Feathers in the wind

I do not apologize for failing to accord titles to some of the people mentioned below. They simply are, IMO, undeserving of their titles.

On מוצי שבת Dvarim/Hazon, Shalom Cohen of Shas’ Council of Sages, called all who wear a knitted kippa (כפה סגורה) “Amalek.” while his Iraqi controller sat – or perhaps slept – in a chair next to Cohen. (To be fair, Yosef is old and he has been, perhaps still is, ill.)

Photo courtesy of Kikar HaShabat

The silence of the rabbis was deafening.

I have yet to see any so-called “orthodox” rabbi chastise Cohen publically.

There have been a few objections to the way haredi soldiers are treated in haredi neighborhoods, but NOTHING from any well respected rabbis in Israel or elsewhere – read the U.S. ABOUT Cohen’s remarks. Nothing.

R. Marc Angel, in a personal note, wrote “The words of Rabbi Cohen are despicable.” He also said that Rabbi Daniel Bouskila wrote a sharp critique on behalf of the Sephardic Educational Center (SEC) but where is the critique? The SEC Web site ( http://www.secjerusalem.org/ ) is “coming soon.” Perhaps the “sharp critique” is on Facebook. I don’t “do” Facebook or Twitter.

Both Cohen and Yosef have tried to back-peddle, claiming that what Cohen meant to say was that only the leaders of the political parties that refuse to cave to Shas are “Amalekim.”

I’m put in mind of the gossiper who finally realized the harm he caused.

He went to his rabbi and asked how he could make amends.

The rabbi told him to go home, take a feather pillow, cut it open, and scatter the feathers to the four winds.

The gossiper did as he was told.

Feeling no better, he returned to the rabbi and reported that he still felt bad. Was there more to the punishment?

Yes, said the rabbi, now go out and gather up all the feathers and make a pillow.

But, the gossiper replied, that’s impossible; the winds scattered them too far.

THAT, said the rabbi, is what happens when you utter untruths. Like the feathers, they cannot be retrieved, cancelled.

Cohen, in his self-centeredness – "If you are not like me, you’re not Jewish" – didn’t gossip but he most certainly caused a חלול השם. He disgraced himself. He disgraced his master. He disgraced Shas. He proved that the Council of Sages is misnamed, for a true “sage” never would utter the words he uttered.

We are told that the Temple was destroyed and most of us exiled because of baseless hatred – political and physical internecine warfare; Jews against Jews.

There is an abomination sitting where the Temple stood. I can write without concern of contradiction that the third Temple will not rise in my lifetime; if it did, it would be doomed as were the first two and we – Israelis – will be banished from the land (if not slaughtered by our enemies).

Why?

BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT LEARNED FROM THE PAST.

Simple.

We are proving we are not one people concerned for one another. We are opposing groups of people who refuse to compromise, to coexist with people of differing outlooks.

Cohen’s words have been scattered to the four winds, carried on the silence of the “gadolim” – the “name” rabbis.

Perhaps some rabbis have spoken out in the confines of their own synagogues – mine have not – but whispering that Cohen’s words are “despicable” isn’t enough; the rabbis have to cast off their fear of the rabbinical mafia in Israel; American rabbis have allowed themselves to be cowed too long by the Israeli rabbinute, an organization more political and profit-focused than concerned with the religious welfare of the average Jew.

Cohen & Company – Mizrahi and Ashkenazi haredim – are far out of line calling other Jews “Amalekim” simply because these Jews disagree with them. Whether they are referring only to the likes of Bennet and Lapid or to everyone who owns neither a black hat or black suit, the stupidity of Cohen’s remark is inexcusable. Yosef’s remarks are too little, too late (by a week).

As for the gadolim – they may remain “gadol” in their own eyes and the eyes of their followers, but from my perspective, their silence reduces them to “katanim.”

If my knit kippot make me less a Jew than Yosef, Cohen, and the misnamed Council of "Sages," that's fine with me. I don't WANT to be associated with such people.

On the other hand, I never will tell ANY Jew he, or she, is not a Jew because we have different perspectives.

I accept the North African (Sefardi) approach: I'm a Jew. You are (1) observant like me, (2) less observant than me, or (3) more observant than me.

But we're all Jews.

Even Yosef, Cohen, and the Council of Sages (from Chelm).

