A Sage, not a Saint

Rabbi Elyashiv, the last "great sage" of Haredi Judaism, died today at age 102. While he has been admired by many in the Orthodox world for his integrity and respected for his knowledge and leadership, I don't feel it's quite appropriate to celebrate his life "with a full cup."

As a leader, he was "principled" to a fault, vigorously refusing compromise or accommodation with other communities he disagreed with. In cases where he could have ruled leniently, he quite often decided that the true path to righteousness lay with hardship and difficulty-- for his followers and for many others. As Failed Messiah notes, his tenure as leader of the Haredi world also saw not a few moments of hypocrisy, as well, most notably declaring that it was forbidden for Haredi Jews to donate organs but perfectly kosher for them to accept them. Leah Vincent at Unpious discusses how Elyashiv's positions may have empowered and enabled child abusers in Haredi communities. Anyone who has kept abreast of academic/intellectual freedom in the Haredi world knows how far-reaching Elyashiv's power was when it came to silencing writers like Natan Slifkin or Nathan Kamenestsky. And, of course, under his tenure, the position of Haredi women, particularly in Israel, has deteriorated even further under an epidemic of misogyny masquerading as a concern for modesty.

Reports suggested that he had sacrificed much to become a great sage in his community. He seemed to be estranged from his family and lack personal connections with friends or colleagues. Worst of all, under the pretense of caring and assisting their great rabbi, a group of hangers-on used his name and position to advance their own pet interests and biases, in activities that can only be described as elder abuse as the rabbi's mental and physical state steadily deteriorated.

I would like to admire R. Elyashiv. But the truth is that I feel sorry for him, and his family, and even his followers, who have spent so much time denying any problems with his health (or their community's) that they now seem at a total loss to do anything now that the inevitable has happened.

A sof shalem to Rabbi Elyashiv. And hopes for a chayim shelayim to the ones whose lives he touched-- for good and bad.

Dying with dignity versus living without it

My father-in-law works in end-of-life care, so over the years we've had lots of conversations about the topic. While I personally have not experienced close friends or family going into hospice, I have come to have a greater appreciation for the palliative method over a "preserve life at all costs" approach. Still, I understand that this creates a bit of a mind for medical ethics and for those in the medical profession: one long-standing definition of a doctor, connected with the Hippocratic Oath, is the concept of doing no harm. It is one that I think many Jews can connect with as well-- Judaism is supposed to celebrate and venerate life, and I've read that the implication that comes with that philosophical orientation is that there is a very strong bias against ending life if it can be preserved.

However I think that at the end of the day, both Judaism and medicine have enough depth to them that, if one is interested in making the case, there is certainly enough intellectual ammunition to support a more palliative approach. The big question, I believe, revolves around the notion of what harm is and where "quality of life" intersects with the broader category of "life." Just as there are certain mitzvot that traditional Judaism commands Jews not to violate even if it leads to their death, it would seem logical that there are similar scenarios in which it is appropriate to re-evaluate priorities and, potentially, decide to discontinue treatment (particularly aggressive or debilitating treatment) in favor of a more dignified and comfortable end to the patient's life.

I've been thinking about these issues a lot lately as I've been following the news about R. Elyashiv in Israel. He has been a long-running Internet antagonist for the several years I've been blogging, a perfect example of how the Haredi community, particularly in Israel, seems to value authority over discussion, and isolation over engagement. In recent years, R. Elyashiv has banned books without reading them, technology he doesn't use or understand, and condemned whole swathes of people he has never met. In my eyes, he was the best example of the living anachronism that traditional Judaism must struggle to avoid becoming.

But a few weeks ago I read an article in Haaretz that changed my thinking a little.

On the top floor of a Jerusalem hospital lays a very old man. He is slowly dying, but he won't be left in peace. A small circle of courtiers around him continue to issue in his name edicts and rulings, ensure that his signature still appears on letters and when his medical situation improves temporarily, they will remove him from hospital and seat him in his chair at the synagogue, where everyone can see him. The hospital staff grumbles that all this just prolongs the old man's agony, but there is nothing they can do as the retinue controls all the old man's moves. 

Only a tiny handful of relatives and trustees are allowed to talk with him, and they jealously guard his real mental situation while everyone is told that he is fully lucid and talking with his family and doctors, praying and studying as normal. 

This is how the great rabbis die nowadays. These were the circumstances of the last years of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, as the Chabadniks fought over him, manhandling him to the window of his study so he could wave to the crowds on Eastern Parkway, steadily deifying him as he descended into his last coma. His body died in 1994, at the age of 92, but many of his followers still believe he is with us. 

Rabbi Elazar Menachem Shach suffered similar indignities when visitors to his home in Bnei Brak were shown the volume of Talmud he was studying from, but were not told he had been on the same page for 10 years. Just before he turned 100, he was finally allowed to retreat from the public stage and given a few years of rest before he died at the age of 102. 

The retainers of Kabbalist miracle-maker Yitzhak Kadouri bodily carried him to events well into his 11th decade, making sure he muttered the required incantations, shouting in his near-deaf ear the names of those to be blessed, and continued a brisk trade in his handwritten amulets until death finally liberated him from their clutches at 106. 

By some accounts, 101-year-old Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, the great sage of the "Lithuanian" ultra-Orthodox community, is undergoing the same treatment as these words are being written. For months now he is being shuttled back and forth from hospital to his tiny apartment in Mea She'arim; but despite growing reports on his frailty, he still seems capable of publishing momentous rulings on the pages of Yated Ne'eman, such as the one that appeared two weeks ago forbidding Haredi men and women from participating in military or academic vocational courses under non-Haredi auspices. While there are those who treat these verdicts as the word from up on high, speculation is growing that for months now, if not years, Rabbi Elyashiv's name has been appended to endorsements and prohibitions he has never heard of. 

Modern medicine has created an intractable theological dilemma for Haredi Jewry. While it prolongs the lives of rabbis well in to their 90s and beyond, it does not guarantee soundness of mind. But how can a community brought up on the doctrine of "Da'at Torah," rabbinical infallibility, accept that their leaders' memory and reasoning can deteriorate. They liken their rabbis in old age to Moses, whom the Torah tells us that at the age of 120, "his eye was not darkened, nor his moisture ceased." And above all, their mind, this god-given gift to an entire nation, surely cannot fail, only gain strength and wisdom. But that is simply not the way of the human body.

Assuming even half of Anshel Pfeffer's article is true, it raises a fascinating point that, to my embarrassment, I had only half-recognized myself up until now. Yes, it is incredible, bizarre, and rather unbelievable that these gedolim are still giving pronouncements on issues of the day past the age of 100. And the reason it is all of those things is because they aren't actually doing it. These elders are not reading these books, not condemning these technologies. They've never seen them. Most of them spend most of their time going back and forth from home to shul to the doctor. It is their handlers, their advisers, their heirs, who are pulling the strings. In the height of chutzpah, these younger people manipulate, deceive or even impersonate their supposedly venerated leaders, men that their communities see as truly holy, to exert their own desires for power. And while doing so, not only do they undermine their credibility, their independence, and their reputation-- but they also turn them into political symbols to fight their pet battles, regardless of whether the sages know or care about the issue or not.

Even now, this is going on with R. Elyashiv.

Rav Elyashiv is listed in critical/stable condition. The gadol hador is in a medically induced coma and connected to a mechanical respirator, fighting the fluid buildup in his lungs, the result of diminished cardiac output as seen in congestive heart failure. 

Family members are in the hospital, where hundreds continue to gather, compelling hospital security and police to deploy additional manpower to keep people outside. Officials report that while the avreichim and rabbonim mean well, they are not assisting the rav’s situation and they are hampering hospital personnel, interfering with them. Additional security has been placed at the second floor entrance to the emergency room, the hospital’s night entrance.

Think about that: R. Elyashiv has not been conscious for days. He is in a coma. He is on a respirator. And yet there are so many people crowding into his room that the staff can't even do their job. I have no doubt the vast majority of the people visiting this man are sincerely there because they care about him. But the lack of understanding about what they need versus what he needs is pretty shocking.

There's yet another dimension to this: the idea that if R. Elysahiv goes, the entire community will suffer a major tragedy. There has been little thought as to who will succeed him, what training or support they might need, ways the community might be able to help the family grieve, etc. A month after another serious hospital visit, several days since he has been in a coma, and R. Elyashiv's community shows no sign of letting go. They will not consider what happens next because they will not admit that he is going to die. To that point: he cannot be allowed to die.

