The Beit Midrash or the Shul Which is Holier And Why?

So there's an idea that the BM is holier. Why? Is it simply because Torah study is great or something of that nature? No, it's because Judaism is a religion of complete life. We don't just act one way in the house of prayer and another in the world. By studying Torah, we learn what to do when we are out in the world:

Says Rav Hirsch: "Now, it is just because our Houses of G-d and the Divine services within them are not the essence of our worship of G-d, but are rather places and occasions for preparing ourselves for the worship of G-d in practical life. They take but second place in holiness compared to the Batei Midrash, houses of learning, which are devoted to the studying and teaching of the Torah. i.e., the inquiries into the prescriptions of the Divine Will as to how a G-dly life should be led by man."

R' SR Hirsch
Collected Writings Vol. I p.192
Cited in Rabbi_Beinish__Ginsburg/Behar-_Serve_Hashem_Everywhere

So you'll hear people spin this around and make the cultic seem like the ideal, that Torah study is just for study sake and that's why the BM is better. This is the opposite of how R' Hirsch approaches it. The very reason the BM is holier is because it applies to life.

Halachah is not enclosed within the confines of cult sanctuaries

"It [halacha] does not differentiate between the man who stands in his house of worship engaged in ritual activities and the mortal who must wage the arduous battle of life. The halachah declares that man stands before G-d, not only in the synagogue, but also in the public domain- in his house, while on a journey, while lying down and rising up.

The halachah is not enclosed within the confines of cult sanctuaries, but penetrates into every nook and cranny of life- the marketplace, the street, the factory, the house, the meeting place, the banquet hall- all constitute the backdrop for religious life."

R' Joseph Soloveitchik

Halakhic Man, pp. 93-94, cited in Rabbi_Beinish__Ginsburg/Behar-_Serve_Hashem_Everywhere

Battle for the Gadolim

"He who controls the past, controls the future"  1984, George Orwell

1984 joins Winston as he sets about another day, where his job is to change history by changing old newspaper records to match with the new truth as decided by the Party.

"He who controls the past, controls the future" is a Party slogan to live by and it gives Winston his job, but Winston cannot see it like that. Barely old enough to recall a time when things were different, he sets out to expose the Party for the cynically fraudulent organisation that it is.

Do not shirk the social obligations of pulsating modern life

Do not shirk the social obligations of pulsating modern life; do not regret that today's nations, in their struggle for enlightenment, have invited also the sons of Jewish law to participate in their social aspirations and that they have opened for the sons of Israel the gates to scientific and civic endeavors and achievements. The more you will saturate yourself with the spirit and the timeless purpose of the Law of your God, the more you seek its fulfillment in your own small life and home, and the more you feel strong and of good courage in the presence of your God, then the greater will be your understanding of the nature of your mission: To wed yourself with all your energies and in selfless surrender of all your moral and spiritual being, to all the good and genuine achievements of the age in which you live; to apply your Jewish principles and perceptions to meet the challenges of your day. You must demonstrate that one need not cease to be a loyal son of the unabridged Jewish Law in order to win recognition in the arena of secular education and civic competence. You must prove to the world that this ancient, eternal Law of God is such a mighty wellspring of moral and spiritual energy that the spirit and mentality which the enlightened, upright, Torah-true Jew can draw from his loyalty to this Law are by no means the least significant contributions he could bring to the symposium of the nations when he enters in the life of the nations of the world.  (Collected Writings VIII, p. 325)

R' Samson Raphael Hirsch, Collected Writings VIII, p. 325, cited in Judith Bleich Rabbi "Samson Raphel Hirsch, Ish Al Ha'edah", Jewish Action, in Dr. Levin's TIDE page

What all this means is that going to work is more than just 'parnassah,' more than just cash. It is more than a place for an occasional kiddush Hashem. We can accomplish there far more than that. It means also that we need not lament our involvement with the world, as some will have you believe. I'm sure you have heard that idea that Esav gets us in two ways, by killing us and by embracing us and that the latter is worse. I'm not denying that Esav's embrace does turn out badly for many people, but that's not because of the embrace per se but because they depart from the Law and the Jewish spirit. They don't have to. And our involvement with the world can be the platform for an engaged and inspired Divine service. You don't have to live all your days in the yeshiva building.

Does this teaching also bear inherent dangers?

R’ Joseph Breuer (1882-1980), Rav Hirsch’s grandson and leader of the Washington Heights community in New York, explained:

...the question of one’s attitude towards the demands and implications of the Torah im Derech Eretz precept agitates all circles of contemporary Orthodoxy especially in Eretz Yisrael. Western European Torah-true Jewry owes its survival to loyal adherence to this precept. Does this teaching also bear inherent dangers? Unquestionably so. It has cost victims in the past and will also have them in the future. Yet the author poses this pointed question: Is not the way of life which aims at the complete isolation of the youth from the influence of the contemporary world of culture a far more dangerous one? (A Unique Perspective, p. 473)

Rav Kook: Sukkot: All of Israel in One Sukkah

Sukkot: All of Israel in One Sukkah by Chanon Morrison (posted with permission)

The Talmud in Sukkah 27b makes a remarkable claim regarding the holiday of Succoth:

"For seven days ... all who belong to the people of Israel will live in sukkot [thatched huts]" (Lev. 23:42). This teaches that it is fitting for all of Israel to sit in one sukkah.

