Jack Wertheimer Is Back

Rabbi Eytan Kobre writes for Cross-Currents:

…JTS’s Jack Wertheimer is back on the attack against the non-Orthodox, this time with What Does Reform Judaism Stand For? in this month’s Commentary.

Something must be done about that man, if only by having him join the roster at Cross-Currents, so that his incisive pieces can be written off as just so much Orthodox triumphalist, exclusivist tripe, which can’t quite so easily be done now that he’s the JTS Provost publishing in Commentary.

Perhaps I’ll have other occasion to comment at greater length on the article, but for now I’ll suffice with one comment. He writes:

In a remarkable statement issued last summer, Rabbi Yoffie distinguished the Judaism practiced by Reform from other forms of Judaism in these words: “If you take it all upon yourself as an obligation rather than as a choice, you’ve reached the point at which you’re no longer a Reform Jew.”

Here, at last, is a candidly non-inclusive position. What it suggests is that in today’s Reform, red lines continue to exist to the Right: for a rabbi or a congregant to flirt with the basic concept of religious obligation, or venture too close to traditional Jewish observances, is to rule oneself out.

What of red lines to the religious Left? Are there any limits there? True, the movement disapproves of such outlying phenomena as the Society for Humanistic Judaism with its denial of a personal God, or Jews for Jesus. But, as we have seen, it has accommodated all sorts of other innovation under the rubric of legitimate Jewish expression, and has been remarkably silent on what it would consider beyond the pale.

The reference to Humanistic Judaism jogged my memory, causing me to delve into my voluminous files under “R”, for Responsa, Heteredox (I’ve thought from time to time of drawing on my vast archives and expertise to pen a monthly column titled “A Review of Periodical Heterodox Responsa Literature,” to compete with Rabbi Bleich’s long-running Tradition feature, but the I realized: who would read it?) What I retrieved was a CCAR responsum from 5751 regarding a secular humanistic congregation seeking admission to the Reform congregational body, UAHC.

Briefly, the question before Responsa Committee was this:

Reform Judaism has been an open-ended and variegated movement. It is historically flexible, but how far does flexibility go? Can it accommodate the philosophy and liturgy of this particular Congregation?

The responsum sets outs to answer this difficult query and, along the way to its resolution, engages in a great deal of very subtle lomdus, which I found fascinating. To share the wealth, I’ll quote an illustrative snippet of this, (and will, of course, withhold [almost] all other comment, respectful as I am of other religious traditions):

Posted in Conservative Judaism, Reform Judaism | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Jack Wertheimer Is Back

Why Do People Become Orthodox?

Conservative rabbi David Wolpe of Temple Sinai writes:

The three principal, positive reasons why I believe people choose to be Orthodox: community, coherence and connection.

Community. Orthodoxy creates a powerful caretaking community. Little wonder that so many step into an orthodox synagogue and feel instinctively, here is the emotional core of what religion at its best. The shul visitor to shabbes lunch quotient, which I propose as a measure of a community’s fidelity to itself, is immeasurably higher in orthodox communities than in any other denomination.


Coherence. This is not only a feature of orthodoxy, it is the defining intellectual position. All of the tradition is essentially seamless. There may be opinions whose place we cannot yet define; some particularly outré speculations can be ruled out of court. But there is no degree of apparent discontinuity that would persuade the orthodox community that Moses, Rabbi Akiva, Maimonides and the Lubavitcher Rebbe were practicing essentially different faiths — or, as one modern scholar puts it, "Judaisms." Positing a grand fabric lends coherence that is sometimes missing when parts of Jewish history or thought are dismissed, or opinions explained sociologically rather than harmonized halachically. No believer needs to seek footing on a slippery slope, because everything is understood (with but nugatory exceptions) as an integrated whole. The twists of the oral law, its periodic seeming implausibilities, are kept from challenging the system by the certainty that contradictions are flaws in understanding, not in revelational content.

