Gedolim: A Cost-Benefit Analysis

I was recently discussing the subject of Chareidi leadership with a friend of mine. I asked him to explain the benefits of having "Gedolim." "What productive measures," I inquired. "Have the gedolim taken in recent memory? How have they improved the state of 21st century Orthodoxy?"

My friend opined that most of the Gedolim's positive works are felt on a one-on-one, personal basis. That is, that these Torah sages provide wise and thoughtful counsel to many of their students and disciples. I would tend to agree. But what qualifies these individuals for public leadership?

Here is a brief analysis of the costs and benefits of Chareidi leadership:

Benefit: Rescuing a kidnapped teen from a Jamaican prison camp
Cost: Kidnapping the teen and sending him there in the first place

Benefit: Approving and endorsing concerts to benefit charitable causes
Cost: Banning those concerts

Benefit: Endorsing books that tackle complex and controversial issues in Jewish thought
Cost: Banning those books

Benefit: Encouraging inter-denominational Jewish dialogue in a thought-provoking, interesting work
Cost: Banning the book and forcing the author to cancel his promotional appearances

Benefit: Gedolim cards
Cost: $1.00 a pack at Eichlers

J.D.

Cross-Currents Comment

Recently, Cross-Currents' Avi Shafran wrote a piece, entitled "The Missing Ethic," in which he denigrated critics of recently indicted Agriprocessors (a.k.a. Rubashkin). According to Shafran, those who protest Rubashkin's numerous legal and ethical failings are jumping the gun.

Among other gems, Shafran wrote that "...until some wrongdoing is actually proven, not merely suspected or charged, no human being – certainly no Jew, bound as we are by the Torah’s clear admonition in such matters – has any right to assume guilt, much less voice condemnation or seek to levy punishment."

A Pravda Ne'eman reader attempted to post the following comment, only to have it rejected by the zealous Cross-Currents moderators:

"But unless and until some wrongdoing is actually proven, not merely suspected or charged, no human being - certainly no Jew, bound as we are by the Torah's clear admonition in such matters - has any right to assume guilt, much less voice condemnation or seek to levy punishment."

Did this happen with Lipa Schmeltzer? According to his comments in a recent interview, there was much disinformation which resulted in the fiasco of the canceled concert.

I am afraid that essays such as this by R. Shafran are counterproductive to his cause. What people see is that where there are claims of serious interpersonal wrongs (fraud, abuse, etc.), there is much talk about "don't be motzi shem ra" and "innocent until proven guilty," but where the allegations are of things not being in accordance with charedi religious sensibilities, it's shoot first and ask questions later (if at all).

Français, pour nous, ah! quel outrage

Something is rotten in the state of France:

The Jewish community around the country was saddened by the news of the election of Prof. Gilles Bernheim to the post of chief rabbi. The elections were held in accordance with the ancient system introduced by Napoleon Bonaparte 200 years ago, which grants 300 community leaders and activists the right to take part in the vote. The results do not reflect the will of a majority of French Jews.

Besides for the fact that the Yated feels it necessary to refer to a non-Chareidi Rabbi as "Professor", Nachum had this to say in a comment at Gil Student's blog:

The Israeli Chief Rabbis are selected by a group of "insiders" (and government officials) in a process set up by the British government in the 1920's. The Charedi community in Israel- especially those elements represented by the Yated- has taken advantage of this to fill the office- an office they do not recognize- with people who are singularly unrepresentative of the Israeli Orthodox community, especially that community that respects the Rabbinate, let alone the Israeli population as a whole.

Funny, I don't see the Yated complaining about the Israeli process when they are able to manipulate it.

Not that they really have a right to complain about France. Note that the Yated here seems to be confusing "French Jews" with "French Chareidim." The two are hardly synonymous.

Hat tip: Hirhurim

M.D.

Effects of Long-Term Cannabis Abuse

I could link to any number of peer-reviewed articles on the subject, but I think the following video is sufficient:



"Dude, it's like your fingers... are like Rebbi Nachman's fingers... and they are like... on fire man. Let's go get some Doritos... I'm feeling the mad munchies..."

