Thursday, January 26, 2012

The Making of Haredim

A book published in the Haredi community claimed that Orthodox Judaism — and specifically, Haredi Judaism — is the traditional approach to Judaism, which started with Moses. In my monograph “The Novelty of Orthodoxy” I explained how Orthodoxy was, in many ways, a new approach to Judaism, which began with Chasam Sofer as a reaction to Reform and the Enlightenment. But Haredi Judaism is itself a novelty vis-à-vis the Orthodox Judaism which preceded it.

I am pleased to announce the e-publication of a new monograph, "The Making of Haredim," which explores the nature of Haredi ideology and demonstrates how it can be rated as distinct from its predecessors. The monograph can be downloaded after making a donation via PayPal; the recommended donation for readers of this website is $5. Please bear in mind that this is not a payment for the monograph itself, which is shorter than the others in this series; rather, it is a donation in exchange for all my writings on this website (including the Jerusalem Post articles - the Jerusalem Post does not pay me for them!), which takes up quite a bit of my time. There are some people who, incredibly, always pay only one cent, but others, who feel that they have gained much from the Rationalist Judaism enterprise, express their appreciation with a larger donation, which is gratefully appreciated.

You can make a donation via PayPal or credit card by clicking on the following icon. After the payment, it will automatically take you to a download link for the document. If you have any difficulties with the download, please e-mail me.







Wednesday, January 25, 2012

When Saying Sorry Is Not Enough

Everybody makes mistakes. Goodness knows I've made plenty myself. People who write or speak in public extensively are especially likely to write or say something, at some point, that they should not. In such cases, a retraction and apology is called for. When it is given, people should forgive and forget.


Still, there are mistakes and there are Mistakes. Sometimes people makes mistakes that reveal such appalling judgement, and/or have such potentially devastating consequences, that a simply apology, even a heartfelt one, is not enough. The person to make the error has to take a leave of absence from his or her public role. This does not necessarily entirely erase the damage, but it does show that the person is taking responsibility for it.

The latest such incident, which prompted me to write this post, is Andrew Adler's mindbogglingly stupid editorial in the Atlanta Jewish Times suggesting that the Mossad take out President Obama, and claiming that Israel is already weighing this option.

Watching an interview with Adler in tears, there can be no doubt that he genuinely regrets his mistake. But with a mistake of these dimensions, even a tearful apology is not enough. He had to resign - and he did.

Frankly, I think that there are others who should likewise take a leave of absence from airing their views in public, as a consequence of errors that involve particularly colossal bad judgment and/or have potentially devastating consequences:

  • Rabbi Dovid Kornreich for publicly suggesting that homosexuals investigate the option of suicide. His subsequent watering down of the suggestion, and his eventual claim that he never really meant it in the first place, are inadequate in light of what he actually wrote.
  • Rabbi Avi Shafran for his article claiming that Bernie Madoff is more worthy of admiration than Captain Sully, who safely landed his plane in the Hudson, on the grounds that Madoff went beyond what was expected in apologizing, whereas Sully was just doing his job. Rabbi Shafran did apologize, but his apology was somewhat lacking; and even a true apology should not suffice in such a case. Aside from the insanity of even just thinking that it is true, there is also the unbelievable foolishness of putting such a thing in print. Can you imagine if Gawker would have gotten hold of the article? "Prominent Orthodox Spokesman Praises Jewish Swindler, Disses Gentile Hero"?

  • And most of all: whoever at Ami magazine made the decision to run a cover photoshopped picture of of Nazis marching in front of the White House with swastika-flags hanging from it. What on earth were they thinking?! Even Rabbi Shafran was horrified at that one! Why are they so hesitant about properly apologizing?

Repentance doesn't just mean saying that you're sorry. It means taking responsibility for your mistakes.

(On a related note - I have been very uneasy with some comments that have been submitted lately by radical political right-wingers. I'm still weighing up a formal policy, but if you don't see your comments appear, you now know why.)

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

The Physical Dangers of Anti-Rationalism

A number of people sent me details of a tefillah request that has been circulating. A kollel man from Kiryat Sefer wanted to perform the mitzvah of shiluach hakein, sending away the mother bird. As his wife and small children watched, he climbed over the edge of the balcony in order to perform the mitzvah. To their horror, he fell off the balcony, and was rushed to hospital in critical condition. (He is since doing much better, but still has a long way to go before full recovery.)

