My Proposal for a Framework to Bridge the Chareidi/Non-Chareidi Gap in E"Y

 

I wrote an article which was recently posted on the Cross-Currents blog. Like many people, I'm frustrated with the vilification I'm hearing about points of view and decisions they disagree with. People talk past each other and impune the other's motives.

 

I had a 60 hour clinical training during law school with Professor Baruch Bush on how the theory and practice of transformative mediation (videos of Prof. Bush explaining transformative mediation above). It seems like it would be a very effective way to get the various sides to hear each other and, who knows, perhaps reach a long-term, consensual, and peaceful resolution and avoid further "culture war." The trick is getting the parties in the door.

 

I definitely recommend people read my article, the first few paragraphs of which I've copied below. Click here to read the full article.

Both sides on the chareidi draft issue in Eretz Yisroel see the other as an existential threat. The current coalition government apparently thought that they did not need to compromise on the imprisonment issue when they unilaterally negotiated and recently passed their draft bill. On the other hand, the various chareidi communities do not think they need to compromise in their total opposition to the law in any form and believe their show of solidarity on the issue at the Atzeres Tefillah gathering in Yerushalayim backs up that position. All they need to do it wait until the next election and give a majority to any coalition government which agrees to repeal the law.

When both sides look at the other, they feel simultaneously vulnerable and powerful. In reality, this is the perfect opening for leaders on both sides to participate in an open-ended dialogue that, based on past history, has a strong potential to not only enable them to reach a peaceable resolution to the conflict, but to bring them closer together. That framework for conversation is called “transformative mediation.”

The Transformative Model

The chareidi and non-chareidi communities in Eretz Yisroel need some framework within which to transform the downward spiral in their relationship. The current conflict is like a civil litigation. Both sides start with the intention of defeating the other, but in court, most cases are ultimately resolved consensually before trial. In this inter-communal Jewish dispute, however, it is not enough to settle individual issues with particular compromises while both sides continue to inwardly despise one another. We must transform the nature of the relationship between the two sides and reshape the form of the dialogue.

In the legal world, there are a variety of ways consensual resolutions are reached. Settlements arise from direct negotiation before or during litigation and sometimes through mediation. Most forms of mediation are mediator-driven. In other words, the mediator guides the parties through the issues to be resolved and sets the tone for what he believes a resolution should look like. In standard mediation, the mediator is an experienced professional with a good understanding of the strength of each side’s legal arguments and who is most likely to win on what issue in a full-blown litigation. He uses his knowledge and influence to guide the parties to what he believes is a workable solution. While this is often effective if the only goal is achieving a settlement, it often leaves parties with just as much animosity toward one another and feeling steamrolled into a settlement with the mediator taking the other party’s side on some issue.

But this method will not work here because the stakes are too critical. Neither side can risk participating in a process which could potentially force it to cede precious ground. This crisis demands a deeper response. The issues and values at stake are so personal and so nuanced for both sides that any outside intervention or coercion would not address the underlying issue; the relationship between the chareidi and non-chareidi communities in Eretz Yisroel.

More Than Compromise – Transforming the Dialogue

The good news is that transformative mediation is a participant-driven form of mediation which does not limit its goals to ironing out a compromise to a particular circumscribed conflict. Rather, it is structured to transform the form of the dialogue and the parties’ relationship... Click here to read more.

Click here to get Dixie Yid in your e-mail Inbox or here to "follow" me on Twitter.

Very Interesting Speech by Rabbi Dov Lipman Telling His Story From Aliya to MK

 

 

This is a very interesting commencement speech where Rabbi Dov Lipman tells his story from the time he made aliya, through his involvement as a community activist, his introduction to Yair Lapid, how he became an MK, and what he's been doing there since then. HT Life in Israel. As before, I don't personally endorse all aspects of the the current Israeli coalition government's agenda, but I very much appreciate people who are looking for a way beyond the extreme pirud and mutual-condemnation. Enjoy! And see below for a speech by Yair Lapid which R. Lipman refers to in this speech which, in part, caused him to realize that Yair Lapid does not hate Torah and Yiddishkeit.