Obviously, no sukkah is large enough to hold the entire Jewish people. What is the meaning of this utopian vision - all of Israel sitting together in a single sukkah?

The Unity of Succoth

As long as we are plagued by pettiness and other character flaws, we cannot attain true collective unity. But after experiencing the unique holiness of Yom Kippur, this unfortunate state is repaired. After our lives have been illuminated by the light of teshuvah and the entire Jewish nation has been purified from the negative influences of sin and moral weakness, the soul's inner purity becomes our predominant quality. With this regained integrity, we merit an ever-increasing harmony among the diverse sectors of the nation.

During the holiday of Succoth we absorb the light of Torah and a love for truth. Conflicting views become integrated and unified. Through the spiritual ascent of the Days of Awe, we attain a comprehensive unity, a unity that extends its holy light over all parts of the Jewish people. During this special time, it is as if the entire nation is sitting together, sharing the holy experience of the same sukkah.

According to the Hasidic master Rabbi Nathan (1780-1844, chief disciple and scribe of Rabbi Nachman of Breslov), this sense of unity is the very essence of the mitzvah of sukkah. He wrote in Likutei Halachotthat one should fulfill the mitzvah of sukkah with the following kavanah:

"One should concentrate on being part of the entire people of Israel, with intense love and peace, until it may be considered as if all of Israel dwells together in one sukkah."

C'neged Kulam

This may sound bold, but I do consider that today some people actually emphasize Talmud Torah too much. It seems at times that there's only one mitzvah in their world - a kind of reform Judaism. I often ask, what's your basis for this. They cite the mishnahthat Talmud Torah is c'neged Kulam.

I have been told that R' Shlomo Wolbe has a book showing at least 7 things that are described as c'nedged kulam. here are 6 of them

Shabbos is equal to all the mitzvot of the Torah. (Yerushalmi, Berachot 9a)

Great is circumcision, for it is equal to all the mitzvot of the Torah. (Yerushalmi, Nedarim 12b)

The mitzvah of tzitzit is equal to all the mitzvot of the Torah (Nedarim 25a, Menachot 43b)

Charity and bestowing kindness are equal to all the mitzvot of the Torah (Yerushalmi, Pe’ah 3a)

Settling the land of Israel is equal to all the mitzvot of the Torah. (Tosefta, Avodah Zarah 5)

And then in the mirror language of the mishnah in peah is Lashon hara is kneged kulam (tosfefa peah 1:2)

תוספתא פאה א, ב
על אילו דברים נפרעין מן אדם בעולם הזה והקרן קיימת לעולם הבא:
על עבודה זרה ועל גלוי עריות ועל שפיכות דמים
ועל לשון הרע כנגד כולם.

(source in the Tosefta located by Natan Slifkin)

so clearly it's not so simple as we see in the Rambam

And when you investigate this matter, you will find that Talmud Torah is weighed as equivalent to everything, because through Talmud Torah a person merits all these [mitzvot in the list], just as we explained at the beginning—that study leads to action. (Rambam, Commentary to the Mishnah, Pe’ah 1:1)

The Rav on Maintaining Your Individuality

I was very young when I came to America and various people gave me advice how to be an effective Rabbi and teacher by following the example of this or that successful person. They meant well of course but had I followed their advice, I would not be what I am today. Of course I am nothing, but the little that I am is because I refused to change my persona. God has given each of us a unique identity, and to the extent that we are faithful to it we will be fulfilled. Why then do we see so many unsuccessful and frustrated Jews despite God’s promise that we will each be richly rewarded? It is because in developing themselves they did not remain faithful to their roots, to their true selves. My father, who was my real teacher, taught me this lesson. When I was young and we would learn Gemara together, I would repeat his words exactly, only to have him tell me “if you simply repeat what I said you will never be a lamdan – you have to explain it in your own words.” In other words, a person is true to himself when he is faithful to the Torah and tradition, and faithfully upholds their fundamental principles, albeit in ways that reflect his unique persona.

Joseph Soloveitchik

Transcribed by R' Basil Herring in TorahMusings.org  http://torahmusings.com/2013/08/the-rav-on-remaining-true-to-ourselves/

Reasons TIDE Struggled in America

Everybody has their guesses why TIDE in its pure form didn't spread in America. Certainly, elements of TIDE have prospered. American yeshivot of all but perhaps the Chassidic camps study secular subjects. This has a lot to do with the US government of course. People may not know it but German Orthodox people were key in setting up the frum infrastructure in America. Kashrut, Mikvot, organizations like the Agudah. German Orthodox were key in that. Also, Torah u'Maddah is built largely off of TIDE, even though in many respects it departed from it. Also, R' Hirsch's Torah is all over klal Yisrael: his etymology, looking at mitvot via symbolism, his care to use reason and sound reasonable.

