039) Tzedakah - Corner Stone or Stumbling Block

No one can debate the fact that giving charity or Tzedakah is a cornerstone of our religious system. Much has been written about the topic and it is not necessary to reproduce the copious wordage that has been expended in that regard.

Sadly, not everybody writing on the importance of giving is as concerned about the giving as they are about the receiving. I personally know of one particular author who wrote a book on Tzedakah, who told me that his organization desperately needed funds and he had to impress upon his readership the importance of giving. Sure, he was expounding Torah. But he lost my buy-in.

I also knew a famous Meshulach (fund raiser for Torah institutions) who because of his astute professionalism took 80% of the money he raised, for himself. Sure, he got people to fulfill the great mitzvah of Tzedakah, and in a perfectly legal manner also filled his own coffers. What a clever man. What a win-win situation.  But I could never give my money to such a person.

Rabbi Nachman of Breslov warns us not to just give money to anyone who requests it, no matter how many times they tell you it’s for Tzedakah. Money, he says should only be given to an Oni Hagun (someone whom you know for certain needs help). Indiscriminate giving is not an act of kindness, but an indication of how you have been duped into falling for the oldest trick in history. Don’t think you have always performed a great mitzvah every time you have been relieved of your money.

But never before have I ever come upon such (spiritual) trickery and (financial) thievery as when I read a pamphlet accompanying Jewish Life, a mainstream orthodox magazine in my community recently. This was an appeal by a well known international charity, known as Kupat HaIr which collects money for poor Torah scholars. This organization is endorsed by whom they call ‘Gedolei HaDor’ (Rabbinic Giants of our generation). By contributing money, these great rabbinic leaders will sincerely offer up heartfelt prayers on your behalf. And then:

 The poor will finally know what it’s like to be wealthy, and children will began (sic) applying themselves industriously to their learning to the point where mothers will rub their eyes in disbelief and excitement… 

Once-a-year…Maranan Hagaon Harav … shlit”a,  Maranan Hagaon Harav … shlit”a, and Hagaon Harav … shilt”a – each in his own shul- will recite the same tefillah [prayer]…on your behalf as a contributor to Kupat HaIr…you will merit to raise your children easily; you will merit having all your physical and spiritual ailments cured…less doctors…less worries…

During the holy moments when the aron [ark] is open…they will pray for you, contributor to Kupat HaIr….we want the best for our contributors…in recent times the number of children born…has grown so large that the burden of proof is no longer upon us. People counted out one hundred and four perutos [coins] – twice the numerical equivalent of the word ben [son] – gave them to poor and humble Torah scholars and merited…one child or more – the following year…the segulah has the power to change a persons mazel for the better… to merit parnassah [wealth], medical cures, and the like…

 After reading this arrogant deception and open manipulation, the frightening things for me are:

1. That such incredulous claims are made by so called leaders of our generation.
2. That the impossible is promised only to those who pay.
3. That this superstition is endorsed by a normative publication in a modern orthodox community in 2014.
4. That people actually fall for it and contribute with great expectations that a few dollars can create miracles. 

The Kotzker Rebbe says:

Ten Righteous men may have been able to save Sodom. But fools who follow even a great leader, can reduce that leader to a fool himself.

(Kochav HaShachar p 85, par 4)

If I had read that leaders of another religion had made such claims as those quoted above, I would have laughed. When I read that leaders of our religion make and endorse such ridiculous claims, I want to cry.

Are we following fools, or are we the fools the Kotzker refers to, who are reducing our leaders

to becoming fools themselves?

How did such a noble mitzvah as Tzedakah go from being a cornerstone of our faith, to become a stumbling block for the ignorant and gullible?

If I have to give money for someone to pray for me, I’m sorry but I don’t want their prayers.

They are not praying for me but preying upon me.

038) Rather Make The Wrong Decision And Be Right

One of humanity’s great questions is: At what stage do we sacrifice self-principle for self-gain? Almost everybody trades principle for benefit at some stage. Some people are able to hold on just a little longer, while others hardly entertain the notion of principle at all.

How important is principle and why does it always get in the way of things we really want to do?

