Family

POST A COMMENT

• Pingback: Your Cousin Moishe’s Take on Your Intermarriage » Mixed Multitudes – My Jewish Learning: Exploring Judaism & Jewish Life

• 
  By mikewinddale 6/29/09 at 10:25 a.m. UTC

  I’ll second Ahavah. Professor Menachem Friedman, an expert on Haredi sociology and history at Bar Ilan University, has noted that two factors have supported the rise of Haredi yeshiva culture:

  1) The modern welfare state, in which the government will fund your refusal to get a practical education and occupation;

  2) Nostalgia-motivated tzedaka.

  Regarding the second, Friedman convincingly shows that Haredism has very little authentic connection to prewar Eastern European Orthodoxy. As Friedman says, "In my opinion the Eastern European, Ashkenazi character of haredi Jewry remains questionable to this day."

  A crucially needed desideratum: Israel MUST stop funding Haredism. Haredism is able to survive in Israel soley due to the funding provided to it by the Israeli government. Were the Israeli government to cease this, the Haredim would literally have a choice between getting jobs or starving. 

   
• 
  By Ahavah 6/25/09 at 2:26 p.m. UTC

   This is the type of racist, bigoted cult fantasy that WE are supporting every time we give money to an orthodox yeshiva, kiruv organization or charity.  The only way to stop these lies from being taught to children or teens or even adults is to cut off their funding at the knees.  Countless non-Chereidi give money to these institutions, suffering from some sort of "fiddler-on-the-roof" nostalgia or holocaust guilt, without realizing what they are actually teaching the students.  This letter should be widely circulated to Jewish organizations and Federations to show what the UO really are.  It’s disgraceful and disgusting.   

   
• 
  By mikewinddale 6/20/09 at 2:20 p.m. UTC

  David,

  Indeed, I am quite aware what Jewcy is attempting with such features as this one. This is precisely when I so vehemently protested that Moishe does not represent Orthodoxy. This is not apologetics by me; I honestly and truly do believe that Moishe’s words are a pathetic caricature of Orthodoxy. However, I am concerned that what is obvious to me is not obvious to non-Orthodox Jews, and I so I feel an imperative to point out how very non-Orthodox Moishe truly is, lest Jewcy and its readers use Moishe as a straw-man with which to discredit Orthodoxy.

  In other words, the two of us both are trying to combat Jewcy’s agenda, each in our own way. You seek to emphasize that Moishe’s stand against intermarriage per se is correct Orthodoxy, even as his particular implementation is in error. I, on the other hand, seek to altogether discredit Moishe as Orthodoxy’s spokesman. Each in our own way, we are combatting the discrediting of Orthodoxy. Even though I disagree with your approach, I do respect it.

  —————

  You say about me, "As a BT, you recognize that Judaism lives up to its ideals…". Actually, I completely disagree with this statement. There was a time when I did believe that Judaism lives up to its ideals, but this was a time when I had been exposed almost exclusively to the German/British Neo-Orthodox variety of Orthodoxy, as exemplified especially by Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch and Rabbi Dr. J. H. Hertz. As far as I knew, Orthodoxy was represented by individuals not only with profound Talmudic knowledge, but also with PhDs in semitics and philosophy. For me, Orthodoxy at its truest was exemplified by rabbis who declared that the Bible’s and Talmud’s message was one for humanity, a message that recognized and embraced all that is true and correct in the world’s knowledge and endeavors, even as it eschews all that is false and incorrect in the same world’s knowledge and endeavors. I have since seen that Rabbi Benzion Uziel, the late Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel, would wholeheartedly agree with Rabbi Hirsch on all this.

  In Rabbi Uziel’s own words (remember, these were penned by a traditional Orthodox rabbi, one without any university education, in fact),
  Our holiness will not be complete if we separate ourselves from human life, from human phenomena, pleasures and charms, but (only if we are) nourished by all the new developments in the world, by all the wondrous discoveries, by all the philosophical and scientific ideas which flourish and multiply in our world. We are enriched and nourished by sharing in the knowledge of the world; at the same time, though, this knowledge does not change our essence, which is composed of holiness and appreciation of God’s exaltedness.