This case is particularly tragic because, as I explained in my monograph on shiluach hakein, this anti-rationalist view of the mitzvah, in which one should send away the mother bird even if one does not want the eggs, is not the approach of most (if not all) Rishonim, and probably not of Chazal, either. For them, the mitzvah of shiluach hakein is one of compassion, to be performed only if one actually wants to take the eggs (which would generally have been the case in antiquity, when such food was not as easily available as it is today). But if one does not want the eggs - as would always be the case today - there is no reason to send away the mother bird (and it is needlessly cruel to do so).

In the view of Rambam, all mitzvos serve either to teach ideological lessons, to improve our characters, or to improve society. Torah should be teaching us to lead our lives wisely and sensibly. The mitzvos do that - if we would only interpret them correctly. One person who wrote to me pointed out that this tragic case lends new significance in the juxtaposition of the mitzvah of shiluach hakein with the mitzvah of ma'akeh, building a protective fence around one's balcony. I am reminded of the tragedy of the Versailles wedding hall, which collapsed during a wedding. Some people were wondering what area of avodas Hashem was deficient. Tzniyus? Kashrus? Talking during davenning? The obvious contender - ma'akeh, and the idea behind it - was not even considered!

We should pray for the full recovery of Naftali ben Minka Mindel. And we should pray that people let the Torah be a tree of life and a source of wisdom.

Monday, January 23, 2012

The Parenting Dilemmas of a Rationalist ZooRabbi

On Friday night, my six-year-old was excited to tell me what he had learned in his (charda"l) school. Last year, he had told me about how one frog miraculously became many, which prompted me to write a post bemoaning how drash becomes peshat (and see too this post). This year, things were even worse. His teacher had told him that the plague of arov did not only include lions and tigers and bears. It also included dangerous humanoids that are attached to the ground, like a vegetable, by a cord emerging from their navel (and which were able to come because God brought the entire patch of ground that they were on), as well as giant octopuses which broke through the roofs of the Egyptians' houses and unlocked their doors from the inside. My son, who knows much more than most six-year-olds about animals, expressed particular surprise at the vegetable-man - he had never heard of such a thing.

My dinner guests, who read my material, saw me wincing. Of course, I was familiar with both these views, which I discuss at length in Sacred Monsters. The first was presented by the Vilna Gaon, the second by the Midrash Sefer HaYashar. Needless to say, with all due respect to these authors, I see these explanations as ahistorical. There is no vegetable-man (and in my book, I explain how such a belief developed). And giant octopuses are probably not capable of such things, although they do come close. So we have recent anti-rationalist drash being taught as historical peshat. (This is not a problem unique to charedi or charda"l schools; modern Orthodox schools teach the same things.) Moreover, there is no particular value to being taught such things; it merely encourages children to seek wonder only in the supernatural and not in the natural.

But on the other hand, as my wife points out, undermining your child's teacher is deeply problematic. It's also not great for your child's self-confidence to dismiss an explanation that he is excited to share.

The next day, however, something happened that changed my mind. My eight-year-old showed me a book that she had gotten from school and enjoyed. It was a wonderful Hebrew children's illustrated storybook about the life and times of Galileo. The book explained how Galileo did not accept by rote all that his teachers taught him, deciding instead to evaluate matters for himself - and he was vindicated.

This is quite a strong introduction into the millennia-old clash between tradition and reason. But my eight-year-old and six-year-old had nevertheless read the story, and were both able to understand it. I reasoned that if they can read and understand such a book, it should be possible to carefully explain why I don't believe in vegetable-men, and to explain how other people disagree, but why one should still respect them. I attempted to do just that; and I also took the opportunity to explain to my eight-year-old, for the first time, and very sparsely and carefully, the controversy over my books.

I hope and pray that I was correct and successful.

Sunday, January 22, 2012

February Lecture Schedule

Here is a list of my forthcoming lectures that are open to the public:

NEW YORK:

Shabbos February 4th:
Beth Sholom, Cedarhurst
Friday-8PM: “One People, Two Worlds: Rationalists & Mystics”
Shabbos morning-11AM: “Battle for Beit Shemesh: The Evolution of Chareidim”
5PM: “The Animal Kingdom in Jewish Thought

Sunday February 5th:
12pm - "The Challenge of Dinosaurs" - at the YU Sefarim Sale.

