The argument of the ultra-Orthodox today is identical to the argument before and during the Holocaust. This is what a rabbi ruled in the middle of the Holocaust! to a family member who asked his opinion about leaving occupied Europe and immigrating to Israel. His answer was that it is forbidden, "because in the land of Israel a prostitute stands under every tree" - a quote from his words. This was defamation then and it is defamation today.
And if in their opinion - which is not based on anything at all - they will become secular? Does this allow them to stand on the blood? Where do they get this heretical halakha from?
I have the same issue - I wonder aren't they being punished in the next world for all the lives they forfeited?
Today, by saying not to go - others will pay with their lives, so it is not direct. There in Europe those guys and families ended up dead in chambers of gas.
As Rabbi Slifkin state, Rabbi Eichenstein makes it absolutely clear that charedi boys cannot serve even if in a all charedi unit. Please keep repeating this again and again when inevitably someone on this forum or elsewhere claims that's it's all the fault of the army who won't agree to give the charedim the conditions that they ask for and of course they would serve if their conditions were met
As Rabbi Eichenstein says in his speech, the concern is that the IDF cannot be relied upon to provide the promised accomodations. Anecdotal evidence indicates that this is a real concern. As I have previously posted to this comment forum, see https://www.inn.co.il/news/642592 for the remarks of R. Dovid Fendel, the rosh yeshiva of the largest hesder yeshiva, in Sderot.
That article says "religious people should not go to secular army units, but everyone including charedim should serve in the army, and the charedim should go to charedi hesder yeshivas". Do you agree with that?
You just keep moving the goalposts. At a certain point it just becomes ridiculous, especially to religious people who know better and know the difference between halakha, chumra, mishegas, and excuse.
I couldn't agree more. If the chareidi boys are so devoted to yiddishkeit they will stay frum wherever they are. If they don't there is something drastically wrong with the education they receive.
The notion that a quality Jewish upbringing/education will allow one to remain resolute in all circumstances and thus one need not be concerned about engaging them is contradicted by numerous sources. Avoidance of temptation is an elementary part of the Torah lifestyle.
That being said, part of a Torah lifestyle must also include preparation for the inevitable engagement with compromising circumstances if it is realistic that the average person, when properly prepared, can be successful in them.
Exactly right. For someone to refrain from earning a living out of concern for spiritual compromise would be misplaced, as untold numbers of people have demonstrated that it is possible to maintain a healthy religious life while being out in the marketplace.
Imagine, though, a hypothetical situation in which a significant percentage of those who leave the cocoon of the yeshivah for the workplace drop out of religion. Let's say one out of every four young men in the workplace goes off the derech. Could a parent be blamed for trying to keep his children out of such a situation, despite the hardship that it would cause?
Thankfully that is not the case, but there is a perception in the chareidi world that service in the IDF leads to significant numbers of people dropping out of Judaism or their frumkeit being severely crippled, and it is not without substance.
A parallel exists in the attitude toward college attendence. Is college deleterious enough for one's religiosity that it be avoided? Again, it depends on experience. Most of us would be hard pressed to identify someone who went off the derech by attending Touro or YU or taking some classes while in a yeshiva framework. What about moving into Penn or Yale for a couple of years? While there are certainly many individuals who are successful, there is also certainly a significant number of MO youth who are destroyed by it. And herein lies the above divergence: American MO will insist that there be no limits to one's educational opportunities, no matter the risk. Chareidim will realistic about spiritual safety. (A similar parallel exists regarding the pitfalls experienced by Dati Leumi youth in university studies that are antithetical to Torah beliefs.) The reality on the ground is key.
We don't blindly "confront the unconfronted" in physical matters when great risks are involved; does our religiosity deserve any less?
College and army are hardly the same thing. Going or not going to college is a personal choice, and if someone believes that it will challenge their religious observance, it is very reasonable to chose a different educational framework. Not going to Penn or Yale won't harm anyone else.
By refusing en masse to go to the army, Haredim are causing others to die.
Of course college and the army are very different - I was responding to Ephraim's comment.
The Haredi concern is that if its youth would go en masse to the army it would inflict massive damage on the level of observance of the next generation, which would have vast repercussions on the religious nature of the Jewish People.