  However, ever since I moved to Israel and became exposed to Orthodoxy of the non-German/British variety, I have discovered that precious few Orthodox Jews subscribe to the Orthodoxy which for me is the only true Orthodoxy. By contrast, normative Orthodoxy is indeed parochial, myopic, fearful, racist, cowardly, misanthropic, and obscurantist. I write this with pain in my heart, taking no joy in this declaration.

  In fact, I would indeed agree with David Kelsey on the harm done by Haredi kiruv institutions, and the sorts of baalei teshuva they produce. A baal teshuva per se is a beautiful thing, but a Haredi baal teshuva in particular is not so.

  I elaborate on my disatisfaction with Orthodoxy in my "One Man’s Judaism: A Reply to Eli Putterman’s “The Theological Concessions of Modern Orthodoxy” (Kol haMevaser 2:7)", http://www.scribd.com/doc/16251546/Kol-Hamevaser-27-Reply-to-Puttermans-Theological-Concessions-of-Mo
• 
  By mikewinddale 6/18/09 at 2:46 p.m. UTC

  With all respect to you, David, I find your response incredible.

  Of course intermarriage is wrong; of course it is a disaster. No one will disagree here.

  Rabbi Marc Angel, in his article in Tradition 12:3-4 (Winter-Spring 1972), "Another Halakhic Approach to Conversions" discusses the view of Rabbi Benzion Uziel. Rabbi Uziel, the Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel in the days shortly preceeding and following 1948, believed that in cases of intermarriage, we should give Orthodox conversions even to non-Jewish spouses who are not prepared to become Orthodox/observant. Ideally, all converts should be observant, but, nevertheless, halakhah holds that after-the-fact (post facto), or in cases of need, this ideal can be waived, and even non-observant converts are kosher converts according to Orthodox halakhah.

  For all the following URLs, I had to insert "XX" in the "www" and ".com"/".org", in order to get past the spam filter. So remove the XX to turn wXXww and oXXrg, etc. into www and org.

  For more details on Rabbi Uziels’ view, see Rabbi Angel’s article, "The responsa of Rabbi Uziel", at httpXX://www.jewishideas.org/responsa/responsa-of-rabbi-uziel Many other rabbis held see similar positions; see
  — Professor Zvi Zohar, "Halakhic conversion of non-religious candidates", adducing numerous other Sephardi rabbis, wXXww.jewishideas.oXXrg/responsa/halakhic-conversion-of-non-religious-candidates
  — Professor Zvi Zohar, "Retroactive Annulment of Giyyur (Conversion)?", wXXww.jewishideas.oXXrg/articles/retroactive-annulment-giyyur-conversion
  — Rabbi Marc Angel, "Conversion to Judaism: Halakha, Hashkafa, and Historic Challenge", wXXww.jewishideas.oXXrg/min-hamuvhar/conversion-judaism-halakha-hashkafa-and-histori
  — Professor Marc B. Shapiro, "Marc B. Shapiro – Responses to Comments and Elaborations of Previous Posts III ", seforim.traditiononline.oXXrg/index.cfm/2008/8/29/Responses-to-Comments-and-Elaborations-of-Previous-Posts-III, section s. v. "6. I have been asked to say something about the current conversion controversy."

  But let us return to Rabbi Angel’s 1972 article, op. cit. Rabbi Uziel based his leniency on what is said by the Prophet Malachi:
  Judah has dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah has profaned the holiness of the Lord which He loves and has married the daughter of a strange god. May the Lord cut off to the man that does this . . . (Malachi, 2:11-12).

  Above, in "The responsa of Rabbi Uziel", we read:
  Rabbi Uziel’s attitude is reflected in another of his responsa (Mishpetei Uziel, 5698, no. 26): “It is incumbent upon us to open the door of repentance; our sages of blessed memory did much for the benefit of those who would repent….I admit without embarrassment that my heart is filled with trembling for every Jewish soul that is assimilated among the non-Jews. I feel in myself a duty and mitzvah to open a door to repentance and to save [Jews] from assimilation by invoking arguments for leniency. This is the way of Torah, in my humble opinion, and this is what I saw and received from my parents and teachers.”

