Letters of the Rav zt'l

I have been spending the little free time I have reading a wonderful collection of Rav Soloveitchik's letters, entitled: Community, Covenant and Commitment, (Toras HaRav 2005) and edited by my friend, Rabbi Nathaniel Helfgot. The letters reveal a passionate, engaged side of the Rav, while simultaneously providing highly suggestive ways in which his core philosophical ideas both developed and found concrete expression. Every letter is a gem, and the translations are first rate (though I wish they would have published the original texts in Yiddish and Hebrew.)

Of special note are the Rav's endorsement of Talmud study for girls, and his remarks about the mission of Einstein Medical School and the desired curriculum at RIETS.

Kulturkampf Now...

In all of the discussion of the political and security elements of the 'disengagement,' even its opponents have largely forgotten that the Left's agenda is as much cultural as political. The desire of the Post-Zionist Left in academia, the media and in government is to detatch itself not only from Falestin but from the Jewish historical heartland and Jewish religio-national memory.
The demonization of religious settlers is part of that effort (since most Jews who live in Yesha are not Orthodox.)

This aspect was recently highlighted by Moshe Dann in an article that appeared on the Arutz Sheva website. Despite the publication venue, many (though, not all) of his points are well taken. If the Jewish State is to survive, it is the solemn obligation of the Religious and traditionalk community to stop bickering and get to work. (Rav Elyashiv's stance on pre-nuptial agreements is exactly the wrong position in this regard.)

Herewith are some salient parts of the piece:

Missing in the debate over Israel's proposed retreat from all or most of Judea, Samaria and Gaza -- the historical and strategic heartland of Israel -- is the context in which that policy has emerged. During the last forty years, secular, Jewish, Israeli Leftists have assaulted Jewish identity, the foundations of Zionism and the institutions of Israeli democracy. They have diminished Jewish content in public education and in daily life, they have attacked the national-religious settlement movement in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, they have politicized the IDF and the courts. They control the media, educational and cultural institutions, and, by and large, Israel's political economy.

The Sharon/Peres plan [Note: I think it's more Peres than Sharon in this regard- JRW] is part of an agenda that seeks to destroy Zionism and replace it with Israelism (nationalism, per se), to transform Jewish nationhood into a secular, pluralistic republicanism (in the Western European tradition), and to maintain control of Israel's political/economic system in order to preserve the interests of the ruling elite. That elite seeks to de-Judaize Israel, to assimilate and integrate into (and hopefully be accepted by) the international community, especially the West, and to stay in power. These are the people who control Israeli banks, newspapers and TV, as well as major industries. This is not sinister or conspiratorial; there is no need for a coup d'etat. This is business as usual.Three main obstacles stand in their way: anti-Semitism, Arab terrorism and the national-religious Zionist camp. The latter, especially the Jews who live in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, are not marginal; they are fully integrated into the fabric of daily life, especially in the IDF. These Jews are rooted in an ideology of Jewish settlement that is basic to Zionism and Jewish consciousness."Disengagement", even if possible, is not only or even primarily intended to separate from Arabs (the external threat), but from the religious Right, "the settlers", who represent an internal threat to Israel's ruling elite. Both Arab and religious, Jewish nationalists -- because they are idealists -- are perceived by the political/economic establishment in Israel as threats to their power. They can't be bought. "Disengagement", therefore, means nothing more than uprooting Jewish communities and allowing Palestinian terrorists a sovereign state in return for, hopefully, international good will.

For the international ruling elites, Israel is an anachronism among states and Zionism is an impediment to assimilation into a world economic structure. Israel is particularistic (nominally Jewish) in a 'pluralistic/universalistic' world; the basis for its existence is a 'homeland for Jews.' That made sense after the Holocaust. Today, it is inadequate and insufficient as an historical reference....Regardless of Palestinian terrorism and incitement, the "inevitability of a Palestinian state" (in Sharon's words) has become an obsession that has paralyzed the government's ability to consider any other options and requires Israel's dependence on American/European and Palestinian good will. That policy comes out of a deeply-rooted belief that the Jewish people do not have the inalienable right to establish their national home in the Land of Israel. Yoram Hazony's book The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul laid out in striking detail how Israel's left-wing intellectual "elite" have undermined the basic premises of Zionism. Published just before former Prime Minister Ehud Barak agreed to give Arafat and the PLO almost everything they wanted -- nearly all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, including east Jerusalem and exclusive rights over the Temple Mount -- Hazony exposed a cancer that has eaten away at Israel's raison d'etre as a Jewish state. This "post-Zionist" policy waited only to be implemented. Prime Minister Sharon, who presented himself as a right-wing leader, became its Godfather.