The single most important mission of the Jewish People is to preserve itself as the people of the Torah for posterity. It is this that has prompted Jews throughout history to place spiritual welfare above physical safety and even life itself. Think the Chashmonaim who took up arms against the Seleucid shmad: it was a suicidal undertaking (their success demanded a miracle), yet the preservation of a Jewish nation that is religiously hampered is of no value.
Now, you will argue that you don't see the spiritual dangers in the IDF; the dati leumi manages it just fine; etc. That's fine. But the hareidim do perceive the situation as such and that is what is driving their attitude.
Hameiri: "The matter of a "pious fool" is one who is overly pious even in matters where his piety causes harm either to himself or to another; such as one who fasts every day, or who sees a woman drowning in the river and says 'I will not go down to save her lest I look upon her nakedness', or who sees a baby gurgling in the river and says 'I will remove my phylacteries before I enter' " (Beit haBehira laMeiri, Sotah 20a).
Given the opportunity to look back objectively at their haredi chinuch, from outside the yeshiva bubble, young Israeli haredim WILL drop their Yiddishket.
Their system cannot co-exist with healthy questioning and objectivity.
No he is wrong. The army will happily let them recreate the charedi bubble inside it if it means they can get thousands of new recruits. But he won't even agreeto that. Why? Because it would challenge the charedi ideology that they don't owe a thing to the rest of the nation but everyone else owes them
But above all, they can't risk the loss of political support. A guy goes into the army, gets a job, soon some of them will be voting for Likud or something.
And if in their opinion - which is not based on anything at all - they will become secular, does this allow them to stand on the blood? Where do they get this heretical halakha from?
That's correct. My point was that even a hesder rosh yeshivah was moved to decry the spiritual pitfalls of the IDF and that they must be taken very seriously in determining how frum people engage with service. The religious future of the next generation does not take the back seat to army service. Clearly Rav Fendel's judgement is that it is still feasible to work within the system. But my impression is that he would not be dismissive of those with different judgement as completely irrational or disingenuous.
While I understand your point, I don't think it overcomes Efraim's point that trangressing a negative commandment intended to protect the future of all Jews in the name of protecting the religious future of the next generation of a specific community had better come with a darn good justification. And not attempting to work within the system is not a good way to convince people otherwise.
So in line with the Midrash about Yosef, Hillel, and Rebbi, when the charedi gets to Shamayim and, in response to asking why he didn't serve, he says, "I feared for my religious standards," I imagine Hashem will trot out Agam Berger. She's certainly earned her place with those three.
I read R' Bazak's post with a sinking stomach, thinking, "Oy, he never got to fulfill his dream, and now no one will do it..." and then I got end, and that made it even more amazing. We live among giants.
I hate debating a narrow point at the risk of being called out on the general subject, but Yosef, Hillel, and Rebbi Elazar Ben Harsom in Yoma 35b did not choose their situations. Yosef did not choose to be his mistress' servant; Hillel did not choose to be a pauper. They would have been obligated to escape from their tests. We do not have a precedent, or at least the Gemara mentions no precedent, of anyone choosing a compromising situation being used as a challenge for one's religious lapses.
It happened. You called me out on the general subject.
Reproof is normally done on the recipient's terms, that even on their terms they are wrong. Without rehashing their terms, according to those terms, that which you call a Chakira separates what they are doing from the stories of Yosef, Hillel, and Rebbi Elazar Ben Harsom.
Ah, too late I realized that I was dealing with what I'm pretty certain is a product of contemporary yeshivot, someone who has to make a whole debate even out of innocuous points such as mine, particularly if they disturb his worldview. Lesson learned, I hope. Everyone else can take it as they want.
I apologize. Maybe next time I'll say nothing, or CAPITALIZE that I'm dealing with a side point, or first check with you if you are commenting innocuously. But if you want to correct me on a side point, I'd be much obliged if you do. Best.
On the one hand I am not clear on what is meant by “rationalist” Judaism.
On the other hand I have never interacted with a defended of the draft exemption who would even continue to converse beyond the exchange “something’s got to give, and it clearly can’t be Torah” / “something’s got to give, and it clearly can’t be survival.”