  In other words, it is precisely because of the severity of intermarriage, that Rabbi Uziel was so lenient. Rabbi Yisrael Salanter was known for being very lenient regarding the Yom Kippur fast, often telling people to eat rather than fast. He was asked, and he replied, "I’m not lenient on Yom Kippur; I’m rather strict on saving lives". Similarly, Rabbi Uziel was so lenient on conversion precisely because he was so strict on intermarriage. (By contrast, those who recently annulled Rabbi Drukman’s conversions, the annullers are apparently not concerned at all that now, these non-Jews will live in Israel, speak fluent Hebrew, and marry Jews. By contrast, Rabbi Drukman was concerned with the prohibition of intermarriage, and strove to prevent intermarriage. The annullers, by contrast, are lenient on intermarriage.)

  ———-

  So we’ve established that everyone (except those who annulled Rabbi Drukman’s conversions) is concerned about the prohibition of intermarriage. Everyone (except the Haredim) holds that it is a mitzvah to prevent intermarriage.

  But this is no justification for Moishe’s grave and disgusting distortions of Torah. The Torah does not say that non-Jews are animals and slaves; the Torah does not say that a Jew and a non-Jew cannot connect maritally as human and human. The Talmud says of Jews, "atem keru’im adam" ("You are called Adam" or "You are called man"), meaning that Jews, even Jews, are considered humans. Non-Jews are obviously humans, and Jews are humans as well. (One could theoretically argue that only Jews are humans, and that non-Jews are not humans, but this is difficult, since everyone agrees that non-Jews are descended from Adam. To say that they are descended from Adam but not human would require some mental gymnastics or some very questionable Biblical exegesis. For details, see Rabbi Judah Halevi’s Sefer haKuzari.) Our sages explain "Derech eretz kadmah laTorah", "The ordinary ways of the world come before Torah". This means that ontologically and chronologically, a Jew is first of all a human. Now, G-d, at Sinai, took Jews out of that classification for the purposes of the mitzvot and the Torah. A Jew is not allowed to marry a non-Jew, etc. But in the end, though a Jew is prohibited to marry a non-Jew, this relationship is still conceivable by virtue of their common humanity, and were it not for the prohibition given at Sinai, there’d be no moral problem whatsoever with this intermarriage.

  We might say that a Jew is essentially a "human of the Mosaic persuasion". (Not that I am endorsing the Reform "German of the Mosaic persuasion". This is certainly false; the Jewish people constitute a nation, "Am Yisrael" ("The People of Israel"). But just as a German can be called a "human of the Germanic persuasion", a Jew can be called a "human of the Mosaic persuasion". And just as a German is bound by German law despite his also being a normal human, a Jew too is bound by Jewish law even though he is also a human. The Reformers were wrong here as well; they felt that being a "German of the Mosaic persuasion" exempted one from Jewish law, as if a German is exempted from German law by virtue of being a human as well.)

  
  See Rambam/Maimonides’s Shemonah Perakim: there, Rambam notes that whereas with the ethical laws, a person should make G-d’s will his own personal will (i.e., since G-d prohibited murder, one should not even desire to murder, likewise with theft, etc.), by contrast, with ritual commandments, a person should say, "I love pork, but what can I do? G-d has forbidden it to me". That is, the ritual commandments, while legally binding, do not change morality. Pork is prohibited, and intermarriage is prohibited, but one should not look at pork and intermarriage as disgusting from a moral standpoint. G-d has prohibited them, for very good reasons even (for example, raising a Jewish family is much easier is both parents are Jewish, the laws of kashrut help ensure Jewish unity, etc.), but there is nothing intrinsically immoral about pork and intermarriage on a human pre-Jewish level. By contrast, one should feel in his inner recesses that murder and theft are wrong, and even if G-d had never prohibited them, one would still be required to refrain from them, for they are intrinsically immoral.

  Rabbi Yehiel Weinberg, the leader of German Orthodoxy before the Holocaust, said that whereas we say a beracha on ritual commandments, we never say a beracha on moral commandments (giving tzedaka, for example), because the moral commandments would be commandments and intrinsically obligatory even without G-d’s command. On the other hand, had G-d not commanded the ritual commandments, they would not be prohibited at all.