With that same, here are I believe some of the reasons for the struggle of TIDE in America:

The Holocaust. German Orthodoxy in the 19th century and beyond never had big numbers. When R' Hirsch got to Frankfurt, there were 100 frum families. He worked wonders there but still. So when the Holocaust destroyed German Jewry, well, think what that's going to do to TIDE which was taking place mostly in Germany.

Assimilation in Germany. Even without the Holocaust there weren't that many TIDE people. That's why R' Hirsch came up with the whole program - even though he intented it as a l'chatchila approach to Torah life. Emancipation of the Jews in Europe made this possible. So the two went together. Emancipation caused many to go off. Emancipation made TIDE possible.

The Holocaust. People lost faith in Western culture for obvious reasons. The prime example of it, the Germans, sank to the lowest of the low.

The Collapse of Culture in the 20th century. Can you image that there was a time when a book by Charles Dickens was new to the world? I believe that some of his books were serialized in magazines, ie released chapter by chapter. For us Dickens is a throwback. The new books of today are full of filth. It's hard for most people to get excited by old stuff. They want to see new stuff with contemporary imagery and language. In Hirsch's day the world of letters was clean. There was apikorsis in some, but you could easily distinguish by author. Today it's so hard to find a book or movie that's completely clean. There's always a problem. It takes a tremendous amount of work to find the clean stuff if you can find it at all. It is not unfair to say that people often are only as good as they have to be. So you see things like British actress Julie Andrews appearing as a nun and a proper nanny in movies in the early 1960's and in a state of undress in the 1970's. Everybody just lost it when the society in general lost it. Very few can hold up things by themselves. So who can you trust? You really have to go back to the 19th century and that isn't so appealling for most people. They want contemporary material.

The Shift in High Culture. The issue isn't merely schmutz or antinomianism or athieism. It's also cynacism and wounds. Art and literature in the 19th century was romantic, hopeful. By the 20th century it became fractured like the people. Think Hemingway and Picasso. The world wars damaged everybody, damaged innocence and the high culture reflected this. I don't criticize the high culture for this. It was needed to express what became of the world. But it doesn't fit so well with Torah, which is essentially positive. Picasso is useful, but more as an adjunct to Torah thought than Rembrant, which you could more easily integrate. I believe that Rabbi Soloveitchik is helpful here. He talks about despair and dichotomy. I use him to help along my TIDE, to make it fit for contemporary issues. But this isn't so easy to do and most people don't have the patience for it.

The Shift to Populist Culture. The young generation took over much of the creativity market. Rock music became to the 1960s what Mozart was to his day, whenever that was exactly. Problem is that Rock music and other popular art forms made a radical departure from many of the religious values. So you can't know of a really meaninful Who song but it's on an album with all kinds of problematic stuff. This makes it all so complicated. It's not as simple as opening a book of Schiller's poetry anymore.

The American personality. America is an informal country, especially since the 1960s. TIDE requires decorum and discipline. Think of the cliche of German punctuality. It's not a cliche. I once went to the 8:30 Shabbos minyan at KAJ in Monsey (decades ago). I got there 5 minutes early after hearing about German punctuality. But there was nobody there. I thought, I guess that's a myth. Guess what? The clock hit 8:30 and people poured through the door.

The German personality. They are not the friendliest. This has not helped. I know a BT who lived in Washington Heights and said he received all kinds of Shabbos invitations. So I'm not saying they don't do chesed. But they are not outgoing. Maybe that's a better term. To build a movement you need to be outgoing like Chabad. So how'd it work in Frankfurt? If you wanted to be Torah observant, you didn't have so many other choices. Today you do. Also, the choices are more in synch with the American style. Now, if TIDE had been adapted to have an American style, that surely would have helped.

Austritt. R' Hirsch needed to separate from the reform congregations which had taken over Germany. It's understandable. The Wash. Heights community kept this going when it probably didn't make much sense anymore. They even refused to talk to Yeshiva U., which was probably the biggest mistake. George Frankel writes about this in one of his essays. When everything has to be just so and the world changes radically, you can become irrelevant fast.

Immigration. The Eastern Europeans who always outnumbered the modern Germans by about 100 to 1 just took over by sheer numbers.

Zionism. R' Hirsch observed the three oaths from Sanhedrin. It's entirely possible he would have considered them nullified by the Holocaust and the San Remo Conference as did many others. But he passed away long before all that. Meanwhile, Zionism became a huge thing in the Modern Orthodox world which otherwise would have been prime territory for TIDE. So there's a big conflict there. In much of the MO world, Zionism plays too much of a role. It's like the number 1 mitzvah in many places. So it's going to be hard to follow someone whose writings criticized Zionism so much.

But none of that means you can't be TIDE. It just tells you why it faded. You might think it's not a viable derech since you don't see it. But it is viable. There were greats in our era like R' Breuer who practiced it and so can you.