“If Rav Elyashiv in danger,” said Rav Edelstein, “we are all in danger.” 

In his morning shiur, Rav Edelstein linked Rav Elyashiv’s condition to the security situation in Eretz Yisroel, stating that Rav Elyashiv protects us. 

“We are in danger and need protection and are in grave danger… We are a lonely sheep among seventy hungry wolves. In such a situation, we need protection. ” 

The rosh yeshiva then described Rav Elyashiv as protecting the generation. 

...Later, the rosh yeshiva described how the power of the righteous can prevent wars and catastrophes, adding that it is known that before World War II, many gedolim, including Rav Boruch Ber Leibowitz, Rav Shimon Shkop and others,  perished, thus removing these “righteous defenders” from the world. 

“Now in our generation, we have an individual who defends us through his toil in Torah,” said Rav Edelstein. “Now he’s sick and we are compromised. We must all daven and learn Torah.”

This kind of personality worship cannot be healthy. This extreme identification of one mortal person's health with the entire community's well-being verges on the nutty. Sooner or later, R. Elyashiv is going to die. What happens once he does? The way people are talking about him is making it sound like they think he can't die. Are they going to deify him like Chabad did with Schneerson? One can only hope that people like R. Edelstein don't actually believe what they're saying-- in which case, the whole thing becomes one big PR stunt. Which is worse?

Death is part of life. All people die. Judaism, which is rooted in the real world, knows this. Yet some of this pragmatism seems to be getting lost. The elders of our communities should be honored and allowed to pass in peace, not have their accomplishments be sabotaged in their final years by the very people who should be protecting them and preserving their dignity. There is something seriously wrong when leaders don't pass the torch until they reach 100... only to give it to people in their 90s. When did we start acting like the Catholic Church?

I cannot in good conscience wish R. Elyashiv a refuah shleima, a complete healing. I believe he is beyond that. I wish him the same wish I have been wishing for my own grandmother, a woman thirteen years his junior but just as mentally and physically compromised as him. I wish that they both be allowed to go in peace, comfortable, content, and with dignity. Not a refuah shleima, but a sof shleima (complete end). Or, perhaps more poetic, a chayim shleima (complete life).

If R. Elyashiv's people truly respect him, if they truly believe that he is the best of their generation... and if they truly believe their prayers have the power to keep him alive until 120...

They should stop.

And let him go.

Are we talking about the same place?

Jonathan Rosenblum wrote an article encouraging the mayor of Bet Shemesh to confront the Haredi wingnuts that keep attacking students at a Modern Orthodox girls' school because it's too close to their turf and because the girls aren't dressed quite modestly enough for their tastes. As often happens, my issue with Rosenblum is not so much with his main point, but rather the way he goes about arguing it.

Case in point: to illustrate that Haredim can live by their principles of modesty but also avoid becoming major jerks, Rosenblum discusses the fine folks of Kiryat Sanz:  

Last week, I found myself davening Mincha in Kiryat Sanz in Netanya, prior to spending a few hours at the separate beach across the road. Kiryat Sanz is a largely self-contained neighborhood of Klausenberger Chassidim, though late Klausenberger Rebbe insisted from the beginning that there be a Sephardi community within Kiryat Sanz. Laniado Hospital, which the Rebbe built, lies at the edge of the neighborhood.

While in Kiryat Sanz, I noticed one or two women in decidedly non-Chassidic dress walking through the neighborhood. No one paid them any attention. Just to make sure that my powers of observation are not waning, I called a doctor friend who lives in the neighborhood, and he told me a story of rabbi who once spent his summer vacation in Kiryat Sanz. After a week, he complained to the Klausenberger Rebbe, of blessed memory, that he was shocked by the presence of immodestly dressed women in Kiryat Sanz. The Rebbe replied, “That’s amazing. I’ve been here over ten years, and I never saw anything like that.”

My friend then told me another story that captures the ahavas Yisrael that the Rebbe made the animating value of his community, along with devotion to Torah study. Once the Rebbe heard that some Chassidim had shouted, “Shabbes,” at seaside bathers. He ordered them to cease and desist forever. “Nobody ever came closer to Torah because someone shouted at them,” he said. “Open your windows and sing Shabbos zemiros at the top of your lungs. That might have a positive effect.”

Many Mazel Tovs to the Klausenberger Hasidim, who apparently follow their rebbe's approach in not sweating the small stuff.

However, it's a little unfortunate that shortly after reading about the tolerant and open-minded people of Kiryat Sanz that I happened to stumble across this piece over at FailedMessiah:

Sanz hasidim are forced submit their mail, the land line phones, their cell phones and computers to censorship that includes banning all computer games for children and having a rabbinic committee certify that all laptops have their Internet capability permently disabled.

Hmm... Well, as long as they're only harassing themselves, I guess we're still cool. Rock on, Klausenberg.

No Intellectual Honesty, No Gedolim

Last week while opining on why cloistered Haredi media is not really the same thing as major news organizations, I mentioned a sad paragraph that had appeared in the Jerusalem Post's coverage of the Tel Aviv shooting:

Meanwhile, a senior editor at the haredi daily Hamodia said that his paper would totally ignore the incident.

"We do not want our children asking questions about that community," said the editor, who was interviewed on condition of anonymity.

"Our philosophy is to stay away from that entire issue," added the editor. "Someone who walks into a perfumer's store comes out smelling good. But someone who walks into a tanner's comes out smelling bad."

I suppose this shouldn't be all that surprising, given the Haredi world's track record on "undesirable information." Similar thinking appeared in 2005 and 2006, when Israeli Haredim preferred to ignore the Gay Pride debacle rather than give it increased publicity. To a degree, I can appreciate the "if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing at all" sentiment-- except that when it comes to dealing with a problem in your community, say, hateful incitement, saying nothing is the moral equivalent of an emphatic shrug, or passing the buck. If anything, refusing to condemn the Tel Aviv shooting sends the message to youngsters that it's not such a big deal, which is indeed a big problem.

Now today we have a similarly bone-headed argument for censorship, only this time coming from a Mafdal, or Religious Zionist, rabbi, in fact, the Chief Rabbi of the IDF, who is irked that the army magazine did a series of articles about gay officers, in honor of Gay Pride Month. Ronski has said that he doesn't think homosexuality is an appropriate topic for the magazine. Apparently Rabbi Ronski was particularly disturbed by an article describing an officer who identified as both religious and gay. Today, the universe tried to achieve some karmic balance by having a group of religious gay IDF soldiers slam Ronski in the press.

A group of religious homosexuals serving in the Israel Defense Forces sent a letter of protest to IDF Chief Rabbi Avichai Rontzki yesterday over his statement that it is inappropriate for the army journal Bamahane to run articles on homosexuals in the IDF.

The statement, which was reported in yesterday's Hebrew edition of Haaretz, "gives us the feeling that we, religious homosexual soldiers and officers, have no place in the army," the soldiers wrote.

"As religious men loyal to the path of religious Zionism," the letter continued, "we view military service as a duty and a privilege. With God's help, your words and your effort to prevent articles in Bamahane will not succeed in harming our integration into and advancement in the IDF."

The soldiers, all graduates of hesder yeshivas or religious pre-army academies, said they "believe it is everyone's right as a private individual" to hold racist or homophobic views. "But because you are an IDF officer and serve as the IDF's chief rabbi ... we expect you to be the rabbi of all IDF soldiers, including religious homosexual soldiers," they wrote.

The IDF is dismissing the calls for Ronski's resignation by saying that he "has a habit" of saying boneheaded things. But I think there are some deeper issues here. First is the mater of the Mafdal world becoming more Haredi in its thinking- again, Ronski is a good example of the trend.

There has been tension growing between Modern Orthodoxy and Haredi Judaism for 15-20 years, but the past few have seen some big rifts developing, as hot-button issues like Zionism and feminism continue to stir the pot. The fact that the Haredi response to anything threatening is to either ban, ignore or censor it does not improve matters.

The bigger problem, however, is that Modern Orthodoxy, including the Mafdalim in Israel, continues to sublimate itself to Haredi Judaism, in thought if not outright deed. As an outside observer, I continue to be unable to understand exactly why this is so, particularly since, unlike, say, ignorant secular Jews' love affair with Chabad, Mafdal folks know their halakha and, in theory, should have enough education and pride to be able to stand up for their traditions and practices and not cave in to a group whose primary intellectual argument seems to be the ability to yell very loud.