  The Talmudic rabbis in fact said, in the book Sifra, in very literal translation: "The ritual commandments are the commandments that were they not written [in the Torah by G-d], there’d be no need to write them [ourselves]. The moral commandments are those commandments that were they not written [in the Torah by G-d], there would be in fact an obligation to write them [ourselves]."

  Do not mistake me: the ritual commandments are obligatory. But their obligation is different than the obligation of the moral commandments. And we should not be surprised; elsewhere in Sifrah, we are taught that G-d took us out of Egypt in order that we’d keep the laws of proper weights and measures. Rabbi Yom Tov Schwarz, in his book Eyes to See, notes that weights and measures is given as an a fortiori: if merely using wrong weights so prohibited, all the more so to steal and rob outright! So if we were taken out of Egypt for the sake of the laws of weights, this really means we were taken out of Egypt for the sake of social morality and justice in general. Similarly, notes Rabbi Schwarz, while the Talmud says an unmerciful and unkind Jew should be suspected of not really being a Jew, the Talmud never impugns the Jewishness of someone who breaks Shabbat or kashrut. A Jew who violates Shabbat is a sinful Jew; a Jew who steals or insults another person is not merely a sinful Jew, but may perhaps not be a Jew at all, according to the Talmud. In fact, this is halakhah in the Rambam and Shulhan Arukh: someone who is not kind or merciful, you should suspect they are not really Jewish, and the laws against intermarriage apply to them. This is clear-cut halakhah, written in black-and-white in the codes of Jewish law. 

  The fact is, the chosenness of the Jewish people is almost a historical accident. That is, there is no deep-seated metaphysical justification for Jewish chosenness. If G-d’s purpose is for all humanity to worship Him and behave morally, of what purpose are the Jewish people? Rather, the fact is that historically, mankind sinned in Eden and before the Flood and at the Tower of Babel, and finally, G-d decided to take a slower path: He chose one righteous man, Avraham, and of him, made a whole nation whose purpose is to educate all mankind. ("A kingdom of priests and a holy nation" – Exodus 19:5-6; and what is a "priest" if not a leader of his congregation?) The purpose of the Jewish people, then, is to elevate all of mankind to the level we currently occupy. Some might call it "ethical monotheism", while others (based on the Amidah) will call it "tikkun olam". Either way, the Jewish people do not have any intrinsic spiritual advantage. So while intermarriage is prohibited, because it destroys the Jewish people and frustrates our task as a "kingdom of priests and a holy nation", a "light to the nations", nevertheless, on the human level, there is no reason to assume that a Jew and a non-Jew cannot make a perfectly good couple. Only, this "perfectly good couple" will not be a Jewish one, capable of serving G-d’s intent that the Jews be a priestly nation apart from all other nations. Rather, it will be a "perfectly good couple" of the human persuasion; this is fine on a human level, but it lacks the Jewish particularity.

  In fact, Rabbi Benzion Uziel (whom we cited earlier on conversion) said it is obvious that Jews and gentiles must respect each other and each other’s knowledge: since Jews and gentiles, he said, are working for the same goal (tikkun olam, etc.), it is obvious we must respect each other. The goal of Judaism, according to Rabbi Uziel, is to "perfect the world under the sovereignty of the Almighty" (l’taken olam b’malkhut Shad-ai, as we say in the Amida), and from this phrase is derived the phrase "tikkun olam". (l’taken olam is the verb, tikkun olam is the noun) 

  Moishe, then, has ENTIRELY misunderstood what it means to be Jewish. He hasn’t the faintest slightest inkling of a clue what it means to be Jewish. Therefore, he cannot understand why intermarriage is prohibited. If one believes that the Jew is intrinsically superior to the non-Jew in his soul, and if one believes that Jews and gentiles lack a common humanity and goal for life, then of course one will speak as Moishe does. But in truth, Moishe has no idea whatsoever what it means to be Jewish.

  —–

  Also, Moishe ENTIRELY is mistaken on how to bring others close to Torah. Even if he were entirely correct in his philosophic views (he is entirely incorrect, however), he would still be entirely incorrect on his pedagogic tactics.