Somebody to Love or Somebody to Hate

Decades ago, a rock band made a song called "Somebody to Love." It concerned a lonely person who was looking for somebody to love. 

They need to write a song that captures what some in the frum world are looking for - somebody to hate. I watched this over the High Holidays. Before shofar blowing on Rosh Hashanah I listened to a speech decrying New York City’s informed consent ordinance that requires parents be given information on the association between mitzitzeh b’peh, herpes, and infant mortality. The speaker disparaged Orthodox Jewish proponents of the measure by referring to them as “so-called Orthodox” and portraying their efforts as a “war against bris milah.” No matter that the diatribe occurred in a building where the mareh d’atra is HaRav HaGaon R ’ Hershel Schachter who opposes mitzitzeh b’peh in our day and age (as did R’ Chaim Soloveitchik in his era) estimating that it kills a dozen babies in New York City each year.  

Now people have a right to argue for the continued practice of mitzitzeh b’peh, which does have Talmudic basis, even though the Chatam Sofer said that it is an non-essential part of the brit milah. However, what I observed was an attempt to portray shomer mitzvot people who rely on the Chatam Sofer and other great poskim in the hope to save lives of infants as some kind of ancient Greeks out to destroy the Jewish religion. This sends a certain message, and the message is this: if you are not a card carrying member of our particular camp then you are not Torah observant. You are the enemy. Woe to you on this day of judgement. 

And he did this on Rosh Hashana! We are individually getting judged on RH. It is not the time to point fingers. 
 

Then, more startling still, was the speech before Ne’ilah on Yom Kippur where a speaker also disparaged what he termed the ‘so-called Orthodox,’ - this seems to be the insult of the hour - for certain activities taking place in Riverdale. Now, it seems to me that Yom Kippur is a time for forgiveness and national unity. According to Rabbi Nathan (1780-1844), chief disciple of Rebbe Nachman of Breslov, national unity is the essence of the mitzvah of Sukkah. Rav Avraham Kook finds a source for the connection to Succah and national unity in the Talmud:

"For seven days ... all who belong to the people of Israel will live in sukkot [thatched huts]" (Lev. 23:42). This teaches that it is fitting for all of Israel to sit in one sukkah."
 

As no single Sukkah can hold millions of people, the Gemara is intended to depict the concept of unity (Mo'adei HaRe'iyah, p. 96 in Silver from the Land of Israel, Chanan Morrison). According to Rav Kook, we arrive there over Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur by addressing our personal flaws. Polemics don’t get you there. Working on oneself does. On Yom Kippur, if you are going to judge anyone it’s yourself. I suppose when polemics are at the root of one’s approach to religion, it’s hard to turn off even at the holiest moment of the year, the moment when we each are supposed to cast our gaze in the mirror. 

Some people build their religion off of opposing others. I am not him! I am wonderful. He is horrible. Some people are looking for somebody to hate.

the most intimate union between Judaism, total, unadulterated Judaism, and the spirit of all true science and knowledge

Rav Hirsch (Coll. Writings, Vol. VI, p. 392-3): 'Ever since we have begun to make our modest contribution to the Jewish cause by speech, pen and deed, it was and is our wholehearted endeavor to present and advocate the most intimate union between Judaism, total, unadulterated Judaism, and the spirit of all true science and knowledge…we maintain that our whole future, with all ideological and social problems the solution of which is eagerly awaited by mankind, belongs to Judaism, full, unabridged Judaism…because we can view the welfare and future of Judaism only in the framework of the most intimate union with the spirit of true science and knowledge, of every age, we are the most outspoken foes of all false science and knowledge, foes of every attempt, in the guise of science, to lay the ax to the roots of our Jewish Sanctuary…for if there were no alternative and we had only the choice between Judaism and Science, then there simply would be no choice and every Jew would unhesitatingly make his decision…rather to be a Jew without Science than Science without Judaism. But, thank G-d, this is not the case…' "

Cited in Rabbi Pinchas Frankel

Pavarotti Last Performance "Nessun Dorma" @ Torino 2006

Pavarotti Last Performance "Nessun Dorma" @ Torino 2006

Gershwin plays Gershwin: Rhapsody in Blue

Gershwin plays Gershwin: Rhapsody in Blue

Voice of Tchaikowsky & Anton Rubinstein On Edison Cylinder (1890)

Voice of Tchaikowsky & Anton Rubinstein On Edison Cylinder ! (1890)

(some Kol Isha prior to one minute mark)

W.B.Yeats Reading His Own Verse

W.B.Yeats Reading His Own Verse

T.S. Eliot Reads: The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock

T.S. Eliot Reads: The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock

The Talmudic sages held labour in great honour.

R' Samson Raphael Hirsch

 

164      JUDAISM ETERNAL

 

The Talmudic sages held labour in great honour. Their principle was: "Great is work, for it honours him who does it." They said : "Skin a dead animal in the street to earn your bread, but do not say, ' I am a priest, a great man, it is not fitting for me' ." "Live on the Sabbath as on a weekday, but do not be dependent on others.'" "Hire yourself out to do work that would otherwise be repulsive to you, and remain independent of others."
 