Coincident with Oslo, far-left-wing education ministers cut budgets for teaching about Judaism and introduced pro-Palestinian propaganda in textbooks. Today, Jewish students in Israeli secular schools may graduate knowing little or nothing about their religion or their history. That is a deliberate policy. Israeli universities, with one exception, are bastions of anti-Jewish, leftist propaganda. TV stations, which are primary cultural molders, denigrate Judaism and Jewish values and promote consumerism. Alternative radio stations (like Arutz-7) that provided services and information to supporters of the right were closed (unlike the left-wing's Voice of Peace, or the hundreds of pirate Arab radio stations). Specials laws and penalties have been proposed to prevent expressions of dissent. Legitimate protests are considered criminal acts. New prisons and detention camps are planned for those who resist evacuation. Ministers who disagree with Sharon have been summarily fired. Never before has such arrogance been institutionalized and legitimized. Even institutions which are supposed to prevent such abuse have remained silent. Indoctrinated by Israel's left-dominated media, many Israelis no longer believe in their country and the justice of its cause. Politicians, community leaders and "artists" espouse anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist doctrines that would be considered bigotry if uttered by non-Jews; their insults are carried by a compliant media into every home. Add to all this four years of unremitting terrorist attacks and the result is emotional exhaustion and despair. Sharon has taken advantage of that societal malaise to fragment and demoralize the opposition; but this is not new. The seeds of this denouement can be found decades ago in attempts by Israeli leftists to substitute a form of nationalism for religious faith and a detachment from Judaism. Their attack on Jewish identity, the one common denominator that holds us together, is an attempt to break the connection between Judaism and Zionism. Israeli leaders are unable to express an authentic, proud and definitive Jewish message. Nor have they been able to articulate Israel's place and purpose in Jewish history. They have defended Israel as if it were simply a country like any other -- rather than one that lives on the edge of extinction because it is Jewish. That distinction is crucial: the only reason that the Land of Israel has value is because Jews live in it, because it is central to Jewish consciousness and belief. The culture of Israelism, which spurns Jewish content and has little or no understanding or connection to Judaism, or Israeli history, contains a kind of Judeophobia. Attacking Jews who live in Judea, Samaria and Gaza is an example of the kulturkampf that is tearing apart Israeli society and, with it, the nationalist ideology and religious belief that define and distinguish us. For the Left, that is why the Jews of Judea, Samaria and Gaza have become "The Enemy".

The struggle in Israel over Sharon's policy of retreat is not merely about power, and certainly not "peace", but over Jewish identity and Jewish values. It is ironic that those who support this policy because of their concern for the "Jewish character of Israel" and" Israeli democracy" have so little regard for either at home. Anti-Zionist Leftists have, however, raised important questions. What does Jewish national self-determination mean when so many Israelis reject that premise or have little understanding of it?If Israel is nothing more than a few Jewish symbols and some official recognition of holidays, but without a Jewish content, why does there need to be a State of Israel at all? In order to ensure their control, the ruling elites and their supporters will buy off whomever they can and impoverish the rest until they too give in. They will imprison those who protest and try to break the will of any opposition. In the name of the State, they will try to destroy the Jewish and Zionist ethos that has sustained and inspired us for thousands of years, and brought us back to our homeland. The triumph of the State, wherever it is, can only be meaningful when it expresses the will of the people. Otherwise, it is only another form of repression.

Modern Orthodoxy Redux: After a Week's Travel Coast to Coast

This past week I've found myself travelling from Florida to Montreal-Toronto-Losangeles-New Jersey. Everywhere I went I found wonderful Modern Orthodox communities, struggling to sustain themselves ideologically and institutionally. Warmed by the dedication of the people I met, I became further convinced that our community absolutely must redefine its priorities. It is time to do a number of things and let the chips fall where they may.

1) We have to stop chewing ideology and recast the curricula of our schools to reflect our ideals. We need to include spirituality and thinking into the schools (especially the high schools).

2) We have to reach deeper into our pockets and cultivate educators and rabbis to teach a torah curriculum that matches our values. We have to validate Hinnukh/Rabbonus as careers and pay their salaries as to what they're worth to us. What kind of message do we send when we chintz on educators and pay fortunes to other professionals. God doesn't do miracles for those who don't try.

3) We need to take a long look at ourselves and say: Torah UMadda includes Baba Qamma, not just sophisticated conversation about the implications of Peter Berger's writings for religion. It is Torah that carries Madda, not vice versa.

4) There is an enormous Orthodox and Traditional population that is thirsty for non-Haredi Orthodoxy. I meet them literally everywhere I travel. We are duty-bound to meet their needs. We will have a serious price to pay and serious answers to the Divine Tribunal if we do not.

Democracy, Pravda-Style (oops! Haaretz-style)

I seem to constantly violate my no politics rule. However, some things are just too incredible to let go by without comment.