J.D.

Is Fun Forbidden?

From the Yated archives: Is Modern Entertainment Any Good for the Soul?

"Even if there is no explicit prohibition against it, entertainment's essence is the antithesis of Jewry and Torah."

"On the other hand, Torah-true Jewry has never taken part in entertainment and amusement programs, whose essence is totally opposed to the basis of our Torah."

And so goes this even-handed screed against fun, relaxation and enjoyment.

This attitude is one of the most dangerous examples of Chareidi extremism in action. The desire to live a TorahTrue™ life means abandoning all forms of moderation. Learn all day, adopt all stringencies, and most importantly of all - avoid fun at all costs.

People cannot be on, all of the time. Individuals, particularly young people, need time to relax their minds and refocus their energies. Judging from the views espoused in this article, it is little wonder that teenagers are abandoning Chareidi Judaism in droves. When all productive outlets, including regular physical exercise, are deemed to be sinful, how can the Chareidi world expect its youngsters to remain "on the derech?"

From my experience, this problem is most pervasive in the yeshivish ("Lithuanian") sectors of Chareidi Judaism. At least in the Chassidic world, people can get their entertainment fix from Rebbes, tisches and a good old-fashioned mitzva tantz.

Or am I overstating the issue? Rabbi Yakov Horowitz Rabbi Eli Teitelbaum, in an article published on Rabbi Horowitz's blog, seems to agree with my analysis. He writes:

When sports and concerts are forbidden, and all forms of kosher entertainment are off limits, we are asking for trouble. If our kids can't find a place to vent their energy within a kosher environment, then they will find it elsewhere. In a time of war even the Torah itself permitted one to marry a captive non-Jewish girl under certain conditions. Chazal explain the logic behind this law. The Torah understood that a person is only human and therefore in this instance, while fighting a war, it gave him some leeway. The Gemora tells us that for everything the Torah forbade it gave us something similar that was permitted. Today's war with the Yetzer Horah is far greater than ever before.

So I ask you again - am I making mountains out of molehills?

J.D.

[Correction: As The Wolf points out, the above quote is not by Rabbi Horowitz. It is by Rabbi Eli Teitelbaum, in an article that was reprinted on Rabbi Horowitz's web site. Sorry for the confusion.]

A Truly Shver Matzav

The following letter to the editor appeared in a recent issue of the American Yated Ne'eman:

Dear Editor,

Why do I have to feel like I am being farhered every time I go to my shver’s house in Brooklyn? I understand that he gives us money each month and we appreciate that very much. But does that mean that I have to be subject to questions about what I’m learning and pressured to say vertlach on the parsha every time we visit? My in-laws are very nice people. They shower my wife, 5 children and me with gifts, they bought us a car, among other things, and graciously give us a monthly check to keep us afloat. Is that the reason that my father-in-law feels compelled to quiz me every time I come to his house?

I mentioned this issue to a friend of mine who said that he experiences the same exact thing. This friend encouraged me to write this letter to the Yated. Actually, he’s pushed me for months to write something, but I never got around to it. Perhaps there is a father-in-law out there who can explain it to us. Why do you have to bombard us with your questions on our limudim and with your vertlach on this inyan or that inyan? It is not that we aren’t interested. It is just that we somehow are made to feel that we have to constantly be ready for our next “exam” when we meet you. (This is surely not as bad as a different friend’s shver who actually makes him fax a shtickel Torah to him once a month. This friend lives in Yerushalayim, while his father-in-law lives in New York.) There are other issues about in-laws that my friend wanted me to share, but for now I think this one will suffice.

Answers, anyone?
Two Friends
C. R. & M. F.
Lakewood, N.

As this pair of self-righteous ingrates so astutely ask: answers, anyone?

J.D.

(Hat tip: Sephardi Lady)

Science, History and Archeology

A few weeks ago, I began outlining useful categories in which to discuss aspects of Chareidi doctrine. We previously discussed the Chareidi view on leadership.

I am going to skip several of those categories (for now) and focus on the Chareidi perspective on "Science, History and Archeology." For those of you who want me to go through the earlier outlined categories in the order listed, please remember that I can skip whatever I want; this is my blog.