The Kotzker Rebbe has a profound and rather novel way of looking at the concept of principle. Instead of being that self-righteous ‘nerd’ that always rears its ugly head every time we want to do something exciting or advantageous…principle itself can become just as useful and beneficial. There is a special satisfaction that comes with living a life based on principle. And this satisfaction can often outweigh the advantages of unprincipled gain.

Of course, not everyone can perceive the pleasure and tranquility of living a life based on high standards of principle and integrity - but some will. Knowing that one has the strength to stand by one’s principles is probably one of the sweetest tastes that life has to offer. But it is an acquired taste.

The Kotzker Rebbe says: 

No matter what, never ever regret a decision one made based on principle.

(Amud HaEmet)

This reminds me of something I think Winston Churchill once said: “I'd rather make a bad decision and be right than make a good decision and be wrong.”

Principle becomes a currency that has a value. It becomes a commodity that, through its acquisition, enriches the soul.

It’s no accident that the Kotzker was also one of the greatest proponents of personal independence and freedom, that the Jewish world has ever known. He abhorred the mindless followers of mass movements. These movements had become extremely popular, as numerous Chassidic groups began infiltrating Poland at that time. Their reach and popularity had become almost unprecedented in Jewish history. In his view, being a part of any overbearing and dominating system, albeit Halachically sanctioned, spelt the end of intellectual individualism.

And, in the world of Kotzk, intellectual individualism and independence was at a premium.

It was the dominant currency of Kotzk.

Freedom and independence were also integral to the primacy of principle – because only ADHERENCE TO PRINCIPLE BRINGS TRUE INDEPENDENCE.

As Winston Churchill once did say; “You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.”

037) Off With The Sheitel

I was quite surprised when I heard that a family friend had recently decided to stop wearing her sheitel (wig). She said that she never felt ‘spiritual’ wearing something heavy on her head all day.

My wife then made a rather profound observation, although it took a while to resonate with me. “The reason we wear a sheitel is not because of spirituality,” she said, “but because of tzniut (modesty)”. At first, I had difficulty in comprehending her comment because surely everything we do in Judaism is spiritual? And then a host of teachings flooded my brain and it started to make sense to me. Let me share some of these teachings with you.

The Kotzker Rebbe, comments on the verse; “You shall be holy because I your G-d am holy”. He says: ‘Kedusha’ doesn't mean ‘holiness’. It means ‘preparation’¹. A human being cannot be holy. He can only prepare to be holy. ‘Holiness’ can only come from G-d.

(Amud HaEmet, p71, par 5)

It seems as if many people are under the illusion that if they observe certain practices they will become more spiritual. Most of us would like to think that that is indeed the case. But the Kotzker tells us that we cannot become spiritual, we can only prepare to become spiritual.

In a sense, it may perhaps be compared to falling in love. You may indeed fall in love with someone, but until they love you back you do not yet have a relationship with them. Yet you could quite conceivably live your entire life under the illusion that you do. Similarly we too could live our entire lives under the illusion that we are ‘spiritual’. But spirituality, like love, is a two way street – “You shall be holy because I your G-d am holy.” Spirituality, by definition, needs to be reciprocal.

Ironically, Rabbi Nachman of Breslov, the master of all things spiritual, makes a fascinating point in relation to prayer:

“Davening”, he says “is meant to be a ‘chiyuv’ - an OBLIGATION - and not necessarily an UPLIFTING experience.” 

(See Sichot HaRan². For the uplifting experience, he reintroduces us to the ancient concept of Hitbodedut; where, in addition to formal prayer, we speak freely to G-d in our own words and in our own time and way.)

This idea is further reiterated by the Kotzker in a most surprising and poignant teaching.

The Kotzker Rebbe once remarked to one of his students: “Cheshbon HaNefesh (meaningful introspection), must be done on the way to shul. Not at shul. At shul we simply get down to the business at hand – Torah study and prayer.”

(Amud HaEmet p 75, par 2)

Let us not fool ourselves into believing that we transform into ethereal lofty spiritual beings when we pray and observe mitzvot and wear our sheitels. If davening is essentially an ‘obligation’ (Rabbi Nachman’s words, not mine), then there is no need to feel that something is wrong should we be left emotionally cold after the experience. I'm also confident that we are guilty of no sin if we complain that our sheitels are sometimes uncomfortable and uninspiring.