Dare to be different

 

By Rabbi Marc D. Angel
Used with permission

Religious Authenticity and our "Tribes": Thoughts for Parashat Devarim

A while ago, a member of our Institute sent me an email. Here are his comments, although I've deleted the name of the rabbi to whom he referred.

"Does it bother anyone else that Sephardim have begun wearing the funeral dress of Ashkenazim- the black hats, suits, and other "garb" of Eastern European Jews ? Even Rabbi X, a well-respected Sephardi Hakham, has succumbed to this. I fear for the future of Sephardi customs and traditions !!"

This phenomenon has been bothering me for quite a few years. It isn't a new reality, but has been going on for a long time. When I was President of the Rabbinical Council of America (1990-1992), I met with the then Rishon leZion, Rabbi Mordecai Eliyahu, and asked that he encourage Sephardic rabbis not to dress like counterfeit Ashkenazim.

The Jewish people need various models of proper rabbis, and the rabbinate should not be squeezed into one particular mold. While Sephardic rabbis don't need to don turbans and kaftans, they could dress as good "Modern Orthodox" and "Religious Zionist" rabbis--in a variety of garbs. The more diversity, the better our ability to attract a wider segment of the population to religious life.

Rabbi Eliyahu responded: the Ashkenazic garb has become the "standard" garb for Talmidei Hakhamim. Sephardic rabbis won't be taken seriously enough if they don't dress according to this fashion. When I said that the situation might be turned around if he and other Sephardic leaders made an issue of it, he said it wasn't worth it and it wouldn't succeed.

I've spoken to many Sephardic rabbis who come to New York to raise funds for their institutions. I've asked them why they dress like Hareidi/Lithuanian rabbis? Invariably, they answer: this is how rabbis are expected to dress.

In the United States, it has become fashionable--even in so-called Modern Orthodox circles--to show one's piety by donning a black hat, black suit, white shirt--and wearing tsitsith hanging outside. This has crept into the Sephardic community, especially when students have studied in Ashkenazic yeshivot. Even Sephardic rabbis have adopted the "black hat" look, as a way of conforming to and identifying with a more extreme version of Orthodoxy.

This is a distressing tendency, because ultimately it fosters unhealthy values: a) it promotes conformity to external standards; b) it undermines Sephardic, Yemenite and other cultural/religious identity and tradition; c) it negates the rich diversity which is a vital source of strength to Judaism and the Jewish people; d) it sends the message that to be a good religious man, you must dress in a particular fashion, otherwise your religiosity is suspect.

It would be a very positive development if Sephardic rabbis did not take on the look of Ashkenazic/hareidi rabbis. It would be a positive development if Sephardic congregations asked their rabbis not to put themselves into the "black hat" mold. It would be excellent if Sephardim who send their children to study in Ashkenazic yeshivot and seminaries would give their children the confidence to avoid the pitfalls of conformity.

Is it realistic to expect these things to happen? Rabbi Mordecai Eliyahu thought the battle wasn't worth fighting--or that it was already lost. I have respectfully disagreed with his analysis. The only problem is that reality seems to bear out the truth of Rabbi Eliyahu's position, and the futility of mine!

In this week’s Torah portion, we read the admonitions that Moses gave to the Israelites, in anticipation of his nearing death. As in other parashiyot, the people of Israel are referred to as “shevatim,” tribes. The twelve tribes of Israel represented the foundational structure of Israelite society, with each tribe having its own land and its own leaders.

A Kabbalistic teaching informs us that each of the tribes had its own distinctive character, its own unique pathway to God. Although all the Israelites formed one people, yet each tribe maintained its own special insights and traditions. The glory of Israel was that each tribe had its own distinctive contribution to make to the spiritual life of Israel. Instead of a homogenized religious life, the ancient Israelites fostered diversity and individuality.

Each “tribe” of the Jewish people today also has its own distinctive features, its own particular way of relating to God and fellow human beings. We not only have Sephardim and Ashkenazim, but so many subdivisions within these groupings, and so many other Jewish civilizations that constitute the glory of Israel e.g. Babylonian,Yemenite, Persian, Italian, Romaniot etc. Each of these groups has its distinctive traditions and insights, and each plays a role in the overall vitality of Jewish life. However, when there are pressures to homogenize the groups into one conforming pattern, then the entire Jewish people lose out. Paths to the Almighty are forced shut, and we are constricted to narrower and narrower confines.