Mostly, though, I find this all particularly sad because of the impact the Haredi approach towards life has on the BIG QUESTIONS, such as Truth, or in Yiddish, Emes. In theory, Emes, both pursuing it, and wrestling with it, should be one of the guiding questions for all people, particularly religious people. Truth is not only worthy of deep intellectual discussion and engagement, but also a bedrock value to countless belief systems.

However, when it comes to dealing with uncomfortable questions, the Haredi approach to Emes seems to be, again, a shrug. When you have Haredi newspaper editors who say they are going to ignore news of the day because "we'd rather not get into that," you have crossed a point of no return. That is the home of crazies like Bill O'Reilly who say they don't want to have their kids "exposed" to gay people (or anything else that makes them uncomfortable) because they don't want to feel obligated to actually act like a parent and "have to explain it." Yes, clearly all you have to do is shelter your kids from homosexuality until they're 18 and they will never have to find out it exists. Run away from Bill O'Reilly, my Haredi brothers and sisters. This man is not a role model!

The origin of my previous post had been one by DYS over at DovBear talking about why the so-called Sages of this Generation... weren't. Later in that comment thread, I wrote,

Torah and Emes do not have to be mutually exclusive. But I do not see the Gedolim even interested in the question of Emes, whether in regards to science, history (making of a Godol), or, even worse, personal relationships (see for instance the treatment of Slifkin and Kamenetsky). And that is truly sad.

Not only is it sad for the Haredim who claim to be the truest representation of our religious heritage to the world. Not only is it sad for the state of Israel who for reasons unfathomable to me continues to privilege this worldview above other Jewish approaches and beliefs. It is also sad because this seems to be the direction Modern Orthodoxy is leaning. Modern Orthodoxy, which, as its triumphalist ambassadors remind us at every opportunity, may very well account for the majority of "real" Jews left in America in 100 years. If this is the straightjacketed moral and intellectual compass that Modern Orthodoxy is going to follow, Lord help them. Yes, they may wind up being the only demographically viable denomination (whatever that means) by 2100-- but if they have sacrificed their cultural and intellectual integrity to become Haredim in lighter clothes, what's the point?

If what's left of the worldy Orthodox want to constrict their minds with Haredi blinders, I invite them to do so. I will stay on the sidelines with my Shiksa Girlfriend and Chinese food. Somewhere between us two groups of sinners, we'll find one Perfect Jew. And then at last we'll have at least one Godol.

Correction, Please

About a month ago one of UTJ's newer (well, actually, older) MKs announced he had an important point to make. Unfortunately it revealed a laughably myopic and self-important view of Jewish history and religion:

Knesset Member Menachem Eliezer Moses, chairman of the Haredi-religious United Torah Judaism party, has found that an animal welfare bill supported by the government could make his shtreimel an endangered species. The shtreimel is a unique fur hat traditionally worn by members of Hassidic sects on special occasions.

MK Moses wants fur imported for use in making shtreimels be exempted from the general prohibition. "It is inconceivable," he said, "to support a bill that outlaws imports for such a clear and important religious need."

Pardon my ignorance, sir, but exactly what "clear religious need" is that? As a friendly neighborhood rabbi, I'm certain you'd be happy to show me the many detailed halachot on shtreimels. Inquiring minds want to know.

Moses, who is a Belzer Hassid and also a rabbi, explained to the coalition representatives the meaning and importance of the shtreimel to the sector his party represents.

The UTJ leader was at pains to explain that he does not oppose the proposed law entirely, "but I request that the law include an appropriate exception stating that import for religious purposes will not be infringed and will not be considered a violation of the law." With a call for the government ministers to amend the law, MK Moses added, "We are not in the Middle Ages, when Jews were forbidden to use explicitly Jewish symbols."

The shtreimel an explicitly Jewish symbol? Um... no. We stole the shtreimel from Polish noblemen, who presumably then stopped wearing them because even back in the 1700s, Jews were not considered all that cool.

It's funny MK Moses mentioned the Middle Ages because, contrary to what he's semi-implying, we didn't HAVE shtreimels back then. The frigging Reform movement has been around longer than Jewish shtreimels. This guy claims that the earliest Jewish use of shtreimels were by the early Chabad hasidim, which would still only be c. 1770s. He also notes that Peter the Great, or should I say Pinhas ben Alexei, the Tzaddik of Romanov, wore a shtreimel.

Thanks to the power of the internet, I was lucky enough to find a picture of this magnificent specimen of Torah-True History:


























Agh! The Yiddishkeit, it buuuurns!

Incidentally, I like this last line. Apparently someone at Arutz Sheva has a sense of humor:

The shtreimel can be made from genuine or synthetic fur, with the latter actually more common among Israeli Hassidic Jews than those overseas. The Rebbe of the Gerrer Hassidic sect, in fact, issued an edict that his followers may only purchase spodiks (a style of shtreimel) made of fake fur and that cost less than $600.

Hmm, if only the Belzer rebbe (or Viznitz?) would follow the Gerrer's lead.

Oh Israel, you are so hilarious.

First, Shimon Peres confirmed suspicions that he is, in fact, everyone's senile old Jewish great-uncle in a spectacular two-fer: Not only did he totally miscount how many US Presidents were around between 1948 and 2008 (hint- there is a world of difference between 7 and 11), he also managed to simultaneously bore and horrify onlookers with a rambling, incoherent anecdote about how Abraham Lincoln supposedly was "totally pro-Israel."

That's right, despite the fact that Zionism did not exist in the 1860s and that Lincoln died 80 years before the state was founded, Peres is trying to count him as "one of ours."

Haaretz has more:

In his speech, Peres also said that president Abraham Lincoln once promised his Jewish "doctor," Isachar Zacharie, to support the establishment of a Jewish state. Peres did not invent Zacharie, but- how shall we put this gently- there are several versions of this story. It seems that one of Lincoln's acquaintances did indeed tell him about an idea to establish a state for the Jews in the Land of Israel, and Lincoln replied that the option was worthy of consideration. He added incidentally that he had respect for the Jews, since his podiatrist was Jewish.

In actuality, Zacharie was not a medical doctor. In England and the U.S. you can treat foot problems without being a physician, and Zacharie was in fact an English Jew.

Let me get this straight: the big claim to fame here is that Lincoln supposedly made a noncommittal (and totally unfulfillable) promise to his Jewish podiatrist?. His unlicensed, Jewish podiatrist, no less. I told this story at someone's Shabbos dinner and the guy across from me seriously did a spit-take, which was impressive given that he was eating tuna salad at the time.

Not only does Haaretz point out that the story is unprovable apocrypha, I feel someone must also ask the all-important "so what?" question- unless the point here is to demonstrate that even antebellum US Presidents had Jewish physicians who bugged them about Israel and who got patronizing pats on the head to get them to shut up about it. This is like when your alter kocker relatives start twisting your ear about how many Jewish Nobel Prize winners there were, or claiming, without any justification, that other famous people were Jewish, half-Jewish, had Jewish friends, liked Jewish foods, or maybe just had an affinity for beards. When the task at hand is playing psuedo-historical Jewish geography, any connection, no matter how dubious, is fair game.

But wait, last week was a really great one for weird Israel news. We all remember the trials and tribulations Jerusalem has suffered the past few years as its gay residents, shameless heretics as they are, have tried to organize pride parades through the capital of the Jewish people (which they apparently lost their citizenship to when they decided to head off the hetero-derech). The Orthodox have not been happy about and have continually voiced this dissent in that most timeless form of political discourse, burning neighborhood trash cans. A while ago a delightful irony (which, IMO, made it all-but-certain that God was secretly rooting for the gays) came up: it turns out the plastic bins release carcinogenic smoke when ignited. The haredi mobs were in fact poisoning their own families and neighborhoods in their mad dash to let their gay bretheren know just how much ahavat yisrael they felt for them.

Now, the police and government have repeatedly made tough statements like "mob rule will not be tolerated" and the like. However this story shows the truth of the matter. Pride is coming up again and as the gays prepare to unleash the rainbow hordes on the city of gold, how has the local government chosen to respond? Will they be reaching out to the haredi community to urge leaders to rein in their hothead activists? Will they put more cops on the streets to enforce order? Just how will they solve this ongoing dilemma?

