Notwithstanding Chief Rabbi Sacks's anti-charedi remarks at last week's dinner - (in our house we eat once a week) - the fact is that my revered hubby and I were shocked when we visited the so-called frum neighbourhood of Golders Green over shabbos pinchos. It might gladden Lord Sacks's heart to see so many women in sheitles and stilettoes, but it broke ours. "High class Mayfair Ladies of the Night they look like" said the Visionary (as if he knows). "Do they even know how to remove tissues from the box ke'halochoh on shabbos?? Do they go to any serious shiurim??? - (HOW DARE THEY?!!)"
We were walking down the main autobahn leading from one eidah charedissssss to the next, when we heard a woman talking (on shabbos!!) to the effect that she "doesn't think her daughter has ever spoken to a non-Jew". I should hope not! What is the chiddush in that? Why should her daughter have to speak to a non-Jew? Why should she have to speak at all? Isn't it enough that she is able to daven mincha and talk to Him? Just because there are goyim in the town doesn't mean we have to sell our holy neshomos. Only ask the Visionary about women talking - to yidden, goyim or even to themselves. Where is it written that this is permitted?
Anyway, we finally reached where we were going when suddenly the Visionary has a sha'aloh. Who is he going to ask in a place like GG in 5773 (may we live to see it), a place where there are no real rabbonim to talk of? But first you need to know the sha'aloh. It is this: if the Chief Rabbi of a Commonwealth of Nations calls a section of yidden "a danger to the future of the Jewish people", and there could chas ve'sholom be some truth to these words, is it permitted to mingle with such people, (especially on shabbos)? What could we do! Here we were right in the middle of Golders Green, on shabbos, and no-one to ask. So I said I would put out an appeal for guidance in this matter, which is why I am now blogging.
Not long ago a learned judge described a section of the mainstream community as having "religious schizophrenia", but my revered husband and I are of the opinion (and ours is the opinion that has stood the test of time remember), that there is religious schizophrenia in ALL sections of the communtiy. So we are getting the next plane back to our own world, where we only have to mix with our own kind of schizophrenics and where we are not subject to the witterings of intellectual giants (like the Chief Rabbi).
Gut Voch from my very learned husband, and his household.
A curious piece of writing but I am not sure who you are getting at. The Chief Rabbi? Unlikely. Jewish Golders Green? Why dig at your own? The Chazon Ish and his family? Unthinkable. So I must be satisfied that for once you have failed to hit your target.
ReplyDeleteYeshayohu, stick to dreams. Mrs Blogs is, as usual, hitting 2 birds in the bush with one stone - or in this case, one blog.
DeleteHowever, I beg to differ with Mrs B's portrayal of the GG women and their mode of dress. It is less of the high class Mayfair variety and more of the Amhurst Park slapper variety; neither is it unique to GG but is very prevalent in Manchester, USA, Antwerp and all over israel.
Also, any woman whose daughter has never spoken to a non-Jew is either the mother of a very young toddler or is likely to have used the colloquial term 'goy', and as that might be misheard as being 'boy' (I've just gone to the mikveh to purify my thoughts again), she would have used the more complimentary term 'Shiygetz'. One wonders how the young lady in question moves about, my experience of living in the diaspora is that one cannot get a bus, train or cab, without talking to the uncircumcised population.
With regard to your quandary, I find it difficult to believe that a learned gentleman as Rb Joe surely is, is unable to make a kal vachomer, if it is permitted to walk down the street of Meah Shearim, it is certainly permitted to walk down Goldbergs Green Road.
Finally, I am unclear as to what the learned judge was doing other than filling the otherwise blank columns of the organ of male orthodoxy. The scientific researchers have yet to answer the question whether schizophrenia leads an individual to become more religious, or if intense religiosity leads to schizophrenia. Needless to say, either way, it is clear that there is an abundance of unmedicated nut-cases freely roaming the streets of TEMPLE of promiscuity and good FORTUNE!
Pi Heh'osson: your kal vachomer is perfect. Rabbi Sacks was referring to the extreme charedi sector when he made his comments, not to the reform charedim of GG and Antwerp etc. And obviously if Mea Shearim is still permitted, so is GG. The real question is how long will it be before moderate charedim, for example R.Pinter, distance themselves publically from the "nut-cases" roaming the streets of Mea Shearim and the like. I bet R. Pinter didn't think he had this problem in common with either yourself, Mrs./(Mr?)Blogs or Lord Sacks!
ReplyDeleteDear Slapper,
DeleteI can only theorise, for I have no proof other than anecdotal references, but I believe that "moderate" charedim, (quite an oxymoron), will never distance themselves from the nut-cases simply because they are too scared to burn their bridges.
Who can tell when next a bas-kol will eminate from the hallowed corridors of Batei Zupnik, demanding the pleasure of Reb XYZ, so that he may be numbered amongst the elders of the tribe of BADATZ EH? Any moderate who distances himself from them will have sinned against he who produces these voices, and will never receive his calling.
Dayan T Weiss, was a moderate, but he kept his moderate opines to himself and NEVER distanced himself from the hardliners. Came the day and the bas-kol was heeded. With a swift change out of his black bekisheh and spodik, into a "regular" shtreimel and the colourful bekisheh and he became a hardliner over night.