The sages of the Talmud held wisdom and learning in too high esteem to degrade it by making it, as they said, a spade to dig with." They themselves taught without payment, and most of them worked for their living, in handicraft, agriculture or trade. They taught that others should do the same. As it is a father's duty to instruct his son in the religious laws, so it is his duty to teach him a trade."

 

According to one view any respectable occupation was on a par with handicraft; according to another it was in any case necessary to teach the son a handicraft, even if he was to pursue some other calling, because only a handicraft was a sure means of livelihood.  A son should be taught a trade that would keep him as far as possible from temptation, and which would also leave him some leisure for study." He should not be taught a trade that will bring him in contact with women.
 

Handicraft, work with one's hands, was especially esteemed. All handicrafts are permanently useful, happy is he who is skilled in one." There may be famine for seven years, but it will not find the door of an artisan;" Love work and do not seek high place.' The God-fearing man who lives by the work of his hands is doubly well off; he is happy in this life and in the next. 
 

Agriculture also was very highly regarded, though some, it is true, preferred business. One of the Rabbis passed a field where the ears of grain seemed to nod to him and greet him. " Nod as much as you like," he said jestingly, " a good stroke of business is better than dealing with you." But the general opinion was different. A man who has no field, it was taught, is no man, for it says : "God gave the earth to the children

Judaism Tied into Life

Judaism is not a religion, the synagogue is not a church, and the Rabbi is not a priest. Judaism is not a mere adjunct to life: it comprises all of life. To be a Jew is not a mere part, it is the sum total of our task in life. To be a Jew in synagogue and the kitchen, in the field and the warehouse, in the office and the pulpit, as father and as mother, as servant and as master, as man and as citizen, with one's feelings and one's thoughts, in word and in deed, in enjoyment and privation, with the needle and the graving­tool, with the pen and the chisel-that is what it means to be a Jew. An entire life supported by the Divine idea and lived and brought to fulfilment according to the Divine will.

R Samson Raphael Hirsch Judaism Eternal II, p. 237

Now what about the attitude of Judaism toward other religious faiths?

R' Samson Raphael Hirsch

 

"Now what about the attitude of Judaism toward other religious faiths? Again, Judaism is probably the only religion that does not pre­sume to reign supreme over all other religions. Judaism perceives itself as an instrument working for all mankind but not as a dictate to be obeyed by all men on earth. It welcomes any human, spiritual or ethi­cal advance brought about by other religious faiths; indeed, it hails every such triumph of truth and goodness as a triumph of its own mis­sion on earth. The attitude of Judaism toward other religions may be compared to that of a true mother toward her daughters. A truly good mother will never look with envy upon the accomplishments of her daughters but will consider all the good her daughters have done as proof that her educational work with her daughters has been a success. She rejoices in the reward assured her by every seed of goodness and nobility that her daughters have taken from her hands to scatter bless­ings upon the rest of the world. Similarly, Judaism rejoices, and has a right to rejoice, in the harvest of light and goodness produced by its daughter religions in the civilized world for the benefit of universal human happiness and culture, just as if the accomplishment had come directly from Judaism. Judaism regards these advances as triumphs of the concepts that are to be brought to the rest of mankind by the Divinely-selected Jewish people." Collected Writings, Vol VII, p. 87

Rav Hirsch and the Haredi World

I think I finally figured out why R' Hirsch is a respected figure in the Haredi world. They portray him as Haredi. Most of them don't even know what Torah Im Derech Eretz is. They just see R' Hirsch as someone who battled the reform. Look at the Artscroll biography. It's all Rav Hirsch the fighter against the bad reformers. Haredim adore the tough guy, the body slammer, the yeller.

The Artscroll rarely addresses Torah Im Derech Eretz and nearly every time the Artscroll bio refers to secular studies they'll make sure to stress that "Torah comes first" or it didn't include literature. The book can't mention the secular studies without limiting it in the same breath.

It's interesting to watch the Haredi descendents of Hirsch. In a world where everything hinges on celebrity, ie gadolim, they can't toss away their chashuv ancestor. But they spin it in Haredi terms. Obviously the horos shah myth comes in handy.

I'm beginning to really see what sheep people are, what followers. Haredism is in and few can think through it or stare it down or just take the good that's in it.

Sources on Chazal and Their Knowledge of Science

Sources on Chazal and Their Knowledge of Science

Fear of Punishment - How much and when?

A student of R' Yaakov Kamenetsky told me that Reb Yaakov told him in on the Shabbos of Slichos in 1983 that in Lithuania they spoke about 'aymas hadin', ie fear of divine punishment, but it was preceded by YEARS of teaching Ahavas Hashem. However, today people first teach fear before anything and this is "terrible."

Reb Yaakov added that when they spoke about 'aymas hadin' it was spoken about in general as faith in the reality of reward and punishment - not that on this and this specific aveira one will suffer eternal pain.