The answer is stunning in its simplicity. Or is that... stupidity?

The Jerusalem Municipality has replaced dozens of plastic garbage bins with noncombustible metal ones, this after recurring ultra-Orthodox riots in protest of the annual Gay Pride Parade have cost the city more than a million shekels over the past five years.

Yeah, replace their trash cans. Way to show them who's boss. They'll think twice before they disturb the peace again. (And such a sturdy material, too! I know if there's a riot going on, one thing I want to make sure of is that the mob has plenty of lightweight, hard, weapons to throw and smash things with.) Who paid for those replacement cans, by the way? I'm guessing it's not the bozos who necessitated the "switch."

The Jerusalem Municipality. Run by idiots, sucking up to idiots.

Keeping Things in Perspective

Back in the days before Dennis Miller went crazy, he made a very good comment in one of his "rant" books that has always stuck with me, along the lines of, "Isn't there something a little presumptuous in a bunch of old men telling women about what they can and can't do with their own bodies?" Miller was talking about the American Congress (at present there are under 100 out of 600 seats) but he could just as easily have been talking about the Haredi rabbinical establishment:

Hundreds of religious and ultra-Orthodox men thronged to lectures on woman's sexuality, fertility, menstruation and birth control in Jerusalem yesterday in the "Innovations in Women's Medicine" conference.

All the lecturers were men while the women, who also came in the hundreds, had to sit behind a barrier in the ninth annual conference held by the Puha Institute, dedicated to women's medical and halakhic issues.

...Conference organizer Rabbi Benjamin David said he was aware that having all male lecturers address such sensitive issues was drawing fire from religious circles.

"First, we don't think that we are not sensitive," he said. "These are very professional halakhic issues and the lecturers are first-rate experts. Second, it's a matter of modesty. We are a very open institute but we have our limits and we don't think it proper for a woman to stand on the stage and address 1,000 people."

Separating between the genders at the conference as well as the intensive occupation with woman's sexual issues indicate openness, not radicalization, he said.

"We put things on the table. It shows openness, contrary to the stigmas on the religious public," he said.

Hmm. Now I know what you're thinking-- no women speakers at a women's health conference? Women having to sit behind a mechitza (could they even hear the lectures)? Shouldn't it have been the other way around-- the men should have been behind the barrier!

Anyway, I'm here to tell you to calm down. Believe it or not, this conference was actually a major improvement-- remember this?

Chief Sephardi Rabbi Shlomo Amar last week canceled the conference on women whose husbands refuse to grant them a divorce (agunot), which was due to take place in Jerusalem on Tuesday, at the order of ultra-Orthodox Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv.

...Three months ago, Amar persuaded the Haredi sage Elyashiv to approve the conference. Elyashiv conditioned his consent on banning women from the conference.

Impressive. They went from banning women from a conference about women's issues and then cancelling it at the last minute to having it and just keeping them behind a sexiness-barrier, that's a big step. Who knows, in another two years they might have graduated to full Bachanalias. Of course, they'll keep the sheitels on. For modesty's sake.

Revolutionary Rabbis, part 2, or "A plea for Historical Honesty"

Got more confirmation on the Kotzker and Gerer rebbe's involvement in the November revolution of 1830. The source?

Rabbi Berel Wein:

[Footnote:] Reb Mendel's original family name was Halperin, but because of his support of the Polish national revolution, he changed it to Morgenstern to confuse and escape the punishment of the Russian conqueror. Rabbi Yitzhak Meir's original name was Rottenberg but he changed it to Alter for the same reason as Reb Mendel. Whether their support of the Poles was voluntary or coerced is still a debate among scholars.

Given that I've only been able to find mention of this in one journal article and one book on Jewish history I'd be interested to find out which scholars Rabbi Wein is talking about here (or is he just trying to hedge his bets by not openly saying the rabbis supported Polish indepence?), but I'm glad he's at least helping spread some information about a little-known part of Jewish history that has ripple-effects down to the present-day. If rosh yeshivot are flipping their lids hearing about rabbis of yesteryear just listening to Zionist lecturers, I can't imagine what certain Hasidim would think about their Alter-Alter-Alter-rebbes actively supporting the Polish independence movement and becoming fugitives in the process. Doesn't exactly provide the desired model of "otherworldlyness" or keeping the goyim at arm's length now, does it?

But wait, I found another: Rabbi Dov Ber Meisels, descendant of the Rema, author of a commentary on Rambam's Sefer ha-Mitzvot, and Chief Rabbi of Krakow and later Warsaw. A contemporary of the Kotzker, Rabbi Meisels was an arms-runner for the same 1830 uprising that caused the Kotzker and Gerer to go on the lam. He was also involved in the Krakow Uprising sixteen years later, serving as one of twelve city council members, was elected to the Austrian Parliament (where he sat with the radicals against the occupying government).

Meisels was a major figure in organizing Warsaw's Jews for Polish independence before and during the 1863 Uprising and was involved in various joint Polish-Jewish demonstrations. His activism got him arrested and deported from Warsaw in 1861. Returning a year later, he organized aid and wrote speeches supporting the Uprising as it occured and was again arrested and expelled by the Russians. Upon returning a second time, he lived under constant surveilance by authorities.

Rabbi Meisels died in 1870, and his funeral was the site of a major Polish-Jewish rally against Russian occupation. He was such a volatile figure that the army forbade printing any obituaries following his death.

What does all this show? Only that Jewish history is a lot more complicated than some modern-day arbiters of truth would have us believe. Remember that 150 years ago, "Poland" encompassed most of the European Jewish population, among them many of the most traditional and religious. These are people we have been trained to think of as merely pious, apolitical, even conservative. And some of them were. But there were also others who held some very radical positions, and who saw no conflict between being frum, or even a rabbi or rebbe, a leader and model to hundreds, thousands of other Jews, and interacting with the outside world, with non-Jews, or tangling with thorny political issues.

We should examine our past openly and honestly before enforcing our own pet issues supposedly "on the authority of our grandfathers." If we take a look at the whole picture (as some have tried to do), we find that our grandfathers and their grandfathers had a much more nuanced view of the world than we give them credit. We should not let the creative, even radical personalities of yesterday be co-opted or sanitized by the narrow views of their grandchildren today. Would the Hidushei ha-Rim even recognize his great-great-great-grandson? Would he recognize himself as he has been re-imagined in Ger haigography? Would the Baal Shem Tov, for that matter? Or the Rambam?

I am beginning to think that the great debates of our time will not focus on which denominational clique we affiliate with, but over how intellectually honest we are willing to be with each other and ourselves, and with the source material of Judaism and Jewish history. We will have to struggle over whether we decide to make truth, honesty and openness important values in of themselves, worth defending and fighting for.

The irony is that by censoring the past of "the sages", Orthodox leaders perpetuate the idea to other Jews that there is nothing interesting, engaging, or relevant in Jewish history or tradition. Then again, maybe that is part of the intent and problem-- that some would rather spread the notion of a sanitized past to keep their hold on their own communities and children and could care less if other Jews care about their heritage or not.

The problem is that even if a Jew is not Orthodox, or even no longer a Jew, their communal and family history should still be accessible to them. This is one of the reasons I am so passionate about genealogy and am intrigued by the concept of translating Yizkor books, maintaining the oral history and heritage of communities, with all the squabbles and messiness that implies-- as much as some people may not like the idea, the greatest rebbe and the grandest heretic can still be landsmen, or even family. And their tastes should not dictate what history is allowed to continue on down the line. I have no rabbinical lineage, but some of my ancestors did come from Vilna, and as such, I have just as legitimate a claim-- and right-- to the history of the Vilna Jews as a descendant of the Gaon. By the same token, their lives and histories should not be censored in order to create the image that Vilna was an "ideal" community (by whose standards?) free of strife and conflict in order to somehow honor or elevate the Gaon or his birthplace.

The same point, incidentally, applies to other historical biases present in Jewish history-- for instance, viewing all events through the prism of Zionism or proto-Zionism, and emphasizing the denigrations of the "Ghetto Jew" existence to justify the "New Jew" prototype of Herzl and Nordau, or whitewashing the complexities, setbacks, and failings of Zionism and Israel themselves. The American branch of the discipline has similar blind spots; in particular, focusing on or elevating groups of Jews from certain ethnic, class or political backgrounds at the expense of others.