 

 

 

Click here to get Dixie Yid in your e-mail Inbox or here to "follow" me on Twitter.

Novel Solution to Coalition's Legal Problems with Criminal Sanctions for Yeshiva "Draft Dodgers"

Here's a problem. One terrible provision of the current Israeli government's plan for drafting a portion of chareidim into the IDF or national service is the criminal sanctions for those who do to serve in order to stay in yeshiva. This provision is a train wreck waiting to happen and also prevents any potential consensual solution because no one our side could ever support a law which includes that provision.

 

I've heard Rabbi Lipman say that he also does not want this provision but that the government's legal advisers say they have no choice but to include it because it would be illegal to exclude just one group subject to the draft from criminal sanctions (the chareidim) while the other group (all non-chareidim) would remain subject to criminal penalties.

I have a possible solution. This idea, however, would only work as part of a comprehensive and consensual solution reached between the government and Torah leadership. I have another idea regarding a framework which would facilitate such a consensual resolution by both sides which is the subject of an article I wrote, which is currently in the submission process for publication.

This idea to address the criminal sanctions issue, which could avoid a scenario in which boys could be arrested for learning Torah, is the following: For those bochurim who are not completely exempt (part of the 1,800), who are not serving in a chareidi IDF unit, and who will not elect for a national service option outside of the beis medrash, change the national service rules such that religious studies will be eligible as a form of service in fulfillment of the national service option!

Indeed, under the current law as drafted, any bochur who is drafted already has the national service option if he does not want to join the IDF.

We know that Torah study confers infinite benefit not only on those who study it but on the whole Jewish people as well, so it fits. Certainly there are likely to be a number of initial objections from all sides, like:

(i) How is this different from the 1,800 exemptions which are also in recognition of the value of Torah study?; (ii) some purists/kano'im may still prefer criminal sanctions to Torah study "l'sheim sherut l'umi" rather than the same Torah study where the person did not write on a form that he was studying Torah to fulfill his sherut l'umi requirements; (iii) although they could be revised, the current national service rules are presumably currently drafted not to include Torah study as a service option; and (iv) what's to stop chilonim from trying to use this redefined form of national service to avoid IDF service as well?

Again, this idea is meant as part of an arsenal of ideas and proposals to give all parties the flexibility to come up with a plan that everyone can eventually agree to. And in that context, the parties can come up with ways to address/work-around potential objections to the idea, like the following:

(i) It is true that the sherut l'umi Torah study option would not really be so different in practice from the 1,800 exemptions. The difference would mostly exist on paper, but if it, in combination with a comprehensive resolution, would allow for a larger solution k'ein that which Rav Shteinman and others were working on 10 years ago, most can live with the very small difference between the full exemption and the Torah-study-as-national-service option.

(ii) Most people will agree to fill out paperwork to "get credit" for their Torah studies to fulfill their national service requirement. It's not so different from the hundreds of yeshivos which already give actual college credit for yeshiva study. And for those that won't, in the context of a consensual agreement with the support of the Torah leaders in Eretz Yisroel, there will be much less sympathy or hullabaloo from anyone if a small number of people cause themselves to get arrested for not studying Torah in the same yeshiva as before l'sheim sherut l'umi.

(iii) Just redraft the national service rules to permit people to fulfill the requirement through religious studies generally or Torah study specifically.

(iv) And what would be so bad if chilonim began signing up for yeshiva or seminary in order to avoid the IDF service? It would be a fantastic opportunity for the kiruv world! And to the extent anyone decides to do so at a non-orthodox seminary of some sort, it will (a) be their own choice so not a lifnei iver/mesayeya l'dvar aveira issue and (b) be an added incentive for catch-more-flies-with-honey-than-with-vinegar kiruv work.