Connection, theurgy. Why perform mitzvot? Ta’amei Hamitzvot is, as Jewish philosophers have always recognized, a dangerous enterprise. That which has a reason can be invalidated by a reason. But if mitzvah is, at bottom, ratzon Haboreh, then nothing can be greater than its fulfillment. God wishes it. A mitzvah can make a difference in the fabric of the universe. The kabbalistic, theurgic amplification is that performing the mitzvah can make a difference to (or in) God’s self. How pale, by comparison, is the dutiful liberal explanation that the mitzvoth will make you a more sensitive person, a more caring person, someone closer to the history and destiny of your people. Of what power is such therapeutic encouragement beside God’s expressed will?

There are good reasons to choose orthodoxy. Now, why am I not orthodox? Ah, perhaps that is a question I will have the opportunity to elaborate another day.

Posted in Orthodoxy, R. David Wolpe | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Do People Become Orthodox?

The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford

I watched this movie with growing horror.

Just imagine kicking back on a Tuesday evening, tuning out of the Laker blowout to watch a nice Brad Pitt flick, only to find I’d tuned into, well, I’d write what’s what but I can only lie on the floor in the aftermath of this film and look at the ceiling, the light going out of my eyes before I can find the right words…

From the DVD cover: "Everyone in 1880s America knows about Jesse James. He’s the nation’s most notorious criminal, hunted by the law in 10 states. He’s also the land’s greatest hero., lauded as a Robin Hood by the public. Robert Ford? No one knows him. Not yet. But the ambitious 19-year-old aims to change that. He’ll befriend Jesse, ride with his gang. And if that doesn’t bring Ford fame, he’ll find a deadlier way."

Here are some quotes from the movie:

Robert Ford: [to Frank James] Folks sometimes take me for a nincompoop on account of the shabby first impression I make, whereas I’ve always thought of myself as being just a rung down from the James Brothers. And I was hoping if I ran into you aside from those peckerwoods, I was hoping I could show you how special I am. I honestly believe I’m destined for great things, Mr. James. I’ve got qualities that don’t come shining through right at the outset, but give me a chance and I’ll get the job done- I can guarantee you that.

Frank James: You’re not so special, Mr. Ford. You’re just like any other tyro who’s prinked himself up for an escapade, hoping to be a gunslinger like them nickel books are about. You may as well quench your mind of it, because you don’t have the ingredients, son.
Robert Ford: Well, I’m sorry to hear you feel that way, as I put such stock in your opinion. As for me being a gunslinger, I’ve just got this one granddaddy Paterson Colt and a borrowed belt to stick it in. But I also got an appetite for greater things. I hoped by joining up with you, it’d put me that much closer to getting them.
Frank James: Well, what am I supposed to say to that?
Robert Ford: Let me be your sidekick tonight.
Frank James: Sidekick?
Robert Ford: So you can examine my grit and intelligence.
Frank James: I don’t know what it is about you, but the more you talk, the more you give me the willies. Now I don’t believe I want you anywhere within earshot this evening, okay? You understand?
Robert Ford: Well, I’m sorry…
Frank James: Why don’t you just get, now? Scat!

Jesse James: [Bob walks in on Jesse in the bath] Go away.
Robert Ford: Used to be nobody could sneak up on Jesse James.
Jesse James: Now you think otherwise?
Robert Ford: I ain’t never seen you without your guns, neither.
[Jesse removes a towel, revealing his gun]
Jesse James: [pause] Can’t figure it out: do you want to be like me or do you want to BE me?
Robert Ford: [defeated] I’m just making fun is all.

Jesse James: Give me some more conversations, Bob.
Charley Ford: I got one. This one’s about as crackerjack.
Jesse James: Let Bob tell it.
Robert Ford: I don’t even know what you’re talking about.
Charley Ford: About how much you and Jesse have in common.
Jesse James: Go on, Bob.
Charley Ford: Tell a story.
Robert Ford: Nope. Nope.
Charley Ford: Entertain Jesse. He’s here.
Robert Ford: Well, if you’ll pardon my saying so, I guess it is interesting, the many ways you and I overlap and whatnot. You begin with our Daddies. Your daddy was a pastor of the New Hope Baptist Church; my daddy was a pastor of a church at Excelsior Springs. Um. You’re the youngest of the three James boys; I’m the youngest of the five Ford boys. Between Charley and me, is another brother, Wilbur here, with six letters in his name; between Frank and you was a brother, Robert, also with six letters. Robert is my Christian name. You have blue eyes; I have blue eyes. You’re five feet eight inches tall. I’m five feet eight inches tall. Oh me, I must’ve had a list as long as your nightshirt when I was twelve, but I’ve lost some curiosities over the years.
Jesse James: [stares at Bob for a long time, smiles] Ain’t he something?

