A letter appeared in the Tribune (6 June '13) entitled "Chief Rabbi's valediction", and it fell to Ben Yitzchok to offer a swift reply. The gist of it was that it is a duty on any Gd-fearing yid to "highlight the sinful lifestyle" of those who are, sadly, to be tolerated. This includes reform Jews, mechalelei Shabbos, homosexuals and possibly a few others. Whilst we must legally tolerate the actual people, we dare not tolerate the sins. Let me sharpen my sword and prepare to defend holiness to the hilt then:
If I must take chastisement from a fellow human being in matters of Jewish law, I expect my chastiser to be perfect. If my chastiser can her(or him)self be criticised, their criticism of me is of no consequence. This is in line with principles such as "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", or "he who comes to a Court of Equity shall come with clean hands". It is a kind of natural justice.
Now it is no secret that Charedim do not have such a wonderful reputation outside our own inward-looking communitiy. We cause heaps of trouble where-ever we touch down, and justify all of it using our own principles and values, regardless of the rights of others to their interpretations and values. A classic example is the farcical charedi reaction to the "Women of the Wall" prayer meetings. Instead of leading by example, thereby showing the beauty of traditional orthodox Jewish life, we demonstrate (for want of a better word!) how out-of-touch, intolerant, bigotted and arrogant we are. With our scorn we invite scorn. With our arrogance we invite contempt. With our intolerance we invite anti-Torah feeling (and by definition we cause the Name of Heaven to be brought into disrepute). "Gays Out of the Beis Medrash!" might tick all the right boxes for Ben Yitzchok and his ilk of zealots and fundamentalists, but if I was a gay yeshiva bochur this approach could be the death of me. (How self-righteous would my chastisers feel then?)
How do we think it looks (if we think about it at all) when we ask sha'alos about "how to change a nappy on shabbos", whilst at the same time looking down our noses at other yidden who might not be keeping shabbos halachically - (but who Hashem seems able to tolerate)?
Get off your high horse, Ben Yitzchok. You are what you are, like your gay chaver is what he is, and like your reform brothers are what they are. You don't have the monopoly on anything. Get your kop round that and you will be on the way to frum yiddishkeit.
I have written to the JT, as follows:
ReplyDeleteMr Issacson’s letter of 6 June, headed ‘Chief Rabbi’s valediction’, which Ben Yitzchok rightly saw fit to comment on, refers to tolerating non-conformers. Regretfully, I did not see the editorial of 30 May, which elicited his letter, but assume that “non-conformers” was the correspondent’s choice of term.
In my opinion there is a great chasm between nonconformists – i.e. a person coming to Shul clad in jeans and Tshirt; non-observant – i.e. someone who does not keep Toroh U’Mitzvois, usually out of ignorance or being unable to control his base desires; and, worst of all, reform - who deny that HaShem gave us the Toroh, written and oral, via Moshe Rabbeinu, but promote their concocted theories as to why they are allowed to disregard HaShem’s Mitzvois as they see fit and to suit their personal requirements.
In this case, I would agree with your correspondent, that nonconformists should be tolerated. I would promote that the non-observant be tolerated whilst being rebuked, however, those, such as reform - who twist the Toroh to enable themselves to practice their own comfortable but warped pseudo-theology under the banner of Judaism - cannot be tolerated at all, and as you so eloquently noted; we must highlight their sinful lifestyle: “Ohavey HaShem Sin’u Ra (etc.)”.
I note with great distress, that whilst we (myself included) are quick to lambaste the slightest infringement by the nonconformists – let alone mechalelei Shabbos & reform – we are not so keen to censure one of our own regardless of the severity of the infringement; this is inherently wrong! Even one of our own, who repeatedly transgresses serious commandments and brazenly refuses to repent, must be denounced.
I doubt they will publish it unedited, if at all.
Interesting that you have selected who to 'tolerate', who to 'tolerate but rebuke' and who to condemn outright.
ReplyDeleteHowever, just like you enjoy religious freedom and "being tolerated" by society, so too do these other sections of the community that you have identified. You don't have to subscribe to their views, but you cannot deny them the freedom to practice their Judaism. We believe what we believe and they believe what they believe; and we should be able to show enough maturity, and confidence in our own values, to "live and let live".