Chareidi Jews view the disciplines of science, history and archeology with considerable suspicion. However, as one moves from the "harder" disciplines (biology, chemistry, physics) to the "softer" pursuits (history, archeology) , that suspicion increases exponentially.

Chareidim do not shun science per se, nor do they (for the most part) reject the technological advances that scientific endeavor has produced. However, when there is any conflict between scientific thought and a literal reading of Chumash or Midrash, the scientific view cannot be accepted.

Any evidence offered by scientists in favor of their proposition is tainted with bias; scientists are trained (perhaps indoctrinated) to pursue a naturalistic and atheistic explanation for all unknown phenomena. Findings, regardless of their evidentiary weight, regarding the origins of life, the age of the universe or the fallibility of certain Talmudic pronouncements are rejected as forbidden heresy or, more often, as utter nonsense.

History and archeology, like textual analysis, are viewed as utterly speculative and irredeemably biased fields of study. Chareidim do not believe that scholars in these areas have anything of value to offer the TorahTrue Jewish mind. Even the evidence raised by these ventures, absent the conclusions arrived at by modern scholars, should not be examined.

J.D.

Down with Abominations! Hurray for the Chareidi World!

Although I am sometimes negative about the world of TorahTrue™ Judaism, I recently came across an article that makes me rethink some of my previous negativity.

The Yeshiva World News reports that "Maran Rav Yosef Sholom Elyashiv Shlita called for protests against next Thursday’s scheduled To’eva parade in Yerushalayim." For those of you not in the know, "To'eva" is Hebrew for abomination. It is used here as a reference to the despicable acts that the Torah singles out as "abominations."

In fact, the YWN writes [with no respect for the rules or conventions of grammar -J.D.] that this particular sin is so destructive that "a large tefilla rally is planned, not along the route of the parade to avoid exposing participants to the abomination."

All I can say is that it is about time. I am so happy to hear that the Chareidi world will be protesting against the "To'evos" that occur on a daily basis in Jerusalem and around the world. I assume this means that a full-fledged demonstration will take place where the following abominations are denounced, once and for all:

a) Dishonesty in weights and measures (Deut 25:13-19)
b) Eating seafood (Lev. 11:11)
c) Eating birds of prey (Lev. 11:12)
d) Eating insects (Lev. 11:13)
e) Remarrying one's divorcee (Deut. 24:4)
f) Lying (Prov. 12:22)
g) Arrogance (Prov. 16:5)
h) Justifying wicked behaviour (Prov. 17:5)
i) Business fraud (Prov. 20:10)
j) Idolatry (Deut. 7:25)

Oh wait a minute...

J.D.

More Doublespeak from Jerusalem

Matthew Wagner of the Jerusalem Post reports on the position of the influential Chareidi group, the Edah Chareidis, regarding the upcoming annual Gay Pride Parade to be held in the Israeli capital.

It is quite telling to read the statements of Edah Chareidis spokesman Shmuel Poppenheim, editor and publisher of the rejectionist Chareidi newspaper "Ha'Edah."

A couple of years ago, Poppenheim was singing an altogether different tune. Back then, in addition to loudly encouraging protests against "The Abomination," he announced that members of the Edah religious court, including Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch, participated in a Kabbalistic curse ceremony, also known as a "pulsa denura," in an effort to unleash heavenly fury against homosexuals.

But now?

"We reached the conclusion that it would be better off not getting involved."

"We are not telling people not to demonstrate, but we are also not telling anyone to demonstrate, either. "

"There will always be a few weirdos who will demonstrate no matter what. But we will not be responsible for them."

Once you read between the lines of the above statements, the following becomes clear: For the past several years, the Chareidi protests have been a miserable failure and a complete loss of face for the Edah leadership. However, the Edah still supports protesting against the democratic rights of their fellow citizens but does not want to suffer the embarrassment that would result from another failed, pathetic protest.

The Edah has struck upon a brilliant solution to their conundrum - the unauthorized authorized protest.