Rather let there be full disclosure from the very outset: By keeping Torah and Mitzvot we are only preparing for spirituality. We do not suddenly shed the bonds of earthliness and morph into otherworldly beings.

When spirituality gets misrepresented and over dramatized, as it commonly does, it’s not surprising that so many feel let down when their unrealistic expectations are not met. This is when the sheitels start coming off.

Rather wear a sheitel for ‘modesty’ than for ‘spirituality’. 

Understanding this may help us grapple with the frustration of wondering why we don't hear a choir of a hundred angels singing to us every time we don our sheitels or go to shul.

Our reach into the realm of holiness can only go as far as preparation and groundwork. What happens after that is anybody’s guess.

<sup>1. Kedusha lashon Hazmanah↩
2. The great modern halachic authority, R’ Moshe Feinstein was asked if it is better to daven with a minyan (even if it may be a little distracting), or to pray at home with more kavanah (fervor)? He responded that it is more important to pray with a minyan, which is an obligation, even if one’s ‘spirituality’ is compromised. (Igros Moshe O.C. 3;7)↩</sup>

036) Created Or Inherent Spirituality - Which Is Stronger?

To the layman it may seem that spirituality is, by definition, spirituality. It may seem that there can be no differential between one kind of spirituality and another. In truth, however, that would be like saying that art is art and there is no differential between one kind and another.

In broad terms, the Kotzker Rebbe distinguishes between two very different forms of spirituality. Essentially he differentiates between the type of holiness one is (potentially) able to achieve during the week, and between that which one is (theoretically) able to achieve on Shabbat:

During the week, the type of spirituality one achieves is predominantly a result of NEGATION of the physical.  Whereas on Shabbat, it results from the INCORPORATION of the physical. The latter is superior.

 (Amud HaEmet  p62, par2)

As a rule, the weekday spiritual encounter generally involves some form of battle against materialism. We engage in practices that remind us of our mission to try subdue the physical world. For example, we wear Teffillin to remind us that any contact with materialism has to be controlled and directed, so that we don’t become victims of a world that can very easily suck us under.

On Shabbat, however, the emphasis is completely inverted. For example, we no longer guard our food so much, because we eat big meals. We no longer guard our time so much, because we are encouraged to relax. Even sleep becomes more noble. We sing. We go for walks. We talk. Our study schedule is not so demanding. The holiness of Shabbat is therefore attained through incorporation of the physical, not through its negation. And strangely enough its holiness is superior to that attained during the week.

The Kotzker explains the reason for this:  During the week, whatever spirituality we find is mostly as a result of our efforts and our strivings to become better. On Shabbat, in contradistinction, the spirituality ‘descends’ upon us, almost as if it were a ‘gift’. The latter is superior to the former.

This distinction is an important one. Forget the weekday and the Shabbat for a moment, and let’s apply this principle more laterally: There are two types of spirituality we can experience. The first is the ethereal environment we create when we follow the rituals and dictates of the law. Don’t underestimate the power of this spirituality. It can be very tangible and very real. But it comes about as a result of some sort of fight which we win against the world around us.  Negative elements are identified and duly negated.

The second type of spirituality, however, involves no such battle. It results from a process that is far more natural. The holiness in the moment is identified and simply allowed to become incorporated within. Very little change is required. It is almost as if the spiritual beauty in everything around us suddenly becomes apparent and the need to fight simply goes away.

Put another way: The first type of spirituality is created by our religious labors. The second is discovered and one realizes that it was there all the time. The first is created by observance. The second is discovered by observing.

Unfortunately, many who master the first category, have difficulty in mastering the other. Those who are masters of observance are often not comfortable to let go and allow the inherent holiness of the surrounding world to rain down on them. And those who see and trust the beauty and goodness even within the secular and the mundane, often do not see the benefit of ritual and observance.

To be truly spiritual means one has to be comfortable with both approaches.

Yet, in the Kotzker’s world (not that one should ever have to choose between the two – because the real Torah personality masters both), it seems that he believed that the second category was still superior.