Reb Yaakov repeated this idea numerous times over the years.

A quote from the conversation: "Before people are taught about why they should love Hashem they are taught why they should be frightened of him...I don't understand why they do that".

Maharal on Dissent

Maharal's Be'er HaGolah

"It is proper, out of love of reason and knowledge, that you do not (summarily) reject anything that opposes your own ideas, especially so if (your adversary) does not intend merely to provoke you, but rather to declare his beliefs. And even if such (beliefs) are opposed to your own faith and religion, do not say to your opponent: "Speak not and close your mouth." If that happens there will take place no purification of religion. On the contrary, you should say at such times, "Speak up as much as you want, say whatever you wish and do not say later that had you been able to speak, you would have replied further." For one who causes his opponent to hold his peace and refrain from speaking demonstrates (thereby) the weakness of his own religious faith....This is therefore the opposite of what some people think, namely, that when you prevent someone from speaking against religion, that strengthens religion. That is not so, because curbing the words of an opponent in religious matters is naught but the curbing and enfeebling of religion (itself).... When a powerful man seeks out an opponent in order to demonstrate his (own) strength, he very much wants his opponent to exercise as much power as he can, so that if he defeats him his own victory will be more pronounced. What strength is manifested when the opponent is not permitted to fight?....Hence, one should not silence those who speak against religion... for to do so is admission of weakness."

Cited in Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm, Torah Umadda (Northvale, NJ/London: Jason Aronson,1990) pp. 57-58,translation of this passage from Maharal's Be'er HaGolah, end of last chapter. From Rabbi Nathan Cardozo's Thoughts to Ponder

Fairy Tales

One really irritating thing about kiruv people is the way many make being frum into a fairy tale. I often found myself over the years regressing emotionally just to adapt to it. Rabbi Soloveitchik criticizes this sort of thing, says religion doesn’t solve life’s problems but deepens them. I don’t go for this Stepford wives happy camp approach to Judaism. In many ways, my life was much more satisfying even in spiritual ways before I was frum. Nevertheless, this is the right way to be, in my view, so I do it, and take the bad with the good. Being a BT has been a difficult ordeal. One of the hardest parts is the emotional repression which is just everywhere. But hopefully one breaks through that and allows himself to be honest about life, even frum life. It gets much more enjoyable after that.

Linked post from BeyondBT.com - A Case for Modern Orthodox Kiruv

Linked post from BeyondBT.com  - A Case for Modern Orthodox Kiruv

By David Kelsey

Fair Warning: This appeal is not targeting those Orthodox Jews who consider Modern Orthodoxy religiously unacceptable. This post is only appealing to those Jews who are:
1) Modern Orthodox, or
2) Accepting of Modern Orthodoxy as a legitimate approach to traditional Judaism. If you are not in one of these two camps, this post is not for you.

I am declining to establish the parameters of Modern Orthodoxy. Clearly, the acceptable boundaries for those on the MO left will be drawn differently than the by those on the right-wing of Modern Orthodoxy, and many will debate where the line is separating MO from charedi. But for the point of this essay, despite many grey areas and gradations, I am relying on the fact that in reality, there is a Modern Orthodox world, and there is a charedi world, and it appears that post-high school kiruv–at least outside of the Upper West Side of New York City–is dominated by various charedi branches of Judaism. There appears to be a general lack of interest in kiruv by the Modern Orthodox. BTs have to find them

continue reading

bob dylan explaining his understanding of destiny

it's a feeling you have that you know something about yourself nobody else does
the picture you have in your mind of what you're about will come true
it's the kind of a thing you kind of have to keep to your ownself
because it's a fragile feeling and you put it out there and someone will kill it
so it's best to keep that all inside

bob dylan explaining his understanding of destiny

Love of God, How?

Even though the Rambam says to look at nature to develop love of God, much of the Haredi world attempts to look only at Torah. (R' Miller is a notable exception). But they restrict the Torah. It's mostly Gemara learned rapidly through daf yomi or Brisker derech yeshivish mesechtot, often delivered in terrible English in manner that's intentionally confusing for the purposes of showing off. Then they throw a bit of Chumash on top, usually with the intenion of pushing Haredi agendas.

So how much faith are you going to get from that?

What people do instead in many cases is develop a kind of worshop of gadolim. They can't connect to God so gadol figures become a kind of replacement. This is why you can't question them. They are like gods. Their faces become key. Their photos essential. If you express your disinterest in these figures people look at you as if you can't possible get into the kingdom of heaven without giving yourself to the gadol.

That's why they resort to terrifying people like I saw over Rosh hashana. Much of the Haredi world doesn't have a good way of inspiring love of God.

Remind you of any other religions?