Each “tribe” of the Jewish people has a sacred task of maintaining and vitalizing its unique pathway to the Almighty. This is important not from a feeling of “ethnic pride,” so much as from a feeling of responsibility for the overall vitality and spiritual dynamism of the Jewish people as a whole. Religiosity shows itself in many valid and beautiful ways; we need not abandon our distinctive traditions in order to conform to this group or that group.

To abandon one’s distinctive traditions is to become inauthentic. It doesn’t bring us closer to God. To allow valid religious pathways to fade away is to betray the history and traditions of our “tribe” and the history and traditions of all Israel.
It is to betray one’s own authenticity.

And that is a terrible thing.

 

It’s nice to know I am not alone in encouraging Sefardim and Mizrahim to forego the Ashkenazi black hat fashion. Hakham Mordecai Eliyahu probably was right, but it need not always be that way. All the tribes had their own traditions and all the tribes had their own gate into Jerusalem. If we can put on tefillin according to our traditions, why can’t the leadership follow its traditions of dressing like our neighbors. In Morocco, that might mean a galabia; in the U.S. a suit-of-(almost)-any-color (in most places). My Shabat hat is white and straw to protect my cancer-prone skin from Florida’s sun. (Other days it’s a red, white, OR blue baseball cap.)

Spirituality and Reality

 

By Rabbi Marc D. Angel
Used with permission

In last week’s Parasha, Yitro, we read the magnificent description of the Revelation of God at Mount Sinai. This was the loftiest moment in the history of the people of Israel—and in the history of humanity as a whole—when God directly conveyed the “Ten Commandments” as the foundation of religious and ethical life.

This week we read Mishpatim, which seems so mundane by contrast with Yitro. Mishpatim focuses on property rights, issues in business law, damages and restitution. These practical laws are interspersed with verses instructing us to be concerned for the welfare of the poor, widow and orphan; to be compassionate, since we ourselves were slaves in Egypt and should have learned from that experience to be sympathetic to those who suffer.

The Torah juxtaposes the lofty spiritual experience of Revelation with the practical concerns of daily life. It connects grand religious insights with laws governing everyday business life. The lesson: life as a whole is to be imbued with spirituality. Interpersonal relationships are significant aspects of a spiritual worldview and way of life.

These essential lessons were central to the teachings of one of the great rabbinic figures of American Jewry during the latter nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: Dr. Henry Pereira Mendes. Dr. Mendes, who served Congregation Shearith Israel in New York from 1877-1937, was a dynamic communal leader, teacher, and author. He was founder and first president of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America. He was among the founders of various institutions including the New York Board of Jewish Ministers (now known as New York Board of Rabbis), the Jewish Theological Seminary (originally an Orthodox institution), Lexington School for the Deaf, and Montefiore Hospital.

Dr. Mendes emphasized the need for religion to be a steady and constant force in one’s life. True religion is expressed not merely in ceremonials, but in our conduct in all aspects of our daily lives. In his book, “Jewish Daily Life Ethically Presented,” (published in 1917), Dr. Mendes wrote that “our religion requires threefold work from us: we must work for our own happiness, we must work for the happiness of the world we live in, and we must work for the glory of God” (p. 57). He continued: “Our daily work, no matter how important or menial, if we perform it conscientiously, becomes equivalent to an act of worship. It therefore means setting God before us as the One we desire to please by the faithful discharge of our daily duties. This kind of recognition of good faith, honesty and honor means religion. Conscientiousness is religion. We must therefore do our work conscientiously. We should derive spiritual happiness out of labor by recognizing that God consecrates labor” (p. 59).

In his interpretations of the Ten Commandments (in his book
“The Jewish Religion Ethically Presented” published originally in 1895, and in a revised edition in 1912), Dr. Mendes elaborated on the biblical text, offering moral lessons by which to govern one’s life. For example, in commenting on the commandment not to take God’s name in vain, he remarks: “We take His name in vain, or to no purpose, if we speak of God being good, just, merciful etc., without trying ourselves to be good, just, merciful, etc….We take or assume His name in vain when we call ourselves by His name and say we are His children or His people, while for our convenience or ease we neglect religious duties which He has commanded us” (1912 edition, pp. 59-60).