NOTE: Someone read this blog before it was published and asked: Surely that which one achieves through one’s own efforts are worth more than something given as a gift? To which I responded: Yes. It is tempting and pacifying to think like that. Imagine a child who saves up a few cents. Very noble.  But in a real monetary sense, those few cents are nothing in comparison with a larger amount of money received say through an inheritance. So too in spirituality. The little one achieves is very noble and nice. But it pales into insignificance when compared to that which comes from the world of the Spirit itself

035) Kotzk and Mashiach - An Unpopular View

Much of the Jewish world today is ablaze with talk of Mashiach.

Had the Kotzker Rebbe lived in our times, his views on Mashiach may have proved to be rather unpopular. Remember, ours is not the first generation to popularize Mashiach, and the Kotzker was well aware of similar messianic excitement in generations preceding his. 

He says;

It is better for people to remain unaware of the time of redemption and instead live in the tension of not knowing which times are more auspicious than others.

(Kochav HaShachar p 60 par1)

From this teaching it seems clear that instead of promising people an imminent end to their suffering (which may or may not be accurate) - it would be better for these same people to rather deal with realistic uncertainty in terms of the timing (not the concept) of Mashiach. Human beings have to dig deeper within their souls when faced with any type of angst, and it is precisely in states of profound uncertainty that we grow the most.

In a similar vein, the Kotzker writes about Eliyahu HaNavi, the prophet who is tasked with the official duty of announcing the arrival of Mashiach;

Regarding the custom of opening the door for Eliyahu on Passover night- don’t think Eliyahu really enters through the physical door of your house. Instead he enters through the doors of your heart and mind.

(Kochav HaShachar p 59, par 2)

Even here the Kotzker takes the edge off the immediacy and literalness of the famed mystical figure Eliyahu HaNavi, the great harbinger of Mashiach. He doesn't deny that Eliyahu will foreshadow Mashiach. He simply questions the popular perception thereof.

In another, and perhaps his most poignant comment about Mashiach, he says;

Why is it that Jews always cry out to G-d that He have mercy on us and send Mashiach? Rather we should cry out to ourselves to have mercy on G-d. And we ourselves effect the change that will be Mashiach.

(Kochav HaShachar p 59, par 1)

The Kotzker’s tenor in all these teachings is not to add to the hype by promising immediate and miraculous salvation which only tends to create confusion and inevitable disappointment. He reminds us that determination through uncertainty and not grand predictions, is the essence of spiritual growth. He directs us more inward than outward. He encourages us to think more conceptually than literally. And he tells us to become the miracle rather than wait for it.   

034) The Great Kotzker Contradiction - Either it Matters What Other People Think or it Doesn't

I have set myself the goal of trying to read every single Kotzker teaching I can get my hands on. In the process I have often comes across some interesting ideas and concepts. Here is one of them:

In one place the Kotzker says:

“And Leah’s eyes were weak…” Rashi explains that Leah cried a lot. She cried because people said that since Isaac had an older son (Esau), and a younger son (Jacob) - and since Lavan also had an older daughter (Leah), and a younger daughter (Rachel) - the older son could marry the older daughter, and the younger son could marry the younger daughter. This meant that Leah might end up marrying Esau, hence Leah’s tears.

The Kotzker is a little bothered by this explanation of Rashi, and asks:

Who were these people who were making these suggestions and talking like this? It was only Lavan and his wicked family. No one else. So why should Leah have been bothered by all this talk? - From here we learn that we should always be conscious and aware of what people say!    

(Amud HaEmet p26, par3)

In another place he appears to contradict this viewpoint:

When the spies returned from spying out the land of Israel, they said that the people living there were so big that they resembled giants, and that they [the spies] felt like little grasshoppers in comparison. The spies continued to report; “And so we appeared in their eyes.”

The Kotzker makes this observation:

It’s one thing to report how you yourself feel about a given situation. It’s another to extrapolate about the feelings others are experiencing in that same situation. One never really knows how another feels. Besides, it doesn't matter what other people think about you.   

(Kochav HaShachar p21, par 4)

So from two different books, we are presented with an apparent contradiction. Where does he stand on the issue of how seriously we should take what others think of us? Either it matters what others think, or it doesn’t. Did the Kotzker contradict himself?