Whether this specific idea is ultimately adopted as park of a wider framework of a consensual resolution to this multilateral and very painful conflict is not necessarily important. The main thing is that I think there are ways around even the most intractable aspects of the current conundrum (the constitutional objections to not having criminal sanctions) if and when the parties are ready to work out a long-term solution which addresses the biggest concerns on both sides.

I'd be curious if anyone out there knows of any reason why this idea wouldn't work as part of a larger toolbox such that there is no work-around to the problem. And again, I'm sure there are other objections a variety of parties may have but I'm specifically talking about ones without some sort of possible work-around as part of a comprehensive and consensual solution.

Follow-up Thoughts on the Rabbi Dov Lipman Interviews

In response to a few commenters and some who have corresponded with me offline regarding this post and this post, which shared interviews with Rabbi Dov Lipman, I want to share a couple of thoughts.

 

[Update 8/1/13 @ 10:59 a.m.] [As a side point, although I believe it is clear from the context, I want to clarify for the record that in this blog I speak only for myself. Do not assume that something I say in my own name either is or is not a representation of Rav Moshe Weinberger's views. The only thing which definitively represents Rav Weinberger's views are the drashos where I write that he has reviewed their content. That being said, my own personal belief is that Rav Weinberger has no aversion to studying the positions of those with whom he disagrees and I do not believe he generally condones misrepresentations of those with whom one disagrees and would agree that one should oppose people for what they actually stand for rather than what people misrepresent them as standing for.]

 

First, it has been fascinating to hear how strongly people react to (i) the very idea of hearing or facilitating others' ability to hear a viewpoint which differs from the majority of gedolim and roshei yeshiva in E"Y and (ii) the content of Rabbi Lipman's interviews.

 

With regard to the first point, the Shulchan Aruch (Rema YD 246:4) forbids studying sifrei minim (books of heresy). While Rabbi Lipman may be pursuing a solution different from the majority of gedolim, barring some stretched explanation of the definition of sifrei minim, it is permitted to hear what he has to say. Therefore the question "How could you give such a person a platform?" is spurious. Are we so insecure in our convictions that we cannot hear out a dissenting viewpoint?

 

The second point regarding the content of the interviews is also interesting. Several people who do not agree with Rabbi Lipman at all have commented to me that they are grateful that I shared these interviews because (1) they were misinformed by speakers and frum media outlets regarding what the current coalition is actually proposing and appreciated the fact that the actual plan is more moderate and considerate than there were heretofore told and (2) they were under the impression that nothing but publicity-seeking, pandering, and hatred of the Torah and those who study it could possibly be motivating Rabbi Lipman and those in his party's coalition. Watching the interviews caused them to realize that while they may strongly disagree with his policies, they saw where he was coming from and why he sincerely believes that his plan is the best one to strengthen the Torah and the Jewish people.

 

The first reason why I believe it was important to share these interviews is that it is unjustifiable to suggest that it is better to believe in a false, demonized caricature of a fellow Jew simply in order to avoid shaking our faith in our position, even if that position is similar to that of the gedolim we follow. As I have repeatedly written in the comments to the above-linked posts, it is better to disagree with people on the merits than to condemn them personally, especially here where it's a frum person, a rabbi, there are other rabbeim who support his general proposals (though he says he cannot name them lest they be threatened as he has), and when their intentions are for the benefit of klal Yisroel.

 

But there are a lot of people out there with whom I disagree and I do not go out of my way to understand what makes them tick.

 

The thing that fascinates me about this person is that he is addressing a problem which has broken my heart for a long time and which has been going almost unaddressed until now. And that has nothing to do with secular attitudes toward chareidim or their lack of service in the army. The fact is that whether we understand why He did so or not, given the infinite value of learning Torah, Hashem designed us such that the tafkid for the majority of Jews is to work for a livelihood in one form or another while learning Torah and living ehrlich lives. We have ignored the following teachings of chazal at our great peril:

 

• "Harbei asu k'Rabbi Yishmael v'alsa b'yadan; k'Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai v'lo alsa b'yadan – many followed the path of Rabbi Yishmael and were successful; many tried the path of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and were not successful" (Berachos 35b) [Obviously doesn't mean there aren't exceptions but this is the general outcome.]