Something for Haredim (threatening to leave if drafted) to think about, and also liberal Jews (threatening to leave if the democratically elected government of Israel carries out its legislative platform): where in the world do you think you’re going to go that a bunch of immigrating Jews will be welcome?
Heck, the nations of the world, even the Arabs ones, won't take in *one* Palestinian even as they fill the streets screaming for them. They sure aren't going to take in any Jews.
Right, the West is foolish enough to admit millions of Arabs and Muslims. But their political feelings for the poor Palestinians doom them to remain in misery.
While the Arab countries may say one thing, but their actions, or lack thereof, demonstrate a good practical awareness of who the Palestinians are. (It doesn't hurt that they don't like Jews.)
Obvious ones. Among the several senses of the word “rationalist,” which one is meant? Why does rationalism, so defined, imply the Rambam’s fundamental views (how enumerated?), and vice-versa? How do this blogger’s expressed views derive from rationalist (so defined) premises, or (equivalently) from Rambamish ones (so enumerated)?
Actually, the cherry-picking is done by the charedi leadership who claim that boys who go to hesder units will leave religion, based on the very VERY rare exceptions who do so.
Certainly, our G-d is just, would not forget those whose negligence and superstitions contributed to the needless death of thousands, even if they did so out of ignorance and under the pretence that they're supposedly observing the halacha.
"Apparently, unlike Agam Berger, who grew up in a non-halachic home and did not attend yeshiva, these charedim who have spent their entire lives immersed in Torah Judaism will abandon religion."
In the US at least, that is the case, as documented in the past in these pages wrt attending secular college. It has also been documented as of several decades ago (but I have no update for the current situation) that religious Israeli youth (particularly the unsophisticated) who joined the IDF, abandoned religion in droves.
True. At an earlier period, there was a high risk even without IDF. Later the religious community matured and the gap between those who enlisted and those who didn't widened greatly
But sometimes the trial is thrust upon us despite those pleas. Such as the trial whether one will fulfill the halachic imperative to join in a מלחמת מצוה.
But feel free to tell the others that they and only they are excluded from אל תביאני לידי ניסיון, ולא לידי ביזיון.
Interestingly, "Lead us not into temptation" is the one line in the Lord's Prayer said to be without a basis in earlier Jewish tradition. (Although there is discussion on this.) Make of that what you will.
The argument of the ultra-Orthodox today is identical to the argument before and during the Holocaust. This is what a rabbi ruled in the middle of the Holocaust! to a family member who asked his opinion about leaving occupied Europe and immigrating to Israel. His answer was that it is forbidden, "because in the land of Israel a prostitute stands under every tree" - a quote from his words. This was defamation then and it is defamation today.
And if in their opinion - which is not based on anything at all - they will become secular? Does this allow them to stand on the blood? Where do they get this heretical halakha from?
I have the same issue - I wonder aren't they being punished in the next world for all the lives they forfeited?
Today, by saying not to go - others will pay with their lives, so it is not direct. There in Europe those guys and families ended up dead in chambers of gas.
As Rabbi Slifkin state, Rabbi Eichenstein makes it absolutely clear that charedi boys cannot serve even if in a all charedi unit. Please keep repeating this again and again when inevitably someone on this forum or elsewhere claims that's it's all the fault of the army who won't agree to give the charedim the conditions that they ask for and of course they would serve if their conditions were met
As Rabbi Eichenstein says in his speech, the concern is that the IDF cannot be relied upon to provide the promised accomodations. Anecdotal evidence indicates that this is a real concern. As I have previously posted to this comment forum, see https://www.inn.co.il/news/642592 for the remarks of R. Dovid Fendel, the rosh yeshiva of the largest hesder yeshiva, in Sderot.
"Anecdotal" is not the same as "evidence."
From anecdotal experience, anecdotal is not necessarily anecdotal either.
That article says "religious people should not go to secular army units, but everyone including charedim should serve in the army, and the charedim should go to charedi hesder yeshivas". Do you agree with that?
Yes, if that system was run by religious people who could be relied upon.
Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the case. As such, one can be sympathetic to Rabbi Eichenstein's judgement even if one disagrees with it.