I think there could be two answers:

On the one hand, let’s say he did contradict himself. That’s all the more reason why I would choose him as a teacher. It shows just how human he was. Perhaps when he was younger he didn't care what people thought of him. And perhaps with time he mellowed and took a different view. Or perhaps he started out worrying about how he was perceived by others, only to later on in life realize that life is there to be lived fully by the individual himself, with scant regard for those who opposed him.

On the other hand, let’s say there is no contradiction. We cannot live our lives constantly worrying about how everyone else is going to interpret our actions. If we do, we will never say or accomplish anything significant, for fear that someone might be offended. At the same time, one cannot just barge through life without caring about other the billions of other people we have to share this planet with. Victory has a bitter taste to it if it creates too many enemies.   

The solution lies somewhere in the delicate middle. We need to do what we need to do without allowing others to get in the way. But we don't need to get in the way of others either.

The art of living is to know when to be concerned about what others think, and when the time has come to push on regardless. 

033) When You Think You're Not Teaching - You Are!

The sense of achievement at having raised good children must be one of the greatest joys one can experience in this world. If you have any doubt as to whether this is indeed so, just speak to people who have constant consternation from their children.

When it comes to raising children, some try to take a shortcut and pray that G-d grant them good children. Unfortunately though, the only shortcut is lots and lots of (sometimes thankless) hard word. And then some.

The pragmatic, ‘no nonsense’, ‘no short cut’ Kotzker Rebbe makes an interesting theological and psychological point:

 If you want to raise Torah true children, then – instead of praying for their spiritual well being - simply continue studying Torah yourself. Rather occupy yourself with Torah than pray for your children. This way your children will learn from you and also study, instead of learning from you that they too need only pray for their children.

(Kochav HaShachar p161, par1)

In this teaching, the Kotzker makes striking sense by pointing out that children learn subliminally from their parents. When the parent least thinks he or she is teaching their child – that is when the greatest and most enduring lessons take place.

When moms and dads drive their children from one lesson to another, they forget that the only thing the child is really going to assimilate is the ‘lesson’ between the lessons. How the parent behaves in stressful traffic; the language the parent uses; the ability to control the stress of being late and so forth, all form part of the great syllabus the child subconsciously incorporates into his or her own personality.

When dad leaves for shul on Friday night and asks his young son to join him, and the son says he would rather stay home and play, and dad says fine: That is fine. Children need to play. But when fourteen years pass and dad continues to go to shul alone every Friday night, dad doesn't realize what an outstanding teacher he actually was. He managed to successfully communicate to his child that shul is not important.

We recently acquired a little puppy. When I went to collect it from the breeders, it affectionately jumped up to greet me. The breeder said that if I didn't want it to jump up onto people, I simply mustn't allow it to. Otherwise my inaction would be tantamount to actively teaching it that that behavior was perfectly acceptable.

I know that children cannot be compared to puppies but I think the point is well made: When you least think you are teaching – that is often when most of the teaching take place.

032) The Fourth Dimension

When talking about Jewish practices to people who are not observant, they often ask whether the matter under discussion is a ‘custom’ or a ’law’. Is it ‘Divine’ or ‘man made’? This is quite intriguing because the distinction between Torah Law and Rabbinical Law is often only drawn at quite an advanced level of Torah study. The advanced observer may be looking to better understand the structure of the Law (to ascertain whether extenuating circumstances may or may not allow the Law to be flexible). The non-observer, however, may be looking for a possible justification not to do something (since it’s ‘only’ a Rabbinical Law). This is reminiscent of the Karaites of old, who totally disregarded Rabbinical Judaism.

The question is: How much should we allow this invisible dividing line, between both sets of Law, to influence our observance?

From a purely halachic point of view, there is no practical distinction between them. One does not have the discretion or liberty to choose one over the other. The distinction between them exists only on an academic and theoretical level.

Part of the reason why so much authority is given to classical Rabbinical Law, is because the Torah itself instructs us to adhere to the ‘priest who will be in your day’. Furthermore, as we all know, the Torah of Sinai was presented together with an Oral (read Rabbinical) Tradition to support and supplement it. This gives tremendous credibility to the Rabbinical Tradition, as its authority is rather more primary than secondary.