• "Yafa talmud Torah im derech eretz she'yegias shnei'hem mashkachas avon," "Learning Torah along with making a living is beautiful because toiling in both makes one forget sin." (Avos 2:2)

• "Kol she'eino melamed es b'no umnus k'ilu melamdo listus," "If anyone does not teach his son a trade, it is as if he taught him to be a robber." (Kiddushin 29a)

There are others along these lines, but we went down a path of pretending that we could ignore these ma'amarei chazal without consequences and have experienced how wrong we were, with our children and our own ruchnius as the korbanos. I hope I do not have to recount how each of the consequences spoken about by all of these ma'amarei chazal have come to pass, and then some, l'da'avoneinu.

Anyone who has read about the recent events in Bnei Brak or has come into contact with the "shababnikim" produced by the one-size-fits-all shita cannot help but shed a tear. And that is just the most extreme example. I mourn when I contemplate the diminishment of the tzura of klal Yisroel that results from the fact that such a large number of yungerleit, who are living an ostensibly Toraso Umanaso life, are not living in accordance with their personal tafkid. This has a wide variety of somethwat more subtle, but devastating and widespread effects. We cannot deviate from Hashem's plan for us without consequences.

I do not personally endorse the government's plan or everything Rabbi Lipman says. But I want to hear those who speak about the issue and at least hear and understand what they have to say. That is why I love reading Jonathan Rosenblum (though he certainly disagrees with Rabbi Lipman!), Rabbi Adlerstein, and Rabbi Yakov Horowitz. I cannot understand how anyone can tolerate the continuation of the status quo which is destroying our children.

We need a new plan to solve the issue perhaps. Do you know what I would love to see? I would love for the Gedolim to bypass any askanim and say "The current coalition's plan is a no-go. But we understand the deleterious effects of teaching a one-size-fits-all life path. We also understand those legitimate concerns of the non-chareidi communities. We therefore institute X Y and Z policies for our communities and will enter into direct negotiations with the current coalition to arrive at a solution we can agree to." Halevai!!!

 

Click here to get Dixie Yid in your e-mail Inbox or here to "follow" me on Twitter.

Rabbi Dov Lipman Interview Asks Almost Every Tough Question People Discuss Re Chareidi Draft

It would be very worthwhile to see this 43 minute interview between Rabbi Daniel Korobkin (Ner Yisroel musmach and Rav in Toronto) and Rabbi Dov Lipman (also Ner Yisroel musmach and MK in the Yesh Atid party). Rabbi Korobkin gives Rabbi Lipman a platform to address his very strident critics by bringing up almost every serious cricicism/question people generally direct at him. Very enlightening. With regarding to the last question in the interview (how he understands what the current coalition is doing with regard to drafting chareidim to the IDF/sherut ulami and secular studies in yeshiva ketana) notwithstanding the opposition to such policies by almost all of the gedoleim in E"Y, he quasi-sidesteps the question. Nevertheless, the interview is extremely enlightening in getting to know the must-talked-about Rabbi Lipman much better. HT Rabbi Yakov Horowitz.

 

 

[Update 8/1/13]: You can click here to see my follow up comments on this interview and the comments on this post.

Click here to get Dixie Yid in your e-mail Inbox or here to "follow" me on Twitter.

Mashiach Did Not Arrive -- Again - Must Read Article by Jonathan Rosenblum

Jonathan Rosenblum wrote a fantastic column which appears in this week's issue of Mishpacha Magazine. A must read. See below for the beginning and please click here to read the full article, which I recommend. HT Rabbi Yakov Horowitz.