You just keep moving the goalposts. At a certain point it just becomes ridiculous, especially to religious people who know better and know the difference between halakha, chumra, mishegas, and excuse.
It became ridiculous a long time ago.
Sympathetic with R.Eildelstien judgement?
I am keeping track of the excuses used why the charedim don't have to serve.
ven if one excuse falls away you got 21 others - so the entire thing is simply a joke.
You know what works....when they hear the slamming of the cell door and realize they are in for 3-4 years that somehow gets into their heads.
Will that happen??
'these charedim who have spent their entire lives immersed in Torah Judaism will abandon religion.'
Maybe the lesson is that what they have been immersed in is not actually Torah Judaism.
I couldn't agree more. If the chareidi boys are so devoted to yiddishkeit they will stay frum wherever they are. If they don't there is something drastically wrong with the education they receive.
The notion that a quality Jewish upbringing/education will allow one to remain resolute in all circumstances and thus one need not be concerned about engaging them is contradicted by numerous sources. Avoidance of temptation is an elementary part of the Torah lifestyle.
That being said, part of a Torah lifestyle must also include preparation for the inevitable engagement with compromising circumstances if it is realistic that the average person, when properly prepared, can be successful in them.
"compromising circumstance"
Like a State. Earning a living. The 20-21st century. Confronting the un-confronted.
Exactly right. For someone to refrain from earning a living out of concern for spiritual compromise would be misplaced, as untold numbers of people have demonstrated that it is possible to maintain a healthy religious life while being out in the marketplace.
Imagine, though, a hypothetical situation in which a significant percentage of those who leave the cocoon of the yeshivah for the workplace drop out of religion. Let's say one out of every four young men in the workplace goes off the derech. Could a parent be blamed for trying to keep his children out of such a situation, despite the hardship that it would cause?
Thankfully that is not the case, but there is a perception in the chareidi world that service in the IDF leads to significant numbers of people dropping out of Judaism or their frumkeit being severely crippled, and it is not without substance.
A parallel exists in the attitude toward college attendence. Is college deleterious enough for one's religiosity that it be avoided? Again, it depends on experience. Most of us would be hard pressed to identify someone who went off the derech by attending Touro or YU or taking some classes while in a yeshiva framework. What about moving into Penn or Yale for a couple of years? While there are certainly many individuals who are successful, there is also certainly a significant number of MO youth who are destroyed by it. And herein lies the above divergence: American MO will insist that there be no limits to one's educational opportunities, no matter the risk. Chareidim will realistic about spiritual safety. (A similar parallel exists regarding the pitfalls experienced by Dati Leumi youth in university studies that are antithetical to Torah beliefs.) The reality on the ground is key.
We don't blindly "confront the unconfronted" in physical matters when great risks are involved; does our religiosity deserve any less?
College and army are hardly the same thing. Going or not going to college is a personal choice, and if someone believes that it will challenge their religious observance, it is very reasonable to chose a different educational framework. Not going to Penn or Yale won't harm anyone else.
By refusing en masse to go to the army, Haredim are causing others to die.
Of course college and the army are very different - I was responding to Ephraim's comment.
The Haredi concern is that if its youth would go en masse to the army it would inflict massive damage on the level of observance of the next generation, which would have vast repercussions on the religious nature of the Jewish People.
The single most important mission of the Jewish People is to preserve itself as the people of the Torah for posterity. It is this that has prompted Jews throughout history to place spiritual welfare above physical safety and even life itself. Think the Chashmonaim who took up arms against the Seleucid shmad: it was a suicidal undertaking (their success demanded a miracle), yet the preservation of a Jewish nation that is religiously hampered is of no value.
Now, you will argue that you don't see the spiritual dangers in the IDF; the dati leumi manages it just fine; etc. That's fine. But the hareidim do perceive the situation as such and that is what is driving their attitude.
Avoidance to a degree, but more so building up tools to resist.
That’s the ticket
Isn't it odd that the allegedly "most" frum would become less "frum" the easiest?
Isn’t it ironic, dontcha think? A little too ironic, yeah I really do think…
Hameiri: "The matter of a "pious fool" is one who is overly pious even in matters where his piety causes harm either to himself or to another; such as one who fasts every day, or who sees a woman drowning in the river and says 'I will not go down to save her lest I look upon her nakedness', or who sees a baby gurgling in the river and says 'I will remove my phylacteries before I enter' " (Beit haBehira laMeiri, Sotah 20a).