The bottom line is that we distort our history at our own peril-- and now, more than ever, we, all of us, religious, secular, questioning, American, Israeli, Zionist, Socialist, Republican, Democrat, we all need history and role models we can relate to, use for inspiration, and most of all, trust. Do not purge our history of the great and creative men and women who found a way to engage with their worlds and balance their identities. Do not deny our children our history. It is our right. It is their legacy.

UTJ shake-ups

You know, there was a time when I paid more attention to Israeli politics than American ones. But that time has ended, and I rarely bother to post about the goings-on of the Knesset these days.

On the other hand, I always try to follow developments with my buddies in UTJ. Since lately Kadima, Likud and Labor have been constantly on the verge of collapsing in on themselves and devolving into cannibalistic feeding frenzies, UTJ decided, "Why not us?" The first salvo in this epic battle was launched by Meir "the Beard" Porush when he announced his campaign for mayor of Jerusalem. Supposedly, Porush had the backing of everyone in the Israeli Haredi community. Everyone, that is, except for Ger, the largest sect in the country. The Gerrer rebbe (and his top politico, Yaakov Litzman) were pissed about Porush endorsing non-UTJ candidates in previous elections and not working hard enough to get enough money (all of it) earmarked for Ger schools. Ger wasn't alone; Porush's Degel Ha-Torah colleagues weren't very excited about his running for the post, either:

The first to come out openly against Porush is MK Avraham Ravitz of Degel Hatorah, who does not conceal his disgust with the man, a scion of the powerful Porush family. Jerusalem, he says, "deserves a mayor who intends to run the city fairly, for all its residents, one for whom Jerusalem, rather than he or his family, is of primary importance."

Ouch.

The result? Tons of fun mayhem. There was plenty of press squabbling and name-calling, along with Ger calls to boycott Porush and support anybody else, but it turns out that was just the pre-game show. Ger eventually supported the secular candidate, Barkat, over Porush, and convinced a few other sects to follow along (including, according to some reports, Porush's own Boyaner rebbe). There were also some scuffles on election day in Haredi neighborhoods.

Immediately following the election, there were amusing descents into violence.

First, Litzman was attacked in a Slonimer shul in Mea Shearim. The strangest thing here was seeing the different ways news wires could mangle the term "kugel."

Yediot: "Liztman was kicked, pushed, cursed and pelted with kugel pies. "

Middle East Online: "According to witnesses, young ultra-Orthodox pelted the 60-year-old rabbi with cakes and threw his black fur hat on the floor."

Jpost: "The embattled Litzman, a representative of the Gur Hassidim within the haredi United Torah Judaism Party, was allegedly cursed, pushed and kicked before being pelted with kugel shortly after arriving at a family celebration"

But at least the thugs are even-handed. The next day some people beat up Porush's son. (History repeating itself?)

Sadly, even after hats have been cleaned and brusies have faded, bruised egos take a much longer time to heal. Following the election debacle, the entire Haredi political system is squabbling with itself:

First, Agudat Yisrael is feuding:

[There is a] major rift between two major groups making up Agudat Yisrael.

On one side is Shlomei Emunei Yisrael, headed by Porush, which is made up of a patchwork of small-to-medium-size hassidic sects usually named after the East European towns where they were founded. Some of the sects represented by Porush include Arloi, Slonim, Karlin-Stolin, Seret-Viznitz, Sadigora, Belz and Boston, one of the few hassidic groups named after an American city.

Pitted against Porush's Shlomei Emunei is the Gerer hassidic sect, the country's largest. Until the recent confrontation, Gur, under the aggressive leadership of Rabbi Ya'acov Aryeh Alter, effectively controlled Agudat Yisrael. Now Shlomei Emunei and Gur are waging a power struggle.

Some are claiming that the election debacle will be the eventual death of Ger's control of Agudat Yisrael. Hope you're happy, Porush! Does your beard's ego know no shame?

But there's more. Senior Degel head, Avraham Ravitz, announced a couple of weeks after the election that he was quitting politics, though he would still stay on as Degel chair. This leaves the top Degel position open for Moshe Gafni, who has been chomping at the bit for some time.

And then yet more developments- Degel and Agudat announced they were splitting again- this would be for the third time since 2004. As before, most of the disagreement is hovering over who gets the sixth slot.

In response, some Gerrer movers and shakers have tried to get the rebbe to can Litzman, but apparently he's not interested. Also, Agudat is now apparently considering letting Belz finally have another turn in the Knesset. How nice of them.

Finally, in case Porush has a sudden change of heart about sticking with UTJ New and Improved Agudat Yisrael "half the Knesset representation with half the fat", he will be happy to know there's another party willing to offer him a political home:

Far-right activists Baruch Marzel and Rabbi Shalom Wolpe yesterday heralded the establishment of a new political party, Eretz Yisrael Shelanu (Our Land of Israel), which will vie for seats in the upcoming Knesset elections. Marzel and Wolpe said they have already put out feelers to MKs Aryeh Eldad and Uri Ariel (Habayit Hayehudi) about a possible merger with the new party.

Wolpe also said that if Meir Porush declines to run as a member of United Torah Judaism, his new faction "would be more than happy to accept him."

Awesome, the latest crazy attempt by Marzel to get anywhere near the Knesset! You can tell they're serious because of the other people they've invited in. Clearly this is a very exclusive club.

Now Meir, as your agent I think you should carefully consider all offers...

Weasel Words

First of all, am I the only one that thinks it's weird to put out "appreciations" of great rabbis' lives when they get very ill that sound like they're obituaries?

Second, I was very amused when I saw this ode to R. Eliyahu on the last Haveil Havalim. It's nice enough, but here's where things get interesting.

Hakham Mordehai Eliyahu's early religious education was conducted by his father, who died when Eliyahu was still young. He continued to study under the prominent Syrian-born rabbi, Hakham Ezra Attia (1885-1970), the head of the Porat Yosef Yeshiva in Jerusalem, as well as Askkenazi rabbis such as Avraham Karelitz (1878-1953), author of the well know book, 'Hazon Ish.' His commitment to the Torah was displayed when as a youth, the young Eliyahu joined an underground group that struggled for a Torah-directed government in Israel and was involved in at least one attempt at pressuring the government by means that were considered, by some, to be illegal.

Ooh, mysterious! What, you may ask, is the cryptic "pressure" being danced around? Let's take a look:

[In 1950], a group of more extremist Haredim organized itself, planning to adopt violent measures against the state authorities... [Their] program...[was] not only to defend religion but to enforce observance of the Torah and halakha by force. In April 1950, in the Porat Yosef Yeshiva, one sector of this group created a terrorist underground that called itself Brit Hakanim (Union of Zealots). Its leaders were Yehuda Reider, Eliahu Raful, and Mordechai Eliahu. Brit Hakanim numbered a few dozen young members. Among their terrorist acts they set afire cars whose owners drove on the Sabbath, placed incendiary bombs in football fields where games were played on the Sabbath, and burned down butcher shops that sold non-kosher meat. The underground was exposed by the Israel security services when it was planning on throwing a dummy bomb into the Knesset to frighten its members during a debate on military conscription of women and as its members were planning to set fire to military records in the Jerusalem conscription office. Most members of the underground who were arrested were put on trial, and a few of them were sentenced to prison terms.
- Tzvi Tzemaret, Melting Pot in Israel

The most dramatic plan of the two ultra-Orthodox undergrounds involved a desperate effort to stop the passage of a b ill requiring all Israeli women to serve in the army... Brit Hakana'im commanders first considered throwing a bomb in the Knesset, but the idea was later rejected for the fear of many casualties and negative public reaction. Members of Hamachane, who independently debated the same plan, reached the same conclusion. Rather than rejecting the whole diea, they came up, however, with a better tactic, exploding a scare bomb in the Knesset. Their technicians assembled a small bomb capable of producing a large amount of fire, smoke, and noise... [But] Israel's security services already knew about their planned Knesset provocation. The house's session was stopped abruptly before the vote and a large number of Hamachane activists were rounded up and arrested... four activists were... brought to trial. Prime Minister Ben-Gurion, who concluded that the underground was nothing more than an immature act of disoriented Yeshiva students, instructed the state's prosecution to take a lenient attitude. The leaders of the group were sentenced from three to twelve months in prison. The circumstances that led to the formation of the first underground in Israel's history were described in court by young Mordechai Eliyahu, a key activist and Israel's future chief Sephardi rabbi.
- Ehud Sprinzak, Brother Against Brother

So let's review- while historians apparently cannot figure out which group of crazy theocratic nutjobs Eliyahu belonged to, they were definitely responsible for planting (or planning to plant) a fake bomb in the Knesset. Now, was that the worst thing they could do? No- after all, the smoke probably wasn't even carcinogenic. But I'd love someone to explain to me how planting fake bombs in Parliament buildings is anything BUT illegal.