The phenomenon of chareidi soldiers in uniform, or even out of uniform, being verbally accosted and made to feel otherwise unwanted has spread far beyond Meah Shearim. Wallposters against "chardakim" (chareidim da'at kal) can be seen in chareidi neighborhoods around the country, with religious soldiers in uniform portrayed as missionaries. These attacks by chareidim on one another recall nothing so much as the bitter internecine fighting in Jerusalem that preceded the destruction of the Second Temple. 

Rabbi Ben Tzion Kokis once pointed out at a convention of Agudath Israel of America, that then too those attacking their fellow Jews did so in the name of their greater faith. The zealots destroyed the firewood and water that would have permitted Jerusalem to withstand siege for years, in order to force a direct confrontation with the vastly superior Roman forces, and they accused Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai and the chachamim of lacking faith in Hashem's power. 

As the Netziv (Devarim 32:5) writes of that period, "Most of the killing was done for the sake of G-d. . . . It was difficult to separate the good from the bad since the bad was done for the sake of Heaven." 

If today we again find such bitter divisions within the chareidi community itself, can we really hope that the sinas chinam for which we entered this long galus will soon end.

Click here to continue reading...

 

Click here to get Dixie Yid in your e-mail Inbox or here to "follow" me on Twitter. Picture courtesy of BBC.

My Hamodia Piece in Tomorrow's Paper: Inter-Communal Animosity, the Chareidi Draft, and the Bread of Humiliation

Baruch Hashem, Hamodia's Friday Daily edition includes a piece I wrote looking at a deeper aspect of the conflict relating to the Chareidi draft. That comes out tomorrow morning but their online edition has it tonight.

The title of the piece is Inter-Communal Animosity, the Chareidi Draft, and the Bread of Humiliation

Here's the beginning:

The anger on both sides of the chareidi draft issue is palpable. The following observation risks sounding naïve by making a fundamental observation regarding a complicated issue: the chareidi and secular camps should theoretically get along splendidly. We have the perfect Yissachar-Zevulun relationship. The chareidi community in Eretz Yisrael provides the infinite merit of Torah learning to the entire Jewish people and provides the State with physical protection and security (Bava Basra 7b). On the other hand, the Israeli government grants exemptions from IDF service for yeshivah students, funds yeshivos and Bais Yaakov schools, and provides the chareidi community with a variety of other health and welfare benefits.

The easy answer is that secular people do not have any appreciation for the value of Torah and therefore view chareidim as “moochers” or “parasites” who should “share the burden.” The problem is that this explanation of secular Jews’ motivations oversimplifies the issue and conveniently places the blame and the burden of finding a solution squarely on the “other guy,” our more secular brethren. It absolves us of the need for self-reflection as a community.

Click here to continue reading.

Click here to get Dixie Yid in your e-mail Inbox.

Chometz, Matza, and the Chareidi Draft

Although the notion that 100% of our children should learn only Torah full-time, indefinitely, into adulthood is outside of our mesorah, the current compromise in E"Y regarding the Chareidi Draft has been called a decree of "shmad," forced conversions. In such a situation, even actions which would be permitted according to halacha become forbidden if those requiring it are attempting to take us away from the Torah. Generally speaking, this compromise provides that approximately 75% of our sons should go on to army service/national service (which will enable them to work legally) after age 21.
 

Because this agreement comes shortly before Pesach, some have hyperbolically applied the line from the Hagada, "ולבן ביקש לעקור את הכל," "And Lavan tried to uproot everything" to the actions of Livni, Bennet, and Netanyahu. Indeed, the initial letters of the last names of these three individuals spell "Lavan." But is it true that our children will leave the path of Torah and yiras Shamayim if they do not stay forever in the four walls of the Beis Medrash? Is it the ratzon Hashem, the will of Hashem, that 100% of our children remain forever in yeshiva and never bring their Torah into the world?
 

I would like to quote a section from the Zohar (183b - Don't worry, it's not too kabbalistic) which also relates to Pesach and is very enlightening with regard to the current situation.

