connection of BT's and FFB's in this matter, it brings to mind, on a communal level, the passuk in Koheles: shalach lachmecha al pnei hamoyim ki b'rov hayamim timtzaenu(as well as kol yisrael areivim zeh lazeh).

Baseball as a Metaphor

2007-10-10T22:28:00.000-04:00

In the spirit of October, I offer the following discussions about making use of baseball, or sports in general, as metaphors for more sublime purposes. This post(as well, I assume, the articles quotes therein) was written in a light vein for sports fans, and is not to be deemed an unqualified endorsement of the sports industry.

Rabbi Emanuel Feldman has written that he always has

liked baseball, its non-violence, its patience, the solitary struggle of lonely pitcher against lonely batter. And consider its religious undertones: the goal is to circle the infield and then come back to the starting point, to return to beginnings. Unlike football or basketball, where the clock ultimately runs out, baseball is timeless: a tie game can theoretically continue until eternity.

There is even a lesson to be learned, as in here and here , from a saying which originated with the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Parenthetically, on the subject of sports aphorisms, I once read an essay on the philosophical value of Yogi-isms.

But moving back to the Jewish side of things(l'havdil):

Rabbi Baruch Leff, in a response to an internet article writes that

I wanted to utilize the Yankee loss to teach a powerful Torah lesson about arrogance. Along the way, I think I hit on why many non-Yankee fans dislike the Yankees. But the article is really not about the Yankees, it's about the evils of arrogance. I hope the reader can see that.

Lest one dismiss the above as making use of dubious non-Torah concepts for outreach or other mere mundane, utilitarian purposes, I conclude with Rabbi Aaaron Rakeffet's more comprehensive discussion of the pertinent and over-arching issue of whether one may gain mussar or moral instruction from sports, and if so, how? That is really the heart(and the heat) of the issue.

There’s no question that athletes become models, and there’s a lot to learn from a good athlete. Hopefully we can learn about fair play. From Joe DiMaggio, I don’t have to tell you how much mussar you can learn from a guy that always hustled. Halevai, we should daven, l’havdil, with the same feeling that he went to the ballpark every day. He was always running around on the field. He was asked in the late 1940’s, why are you running, what do you have to prove, you’re already well-known? He answered “there may be a kid who’s never seen me before, and he should know that I always hustle.” There’s a lot of bad in athletics. You see these guys are arrested for dog fighting, the drugs, the women, what happened with Rodriguez. This is ma’asim shebechol yom with the breakdown of society. Marriage is not sacred, a woman has become nothing more than an object, there’s no concept of love or subjectivity. Of course, a person has to differentiate. On the other hand, we shouldn’t be naïve. A yeshiva boy who goes to a ballgame knows he’s basically looking at non-Jews who are poor role models. He’s going for the sport. Shawn Green may be born Jewish, but he’s not yet the gadol hador.

It’s my feeling, and I spoke about this recently, that baseball has such a hold on our youth davka because it’s slow-moving and you can think. In other words, there’s inside basketball and inside football and inside baseball. It’s beneath the surface. What play are you going to use? In other sports it’s quick; you don’t play a role in it. But in baseball, left-hander, right-hander, pull the infield in, push the outfield back, give up the run, worry about the bunt, go for the double play, the squeeze, should he steal, what do you do, put him in scoring position, hit away. There’s so much involved that you have time to think. To me, if you have that Talmudic mind, it’s one of the reasons you like baseball.

I also want to state something else- that one of the most inspiring figures I’ve seen in my life was Jackie Robinson. There, you have enough mussar. Leaving alone the fact that he had a beautiful marriage, and his wife should live and be well, but what the man did to break the color barrier, to go against all odds, to be maledicted and not respond. You talk about Branch Rickey who never went to the ballpark on Sunday. He promised his mother, who was a pious Christian, some sect of Protestant, and to them it was, pardon the term, apikorsut to go to the ballpark on Sunday. So he never went. There’s so much you can develop and learn from all that. From that point of view, you do have what to learn. And it’s no different than the Gemara. The Gemara in Kiddushin talks about kibbud av v’em and says our greatest role models are gentiles who wouldn’t wake up their fathers to get precious stones or the Para Adumah. Whatever was involved, they wouldn’t wake up their fathers. So you see the Gemara didn’t hesitate to use gentiles as examples. So baruch Hashem we have role models, and a good rebbe can do a lot from baseball, or all sports.

Now, it may all be shtuyot, someone can be cynical and sarcastic. But, when all is said and done, I would say that over the years my knowledge of baseball made hundreds of kids into bnei Torah. You ask me how? I don’t say this applies to the kollel, because they’re older and they’re established. But you have no idea the effect it has on younger students when the rebbe knows baseball. You can ask them 20 or 30 years later and they’ll say “Rebbe you changed my life when you talked about Mickey Mantle and Joe DiMaggio.” Why? Because a kid comes into a rebbe’s shiur, and the rebbe knows how to learn a little, and beseder, he’s a yarei shamayim, and he’s living Torah. In the kid’s mind, who can be like the rebbe? He’s from a different generation. Suddenly the rebbe opens his mouth to talk baseball and he’s one of the kids. Now he can teach Torah.

This is not a sports blog, but 'tis the Season, and I suppose all bloggers have their moments of weakness.