The Edah says "we are not telling people not to demonstrate" and therefore "we will not be responsbile for them." This may be credible coming from another society, but coming from this Meah Shearim-based Chareidi faction? Please. These are people who loudly instruct their constituents regarding every detail of their private lives, through bans, signs and modesty enforcement squads.

Of course they will be responsible for the actions of those Chareidim, encouraged by the tacit approval of their leadership, who protest violently against this latest outrage in the Holy City of Jerusalem, the exercise of the rights to free speech, expression and unimpeded assembly.

J.D.

Does this man represent you?

Chareidi rabbi discusses "Moral domestic terrorism."



This is Rabbi Yehuda Levin, a man who claims to represent American Orthodox Jews. He is the same individual who claimed that gay marriage in Israel was "worse than the Holocaust."

Notable ideas:
- Gay pride parade = child rape
- "Male member" is an acceptable euphemism
- "As a believing Jew," Rabbi Levine is certain that the recent "cyclone, fires and earthquakes" are the direct results of the California court decision regarding same-sex marriage

Zeh Ha'Ikar

In the middle of a particularly disjointed article, Arye Geffen wrote:

I do not wish to lecture on emunas chachomim, the trust we must place in our wise Torah leaders; this subject is as old as the hills. I would like to dwell upon the "wise guys", that is, the people who believe in their own cleverness, who think highly of themselves and feel superior to others.

I am not referring to those who choose a different way of life or who were born into a different ideological framework. Each flock has its shepherd; the wise man will anticipate the future, and our camp were wise to think of future developments and plan accordingly.

Believe what you want, as long as you don't think for yourself.

M.D.

Modern Orthodoxy vs. Moderator's Orthodoxy

As many observers have pointed out, there is a strong tendency among some Chareidi leaders and educators to marginalize other groups within Orthodox Judaism. Such a trend is all the more disturbing when the attitude is being inculcated in young, impressionable teenagers by controlling adult authority figures.

One such example is Frumteens.com. This site, moderated by at least one anonymous Chareidi Rav, is a constant source of such invective.

Please find a sampling below for your edification and comments:

"The heterim set forth by the Modern Orthodox world are halachicly invalid, make no sense (sorry, guys), and if taken to their logical conclusion, would permit many, many more issurim as well."

"The root problem with Modern Orthodoxy, the issue from which stem all other issues, is that they incorporate secular, non-Jewish, values into their religious practice. What the secular world values, they believe is valuable. What the secular world thinks is normal, civilized, sophisticated, good, and proper, they do too, and they incorporate those values and attitudes, which are often corrupt and against the Torah, into their religious practice."

"If you hear stuff like that [e.g. remarks regarding historicity of certain episodes in Tanach] from a Modern Orthodox rabbi you should not be surprised. This is nothing new, and nothing surprising. I know Modern Orthodox rabbis who even believe in evolution. Seriously."

"The reason there is not as much opposition to modern orthodoxy as you suggest, is because modern orthodoxy poses no danger to anyone nowadays - it is completely irrelevant and not taken seriously by bnei torah. it's just some deviant group of confused groups of jews, and everyone knows that."

See here and here.

JImmy's Survey

A while back, JImmy (of Harry Maryles fame) posted a comment on my very first post. His comment, in the form of a sarcastic survey, purported to determine whether or not I was a "real centrist." I answered him in kind. Some readers have said that this response deserved a post of its own, so here it is.

As an aside, I have never claimed to be centrist. I think it is an arrogant and useless term. Everyone, deep down thinks of themselves as centrists. Reform Jews are centrists: not like those off-the-map Mordecai Kaplan Reconstructionists or those right wing Conservative Jews. Satmar Chassidim are centrists: not like those left wing Agudah-niks or those crazy, fanatical Neturei Karta nutjobs.

JImmy posted:
Do you think that you're a real centrist? Well, your answers to this checklist will help you in your quest for self-awareness.