2:30 pm - "The Evolution of Orthodoxy: From Chasam Sofer to the Battles of Bet Shemesh"
3:45 pm - "Beasts of Prey: Bears, Hawks and Other Predators in Jewish Thought"
Washington Heights Congregation, 815 West 179th Street
Entrance Donation: $10 for one lecture, $15 for both
Download flyer with details here 

Monday February 6th:

7pm - "How (not) to Become a Heretic: What Must a Jew Believe?"
Drisha Institute of Jewish Education
37 West 65th Street, 5th Floor, New York
Tuition: $18; June and July Immersion Program alumni no charge; $10 suggested donation for college students.

BALTIMORE:

Wednesday February 8th:

7pm at Beth Tfiloh’s Epstein Chapel: “Were the Rabbis always Right.” Free admission.

Thursday February 9th:

8pm - "Shaking the Heavens: Rabbinic Responses to Astronomical Revolutions" at Shomrei Emunah. Entrance donation $10. Download flyer here.

Shabbos February 11th: Suburban Orthodox

WASHINGTON:

Sunday February 12th:
2-5pm - The Torah Tour of the National Zoo. Download flyer with details here.
7:30pm - "The Evolution of Orthodoxy and the Making of Charedim" - Kesher Israel. No admission fee, but RSVP required - see www.tinyurl.com/KIZooRabbi.

RIDES REQUEST:
If anyone can give me a ride from the 5 Towns to the YU Sefarim Sale on the morning of Sunday Feb. 5th, please be in touch!
If anyone can give me a ride from Washington Heights to Woodmere following my lectures on Sunday Feb. 5th, please be in touch!
If anyone can give me a ride to Baltimore on Tuesday Feb. 7th, please be in touch!
If anyone can give me a ride from Baltimore to NY (preferably the 5 Towns) on Monday Feb. 13th, please be in touch!

Friday, January 20, 2012

Is Talmudic Science Rated As Torah?

When Chazal discuss their views on matters relating to the physical world, which have now been rendered obsolete, is this still considered to be Torah? May one study it in the bathroom? Must one say birchas haTorah before studying it? Or is it bittul Torah to spend time on it?

There are different categories to discuss here. One is scientific information that does not relate to Scripture, halachah or theology in any way; for example, the medical remedies in the Gemara. If the medical texts of Rambam are not considered Torah, why would the medical texts of Chazal be considered Torah?

Another category would be scientific information that Chazal attempt to derive from Scripture - for example, the exegeses from Scripture via which Chazal deduce that the sun travels behind the sky or along the horizon at night, and the exegeses via which they deduce the nature of the "firmament."

Of course, the answer to this question depends on how you define "Torah." Is Torah that which was given at Sinai? Or is "Torah" man's attempt to understand and develop that which was given at Sinai? The first definition seems a little narrow; but the second definition is somewhat ambiguous.

Rav Moshe Shapiro commented to a number of people that if anything in the Gemara was nothing more than obsolete scientific beliefs, it would be bittul Torah to learn it. Since we know that people such as the Vilna Gaon were virtually never mevattel Torah, it must be that Chazal were never merely discussing science. Accordingly, everything in the Gemara is discussing metaphysical matters, and is Torah.

But this, of course, stands in contrast to the opinion of most (and perhaps all) Geonim and Rishonim. 

Rabbi Moshe Meiselman claims that when Chazal related mistaken beliefs about cosmology or spontaneous generation, they were merely offering their own opinion on scientific matters, which were therefore fallible, rather than expounding the Torah. I'm not sure if he therefore considers that these things are not Torah. But in any case, his position is inherently flawed, because Chazal did indeed invoke derashos for their views on cosmology and spontaneous generation.

So what's the bottom line? Personally, I have no idea.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Building Tolerance – Even For Haredim


(This article appears in today's edition of The Jerusalem Post)


America! In Israel, that’s often more than just the name of a place. I once saw a commercial which featured it as an adjective, describing a product that was of superior quality. “What can I tell you?” asked the person in the ad, “It’s America!” And it’s getting to be difficult to find a store with a real Hebrew name; they all have English names now, either written in English or in Hebrew transliteration.

This is somewhat of a tragedy. Israel has so much to be proud of. We didn’t make it back to our ancestral homeland and revive an ancient culture just to toss it out in favor of a different and much younger one!

But there are some aspects of America that Israel would do well to emulate. And I’m not talking about the usual new immigrant gripes about poor customer service. Instead, I’m referring to how the ultra-secular in Israel sometimes act in ways that would be considered entirely out-of-bounds in America.