Natan Slifkin: Rationalist Judaism: Over-Emphasizing The Truly Important

Rationalist Judaism: Over-Emphasizing The Truly Important by Natan Slifkin, Rationalist Judaism Blog (posted with permission)

---

Over-Emphasizing The Truly Important   Can the importance of something that is really important be over-emphasized? Yes, of course it can. As long as something is not the only matter of importance, it is possible to over-emphasize its importance. The engine is by far the most important component of a car; but it is possible to over-emphasize the importance of the engine. Still, when something is really important, and is not taken at all seriously enough by many people, and especially if it is something that defines one's social group, then some people will naturally be hostile to the proposal that it is being over-emphasized. And so I expect that this post, and the series of posts that it launches, will receive a great deal of opposition. Twenty years ago, the head of a well-known school in Jerusalem told me why he decided to reject Religious Zionism and join the Charedi world. He said that while yishuv ha'aretz is important, it seemed a perversion of Judaism to take one mitzvah and define one's entire religious life around it. Without commenting on that directly, it seems to me that the Charedi world, which often refers to itself (in exclusion to the Religious-Zionist and Modern/Centrist Orthodox) as the community of "Torah Jews," does the exact same thing with regard to a different mitzvah. I am talking, of course, about the mitzvah of Talmud Torah. Beginning about two centuries ago, and accelerating in the last few decades, the mitzvah of Torah study has been dramatically transformed in both the importance attached to it, and in the very nature and function of the act itself. With regard to the latter aspect, I introduced this topic a few months ago, in a post entitled Learning Torah: Rationalism Vs. Mysticism, when I discussed the difference between the rationalist and non-rationalist/ mystical approaches to Judaism with regard to avodas Hashem, the service of God. Rationalists understand the purpose of mitzvos, and religious life in general, as furthering intellectual and moral goals for the individual and society. Mystics agree that mitzvos provide intellectual and moral benefits, but see their primary function as performing mechanistic manipulations of spiritual or celestial forces. Examples of this difference are the mitzvos of mezuzah, netilas yadayim, and shiluach hakein. Another example is the mitzvah of learning Torah. For the rationalist Rishonim (as well as for Chazal), learning Torah serves to increase one's knowledge, and to refine one's character, via moral lessons and learning the commandments. (See my post on The Rishonim on Torah Study.) With the rise of mysticism, on the other hand, came a new and primary function of Torah study. As expressed by R. Chaim of Volozhin in Nefesh HaChaim, the primary function of Torah study was now seen as being to metaphysically sustain the universe, via the creation of spiritual "worlds." Another aspect of this transformation is that learning Torah became an end unto itself. (See my post on The Goal of Torah Study.) A few months ago, I met a successful Torah educator who said to me, "The charedi world has made learning Torah into an avodah zarah." I wouldn't have phrased it that way myself. But the ramifications of the difference between the rationalist and mystical views of Torah study, which relate to the increase in importance that has recently been given to Torah study, are vast and often catastrophic. In future posts (not necessarily consecutive), I will be discussing examples of this phenomenon.

Prayer in the Native Tongue

This RH I did most of my prayers in English. Oy how refreshing. I was directed early on in my frum career to daven in Hebrew despite my objections. It came at me like so my rabbinical directives in the Haredi world: dictatorial, not to be questioned, above the realm of making sense or working for people, portrayed as 'the true and proper way.'

Yet, incredibly, my two yeshivot didn't offer grammar classes. Four years of study without a class in Hebrew. I just found out that I have been singing the Rebbe Nacham song wrong for 25 years. I have been saying 'col olam culam' when it should be 'culo.' Grammar.

I did teach myself grammar eventually, against the wishes of the Yeshiva heads. I can tranlsate most of the siddur, but that doesn't mean it speaks to me. The Hebrew just isn't natural.

Well, I did it my way finally this year and the results were promising. I actually got into the words. You see, I like English. I don't consider foreign languages traife. I think God made them after the Tower of Babel incident. They are miraculous really and beautiful.

I used the Sacks translation in the Soloveitchik Siddur. Some key differences from Artscroll: Lord rather than Hashem. I have never taken to the word Hashem. It sounds like the name of a strange god to me. I try to translate it in my head as 'the name,' but I still feel like I'm talking about an Egyptian god or something.

Loving-kindness rather than just kindness. The former makes me feel loved. The latter makes me feel that God has nice qualities but His relationship to me is impersonal. He's kindly. That doesn't mean He loves me or that I'm lovable. And after 25 years of being taught have little other than terror of God, I need to know both things.

Rav Hirsch on Contributing to Society

DUTIES OF THE SUBJECT AND OF THE CITIZEN

by Samson Raphael Hirsch, Horeb 96

Now these are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the prophet sent from Jerusalem unto the residue of the elders which were carried away captives, and to the priests, and to the prophets, and to all the people, whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away captive from Jerusalem to Babylon, ...

Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon:

Build ye houses, and dwell in them, and plant gardens, and eat the fruit of them;

take ye wives, and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; that ye may be increased there, and not diminished.

And seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captive, and pray unto the Lord for it; for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace. . . . JER. XXIX, Iff.