 [last lines]
Narrator: He was ashamed of his persiflage, his boasting, his pretensions of courage and ruthlessness; he was sorry about his cold-bloodedness, his dispassion, his inability to express what he now believed was the case- that he truly regretted killing Jesse, that he missed the man as much as anybody and wished his murder hadn’t been necessary. Even as he circulated his saloon he knew that the smiles disappeared when he passed by. He received so many menacing letters that he could read them without any reaction except curiosity. He kept to his apartment all day, flipping over playing cards, looking at his destiny in every King and Jack. Edward O’Kelly came up from Bachelor at one P.M. on the 8th. He had no grand scheme. No strategy. No agreement with higher authorities. Nothing but a vague longing for glory, and a generalized wish for revenge against Robert Ford. Edward O’Kelly would be ordered to serve a life sentence in the Colorado Penitentiary for second degree murder. Over seven thousand signatures would eventually be gathered in a petition asking for O’Kelly’s release, and in 1902, Governor James B. Ullman would pardon the man. There would be no eulogies for Bob, no photographs of his body would be sold in sundries stores, no people would crowd the streets in the rain to see his funeral cortege, no biographies would be written about him, no children named after him, no one would ever pay twenty-five cents to stand in the rooms he grew up in. The shotgun would ignite, and Ella Mae would scream, but Robert Ford would only lay on the floor and look at the ceiling, the light going out of his eyes before he could find the right words.

Rick J. Walsh writes on imdb.com:

 Andrew Dominik’s The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, is a deliberately paced, stunningly visualized, and emotionally charged exploration of the early development of mass media celebrity in America. The film riveted my attention for two hours and 40 minutes, and has remained on my mind for several days after my viewing. Although centered on one of the iconic legends of the Old West, it is far beyond an updated reincarnation of the Western. It is an epic allegory about the development of the American cult of celebrity and the effects of this obsession on the individuals caught in its web.

Visually, the film soars beyond anything that has hit the screen since Conrad Hall’s final masterpiece with Road to Perdition. Roger Deakins, the cinematography genius behind The Shawshank Redemption, Kundun, and all the Cohen brothers" films since The Hudsucker Proxy, surpasses his best work. He pulls out all the stops here—intricately orchestrated changes in focus, richly textured colors, dazzling use of light sources, careful manipulations of time, powerfully significant fade-ins and fade-outs, and shots through rain, snow, and rippled old glass—to communicate the story. Deakins’ contribution stands out in the railroad train robbery sequence at the beginning of the film. Clearly defined, flickering light sources and deep black shadows create a dazzling, nightmarish vision that haunts the rest of the film. This sequence alone is worth the price of admission.

The richly textured, historically precise visual aspects of the film bring to mind Terrence Malick’s Days of Heaven and Robert Altman’s McCabe and Mrs. Miller. However, instead of the understated, "realistic" performances featured in those films, The Assassination of Jesse James…showcases powerful, yet still realistic performances by an outstanding ensemble cast.

Sam Rockwell, as the not-too-bright but well-meaning Charley Ford, and Mary-Louise Parker, as Jesse’s loving wife, stand out. Yet the film belongs to the two titular leads, both of whom deliver the performances of their careers and create characters filled with disturbing contradictions. Brad Pitt’s Jesse James is alternately pitiable and terrifying—an affectionate, loving father, an old-before-his-time sage, an adventurous daredevil, an unrepentant bad boy, and a vicious sociopath. Casey Affleck’s Robin Ford is a complex, repellent, and tragic character who challenges the audience’s complicity in the undercurrents of the film.

Posted in Hollywood, Personal | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford

Will American Jewish University Take Over The Jewish Community Library Of Los Angeles?

The library is now located in the Jewish Federation building at 6505 Wilshire Blvd, which means you have to go through an elaborate security check to get to it.

The American Jewish University recently made a presentation to the Federation to take over the library and locate it on its Bel Air campus off Mulholland Drive.