  To bring the distant closer to Torah, the way is NOT to cast scorn and brimstone on them. Rather, one must show them love and show them with love and intellectual arguments that Judaism is correct.

  The reason is one advanced by Rabbi Yaakov Ettlinger (the teacher of the famous Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch), and followed by almost all Orthodox rabbi today: today’s non-Orthodox Jews are not like the heretics of yore. Back in the Medieval era, everyone, even heretics, knew that Orthodoxy was authentic. A person might violate halakhah, but he still knew he was violating the Torah. But today, things are different; non-Orthodox Jews honestly and truly believe they are following the Torah. A non-Orthodox Jew who intermarries or eats pork honestly believes the Torah permits this. Rabbi Yom Tov Schwarz, in his truly magnificent and grand book Eyes to See (wXXww.urimpublications.cXXom/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=UP&Product_Code=Eyes) devotes an entire chapter to this topic. He notes that Nachmanides (RambaN), for example, said that there could come a day when Jews, through no fault of their own, honestly believe the Torah is no longer legally binding anymore. This is surely an error, but it is a well-intentioned error, and we cannot treat those in error as heretics. Long long ago, RambaM (Maimonides) already ruled that the children of Karaites are not heretics, for they were raised from their youth in the Karaite heresy, and they (the children) cannot be expected to realize that Karaism is wrong. They simply don’t know any better.

  It is the same with non-Orthodox Jews today. Even if Moishe were correct that non-Jews are beasts and animals with no value save as slaves (thank G-d he is wrong here!), his tactics would still be in error. He cannot expect Noah to realize, via fire and brimstone and scorn and derision, that Torah is correct. He cannot blame Noah for not instinctively knowing that Judaism is true and that the Torah is binding. Rather, Moishe must lovingly and persuasively show Noah that the Torah is true. The answer is with emotional love and intellectual rigour, with clear and convincing proofs and with brotherly love.

  In Tradition 23:4, Rabbi Yehuda Amital wrote an excellent article on this, titled, "A Torah Perspective on the Status of Secular Jews Today". Read the article at wXXww.edah.oXXrg/backend/coldfusion/search/document.cfm?title=A%20Torah%20Perspective%20on%20the%20Status%20of%20Secular%20Jews%20Today&hyperlink=amital1%2Ehtml&type=Document&category=Jewish%20Diversity%2FRelating%20to%20the%20Non%2DOrthodox&authortitle=Rabbi&firstname=Yehuda&lastname=Amital&pubsource=Tradition%2C%2023%3A4&authorid=334

  So David, I agree with you that "Moishe may have the correct bottom line but the wrong approach". But this is such an understatement, that I believe it obscures matters. Moishe has the correct bottom line (intermarriage is wrong), but his approach (non-Jews are animals, and convince Noah with fire and brimstone) is so unbelievably wrong, that it is almost irrelevant whether he has anything right. He is 0.001% right and 99.999% wrong. Moishe’s words are so disgusting and so misguided (does anyone here think that Noah anymore has the slightest chance of ever becoming a loyal Jew, after what Moishe has said in Judaism’s name?), that I believe it is pernicious and dangerous to do anything but emphasize the error in his words.
• 
  By mikewinddale 5/30/09 at 6:24 p.m. UTC

  According to Rabbi Yehiel Weinberg, the gadol hador (preeminent rabbinic authority) of prewar Germany, the Torah is the "form" (in the Aristotelian sense) and mundane life and secular knowledge is the "matter".

  Haredism/Ultra-Orthodoxy has negated mundane life and secular knowledge, and thereby negated the "matter". As we know, according to Greek philosophy, form without matter and matter without form are both equal to zero, as far as practical reality goes.

  So assuming that "Orthodox" means following the Torah, the Haredim cannot claim to be Orthodox, because they have rejected the Torah perspective on the purpose of the Torah. As a friend of mine has quipped, the Haredim do the equivalent of reading the VCR manual and throwing the VCR itself in the garbage; such a person cannot be called an adherent of VCRism. Similarly, anyone who reads the Torah but fails to apply it to real life cannot be called a follower of the Torah.

Wanna post your own comments? Gotta log in first!