607 Thus God calls upon the Jews carried off into captivity in Babylon to settle there, to further the good of that country as citizens and subjects, to pray for its weal-the country which had forcibly taken them to live in its midst. He demands that every Jew find his own well-being only in that of the country, and, even as for his own, to work and pray for the welfare of the country-and yet Israel was not to spend longer than seventy years there! Thus for all time did God lay down Israel's duty towards those countries and nations to which, far from being brought forcibly, they have freely emigrated, in which there is no predetermined time for the length of their stay, in which each salutes the soil which gave him birth, in whose princes and Governments everyone recognizes the safeguard of his material well-being, and whose weal and woe Israel has now shared for thousands of years. Let us repeat-in which­ever land Jews shall live as citizens, as inhabitants or enjoying special protection, they shall honour and love the princes and Government as their own, contribute with every possible power to their good, and fulfil all the duties towards prince and land which a subject owes to his prince, an inhabitant to his land, and a citizen to his country.

608 When Israel was still united in a common land they did not call themselves Am, one people, for the reason that one common soil bore them all. For, alone among all the peoples of the earth, the posses­sion of the land and the ensuing organization of the State was for Israel not an end but a means to the better fulfillment of their Jewish duties. The Torah did not exist for the State, but the State for the Torah. And only the Torah, the idea of being joint bearers of a spiritual calling, fused the individuals into an association of human beings whose inner cohesiveness is reflected in the term Am (literally, society) and whose character in the wider sense as a nation is designated by the term Goy, that is to say, a corporate body or a people.

And even later on, far away from her land, when Israel sees her visible bonds of nationhood broken, the dispersed Jews call themselves Am, one nation, not in remembrance of a land once jointly possessed, not looking towards the future when God, as His words through the prophets teach us, will once more have united them, but in the consciousness of being, in the present as in the past, bearers of an eternal idea, an eternal mission, and of a God-given destiny which, in Israel, overshadowed, and still overshadows, the existence of the State, and which therefore has survived the State's downfall. We mourn over the sin which brought about that downfall, we take to heart the harshness which we have encountered in our years of wandering as the chastisement of a father imposed on us for our improvement, and we mourn the lack of observance of the Torah which that ruin has brought about. Not in order to shine as a nation among nations do we raise our prayers and hopes for a reunion in our land, but in order to find a soil for the better fulfillment of our spiritual vocation in that reunion and in the land which was promised, and given, and again promised for our observance of the Torah. But this very vocation obliges us, until God shall call us back to the Holy Land, to live and to work as patriots wherever He has placed us, to collect all the physical, material and spiritual forces and all that is noble in Israel to further the weal of the nations which have given us shelter. It obliges us, further, to allow our longing for the far-off land to express itself only in mourning, in wishing and hoping; and only through the honest fulfillment of all Jewish duties to await the realization of this hope. But it forbids us to strive for the reunion or the possession of the land by any but spiritual means.' Our Sages say God imposed three vows when He sent Israel into the wilderness: (I) that the children of Israel shall never seek to re-establish their nation by themselves; (2) that they shall never be disloyal to the nations which have given them shelter; (3) that these nations shall not'~_ oppress them excessively (Kethuboth, III, I). The fulfillment of the first . two vows is confirmed in the pages of history; about the third, the nations concerned must judge themselves.

1 See footnote on page 14:5, Vol. I.-Ed. Note. 

609 It is therefore Israel's religious duty, a duty imposed by God and no less holy than all the others, in whatever land they dwell in, not only to fulfill all the duties which the laws of that land explicitly lay down, but over and above that, to do with thought, word and deed everything that can contribute to the weal of that nation. Among those duties Jeremiah enumerates, in the first place, that of settling down as a proper citizen, establishing a home and maintaining it. Although by doing so the individual is only directly promoting his own well-being, nevertheless the welfare of the nation depends on the way such self-interest is pursued; for the nation's weal is based on the countless individual homes united in their honest endeavour. In the second place, there is the duty to obey the laws of the land and any regulations which the country's king and authorities promulgate for the general good (dina d'malchuta dina); to give honestly and joyously all that the community demands for the common good from the individual in the way of treasure, energy and wisdom; and to sacrifice even life itself when the Fatherland calls its sons to its defence. But this outward obedience to the laws must be joined by the inner obedience: i.e., to be loyal to the State with heart and mind, loyal to the kings, to guard the honour of the State with love and pride, to strive with enthusiasm wherever and whenever you can so that the nation's institutions shall prosper, so that every aim which your country has set as its national goal shall be achieved and furthered; above all, however, to work for the three pillars of every congregation of human beings, be it the State or be it the community, for emet, for din, for shalom for truth, for justice, and for peace, and for the community spirit in each individual. What has been said in this respect on duty to the community (see the preceding chapter) also applies in its entirety to your duty as subject and citizen.

And this duty is an unconditional duty and not dependent upon whether the State is kindly intentioned towards you or is harsh. Even should they deny your right to be a human being and to develop a lawful human life upon the soil which bore you-you shall not neglect your duty. Render justice unto yourself, unto the name which you bear and unto the duty which God lays upon you: 'Loyalty towards king and country and the promotion of welfare wherever and however you can.'