At our current rate, the only part of Jewish Los Angeles that won’t be under the control of the AJU by 2020 will be this blog (unless it wants to offer me $25 a day).

Posted in AJU | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Will American Jewish University Take Over The Jewish Community Library Of Los Angeles?

The One Problem With The Happy Minyan In Particular And Orthodox Judaism In General

The Happy Minyan meets on Shabbos at a karate studio.

The bathroom is in the back, near the woman’s section.

Women tend to congregate around the bathroom.

There’s no loud fan in the bathroom and you couldn’t turn it on on Shabbos anyway.

I pity the poor man who goes in there for some relief but then is overcome by a fear of making rude sounds to the point where he gets all stuffed up and can’t do his business.

What’s a Jew to do?

I know one visitor to the Happy Minyan on Shabbos morning who put off the awful reckoning as long as he could, then when he sneaked around back to the loo, some women started pounding on the door. He pleaded for a respectful silence but these sheilas set up shop just outside and exchanged lashon hara while this poor guy cast his eyes towards heaven and contemplated a mile walk home where he could do his business in peace.

This is a frequent problem in Orthodox Judaism. We tend to live closely together in ghettos of our own making. We can’t turn on loud fans on the Sabbath. What if you’re in someone’s house and the bathroom is right by the dining room filled with people you want to think well of you, and you have gas and intestinal distress and you have to go but you have inordinate fear of making rude sounds in public?

Turning on the water in the sink doesn’t always cover up the sounds of the truly explosive (not that I’m ever one of them, despite my bean-rich vegetarian diet).

I never suffer from these problems (the few times I’ve made sounds while doing my thing it’s been to the tune of "Tie Me Kangaroo Down, Sport"), but lesser mortals do and I feel for them.

Perhaps the best solution is the loud singing of niggunim by those outside a bathroom in use?

Posted in Happy Minyan, Orthodoxy, Pico/Robertson | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The One Problem With The Happy Minyan In Particular And Orthodox Judaism In General

Ordering A Hit On A Dog

A friend of mine in the UK has been bitten twice by the same dog.

He got back from getting stitched up and called me irate. He wants to know if he can sue.

Friend: "I want to see the thing shot. I know a number. I know some naughty people. For $5000, this guy will blow the dog’s head off. I’m not into ordering hits on dogs, but this geezer is a fully qualified ex-militia. Shall I get it done?"

Luke: "Don’t do that. You could get into trouble."

Friend: "I’m going to laugh my balls off watching that dog’s head come off."

Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Ordering A Hit On A Dog

Jewish Matchmaking

From my live cam chat:

LeahKleim:  have we all gotten sick of our own blogs?
LeahKleim:  it seems none of us are writing as much, even when were sitting on good funny s**t
LeahKleim:  tell me what u think about the world of shiduch dating
YourMoralLeader:  i’ve had no experience with it but it seems like a good idea
LeahKleim:  WHY DONT U TRY IT
YourMoralLeader:  my life is too scandalous to put any matchmaker’s reputation on the line
LeahKleim:  it would make 4 great writing
LeahKleim:  the shiduch world is f**ked up
YourMoralLeader:  I meet great women, my problem is just economic survival, let alone dating, at moment. Tougher for me $$$wise since i quit writing on porn.

Posted in Dating | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Jewish Matchmaking

I Die With Sam Harris – And We Don’t Go To Heaven And We Don’t Get One Stinkin’ Virgin

Monday evening, I drive to the Luxe Hotel (for the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s Jihad Lecture Series) under a heavy burden (no less horrific than that of the poor Jews of Sderot). (Video)

I had just been accused — in my own Moral Leader chat room no less – of disrespecting women (I’d said she was tight and this was misinterpreted as some kind of sick sexual remark, how, I don’t know, my mind boggles, I only meant it as a respectful remark on her body not being all saggy and loose and disgusting, nothing bums me out more than ugly fat women, that’s why I’m so appreciative of the fairer members of the fairer sex, no fatties).

I was stunned silent.

How could I respond?

Did not this woman know that I was in the running for Ms. Magazine’s Man of the Year award for 2008?

My contributions to feminism can not be described.

How about my membership in the first President Bush’s Thousand Points of Light club for my tutoring work with hot legal female Mexican immigrants between 18 and 19 years of age?