Hametz as a Civil Liberty

There was a recent court decision in Israel to allow the open sale of hametz, or leavened bread products, during the 8-week holiday of Passover. Some people are understandably angry about this:

According to MK Zevulun Orlev (NU/NRP), who was next to address the plenum, "the overwhelming majority of the Israeli public wishes to adhere to the Jewish tradition not only personally but publicly and nationally."

"If only we had no need for a law - that should have been the ideal situation, just like we do not need a Yom Kippur law, a Brit Mila law, and just like there is no law mandating the consumption of matza on Pessah," Orlev said. "The Hametz Law was enacted because people - maybe they were a minority, especially in the Tel Aviv area - were scornful, did not show sensitivity, and served hametz in public."

To which the obvious answer should be- SO WHAT? This is the price of living in a democracy. Yes, even those secular bastards in Tel Aviv are entitled to do as they please.

The Haredi Shas party has responded to this by not only threatening to quit the government (something that is irritating some right-wingers, interestingly enough, as it shows just where Shas' priorities are), but also by promising its constituents that it will work extra-hard to make sure to "sweep out" any pesky civil liberty loopholes out by next year.

Shas leader Eli Yishai on Tuesday announced that by 2009 it will be impossible to sell chametz, speaking only hours after the Attorney General ruled the state will not appeal a Jerusalem court's controversial decision to allow the sale of the foods by certain businesses during the Jewish holiday.

"The People of Israel can relax, by next year it be impossible to sell chametz," said Eli Yishai, who is Employment, Trade and Industry Minister as well as heading the ultra-Orthodox party.

Well I'm sure this is helping someone sleep easier. Presumably, someone with way too much time on his hands.

Proponents of the Hametz law are basically taking three approaches. The first, in what is unfortunately becoming all too common, is threatening violence. Because, of course, at this time of great joy, remembrance, and Jewish unity, the best way to show all us sinners the errors of our ways is to burn garbage cans and throw rocks. (One Reform rabbi is trying to spin this positively; I'll wait and see what happens to the businesses that refuse the polite letter.)

The second is to bemoan the good old days when the quasi-Marxist elites of Israel still enforced a status-quo which didn't challenge the religious mores as overtly as they do now. Rabbi Berel Wein leads the way:

There were certain norms of respect that once governed Israeli society, even though that society was perhaps even more secular in lack of observance and in its anti-religious ideology than it is today.

Marxism was a powerful influence in the Jewish world then as was its attendant atheism. Nevertheless the general consensus was a modicum of respect towards traditional Jewish norms that prevailed.

Maybe it was nostalgia or just good hardheaded common sense that the climate in the country reflected a Yom Kippur without traffic, Pesach without public displays of chametz, and Tisha B’Av without restaurants being open for business.

Such was the climate of the times – not one of religious observance but rather one of respect for Jewish history and tradition and for the great section of Israeli society who held these concepts and observances dear.

But the estrangement of Israeli society to this type of public climate has been taking place gradually over the past few decades. Respect for tradition and knowledge of the Jewish past are certainly not emphasized and in many cases not even taught in the Israeli public educational system.

Religious Jews are demonized, albeit subtly but nevertheless constantly, in the main media channels. Sensitivities to neighbors and fellow citizens have become non-existent. Public Shabbat desecration abounds and no one takes into account the damage - spiritual, social, and generational that springs from this.

The climate has changed – no respect for tradition or our past or for the sensitivities of a large and ever growing section of Israeli society is present.

So it is not the individual issue of a public display chametz on Pesach that is so hurtful. It is rather the indication of how severely the climate regarding Jewish tradition has changed. There are many Jews who are not observant but who nevertheless respect the prohibition of chametz on Pesach.

What R. Wein forgets is that much of this status-quo had less to do with ACTUAL respect for Orthodox traditions and customs and more to do with patronizing and courting political support. Much of Israel's old guard were die-hard secularists who were downright antagonistic to religion precisely because of experiences back in the old country, and were either first or second generation departees from Orthodoxy.

Furthermore, there is no reason why my respect of someone else's method of observing a holiday demands driving hametz underground. I can respect what YOU do without doing it myself, or requiring that a third party be forced to go along with what we're both doing (will we mandate seder attendance next?). Same for Shabbat observance- you're in shul all day, what do you care what I'm doing? And why should respect always flow one way- you have religious MKs calling this decision "liberal terrorism." What about respecting the right to civil disagreement, or personal freedom? It's the religious parties who want to legislate behavior here, not the other way around. You can't legislate respect.

The third is just to be pissy:

This week every radio talk show in Israel and every newpaper discussed the “hametz” law. I was surprised no one made a point that I often make when there is a charge of religious coercion: In Switzerland it is against the law to wash your car or hang laundry on Sunday. You get fined! But how come no one calls that ‘religious coercion” ?

Maybe if anyone gave a crap about Switzerland...

And pissier:

Anything to show America and Europe that they are like “everyone else” and disregard religion, because it is “archaic and out of date”, they are more “enlightened and know better”. This is probably the furthest the “High Court” has gotten as far as Torah is concerned. Now we know where we are headed….

And even-pissier:

Israel is a Jewish nation. If someone wants to eat Chametz on Pesach or purchase Pork they should chose a different place to live. If they are living in Israel, they need to respect the laws, culture and tradition of the nation.

I am sure there will be large demonstrations in front of any business selling Chometz, and I am sure that those businesses will be boycotted completely. But, all we need, really is one person standing outside these establishments on Hol Homoed with a cell-phone camera to photograph every person going in and out. Then, those photos should be posted on the internet, the patrons should be identified, and if any of the patrons of these establishments are in the process of conversion, or if they have come to Israel under the Law of Return, the should have their citizenship and/or conversion immediately revoked.

They must be cut off from the Jewish people.

Hey genius, maybe some people want to live in a different kind of Israel, one that doesn't mandate that everybody follow theocratic laws. Israel was built on the backs of its pioneers, religious AND secular. Come on, you're talking about photographing people eating BREAD like they were walking into freaking whorehouses and trying to get them deported. It's not crack, it's freaking BREAD!!

I'm sorry guys, you live in a democracy. People have the right to eat whatever they want. If you want them to not be jackasses about it, try asking them nicely instead of insulting or threatening them. And before you chalk this all up to me being a heretic and all, here are a bunch of more religious folks (relative to me, anyway) who agree with me.

R. David Hartman:

One is caught in this dilemma. I can appreciate the aversion people have for legislating religious principles. I appreciate the feeling of some that the government should not enter into your own private spiritual domain and dictate to you what you can and cannot eat on Pesach. Freedom of religion or non-religion is an option that should be decided by the individual and not by the legislative power of the Knesset.

On the other hand, if we are interested in some shared, collective space that mediates some flavor of Jewishness and gives a Jewish quality to our public life, then it is the role of the Knesset to establish the minimum conditions that would give expression to our Jewish historical heritage.

Should Jewishness be legislated or should it be the result of a personal freedom of choice?

Friend of the blog Antigonos, who, questionable culinary taste aside, makes some excellent points about personal freedom:

...the head of one of the most religious political parties has now declared that he intends to seek a law forbidding the sale of chametz absolutely, making it impossible for even a Moslem or a Christian to have a felafel in a pita too.

...Dear Mr. Yishai: No damn government is going to tell me whether I may eat chametz or not. Get a law passed prohibiting the sale or display of all chametz, and there will be bread on my Seder table (if only for show)! With "friends" like you, attempting to force observance by coercion, we ordinary Jews don't need don't need any other enemies. Please go count your tzitzit, or something, and stay out of my kitchen. I don't force you to eat treif, don't force me to eat matzah (which, by the way, I love).