Then there is the third issue concerning the status of Custom or Minhag: Although the concept of ‘minhag shtus’ (a silly or nonsensical custom) does exist - for the most part, a well established custom is treated with as great a reverence as the other two abovementioned components of our law. The fullness of time seems to imbue the custom or practice with an earned sanctity of its own.

The Kotzker Rebbe teaches that in more recent times, a fourth component appears to have silently crept into our body of tradition. This fourth dimension, he aptly calls ‘Frumkeit.’ ‘Frumkeit’ is difficult to define, but you’ll know it when you see it. It doesn't have to be, but sometimes is, a very visible display of ‘in your face’ Judaism. It’s more of a social construct and peer driven than hallowed over time.

While we have no effective discretion when it comes to the first three components of the Law - Torah Law, Rabbinical Law and Custom - we may (at least according to the Kotzker) exercise some agility with ‘Frumkeit’.

Says the Kotzker Rebbe:

Frumkeit is not necessary for someone who is already ‘fixed’.However, it is sometimes valuable as a means to an end.

(Emet VeEmunah p99, par 6)

I believe it is with regard to this fourth component of ‘Frumkeit’ that our religious mettle gets subjected to the most crucial of tests. How we handle this, defines who we are. We humans are, after all, social beings and need to know and show where we fit into society. But when ‘Frumkeit’ becomes an end in itself, instead of a means, we may have just missed the mark. It may also be an indication that we are not yet ‘fixed’.

When the perceived security of any social construct, becomes an end, the Kotzker reminds us that perhaps we have not yet even begun.

031) Who Gave Me the Right?

Recent media reports have focused much on the unfortunate actions of some so-called Chareidim in both Israel and abroad. Some of these people have used rock throwing and other forms of violence as a means of ethnically cleansing their areas of anyone who is not exactly like them. (See Kotzk Blog 30)

I believe these growing trends of violence are the first stirrings of a new and insidious type of 'reconstructionist' Judaism that is doing a good job of misrepresenting authentic and multifaceted Orthodoxy. They don't practice a Judaism I know.

Whatever happened to the concept of a Jew being supposed to set an example? Whatever happened to the concept of a Jew being supposed to practice a form of spirituality that is warm and inviting? When did ‘exclude’ become the battle-cry instead of ‘include’?

Let’s leave these extreme ‘reformers’ alone for a moment and look at something closer to home. I have occasion to interact with many young religious people in our community. The vast majority of them are wonderful caring and empathic young people, concerned about the world around them, and conscious of their obligation to contribute to society. They also understand the importance of creating a good impression upon those Jews who may have wandered away from Torah values.

But again, there is a small segment of this group, who having been raised religious, take their Judaism for granted. They just want to live like everyone else without the extra burden of having to set a good example. Some of these youngsters do just what other youngsters their age do, except they do it with yarmulkes on.   

I came across such a group, driving drunk around a parking lot with loud music blaring and behaving despicably. People were looking at them and I was embarrassed. I took the liberty of gracefully approaching them and asked them to please calm down. I suggested very politely that they put caps on their heads and tuck in their Tzitzit if they wanted to behave like this. They looked at me incredulously. They failed to see how they were harming anyone by their behavior. What right did I have to reproach them? In their eyes they were just a couple of kids having (dangerous and disruptive) fun. However in the eyes of others, they were representing every other Jew on this planet. Including you and I. This may not be fair but it’s the truth. That’s why I felt I had the right to approach them and not just ignore them.

If they are going to fly the flag by sticking out in a crowd, let them do so with dignity. If not, we reserve the right to censure them because they represent us. If they didn’t represent us, we would ignore them and let them be.

Being visible Torah Jews in public, means we have an obligation to preserve the integrity of the whole nation.

If even one person looks at us and hates Jews or Judaism because of us, we have misrepresented our people.

The Kotzker Rebbe teaches:

“Abraham sat at the doorway of his tent.” Rashi comments: “…To see if anyone was passing by, so that he could bring them into his home.” - In Hebrew the expression ‘passerby’ (over ve shav) can also mean a ‘sinner whom through your exemplary action, you cause to have a change of heart’. Such a person then becomes so inspired that he wants to come into your ‘tent’ and be like you.