No Orthodox Jew in the world has done more work with fallen women than I have.

That’s just the way I roll.

Flinging aside my honor, I have taken the sins of the entire pornography industry upon my shoulders — I bet that when the prophet Hosea was told by God to go marry a ho, he got kicked out of all the Orthodox shuls in his hood too, I bet the Rabbi Weils of his time showed him no mercy, what, a lowly prophet, what kinda bling can he bring to the game? don’t hate, congratulate mofos, bitches — and offered myself up as the sacrificial redeemer for perverts so that those who read my blog will not perish with all sorts of unhealthy addictions, but shall have true life, life eternal, yeah, in my father’s house there are many mansions… I go to prepare a place for you. Young man, there’s no need to feel down. Pick yourself off the ground. Because you’re in a new town, there’s no need to be unhappy. Young man, there’s a place you can go. I said, young man, when you’re short on your dough. You can stay there, and I’m sure you will find many ways to have a good time.

Young man, are you listening to me? I said, young man, what do you want to be? I said, young man, you can make real your dreams. But you’ve got to know this one thing! No man does it all by himself. I said, young man, put your pride on the shelf, And just go there, to the Y.M.C.A. I’m sure they can help you today. It’s fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A. It’s fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A. They have everything that you need to enjoy, You can hang out with all the boys…

I run into my mate Jeff. Not only does he refuse to kiss my tzitzit, he denies our love three times before the cock crows.

Just a few hours earlier, our relationship had been sanctified before God and state in a moving ceremony presided over by the right honorable Mayor Villaraigosa.

And now this?

I try to spread oil on troubled waters by remarking how tight Jeff looks.

He replies that I don’t treat men with respect.

So I start yakking with a fine Christian couple at Biola University.

"Is that like Ebola?" I ask.

"Like they haven’t heard that a thousand times," says Jeff.

"Actually, I’ve never heard that before," says the Christian gentleman. "Nobody has been so cruel as to compare my school to a plague."

Somehow this is not my day. Everything I say is being misinterpreted.

Let me drown in your laughter, let my die in your arms, let me lay down beside you…

I go to the front row where I’m later joined by famed atheist author Sam Harris.

And that’s when it really gets ugly.

After a fiery introduction by Janet Levy, author Andrew G. Bostom ("The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism") takes the pulpit and reads his speech like he’s Josef Mengele before the Israeli Medical Association.

Bostom pounds in his points like a Roman centurion putting up Jesus for the night. Bang, bang, bang, he slams his points home like T.T. Boy.

He reads his speech with a machine gun delivery, torrents of vicious data, all meticulously (at least it sounded that way) footnoted, and he read every damn footnote.

Occasionally, he’d look up and speak to us for a sentence, never more than two, and it was such an exquisite release.

But after no longer than five seconds, he’d put his head down and ram us with more data.

Sweet Jesus, is there no relief? Is this what I get for denying you? Is this my punishment for converting to Judaism? To be harangued about Islamic Jew hatred?

My life has been such a worldwind since I saw you. I’ve been running around in circles in my mind. You take me to the places where alone I’d never find.

I meant every word I said. When I said that I loved you, I meant that I loved you forever.

Question time. Tony Blair never had it so good. Bostom takes questions and talks to us like a mentch, face to face, no blasted footnotes.

Afterwards, I latch on to Sam Harris and don’t let him go — not in a gay way — until I’d given over my entire life story.

It takes a good five minutes for me to list all my accomplishments.

We talk about atheism among scientists.

Sam’s finishing a Ph.D. in Neuro-Science at UCLA.

More than two-thirds of neuroscientists are atheists would be a safe guess. The more scientists deal with life (biology, psychiatry, psychology, etc), the more likely they are to be atheists. The more scientists live in theory (a la Mathematics and Physics), the less likely (comparative to other scientists) they are to be atheists.

I tell Sam about speaking to a dozen atheists on my first book, A History of X, to the Center for Skeptical Inquiry West. At the end, I was asked if I was a theist. I had to plead guilty.

Some of the old codgers told me they’d just returned from an atheist revival meeting. I bet that was a great time with a dozen people around 70 years of age.

Sam’s typical fan is a 75-year old man.