What is your attitude toward chariedim?
a)indifferrence
b) you'll laugh at an anti-chardie joke
c) virulent animosity

Rabbi Soloveitchick was the greatest mind of ?
a) the fifities
b) forties
c) century

When there are a number of mutually exclusive interpretations of Rabbi Soloveitchick's statemtents, which one is correct?
a) all of them
b) only the most controversial
c) the one that is best suited for your lifestyle

When your daughter's date brings his tephilin, your reaction is
a) silence, because you don't want to impose your views
b) happy that she is conforming to societal norms
c) excstatic, at least the boy is not a charedie

I replied:
Hi JImmy. First of all, let me say that it is nice to have you on board. I'm sure Harry will thank me for giving him a break from your comments.

Although I recognize that your survey was intended in the typical self-congratulatory and arrogant Chareidi style, I don't mind responding to your questions. Obviously, I will not be choosing any of the answers you provided; doing so would only succumb to your "false dichotomy" (or trichotomy, here) logical fallacy.

1. Q. What is your attitude toward chareidim?
A. Read this blog and find out. As far as my attitude towards chareidim, as individuals, I would say that I often have only the best things to say about them. (This is the part where I write: some of my best friends are...) Chareidim are kind, conscientious, devoted and community-minded. Other times, they are arrogant, close-minded, selfish and divisive. Like most people. In terms of the system, well I'm sure my views will become clear during our future discussions and in my forthcoming posts.

2. Q. Rabbi Soloveitchick was the greatest mind of ?
A. That depends. R' Velvel or R' Chaim?

3. Q. When there are a number of mutually exclusive interpretations of Rabbi Soloveitchick's statements, which one is correct?
A. I'll assume you mean the Brisker Rav here. In that case, it is whatever R' Avraham Yehoshua says it is. Not some krum peshat by R' Dovid ch"v.

4. Q. When your daughter's date brings his tephilin, your reaction is...?
A. Complete and utter shock. My daughter is, after all, barely out of diapers.

1. Leadership (Updated)

The Chareidi assumptions about leadership:

(Update: Changes in bold)

Gedolim and Roshei Yeshivah make the most important decisions in Chareidi society. While not actually infallible (Chassidic Rebbes not included), their words and rulings are final and not subject to appeal. Their decisions are entirely based on Torah and are never colored by personal sentiments or animus. They are not subject to manipulation by their handlers and underlings.

Since the sum of all wisdom is contained within the Torah, formal secular training is not a prerequisite for Chareidi leadership. In fact, a college education may be detrimental to a Godol's ability to decide issues based solely on Torah wisdom ("Daas Torah").

In addition, Gedolim are competent to decide issues beyond the bounds of Jewish law. Matters of public policy, financial planning and medical advice fall well within the expertise of a Chareidi leader.

Most importantly, a Godol's dictate is binding on his constituents all Jewry regardless of the ruling's apparent illogic or incomprehensibility.

J.D.

Revised Categories for Discussion

1. Leadership
2. Value of Torah Study
3. Kollel and Employment
4. Role of Women/Modesty
5. Formal Education
6. Secular Culture and Entertainment
7. Gentiles
8. Stringency
9. Uniforms
10. Other Jewish Denominations
11. The Talmudic Sages
12. Science, History and Archeology
13. Israel and Zionism

Of Assumptions and Straw Men

Before we can discuss the various elements of Orthodoxy, we must learn to speak a common language.

I do not want to be accused of creating straw men, that is inventing an absurd Chareidi position and then demolishing it. Therefore, before discussing the ins and outs of Chareidi theology and philosophy, we will need to identify the must crucial points of Chareidi doctrine. If I am missing or misstating/overstating any aspects of Chareidi doctrine, I trust that the readers will correct me in the comments.

Please note that I do recognize that Chareidi society is not monolithic. In different countries, continents and communities, Chareidi leaders and institutions have evolved differently. However, I do believe that the below categories outline the assumptions that are shared by a majority of Chareidi (or Torah) Jewry.

1. Leadership (Gedolim)
2. Value of Torah Study
3. Kollel Lifestyle
4. Role of Women/Modesty
5. Value of Formal Education
6. Secular Culture and Entertainment
7. Gentiles
8. Halachic Stringency (Chumros)
9. Conformity in Dress and Speech
10. Other Orthodox Groups
11. The Talmudic Sages (Chazal)
12. Science, History and Archeology

Once the readers have weighed in regarding the above categories (and added their own), I will proceed to discuss each of them individually in the subsequent posts.