(Kochav HaShachar p168, par1)

Being ‘frum’ is demanding. When a Torah person walks in the street, he cannot be neutral. He has to, by his actions, use his Torah as a means of changing even in some small way, the lives of others. They must want to come into his ‘tent’.

If some of our visible and vocal religious youth are offensively rowdy, how will they influence ‘sinners’ to have a change of heart?

And if some of our stone throwing so-called Chareidim chase people out of their areas, how will they ever be able, let alone want to, come into the tent of Abraham?

The irony is that those who were offended by the youngsters, and those attacked and excluded from the Chareidim, were perhaps the very people Abraham went in search of.

030) Some Ultra-Orthodox Jews Are Revolting

The crazy events of the past few weeks and months in Beit Shemesh and Jerusalem, where small groups of Chareidim took to the streets – (and burned garbage and spat on young Modern Orthodox Jewish school girls who simply wanted a normal religious education) - have become most perturbing. Some of these Chareidim do not even want to ride in the same busses as women and are calling for segregation of the genders in some public spaces.

It is perturbing for a number of reasons: How can ostensibly religious people behave in this manner? This type of behavior is (not so) slowly becoming more and more acceptable to many segments of our very own community. Not enough people are speaking out against this deplorable trend. Does it not remind one of other communities in other parts of the world, who espouse similar sentiments?

The irony is that today, if an orthodox person does or says something just slightly left of center, he is very rapidly castigated by people with loud voices. If he speaks about, say, a possible theoretical reconciliation between Torah and evolution, he gets excommunicated. But if he stones, fights or spits, at best he is regarded as a misguided ‘defender of the faith’, and is free to fight another day.

It is no longer acceptable for those of us who are embarrassed and shocked by the barbaric behavior of some of these men in black coats, to glibly shrug it off by saying that this is just the work of an insignificant and tiny minority (as we have always done in the past). If one follows the news stories one quickly realizes that this trend is swiftly on the incline.

Unless our leadership (if it still exists) does something fast to stem the rising tide of religious extremism, both in Israel and abroad, I fear we may be staring down the barrel of a new phenomenon…a Jewish Taliban.

Sociologically, such rancid behavior can only be a result of a ‘group’ or ‘cult like’ mentality, taking over what once was the preserve of the strong, intellectual religious individual.

A hundred and fifty years ago, the Kotzker warned that Judaism was laying the foundations of its own destruction, by encouraging the emergence of religious mass movements, which were gaining popularity all over Eastern Europe.

Like minded people make a positive contribution to their society. Like clad people, however allow the preeminence of the individual human, (responsible for his actions, and aware of consequences), to be overshadowed by others (who because of allegiance have no concept of consequence). Weak people can now hide behind the coat tails of other weak people. And generally the group will deteriorate to the lowest common denominator.

He further warned that even someone hiding within the very walls and inner sanctum of the Beit HaMedrash, the Study House, may in truth be absolutely vile and despicable.

The Talmud says: ‘If the Menuval or despicable one comes to mislead you, drag it to the House of study’. This is generally understood as referring to the evil inclination, which gets subdued when brought under positive pressure and influence. However the actual term used is ‘Menuval zeh’, which seems to indicate a person rather than a concept. Therefore don’t be fooled into thinking that just because someone looks holy and spends time in a holy place, that he is actually holy. He may be in the House of study but he can still be despicable.

(Emet VeEmunah p20, par 2)

Let us be bold enough to acknowledge and recognize the existence of people who do despicable things in the name of Judaism. Let us speak out with sufficient force against these people, before instead of being a ‘light to the nations’, we simply become just like them.

029) The Smokin' Hot NASCAR Prayer

I am always amazed to see with what authority people speak about G-d. I do, however, understand that people speak, sometimes with great authority about religion. And I also understand that ‘authentic’ religion is the will of G-d. But I nevertheless remain wary of anyone who claims to speak for G-d himself.

This being the case, can there ever be such a thing as a controversial prayer? Is there a spiritual censorship board that protects G-d from hearing things we pray for?

Rabbi Nachman of Breslov was quite outspoken when it came to answering such questions. According to him there were no holds barred when it came to prayer. We were given carte blanche to ask (or even simply to talk to) G-d, for (and about) absolutely anything at all.