Perhaps Rabbi Eichenstein is correct.
Given the opportunity to look back objectively at their haredi chinuch, from outside the yeshiva bubble, young Israeli haredim WILL drop their Yiddishket.
Their system cannot co-exist with healthy questioning and objectivity.
No he is wrong. The army will happily let them recreate the charedi bubble inside it if it means they can get thousands of new recruits. But he won't even agreeto that. Why? Because it would challenge the charedi ideology that they don't owe a thing to the rest of the nation but everyone else owes them
Or, worse in his eyes, they'll drop their Haredism while keeping their Torah observance. *That* is what they're really scared of.
They would rather they become irreligious because it proves their point.
But above all, they can't risk the loss of political support. A guy goes into the army, gets a job, soon some of them will be voting for Likud or something.
And if in their opinion - which is not based on anything at all - they will become secular, does this allow them to stand on the blood? Where do they get this heretical halakha from?
See the aforecited https://www.inn.co.il/news/642592 that even a hesder rosh yeshiva agrees to this "heresy."
The rabbi in the article seems to be arguing for Haredi Hesder units, which is not at all the position of the rabbi that Slifkin cited in the OP.
That's correct. My point was that even a hesder rosh yeshivah was moved to decry the spiritual pitfalls of the IDF and that they must be taken very seriously in determining how frum people engage with service. The religious future of the next generation does not take the back seat to army service. Clearly Rav Fendel's judgement is that it is still feasible to work within the system. But my impression is that he would not be dismissive of those with different judgement as completely irrational or disingenuous.
The problem is not that it's irrational or disingenous. The problem is that it's immoral and causing suffering and danger.
While I understand your point, I don't think it overcomes Efraim's point that trangressing a negative commandment intended to protect the future of all Jews in the name of protecting the religious future of the next generation of a specific community had better come with a darn good justification. And not attempting to work within the system is not a good way to convince people otherwise.
So in line with the Midrash about Yosef, Hillel, and Rebbi, when the charedi gets to Shamayim and, in response to asking why he didn't serve, he says, "I feared for my religious standards," I imagine Hashem will trot out Agam Berger. She's certainly earned her place with those three.
I read R' Bazak's post with a sinking stomach, thinking, "Oy, he never got to fulfill his dream, and now no one will do it..." and then I got end, and that made it even more amazing. We live among giants.
I hate debating a narrow point at the risk of being called out on the general subject, but Yosef, Hillel, and Rebbi Elazar Ben Harsom in Yoma 35b did not choose their situations. Yosef did not choose to be his mistress' servant; Hillel did not choose to be a pauper. They would have been obligated to escape from their tests. We do not have a precedent, or at least the Gemara mentions no precedent, of anyone choosing a compromising situation being used as a challenge for one's religious lapses.
She didn't choose to be kidnapped.
And people being drafted aren't faced with a choice. And even absent a draft, every country needs soldiers, Israel especially.
I'm sorry, your chakira in no way holds up. But it demonstrates something.
The Charedi argument against drafting non-learning always misses the final clause.
It's presented as "It's forbidden for us to be drafted because x"
But it implies "It's forbidden for us to be drafted because x, but others must be drafted despite x".
Not true.
Where do you live?
Uh oh I see I got under your skin. Better I should say I agree with you fully on everything except the small points under discussion.
Or not even that.
Or just keep all my comments to myself.
It happened. You called me out on the general subject.
Reproof is normally done on the recipient's terms, that even on their terms they are wrong. Without rehashing their terms, according to those terms, that which you call a Chakira separates what they are doing from the stories of Yosef, Hillel, and Rebbi Elazar Ben Harsom.
No one's asking charedim to go voluntarily. They're being asked to be drafted, the same as everyone.
Ah, too late I realized that I was dealing with what I'm pretty certain is a product of contemporary yeshivot, someone who has to make a whole debate even out of innocuous points such as mine, particularly if they disturb his worldview. Lesson learned, I hope. Everyone else can take it as they want.