Haaretz has just published two amazing articles. In the first, it argues against Democracy in the Palestine Authority. In the other, it informs us that referenda are anti-democratic.

I guess democracy is restricted to whatever Amos Schocken and Co. think (such as leaving Yesha and de-judaizing Israel as soon as possible). If you disagree, you're not a democrat.

Pravda could not have done a better job, but Sharansky already knew that.

Torah in Motion

I just completed a two part speaking engagement for one of the most exciting Modern Orthodox initiatives to appear in the past few years. It'd called Torah in Motion and its the brainchild of four bright, dedicated, energetic and devoted individuals in Toronto: Rabbi Jay and Ilana Kelman and Dr. Elliott and Leah Malamet. They describe their mission as follows:

The mission of Torah in Motion is to inspire Jewish living and learning in an open and supportive environment. Our mandate is to organize dynamic and thought-provoking programming through conferences, symposia, special speaker series, and educational seminars, in order to foster a higher level of inquiry and spiritual development. Such programming addresses critical issues of pressing relevance and concern in the Jewish community. We aim to foster a community of passionate Jews sensitively engaged with the modern world through the prism of Jewish law, values and traditions.

Over the past few years, they have put togethe a devoted core-group that has gelled into the nucleus for A Modern Orthodox resurgence in Toronto, where it is very much needed. The intellectual quality of the programs that TIM has hosted and the incredible people it has attracted should make it the envy and model for other such projects throughout the Orthodox community. It is far too rare that one encounters the ideal mixture of Yirat Shamayim, Shmirat Mitzvot and intellectual breadth and sophistication as I encountered during my visit here.

May HaQadosh Barukh Hu help them go from strength to strength. God knows we need many more TIMs in our midst.

Orthodoxy Triumphant...Maybe

Daniel Pipes has just published an intriguing article entitled 'The Future of Judaism.' In it, in light of the growing percentage of the Orthodox community within an ever shrinking American Jewish Community (see the 2000 National Jewish Population Survey):

Should this trend continue, it is conceivable that the ratio will return to roughly where it was two centuries ago, with the Orthodox again constituting the great majority of Jews. Were that to happen, the non-Orthodox phenomenon could seem in retrospect merely an episode, an interesting, eventful, consequential, and yet doomed search for alternatives, suggesting that living by the law may be essential for maintaining a Jewish identity over the long term...It also could portend a much deeper shift in Jewish life in America and beyond, being a leading indicator of Orthodoxy's political coming of age and perhaps even its eventual replacement of non-Orthodox Judaism. (Emphasis added-JRW)

I have really mixed emotions over Pipes' remarks. On the one hand, I welcome them. After centuries of suffering the contempt of 'progressive,' 'modern,' 'non-primitive' forms of Judaisms, History ( or better, Divine Providence) is bearing out the axiom, which Traditional Jews have known for millenia, that 'living by the Law is essential for maintaining a Jewish identity over the long term.'

On the other hand, Pipes' remarks both sadden and sober me. I am sad because of the millions of Jews who will die spiritually by assimilation. This, we must recall, is the other side of the equation. I am sad, because deep down inside I ask myself if we could not have done more to spread Torah in North America and Western Europe and, thus, prevent some of those souls from going to oblivion. I am also sad, because in Israel we are losing hundreds and thousands of Jews to ignorance and 'Haskalah-syle' self-loathng. To a very significant degree, this is because we've isolated ourselves far too much.

This brings me to the 'sober' part of my response. In the last conversation that I was privileged to have with my beloved Master and Teacher, Rav Soloveitchik זצ"ל, we actually discussed what already then (March, 1985) looked like an Orthodox resurgence. I was fairly upbeat in my observations. the Rov was noticeably less optimistic. He expressed serious misgivings about Orthodox triumphalism. Self-satisfaction, he seemed to say, is a very dangerous draught. In fact, he observed, he was unsure whether one could even speak of an 'Orthodox movement.'

I was sobered by the Rov's caution then, and I find it even more apt today. It is certainly true that the Torah has had tremendous achievements since it was eulogized as dead in the fifties and sixties. On the other hand, we do not have any time for self-congratulation. We are losing not a few of our young to the insidious temptations of western relativism and hedonism (which masquerade as sophistication). We are more assimilated than we would like to admit. We have created conditions that delay marriage, condemn thousands to bachelorhood, and have put ourselves on a path where our birthrate is lower than it should be. We do not reach out enough or reach in enough.

In this connection, it would be well to reconsider the bans issued against Rabbi Slifkin, the gravity of which I did not appreciate until I was enlightened by a knowledgable friend. There is, in Jerusalem and New York, a group of highly sophisticated Ba'ale Teshuva who entered the Torah World because they had been shown that one can be educated and Torah observant as well. The vicious attacks on Rabbi Slifkin, which are themselves heretical as they contradict the words of literally dozens of Rishonim and later authorities, are creating an atmosphere which will drive these wonderful people from Torah. [Why they can't join the world of the Rov and his disciples is another matter.] What do we have to offer these fellow Orthodox Jews, when the Roshe Yeshiva they so admire deny them their place in the World to come?