We need to be aware that even orthodoxy has its own ways of "twisting the Toroh" to enable us to practise our own "comfortable but warped pseudo-theology". We play with the halochoh left, right and centre for own convenience, only we do it under the umbrella of "orthodox" so it doesn't offend our conscience so badly. If its intellectual honesty you seek, as opposed to traditon, then you will need to accept at least some reform ideology. [If you are now crying "stone her!" then you have condemned yourself as being an intellectually dishonest bigot].
Can't see any reason for them not to publish your letter. Bet they won't publish my reply to it!!
Mrs. Blogs, can I see you for a minute.
DeleteGood morning - I hope things are ok at Blogs Hall despite possible recent cause for alarm.
ReplyDeleteI just want to add to this debate by asking how our hostess regards herself: non-conformist charedi, modern charedi or reform charedi? For my part I reckon loads of us are (hiding) behind her all the way.
Has this blog been banned by the rabbonim yet?
ReplyDeleteI can finally reply without any fear that it is likely to affect the likelihood of being seen by the ever vigilant editor of our esteemed organ.
ReplyDeleteMrs Blogs, I am completely disappointed and heartbroken. From your blog that I have episodically read, I had you down as an extremely witty person with an astute, razor sharp mind. I was sure that you at least would pick-up on the, retrospectively perhaps too subtle, sarcasm that permeates throughout my letter.
Should it have reached the printing presses, and be read by the myriads of international JT readers, I will forever remain ignorant as to whether anyone actually got my point.
If Mrs Blogs, second to none in my admiration, who has always been able to cut a path through the murky world of Blogging, hitting the target on the bullseye yet coming out smelling of roses, every single time, if she cannot understand me, then I really must reconsider with much earnest whether I should ever raise pen to paper (nowadays more like finger to keypad) again. Perhaps the time has come for me to hang up my hat, hit that send button for one final time, never to comment further.
It is with great regret and a heavy heart that I am to depart from the world of blog commentary on such a low key.
To Mrs Blog, keep up your good work, stand up for yourself; and to misquote dear Winston: You must fight them in the shtiblech, you must fight them on the beaches of Bournemouth, all I can promise you is blood, sweat and tears, but justice must prevail.
So long my sweet heroine, so long.
I hope that your confidence will be restored once you go back into full-time learning and look away from sinful sites (!)
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, since no-one understands me either perhaps I should retire from the fray and go back to my kitchen for the good of klall yisroel. Why do my interlocuters always wander off just when the debate is warming up? Do you know, I asked a rov the other day if my blog could be regarded in any sense as anti-Torah, and she said it is anti-Torah not to speak up for the truth. "In a place when there is no man, strive to be a man" quoth she. I told my husband this - he is also a rov (ie not just my husband...) and he said I shouldn't have asked that other rov, because our rov has already paskened that the blog is forbidden. So I asked why it is forbidden if it speaks up for the truth, and he said "its a fair kasher. I have to go to work now so we'll talk later..." Do I sound like a frustrated housewife???
Yossi Heller's letter was published - does that mean he will continue writing?
ReplyDeleteMy rabbi asked her partner what she thought of your rabbi's psak - she replied that our sages have taught us bemokom shain ish, a herring is considered a fish. As to your blog, the Torah clearly states: "midvar sheker tirchok" for as long as you continue to highlight the unethical acts and behaviour of people who are economical with the truth, thereby assisting Joe public to distance themselves from such people, you are considered as doing a mitzvah. Tovoy olecho brocho.
I can't tell you how much I appreciate your show of support. As for your rabbi, her partner their poetic licentiousness, (did I spell that correctly?), I have always said that where there are no men, one woman will do.
DeleteWould you advise me to launch a scathing attack on our charedi war-lords through this blog, or do you think that would ruin my kids' shidduch chances?? There is a very thin line between speaking up for the truth and saying goodbye to the possibility of grandchildren one day. What should I do?
That is a tough one. On the one hand you must stand up for what is right and correct and decry the evil that continues unabated. On the other hand, you risk the shidduch prospects of your children. On the other hand, you blog under a nom de plume, so your true identity is not known. On the other hand it is not unheard of, for an individual to petition the courts to force the hosts to disclose the true identities. On the other hand that would make you into somewhat of a cause célèbre, enhancing the shidduch prospects for your children. On the other hand, that's too many hands. Tradition!
Delete