Another FOTB, Xyre:

The Israeli Haredi establishment won’t be satisfied until every square inch of Israel is a theocracy, and the men in black hats have all the power. Like Iran, but Jewish. People should have the right to buy, sell, and eat what they want during Passover. Just because some three-thousand-year-old law says you shouldn’t eat hametz, that means everybody in the country must be prohibited from it? Passover is about freedom. This includes the freedom not to give a damn about old laws and customs.

...I’m glad for the judicial ruling that recognizes that if people—Jews—want to sell and buy hametz during Passover, they have every right to do so. This is victory for rationality, consideration, and tolerance, and against caving to the Haredim and surrendering personal choice to the theocracy that some Jews are intent on creating in Israel. People have rights, including the right not to observe old (and frankly, quite silly) traditions.

I don't hate Passover. I don't hate religious Jews. I understand that some of them are very upset by a Jewish state that doesn't seem to care about enforcing Jewish law. But the laws of the State of Israel are not the same as Jewish law, and not banning hametz does not infringe on religious Jews' rights to practice their religion. One blogger says the loss of the hametz law paves the way towards the final split of the Jewish people in Israel:

You want stores to have the right to sell chametz on Passover. For seven simple days, you cannot stand the idea of going without bread. You’ll follow your carbohydrates-free diet all year long, but on Passover, woe unto those who dare to deny you the right to buy pita.

For the right to buy some rolls and noodles, you will turn your back on my beliefs. No, I don’t expect you to believe, but would it be so costly for you to honor my right to my beliefs?

...Ultimately, the sale of chametz products in Israel means another desecration of what sets us apart from the rest of the world; what makes us a unique Jewish State. It will not impact on the ability to keep kosher for any religious Jew. All it will do is show us, once again, how far apart Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are – and even more importantly, it will convince those of us with orange hearts that it is useless to believe that we can ever really be one nation.

There was a civil war after the evacuation of Gush Katif. It did not play out in violence as the media and the left so gleefully predicted. It took place in the hearts and souls of those on the right. We surrender. Eat your chametz on Passover and shop on our Sabbath. Desecrate the laws of the Torah if you will and cry about your right to eat pita for those precious 7 days of the year. But what you have lost, the cost of buying that chametz will be in the millions of dollars those stores will lose from religious customers. It is our right to buy OUR pita where we will.

Go ahead, refuse to buy wine from the Golan Heights and honey from the Shomron. Don’t buy products produced in Ariel or those made in Maale Adumim. And we, in turn, will refuse to buy from stores open on Shabbat and those who sell chametz on Passover –and we will all be poorer for the experience.

But even more important than the monetary issues is the fact that you will lose our hearts, our determination to be one with the nation you want to maintain. We will not join a country that would desecrate what we value most – all for a loaf of bread, one time per year. We cannot be part of the Israel you are trying to build because it runs against everything that we believe in – a land that we hold not by the might of the army, but by the right of all that we are, all that we have survived as a people.

What is the cost of selling chametz on Passover? Far greater than Israel can afford to pay.

I acknowledge this woman's pain, but her personal anguish and anxiety seems to be clouding her identification over exactly which party is being wronged here. There is no legitimate reason to FORCE other people to observe Passover the way SHE thinks it should be properly observed. Furthermore, she does not need a LAW to either: A- celebrate her holiday the way she wants to, or even, B- to encourage others to NOT do things she'd rather they didn't. No, you SHOULDN'T get to deny people their bread products, anymore than they should get to deny you your right to eat kosher food or wear traditional clothing. It's your RIGHT to do those things, and its their right to eat whatever on earth they want.

Which leaves us with Conservative Rabbi Reuven Hammer's thoughts:

The tragic reality is that these religious-political leaders do not realize that the more laws they enact the more they alienate so-called secular Jews from Judaism. The more they rant and rave against secular Jews, the less chance they have of creating an atmosphere in which Judaism, Jewish values and Jewish observances will be honored and even followed by the population at large. The more coercion is brought to bear in religious matters, the more the population will rebel against it and revile Judaism.

Rather than spending their energy in trying to enforce unenforceable laws of dubious value, true religious leaders - as opposed to political leaders wrapped in the cloak of religion - would spend their time teaching and demonstrating the beauties of Judaism. Instead they are busy demonstrating the exact opposite. They use their political leverage to wrest vast sums of money from the government, i.e. from the pockets of the taxpayers, to support thousands who will not serve their country in the army or any other way, thereby creating hatred among the secular. They bring disrespect upon Judaism - and desecrate God's name - by sending to the Knesset those who end up in jail for flaunting the very laws of the Torah they pretend to represent.

Every time a religious leader stands up in the Knesset or elsewhere and spouts nonsense such as the speech we recently heard about homosexuals being responsible for earthquakes or faulty mezuzot bringing on terrorist attacks, every time we hear religious people denouncing the government, the courts, the police and whatever as illegitimate, more and more people are turned away from Judaism.

Former Meretz MK and Israel Prize winner for law scholarship Amnon Rubinstein agrees:

The great majority of Israeli Jews want to remain Jewish and would like their offspring not only to stay within the Jewish people but also know more about their heritage. This is why the great majority would opt for Jewish marriages, even if one day civil marriage is introduced. In the same way, they continue to circumcise their male babies - although this should have logically been the most difficult of rites to observe - and to be buried under rabbinical auspices. But when there is an attempt to force on them religious law through secular parliamentary exercises, many rebel.

I am not religious, but out of a mixture of sentiments - including irrational ones - I observe certain traditions. This is why I do not eat hametz on Passover and enjoy matzot throughout the holiday. But I do recognize the right of others to eat and buy whatever they like. This is the substantive meaning of democracy, and this is why, to people like me, Israel can be both Jewish and democratic, notwithstanding the post-Zionist mumbo-jumbo to the contrary.

Indeed. If people on the right are really so concerned about what their fellow Jews are eating, they should be spending energy making them WANT to follow the holiday, to want to at least make an effort. Don't legislate it, and don't demean people that don't want to do it the way you do. It will have the opposite effect, turn them off even more from Judaism and holiday observance, and create ever-more resentment between the two groups.

Any religious practice that can only be enforced through coercion isn't worth enforcing. Such a move is a failure of both religion and democracy, both of which should be voluntary by nature. Passover is the most widely observed holiday in the entire Jewish world. Allowing some supermarkets to sell bread will not stop this. But legislating people's personal rights and freedoms will leave a bad taste in their mouths for years to come. And I'm not just talking about the matzah.

Cleaning out the Tabs

Some things that have been rattling around in my browser for a while:

- Jimmy Carter meeting Hamas. Sounds like a good idea in far-off, theoretical principle-land to me (if anyone could put a good face on the US vis-a-vis Hamas it would be Carter), except that Hamas doesn't strike me as being interested in becoming buddy-buddy, making the whole scenario rather pointless. Carter is supremely well-meaning, but I don't think he's very relevant anymore. (On the other hand, saying he should be stripped off his security detail seems rather childish; I might as well start asking why MY tax dollars have to pay for Bill Clinton to give a speech at a college campus or G.H. Bush to play golf? They're former Presidents, part of the contract is getting Secret Service guys. If you don't like it, change it.)

- An Israeli Rabbinical Court is hearing the divorce case of a couple from French Guadelupe. I'm not sure what to make of this.

- Secular Israelis launch a counter-boycott to the Haredim's actual boycott. This is awesome. Hat-tip Failed Messiah, whose commentary is also good and insightful. Also this from Haaretz, who points out that this isn't as much about Sabbath observance as it is economics. There's some sneaky stuff going on here.

- An oldy but awful: this conservative activist is oh-so, super-totally outraged and shocked at an ad she saw for Puppetry of the Penis in her newspaper. More hilarious than her paranoid accusations that this was deliberately timed to coincide with Easter are her tangled arguments for why this should merit a boycott of the local paper:

"It is apparently no longer safe to even open the local paper at home. The moral squalor in our culture worsens because few are prepared to take a public stand and risk abuse for doing so. We're going to take a stand," she said.

She described the ad as "homo-erotic" and condemned its apparent "mocking of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ," especially on such a day as Good Friday.

"It's clearly not what you would expect for a big city newspaper," she told WND. "You'd expect this in a seedy, fringe newspaper found in a coffee shop."

Damn you, coffee! First caffeine addiction, then adding "venti" to our national vocabulary, and now this! Forget the newspaper, let's just burn down all the coffee shops. Trickle-down outrage. I'm sure it will work.