I apologize. Maybe next time I'll say nothing, or CAPITALIZE that I'm dealing with a side point, or first check with you if you are commenting innocuously. But if you want to correct me on a side point, I'd be much obliged if you do. Best.
Wow! That's an excellent oxymoron. But don't take my word for it. Run it by someone neutral and chilled, if you can find.
Heart-breaking and inspiring and infuriating all at the same time.
On the one hand I am not clear on what is meant by “rationalist” Judaism.
On the other hand I have never interacted with a defended of the draft exemption who would even continue to converse beyond the exchange “something’s got to give, and it clearly can’t be Torah” / “something’s got to give, and it clearly can’t be survival.”
Something for Haredim (threatening to leave if drafted) to think about, and also liberal Jews (threatening to leave if the democratically elected government of Israel carries out its legislative platform): where in the world do you think you’re going to go that a bunch of immigrating Jews will be welcome?
Heck, the nations of the world, even the Arabs ones, won't take in *one* Palestinian even as they fill the streets screaming for them. They sure aren't going to take in any Jews.
Who wouldn't pay attention?
Right, the West is foolish enough to admit millions of Arabs and Muslims. But their political feelings for the poor Palestinians doom them to remain in misery.
While the Arab countries may say one thing, but their actions, or lack thereof, demonstrate a good practical awareness of who the Palestinians are. (It doesn't hurt that they don't like Jews.)
Amen.
A Palestinian *did* kill a king of Jordan. On the Har HaBayit, no less.
By "Rationalist," Slifkin means he's a Rambamist.
Thank you for the clarification, although of course it raises questions too.
What other questions did you have?
Obvious ones. Among the several senses of the word “rationalist,” which one is meant? Why does rationalism, so defined, imply the Rambam’s fundamental views (how enumerated?), and vice-versa? How do this blogger’s expressed views derive from rationalist (so defined) premises, or (equivalently) from Rambamish ones (so enumerated)?
Great post. These proofs against the Chareidi line of thinking are startling.
Cherry picking.
Actually, the cherry-picking is done by the charedi leadership who claim that boys who go to hesder units will leave religion, based on the very VERY rare exceptions who do so.
Once again, I refer to https://www.inn.co.il/news/642592.
You can only post that so many times, you know.
Is this the first repetitive argument that you've seen on this substack?
Not word for word reposting of a link you really understand nothing of, no. You're the first.
Explain???
Certainly, our G-d is just, would not forget those whose negligence and superstitions contributed to the needless death of thousands, even if they did so out of ignorance and under the pretence that they're supposedly observing the halacha.
Those individuals must endure a long purgatory.
"Apparently, unlike Agam Berger, who grew up in a non-halachic home and did not attend yeshiva, these charedim who have spent their entire lives immersed in Torah Judaism will abandon religion."
In the US at least, that is the case, as documented in the past in these pages wrt attending secular college. It has also been documented as of several decades ago (but I have no update for the current situation) that religious Israeli youth (particularly the unsophisticated) who joined the IDF, abandoned religion in droves.
"that religious Israeli youth (particularly the unsophisticated) who joined the IDF, abandoned religion in droves."
'What about religious Israeli youth (particularly the unsophisticated) who didn't join the IDF?'
Without such a comparison, your statement have no meaning.
True. At an earlier period, there was a high risk even without IDF. Later the religious community matured and the gap between those who enlisted and those who didn't widened greatly
Those who didn't enlist were less mature, you mean.
:)
I don't mind, and here and elsewhere actually enjoy, jokes made at my expense. Ch☺️☺️rs!
The Girls of Israel sport Tzitzis and Tefillin, gotcha.
Ve'al tevi'einu... velo lidei nisayon...
Are you presenting that as a serious justification?
But sometimes the trial is thrust upon us despite those pleas. Such as the trial whether one will fulfill the halachic imperative to join in a מלחמת מצוה.
But feel free to tell the others that they and only they are excluded from אל תביאני לידי ניסיון, ולא לידי ביזיון.
Interestingly, "Lead us not into temptation" is the one line in the Lord's Prayer said to be without a basis in earlier Jewish tradition. (Although there is discussion on this.) Make of that what you will.