If Orthodoxy is to triumph, it must meet its internal challenges, as well as its external ones. There is too little time, too much to do, to indulge ourselves in triumphs.

The Battle of the Bans

I've been following the controversy about the banning of Rabbi Slifkin's book and Gil Student's call for a counterban (all relevant material is available at Hirhurim) with a mixture of outrage, bewilderment and bemusement (mostly the latter). I've spent most of my adult life involved in trying to advance a responsible form of modern Orthodoxy. That has often put me on a collision course with various Haredi polemicists. In retrospect, though, I think that a lot of the time I spent in these polemics was a waste. The time could have been put to better use by learning, teaching and (in a positiv way) disseminating my own ideas and those in which I believe.

Apparently, that was the Rambam's position, too. In a letter to his student, R. Yosef b. Yehudah, he admonishes him NOT to get involved in controversies with those who disagree with him (i.e. the Rambam). It's a waste of time, said Maimonides, who then set out a carefully crafted curriculum for R. Yosef to follow. [The text is in the seconf volume of Y. Shailat's Iggerot HaRambam. Unfortunately, I don't have the volume in front of me.]

So, in the matter of R. Slifkin, I suggest that those who support him should read him and push others to do so. To take on the hotheads who would like to crucify him woulkd be a waste of time and of little effect (ibid zeman u-mi'ut ha-to'elet).

On Modern Orthodoxy and Daas Hedyot

My comments about Daas Hedyot appear to have struck a serious nerve, and were clearly misunderstood. I had written that had DH been exposed to Modern Orthodoxy, he would have been spared much of his present angst. He took sharp exception to my remarks, both in his comments here and on his own blog posting.

DH misses my point. For present purposes, Modern Orthodoxy, entails the expansion of one's religious, spiritual and intellectual vistas- primarily through thinking and through expanding one's Torah curriculum. IOW, there is a vast literature that provides the searcher with legitimately Orthodox ideas, but which are outside the very narrowly drawn borders that currently obtain in the Yeshiva World. I trust that DH would not consider such writings or ideas to be heretical. [The late Professor Yitzhaq Twersky used to say that studying the full-range of Jewish intellectual history is an excursion into 'penimiyus ha-Torah.]

In addition, Modern Orthodoxy does see a positive value in engaging and mastering 'General Culture,' though there are wide differences as to the degree and importance of that engagement. Nevertheless, as I did note, this path is both harder and gives one the tools to engage the challnges of a world that imposes itself upon us, whether we like it or not. At the same time, it requires an equal portion of intellectual humility to undertake. [See the Rav's remarks in his noted shiur Gerus and Masorah.]

Reading over DH's remarks, I can't help but feel that he's caught between worlds. He rejects the basics of Yeshiva culture, but rejects the authenticity of anything else. He reminds me of Chaikl Vilner's friend in The Yeshiva (aka Tzemach Atlas). The boy can't leave and he can't stay within the yeshiveshe velt.

England's Shame

My brother, David, offers these comments onm Prince Harry's Nazi proclivities:

I am just amazed about the way the issue about Young Prince Harry's wearing of a Nazi uniform has been set out. The thing that amazes me is that it has become solely a 'Jewish issue'. The Jerusalem Post talks about the need for Holocaust education and sensitivities on the Nazi atrocities. In fact, the Jerusalem Post, quotes the BBC saying that 60% of those surveyed under 35 had never heard of Auschwitz. But what the BBC didn't survey, I guess, is how many of them never heard of Coventry? Or the terror bombing or the battle of Britain or V2 rockets for that matter? How many had never heard of Winston Churchill? Or of D-Day? If I am not mistaken, the Nazi's were pretty actively at war with Britain. And for a long time, a war waged indiscriminately against civilian targets. I find it shocking that the British media felt it was just a case of the Jews being overly sensitive. This is apparent by the only questions they asked. The should have surveyed, as Tom Lehrer said in his song, "...the widows and cripples in old London town who owe their large pensions to Werner Von Braun."
And as for a Prince of the Realm dressing up in the costume of the enemy who brought such death and destruction to Britain and not even think it is wrong, is amazing. And for this to be only a Jewish issue is a sign of a deeper problem on "this blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England."

It seems he's more like his great-grand uncle, the ex-Edward VIII, who was a Nazi stooge than his great-grandfather George VI who backed Churchill and stood with his people against the Nazi menace.

Censorship

Gil Student has devoted a very long posting to the latest attempt to censor a book. This time the controversy revolves around the works of Rabbi