A relative of mine, not especially religious, moved from Israel to the US for a while. On her first day, she was very surprised to see so many religious Jewish women on the bus – and she wasn’t even in New York. She was even more surprised when she discovered that these women were not, in fact, religious, or even Jewish. Rather, it is customary in America for women to dress in a respectable manner for work. When my relative moved back to Israel, she found it jarring to see women turning up for work wearing attire that would be more appropriate for the beach, and men wearing T-shirts with obscene messages.

This is not the only manifestation of ultra-secularism. The New York Times recently ran an article, titled “Israelis Facing a Seismic Rift Over Role of Women,” about the disturbing attitudes to women of many in the haredi world. But there was no mention of an opposing phenomenon: the protest against the Technion offering separate use of a gym, for men alone, after normal hours. The ferocious protest against this “unacceptable segregation” resulted in the gym ceasing to provide this option.

This would be incomprehensible to Americans. After all, every country in the world, including America, has gyms that offer hours for one gender only. It’s not as though the gym at the Technion was imposing on women, or excluding them in any way; it was a matter of giving an after-hours option which was equally offered to women.

Yet while the opposition to the separate hours at the gym was absurd, when one looks at the arguments of the protesters, a distinct theme emerges. It wasn’t the separate hours at the gym per se that offended them. Rather, it was the fear that this was simply one step towards the more extreme exclusion of women that has recently been spreading from the haredi community.

Such fears are perhaps understandable, given the Health Ministry’s haredi-based refusal to allow Dr. Channa Maayan to appear on stage to accept a prize at an awards ceremony. But allowing such fears to prevent a perfectly reasonable request, such as men-only gym sessions after hours, is not only wrong but counter-productive. It simply reinforces the haredi belief – which is not without basis – that there is a rabid, nation-wide anti-religious campaign against them, and that they thus need to circle the wagons and resist any accommodation to the rest of Israeli society.

Haredi society has achieved astounding accomplishments in building up a society of commitment to Torah study and religious observance. But it is now undergoing a period of unprecedented internal and external turmoil. Internally, economic hardship is leading many to reject the kollel-only approach, and the Internet is opening forms of expression that were previously unknown to that world. Externally, there are new stresses with the rest of Israeli society as haredi society grows ever larger; military exemptions become a more serious national matter and growth into new cities (such as Beit Shemesh) causes friction.

More than ever, there is an opportunity, and a need, to integrate haredi society into Israel. But there are forces in haredi society that are strongly opposed to such integration, and many haredim maintain a healthy dose of suspicion vis-a-vis the non-haredi world. Thus, such integration can only work if it is done with tact, sensitivity, and foresight.

This requires that a certain degree of concessions be made to haredi values, however much one might disagree with them. After all, the much-vaunted value of tolerance also requires tolerance of intolerant people, at least insofar as it does not damage the rest of society.

Consider the issue of getting haredim to join the IDF. Deep down, many haredim probably don’t really believe that the country’s security requires having as many people as possible join the tens of thousands already in yeshivot and kollels. After all, this can only be theologically justified with the most tenuous of rabbinic arguments. Furthermore, if haredim really did believe this, then they wouldn’t have taken their 2006 summer break while the country was fighting the Second Lebanon War.

Instead, the haredi refusal to serve in the army is primarily due to their trying to protect a certain religious lifestyle, which is very difficult to do in the army. So at a time when steps are being taken to bring haredim into the IDF, it is essential to help them with this enormous adjustment and show sensitivity to their concerns.

Is it really so very important that religious soldiers attend ceremonies with women singing? To be sure, from a non-haredi point of view, it’s ridiculous for the soldiers to object to it. But it is an issue of great importance to them, and it wouldn’t terribly hurt the army to accommodate it. In the long run, the army would be better off by showing a willingness to be tolerant of haredim, rather than alienating them.

Or consider the Tal Law, which was just renewed. True, it has not been as successful as was hoped, and it probably needs adjustment. But those demanding nothing less than forced full conscription for all haredim lack good judgment, even from the perspective of their own values. Yes, ideally speaking, all sectors would serve the country equally. But it’s just not going to happen, at least in the short term, without civil war. Meanwhile, the idea behind the Tal law is to give haredim more options than simply kollel or full military duty, which inevitably results in them all choosing the former.

At this stage, the challenge for Israel is to begin to enable haredim to willingly enter the army and professional workforce. People should be trying to make this happen more easily and smoothly, rather than making it difficult. We need to show more tolerance of religious minorities – just like in America.