J.D.

The Marketplace of Ideas

Dear Readers,

I feel that you are owed something of an explanation. As some of you are aware, my identity, once a well-kept secret, is now relatively widely known. As a result, I had decided to cease active blogging. My community, such that it is, happens to be a relatively close-knit place. I was made aware that certain individuals were extremely offended by the ad hominem invective that they felt I expressed on this blog.

For that I am sorry. In real life, I am a nice person (if a bit of a cynic). I do not go out of my way to mock individuals, although I am often tempted. Ideas, on the other hand, are an entirely different kettle of fish.

In liberal democracies, the main rationale supporting freedom of expression has been dubbed "the marketplace of ideas." In short, this doctrine asserts that truth will arise when ideas are freely subject to debate in open, transparent public discourse.

As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes (my second favorite jurist) wrote in Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919):

But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas...that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.

I am a strong believer in this idea, with a few important caveats. First of all, this notion is predicated on the assumption that all sides to a debate will have equal access to this marketplace. Historically, the mass media (newspapers, radio and later, television) were restricted to those parties who could afford to transmit their messages to the public. Only the ideas that were favoured by the moneyed publishers could "compete" in the marketplace of ideas. In truth, this marketplace was less of an open bazaar and more of a Big Box Store. Whatever Walmart wants to sell their consumers will be put on the shelf. Potentially better products are not sold unless the proprietor decides to offer them.

The Internet in general, and blogging more specifically, changed everything. For the first time, the marketplace of ideas was truly an open marketplace. Any party could offer their ideas for evaluation by the general public. Blog posts, comments and thoughtful discussions allowed for ideas to be dissected and evaluated by a critical and intelligent readership.

Another caveat must be applied to the marketplace of ideas. Aside from equal access to the marketplace, there must be a parity in competence between the competing ideas. An idea may be true, but if it is presented by an incompetent debater, it is unlikely to rise to the top and be recognized as truth. Conversely, a skilled debater can employ rhetoric and misdirection to promote a thoroughly flawed idea with his or her readership being left none the wiser.

Finally, it must be recognized that people are often more swayed by emotion than they are by reason. A seasoned writer may tug at his readers' heart strings without actually advancing any evidence as to the truth of his proposition.

An extension of that relates to mockery and personal attacks. Rhetorically, these are often extremely effective. Most people would rather heap scorn on an individual than logically evaluate the veracity of his ideas. It is cheaper, faster and a heck of a lot more fun. But at the end of the day, it is intellectually dishonest.

Those major caveats aside, I strongly believe that if there is Absolute Truth in Chareidi doctrine, it can survive reasoned criticism in this public forum. And if it cannot survive such an attack?

Thomas Jefferson, in his 1820 letter to William Roscoe regarding the founding of the University of Virginia, puts it as follows:

"For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it."

So let us proceed in this endeavor with less invective and less character assassination. At the same time, let's continue to critically examine dogma and search for truth, wherever we may find it.

J.D.

(Citation: Much of the information regarding the marketplace of ideas can be found here, here and here.)

Sauce for the Goose

(Note to reader: Insert tongue firmly in cheek and continue)

Chareidi columnist Jonathan Rosenblum has given his explicit haskamah (endorsement) to this blog and others. Writing in the June 6th 2008 edition of the Yated Ne'eman, Rosenblum bemoans the censorship endemic in closed societies:

"We in the frum community tend to think of the blogosphere exclusively as a cesspool of character assassination and worse. But in many places in the world it is also a vital agent for freedom from oppressive dictatorships. Some of the greatest heroes on earth are anonymous bloggers in places like Iran and China casting a searching light on the leaders of their own societies. Dictatorships can no longer completely silence and terrorize their critics. "

Perhaps someone should inform Rosenblum, to use an age-old aphorism, that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

[Tip of the hat to the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe]

More to follow...

J.D.

Last Words

E pur si muove!