He writes: 

We should pray to Hashem for anything and everything. Even for something as mundane as a shirt that needs to be mended. We should get so used to communicating with G-d that we see no difference between asking for something worthy and significant, and something small and insignificant. This concept was so difficult for one of Rabbi Nachman’s students to comprehend that he said: "I am astounded. Do you really mean that I can pray for something absolutely physical and mundane?" To which Rabbi Nachman responded with a question: "Is it beneath you to ask G-d for small things?"

(Sichot HaRan 233)

This was written two hundred years ago. Let’s test this theology with something really modern and mundane.

NASCAR racing is quite far from the relatively slow pace of synagogue prayer. At a recent race, a clergyman was asked to lead the prayers just prior to the event. It was later widely billed as a terribly ‘controversial’ and ‘blasphemous’ prayer.

The following is a (slightly) abbreviated version of that prayer: 

Heavenly Father, we thank you for all your blessings…So we want to thank you tonight for these mighty machines you brought before us. Thank you for the Dodges and Toyotas. Thank you for the Fords. And most of all we thank you for Roush and Yates partnering to give us the power that we see before us tonight. Thank you for GM performance technology and RO7 engines. Thank you for Sunoco racing fuel and Goodyear tires that bring performance and power to the track...May they put on a performance worthy of this great track… 

This poor clergyman was castigated for daring to infer that G-d may also be the driving force behind things of an earthly nature. But I suspect Rabbi Nachman might have been smiling down on that event that night.

The Kotzker Rebbe too, encourages us to not think of G-d as being aloof and detached.

He interprets the verse; 

“Do not make for you a strange god” – Do not make G-d ‘strange’ to you. Be comfortable and relaxed in your relationship with him.

(Kochav HaShachar p30, par2)

Yes, maybe G-d is also the G-d of NASCAR.

028) Is it Bad to Sin?

Of course it is. It’s also bad to eat white bread and drink fizzy drinks. A deeper question would be; Is it evil to sin?

To a casual reader this may seem like a silly distinction. ‘Bad’ and ‘evil’ are only different in semantics. However the literature is full of fascinating debate as to the actual difference between these two concepts.

In classical Kabbalah, every time a person sins he causes a spiritual separation to take place between two G-dly ‘components’ (the Shechina and the Ein Sof). Only Teshuva (repentance or literally ‘return’) can bring them back together again.

In other writings, sin is equated to the very essence of impurity and evil. It is even said to have almost ‘demonic’ characteristics. (See Quest for Authenticity by R Michael Rosen)

However, in the teachings of the three generations of Peshischa, including the Rebbe of Kotzk, sin takes on none of these aforementioned nuances. Sin (while obviously not condoned) loses its esoteric status and becomes something far more human. In Kotzk there is nothing mystical or spiritual about sin. It is simply the natural consequence of human failing and frailty.

In Kotzk sin is not evil.

The Kotzker’s teacher, R Simcha Bunim writes:

Man [Adam], is still referred to as Man, even after his sin. As is Woman [Eve], still called Woman, even after being expelled from the garden.

(Ramatayim Tzofim 1,1)

In Torah literature, many people’s names and certainly statuses change as a direct result of their actions. Yet even with the fundamental and archetypical sin of the first man and woman, they remained essentially the same and unchanged, before and after.

It is interesting that in today’s world, we unknowingly continue to act out both sides of this debate: Some are quite accepting of people who may come from difficult and different backgrounds. They may not condone lifestyles antithetical to that of the Torah way of life but they move on and see what could be, not what was. They don’t dwell in the past. The Kotzker’s brother-in-law, the Chidushei HaRim says:

If you think about dirt you remain in the dirt.

(Chidushei HaRim 261)

Others, possibly from a sense of superiority or fear, can only look disapprovingly down, not ahead. At best their relationship with such people is coldly condescending and painfully patronizing. They seem to believe that there is something almost ‘demonic’ and ‘spiritually alien’ in these souls, and do not want to become contaminated.

These two attitudes are quite prevalent today. My personal belief is that practically there is only one choice that can save us from spiritual extinction. I’m with Kotzk on this one. You can only become contaminated if you believe that sin is evil. But if it’s only bad, perhaps you can ‘contaminate’ them with good.