Religion gets the chix, man. The nuttier the faith (Kabbalah Centre, Scientology, Mormonism), the hotter the chicks. You want to see a depressing selection of female specimens? Go to a Reform temple on a Friday night, or a Church of England on a Sunday morning.

The energy, fertility and pheromones are with the fanatics.

Poor Sam.

I’ll pray for him.

I cried a tear. You wiped it dry.

Somehow you needed me.

That’s my visceral report on the evening. Now for my cerebral report.

Janet Levy introduces the speaker. "How many of you have read The Looming Tower?"

More than a dozen hands go up, including mine.

Janet: "I started reading The Looming Tower. I got up to page 38 and I’m still on page 38. This passage discusses the supposed origins of antisemitism in the Muslim world. ‘Until the end of WWII, there was little precedent in Islam for antisemitism. …Jews had lived safely though submissively under Muslim rule for 1200 years, enjoying full religious freedom.’"

Bernard Lewis, widely regarded as the Western world’s leading scholar of Islam, takes a similar view.

Janet: "I had read the Koran and known [Islam experts such as Robert Spencer] to know that this wasn’t so."

At the end of his speech, Andrew says: "Jews…must demand a mea culpa from their Muslim counterparts for their Jew-hatred which is still being taught in Islamic schools… Let us demonstrate as Jews that we are no longer willing to live with 12th Century expectations of Muslims otherwise they will oblige us."

I ask the first question: "How did you develop your expertise in Islam?"

Andrew: "The same way, though a longer period of time, than it took me to go through medical school. It’s been applying the same discipline…in sitting down and reading. My wife is a compulsive lady. She graduated summa cum laude from medical school. I only graduated cum laude. She used to force me to sit in the chair and read when I wanted to play basketball. My only language is English. I have had to assemble a growing team of translators. I have to have their translation vetted."

Robert Kaplan (the European professor, not the American journalist) writes for The American Thinker:

Andrew Bostom’s new book, The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History, brings massive evidence to show that Jews suffered greatly in Moslem societies due to an antisemitism intrinsic to the Moslem religion. In  this he goes against the commonly held belief that Jews under Islam suffered relatively little for being Jewish and that Islam itself is relatively tolerant, ideas put forward by the philosophes of the Enlightenment as part of their  battle with the Catholic Church, by Jewish historians who contrasted a mythical Muslim past with their own lachrymose conception of the history of their own people in Christian Europe and by contemporary historians of Islam, many of whom tend to view Moslem antisemitism through rose-colored glasses.

 
The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism is a large collection of a broad range of readings from a paragraph to several pages in length, smoothly joined together by Bostom’s own writing. Included are the portions of Islamic scriptures relating to Jews, writing of Moslem scholars, preachers and rulers, writing of Jews who lived in Moslem societies and the reports of Jewish and gentile visitors to Moslem societies as well as writing of Western scholars who have studied various aspects of the experience of Jews in Islam. 
The fact that Bostom’s is a collection of direct quotations allows it to convey emotional tone far better than the usual scholarly writing where the author’s impartial academic voice predominates. Travelers, diplomats and alien residents over the centuries have expressed emotions of sympathy, indignation and compassion regarding the situation of the Jews of Islam which academic authors are reluctant to employ. From their writing we learn telling details of the Jewish condition. For example a Christian traveler in Persia describes a Jew (who by Moslem law has no right of self defense) pleading with a Moslem who is beating his son to beat him instead.
A broad survey, Bostom’s book informs readers about an area of history unfamiliar to most. Whereas readers will know of many cases of persecution of Jews in Christendom (the Crusades, the expulsion of the Jews from England, France, various German states and Spain, the Inquisition, the Chmielnicki massacres, the Kishinev pogroms, the Dreyfus Affair and so on), few will be able to point to similar occurrences in the history of Jews under Islam. Bostom fills in the canvas of such events.
Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on I Die With Sam Harris – And We Don’t Go To Heaven And We Don’t Get One Stinkin’ Virgin

Full Version Of Shmuley Boteach’s Debate With Christopher Hitchens On God

It is moderated by Neil Gilman (a philosophy professor from JTS).

It took place at the 92nd Street Y Jan. 30, 2008.