- WND reenacts that cool Join or Die Ben Franklin cartoon on its website as it quibbles over who's more entitled to teach the Bible in public schools. An Alabama State senator is pissy because the Bible Literacy Project has some liberal people on its editorial board and may incorporate some Hegel, "an occultist whose philosophy laid the foundation for communist brainwashing." He says we should all use Chuck Norris' Bible method instead. Then someone from the BLP responds, basically saying "nuh-uh- we're totally evangelical enough!" (On the actual issue of Bible classes in public schools, see here and here.)

- A Holocaust memorial about Nazi death trains is having trouble in Berlin. Which is bad, but calling the head of the state rail operating company "a Nazi who would have deported Jews himself" isn't the way to fix it.

- Speaking of Jews invoking Godwin's mighty law, something seems to have crawled up Ben Stein's rear and died. Then he made a movie about it. Spoiler Alert: Darwin Equals Hitler.

- A new Jewish peace lobby rears its head. (What happened to Brit Tzedek?)

- Roy Moore has his gigantic black judge's robe in a twist over two incidents he claims demonstrate how intolerant gays are. The first is where two lesbians in Alabama fought against a school board trying to prevent them from attending their prom as a couple. Moore's commentary is as loopy as ever:

Attorney Edmiston not only exhibited hypocrisy but also helped set a precedent for mandating acceptance of homosexuality in the public school system. Pushing aside the right of elected school officials to regulate school functions, the court summarily disregarded the rights of parents and other students who depend on school officials to maintain moral standards. Intent on normalizing deviant behavior, the courts have once again imposed an immoral standard upon an unwilling community.

Exactly what cause did the school have to regulate this couple? They showed up and danced, the only difference was one girl was in a dress, the other in a tux. Look out, Alabama might implode!

Roy is also mad about a photography studio in New Mexico that was sued and fined for refusing to photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony. Roy says "New Mexico is in essence demanding that small-business owners be forced to work against their will." Apparently a lot of conservatives are mad about this one (check the comments for more). Which is funny, because it reminds me a lot of this case, which I'm sure they would have had no issue with.

- Last, the anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising was yesterday. My father's paternal line left Warsaw between 1909 and the 1920s, but there are many cousins who never got out, whose names we do not even know. I do not know if any of them were still there in 1943, if they were part of the fighters or not. But I take comfort in the fact that their neighbors, friends, landsmen, were among those who stood up and fought back. One of the crazy things about the Holocaust that I always have trouble remembering is that, for all its absorption into the public consciousness, for all the research into it by countless scholars, it still remains a very new event, relatively speaking. So it is perhaps not that surprising that there are still some historical debates going on about exactly who did what in the Warsaw Rising.

But an Israeli cloud of disagreement was hovering over the events. Joining the visit was former defense and foreign minister Moshe Arens, who has been dedicating a large part of his retirement to proving the part played by the Beitar revisionist movement in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. Arens claims the official histories have written them out of the story. When asked about this, Peres chose to answer diplomatically, saying he honors all the fighters and victims.

I've read some of Arens' work. It looks solid, and Israeli history has often been very slanted towards the Labor party and their political predecessors. I look forward to the day when we will know about and honor all the heroes who fought-and-died- in the uprising, and all the others. Regardless of their politics.

"They All Look Alike"

A number of years ago I was reading an article by a Breslover rabbi and author (who, incidentally, is the reason that as much as I think Tzvi Fishman and Lazer Brody are absolutely out of their gourds, I can't in good conscience consign the whole sect to the dustbin). The author, R. Gershom, had a very interesting book review which he used as a platform to critique the shoddy and lazy reporting of the Haredi community in secular media, particularly the non-Jewish media. I thought a lot of his points were very good, though I'd like to think that things have improved in the past ten years.

One of the best points made, which I also remember reading in Prof. Heilman's "Defenders of the Faith," where he spent time with Haredi groups in Israel, including participating in pilgrimages with them, was the fact that outsiders see the group as a monolith. R. Gershom writes,

...It is difficult to make an arrest because all the Ultra-Orthodox look alike and they will gang up on anyone, including police, who tried to restrain them... (p. 147)
They all look alike --- Yes folks, he really did say that! We all look alike, even if some of us have light hair and skin, and some of us are dark-skinned, some tall, short, fat, skinny, old, you name it -- not to mention male and female, young and old. But Mr. Pippert does not seem to be able to see us as individuals with distinctive faces -- he can't get beyond the clothes. At least now we know why he lumps all Orthodox Jews together as Hasidim -- because we all look alike to him!

Sounds pretty straight-forward. It was this article, incidentally, and R. Gershom's website in general, that got me more interested in Hasidism and Hasidic history, and which I often try to keep in mind to avoid general stereotyping.

So I couldn't decide whether to be amused or sad when I came across this, posted on, of all places, Breslovworld:

When I got out of my taxi at the airport, I was suddenly thrown from anonymity amongst my own kind in an island of frumkeit in Ashdod, into the cold waters of the outside world, where I stood out like a sore thumb. I was almost the only frum person in a sea of what?.......non-frum Yidden?..... non-Jews? I really couldn't make out the difference because they all looked the same to me.

Charming. This is written by the Rebbetzin of a Hasidic sect in Israel. A Hasidic sect associated with the Breslovers, which has a large proportion of BTs. People that focus on outreach to secular and unaffiliated Jews, and who likely know many personally. The Rebbetzin even mentions growing up with non-Jews in London, so it's not like she's so cloistered.

These are people that, one would hope, would be particularly attuned to the need to go beneath superficialities of dress or fashion, especially since many of them probably have, or continue to struggle, with being labeled as less than frum or illegitimate because they do, or did, things a little differently.

So it is troubling, to say the least, that the Rebbetzin carps on and on about how low and fallen her non-Jewish Jewish quasi-bretheren are:

You would think that having lived most of my life in London together with the non-Jews (even in the same block of flats with them) I would be immune to the realities of the gentile world, but it seems that living and interacting almost totally only with frum people does refine you so that you are hit anew by the decadence of the world outside the frum area.
As I walked into the airport I was struck by the indecency surrounding me, from the advertisements and the shop-window displays to the immodest clothing. And as it all hit me it made me stop - and think - of who we really are.

...And if we are such a glorious and majestic people is it not sad that those Yidden who have chosen to go the way of the other nations have let go of this splendor; instead they cleave to the dross that glitters but is not gold. They have chosen to sell their birthright as the King's beloved children for a pot of lentils – to look and behave like the non-Jews - and in doing so have let drop their elevated status.

...But with the pride of being Hashem's chosen people comes a tremendous responsibility; we are Hashem's children, His ambassadors and emissaries, and as such the eyes of the world are upon us. With this awareness we must behave in such a way that we are an example to the people around us.
And make no mistake about it, when a non-Jew does something, however bad, it is accepted and condoned by the world, but if a Yid does the slightest thing wrong, he, and by extension, the entire Jewish nation, are condemned as being a bad and rotten people, and a shame to their heritage.

As an ambassador of Hashem I am careful to dress cleanly, neatly and smartly when I walk the streets, and to behave politely and considerately to those around me. I am careful to be scrupulously honest and meticulous in my dealings with other people as befits someone who should be setting an example to those around her, and I will not demean myself by descending to the level of those who should, but do not want to know better.

I am always aware that I stand out clearly and starkly as a frum Yid and that my behavior and actions are watched and taken note of. Anything I do will be filed away in the mind of the non-Jew (and the non-frum Yid) for future reference, whether for the good or the bad, to be used by them at the appropriate time.

Here's a tip. Comparing non-Haredi Jews to Esau (!) does not win you any friends. Saying that we all look alike does not make anyone want to hear what you have to say. And I don't care how neat your sheitel is; it doesn't help you if you go around acting like a sanctimonious holier-than-thou because all those sluts at the airport have the audacity to show their wrists in public. You're right, Rebbetzin: we're all examples, and you too, especially now that you have an audience on the web. How much love, for one's fellow Jew or human being, period, is there in an essay about how you can barely stand to be around people that are different than you?

Take a step back and look in the mirror, Rebbetzin. You are not doing frumkeit, or the Jews, any favors.

This essay has the full endorsement of the Melitzer Rebbe shlit’a.

Oh Good. And here I was afraid that this snide worldview only extended to the female members of the sect.