The Zohar asks a question. Chometz is so horrible that one must seek it out and destroy it, one may not own even a single crumb of chometz, and if chometz gets into a pot on Pesach, it is not nullified no matter how great the proportion of non-chomitzdik food is to the chometz. Why are we so strict? We know the seforim teach that chometz is a literal manifestation of the yetzer hara, the "other side," i.e., everything that we hold abhorrent and all aspects of this physical world which bring us away from Torah, emunah, and yiras Shamayim. So if chometz is so horrible, why is permitted the rest of the year?! The Zohar answers with an parable and then it spells out the lesson as follows: 

למלכא דהוה ליה בר יחידאי וחלש, יומא חד הוה תאיב למיכל, אמרו ייכול בריה דמלכא (ס"א מיכלא דאסוותא) אסוותא דא ועד דייכול ליה לא ישתכח מיכלא ומזונא אחרא בביתא, עבדו הכי, כיון דאכל ההוא אסוותא אמר מכאן ולהלאה ייכול כל מה דאיהו תאיב ולא יכיל לנזקא ליה, כך כד נפקו ישראל ממצרים לא הוי ידעי עקרא ורזא דמהימנותא אמר קודשא בריך הוא יטעמון ישראל אסוותא ועד דייכלון אסוותא דא לא אתחזי להון מיכלא אחרא, כיון דאכלו מצה דאיהי אסוותא למיעל ולמנדע ברזא דמהימנותא, אמר קודשא בריך הוא מכאן ולהלאה אתחזי לון חמץ וייכלון ליה דהא לא יכיל לנזקא לון

[There is a parable of] a king who had an only son who became sick. One day, the son wanted to eat. [The doctors] said, let the king's son eat [a certain] healing food. Until he completes his regimen of eating this food, do not let any other kind of food even remain in the house. They did this. Once the son had eaten this healing food, [the doctor] said, "From now on, let him eat whatever he desires. Now, it cannot harm him." Similarly, when the Jewish people left Egypt, they did not yet know the foundation and the secret of emunah. The Holy One, Blessed be He, therefore said, "Let the Jewish people taste of [the bread of] healing, [Matza,] and while they are eating this medicine, let them not even see any other kind of food. But once they have eaten the Matza, which is the medicine which causes a person to ascend and to know the secret of emunah," Hashem says, "From now on, they may see chometz and eat it because it can no longer harm them."

Based on the Zohar, we are not forbidden to have anything to do with the physical world of eating, drinking, and working, just like we are not forbidden from eating kosher chometz during the year. When the Jewish people were young, their faith was weak so they would not have been able to maintain a connection with Hashem if they had contact with the physical world. That, however, was a state of sickness, when we had weak faith. Once we strengthened our emunah by eating Matza, the "bread of emunah" in the right way,  we could begin relating to the physical world and elevate it, rather than have it bring us down.

On an individual level, when our children are young, we have to have pure Torah with a clean environment with no contact with outside, worldly influences wherever possible. However, for reasons only He truly understands, Hashem's ratzon is not that we remain that way forever. For the majority of people, their tafkid is to eventually go out into the world and attempt to elevate the world (and not the other way around). We have to consume only the bread of faith for a while when we are young to build up our emunah. That is while we are weak and vulnerable. But once we have emunah, the outside world should not frighten us. It should be "frightened" of us because we will elevate it and we will not be brought down by it. In the words of the Zohar, when Jews have emunah, the chometz of the world "can no longer harm them." Hashem's plan is that the time of non-exposure to this world is temporary, while we are young and weak. But that non-exposure should not exist indefinitely.

May we be zoche to raise our children right for the first 21 years of their lives so that  when they go out into the world, as indeed it is the will of Hashem that the majority of them do at some point, we do not need to be afraid that they will all leave the path of Torah. We have surely failed in our role as parents and rebbeim if that is a realistic fear. Rather, they will go out filled with emunah so that they can fulfill Hashem's desire "להיות לו דירה בתחתונים," "to have a dwelling place in the lower world."

-Dixie Yid

Click here to get Dixie Yid in your e-mail Inbox.