Posted in Christopher Hitchens, Shmuley Boteach | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Full Version Of Shmuley Boteach’s Debate With Christopher Hitchens On God

The Conversion Controversy

Rav Yitzhock Adlerstein writes:

Several weeks into the current conversion fracas, and I have participated in a webcam debate, read two of Rabbi Sherman’s piskei din, plus teshuvos both modern and pre-modern, several articles in Techumin, a few chapters of an academic work on conversion standards, and several screeds that drip with more violence than a remake of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The questions, however, continue apace.

Strip away all the detail, and the conflict boils down to two hostile assessments of what the other side stands for. Haredim believe that the dati-leumi (DL) camp is prepared to subvert “real” Torah to the dictates of non-religious and anti-religious forces in the government. They charge that when Torah matters are left in the hands of members of the DL orbit, issues of State ultimately trump issues of halacha. Gerus is just the latest in a series. The DL camp, on the other hand, believes that haredim have turned a deaf ear to concerns of Israeli society as a whole, content to contribute their mitzvos and learning, but nothing in areas of the enormous political, military and social issue that face Israel. At the same time, haredim have moved to assert greater control over a Rabbinate that their own people do not use, while attempting to impose their piskei halachah (e.g. the attempt to ban all Shemitah produce that relies on the heter mechirah) on a public that needs all the flexibility that halachah can legitimately deliver.

In duking it out in the current imbroglio, both sides have simply reinforced the stereotypes held by the other. In alienating the other, both sides deserve near-perfect scores.

Rabbi Druckman’s supporters have not responded to a single one of Rabbi Sherman’s charges in halachic language. They have thus added fuel to the fire of those who believe that the DL camp is incapable of dealing responsibly with sophisticated Torah thinking. Rabbi Sherman may or may not be right, but he raises important issues. Rav Druckman, to the best of my knowledge, is a fine gentleman, but not one of the halachic luminaries of the DL world. Professional politicians and MK’s – of any religious party – rarely are. The DL world suffers from no shortage of real bnei Torah and a group of authentic poskim who could and should be dealing with Rabbi Sherman’s point in halachic language.

The have compounded this error by taking comfort in the Israeli Supreme Court’s move a few days ago to freeze Rabbi Sherman’s decision. This should not have been a cause for celebration. It is harder to imagine a less appropriate deus ex machina to answer haredi critics. Rather than winning in the milchamtoh shel Torah, the DL world cheered as Big Brother showing up carrying a big, secular stick.

Many years ago, one of Rav Shach’s, zt”l, addresses enraged the Israeli public. He had dismissed kibbutz-members, cultural icons in general Israeli society, as “rabbit eaters,” devoid of all spiritual content. The nation was enraged. For weeks, people castigated R. Shach and the haredim, while touting the accomplishments of kibbutzniks on the battlefield. One journalist finally pointed out the irony. He observed that all the commentors were actually proving R. Shach’s point. All that the kibbutz defenders could point to was physical prowess and might. Nobody praised them for any spiritual accomplishment. You could imagine R. Shach getting up after all the charges and recriminations, and with a smile on his face saying, “The prosecution rests.” Nothing could make the haredi argument more effectively than a few rallies to support the honor of Rabbi Druckman, speeches denouncing the cold-heartedness of the haredim, appeals to a secular agency to trump the authority of a beis din – and silence on the substantive halachic issues.

To compound the injury, various writers in the DL camp have called for a new Israeli disengagement – this time, from all things haredi. Some have used militaristic vocabulary, speaking of the drawing of battle lines, and the waging of war against the forces of darkness and oppression in Bnei Brak. They’ve called for asserting their independence from haredi influences, of purging the country of their influence, of asserting that the haredim are alien to Torah, and that the real traditional Jews are the dati-leumi (DL), while the haredim are really Saducees. (Last time we heard this, it was Robet Gordis at JTS, I believe, saying the same about Orthodoxy in general back in the ‘30’s.) The writers may have felt better after venting, and may have scored points with their constituencies, but speaking in such terms about the most accomplished halachic minds of the generation – no matter how foreign some may find their attitude towards the State and modernity – does not create the impression of a whole lot of Torah depth.

Posted in Conversion, R. Yitzhock Adlerstein | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The Conversion Controversy