In discussing the commandment forbidding murder, Dr. Mendes noted that “we may not kill a man’s good name or reputation, nor attack his honor….We may not kill a man’s business….Respect for human life carries with it respect for anyone’s livelihood. We may not make it hard for others to live by reason of our own greed” (pp. 65-66).

Dr. Mendes often expressed his philosophy in short sentences and epigrams. A number of these were collected by Rabbi Dr. David de Sola Pool in his short biography of Dr. Mendes. The following are a few examples of Dr. Mendes’ wit and wisdom.

In too many homes, religion is a farce not a force.

The three greatest R’s: Reverence, Righteousness and
Responsibility.

Democracy is the ideal form of government, but it needs ideal citizens.

Let us have less fault-finding and more fault-mending.

Speak to the young: but first to the old.

Peace for the world at last; and the realization of reverence for God by all men. These are the essentials for human happiness. Zionism stands for them.

In 1911, Dr. Mendes had suffered a very serious illness. Upon
his recovery, he delivered a moving sermon in which he called on himself and his congregation to strive more mightily to serve God with righteousness. He concluded the sermon with words of thoughtfulness and profound inspiration: “Let us all try to prove our gratitude to God by doing His will. Then, come sorrow, come trial, come defeat, come death itself, the God who alone knows the human heart, who alone can read the inmost soul, shall judge whether you and I have labored in vain, whether you and I have spent our strength for naught, and in vain,--for surely our judgment shall be with the Lord and our work shall be before our God.”

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The Angel for Shabbat column is presented as a service of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals. Please visit our website jewishideas.org for a wide array of articles of special interest to those who wish to foster an intellectually vibrant, compassionate and inclusive Orthodox Judaism.

The Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals
8 West 70th Street
New York, NY 10023

We don't need

צה''ל  or Yeshiva students

when we have

MILLIONAIRE RABBIS

Rabbi Marc Angel, in his
Thoughts About Thinking: Thoughts on Parashat Nitzavim for September 15, 2012, writes that

"Some months ago, Forbes Magazine published a list of the 10 richest rabbis in Israel (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQM0zpTOP7Y&feature=player_detailpage). The rabbis’ net worths ranged from 9 million dollars to 335 million dollars! It appears that all (or nearly all) of these rabbis have reputations as wonder workers, Sephardic kabbalists, Hassidic Rebbes of huge dynasties. These rabbis have amassed huge fortunes because the public is willing to pay them for their blessings, amulets, holy water etc. It seems that a considerable segment of the public does not believe in its own ability to pray to God, but wants the intercession of holy men who supposedly have an inside track with God. Many people aren’t interested in a “spirit of inquiry”—they want “truth” as promised to them by wonder working rabbis.

"If these wonder working rabbis indeed have such magical powers and can control God, then why don’t they use these powers to disarm Israel’s enemies; to uproot anti-Semitism; to punish the wicked; to provide for all the sick, poor and hungry of the world?"

The rabbi's point is not to disband צה''ל, the Israeli armed forces, and not to close the yeshivot.

His point is that we - Jews - seem to increasingly depend on "wonderworking rabbis" and other holy men and women to intercede with HaShem for us. This, R. Angel contends, is not the Torah way.

The American rabbi is, in my opinion, correct in that Jews have, and should use, our "direct line" to HaShem, I have to wonder:

What if all the millionaire rabbis were to get together (that in itself might be a miracle) and together appeal to HaShem to convince our enemies - the Iranians, our Moslem neighbors near and far, the anti-Semite and anti-Israel people among the non-Jews and, perhaps more importantly, among ourselves, the anti-everything Jewish Jew.

Now is perhaps the most propitious time: יומי נוראים, the so called "High Holy Days," are nearly upon us. Days when, we are told, HaShem is particularly open to our prayers.

I don't think I'd depend solely (no pun intended) on the millionaire rabbis to seek HaShem's protection, but it would be interesting to see what influence these gadolim would have if they, together - putting aside their differences in approach to Judaism - appealed to HaShem to erase hatred from the world.

TO BE FAIR the rabbis' millions are not necessarily personal wealth; the millions include their charities and institutions.

Meanwhile, as it is written in my וזרח נשמש sedur for the daily amedah(עמידה):

" ומלכות הרשעה מהרה תעקר יתשבר יתכלם ותכניעם ותשמידם"