Both of these articles have a familiar tone: “What a bunch of whiners Jews today are!” And to some extent, there’s something to be said for that. In the shabbat meals article, towards the end, Rabbi Rebecca Joseph comments, “This is a problem of an affluent society and an affluent group within that society.” Again, true. Indeed, homeless Jews, poor Jews and Jews struggling to make ends meet aren’t going to be picky about what is served to them at a shabbat meal – or any other (I was reminded of recently rereading the book Rachel Calof’s Story about a Jewish woman who emigrated from Russia to be a pioneer bride, and while they certainly cared about kashrut, which is demonstrated throughout the book in various ways, when her husband comes home with a tin labeled herring and it turns out to be pickled pigs feet.. well, she doesn’t say that they ate, but she certainly hints at it. When there’s no other food, you eat what there is).
Nevertheless, there’s a certain oddity about these two articles. For example, let’s take the shabbat meals article: The title is, “With increasingly particular eaters, Shabbat meals get tough.” And yet, that isn’t actually the sense I get at all from the actual content of the article – let alone from my personal experiences. More »
Let’s legislate non-orthodoxy out of existence. OTOH I’d like to see what the law actually says. Maybe we could add a friendly amendment that since there are no streams of Judaism, therefore the Orthodox have no right to maintain their hegemony, because the Reform and Masorti are not (now, according to this new bill) streams, but exactly as legit as orthodoxy, since it would now all be “just Judaism”? FTW, right? Or we could counter-propose a bill that there is no such thing as Orthodoxy, and the true heir of Jewish practice is [name your favorite non-Orthodox movement].
Or maybe we could get the government out of the religion business, stop allowing the nuttiest of the nuts to determine who is a Jew, while simultaneously preventing people with good intent from converting (contrary to Jewish law, despite the fact that they keep claiming they’re the true inheritors, just like lots of other odd things they do, such as (my fave) prevent Jewish weddings unless their roster of rabbis is involved, despite the fact that one needs no rabbis at all halachicly speaking).
Hey, maybe we should just do that anyway.
Gene Simmons of KISS on Israel. It’s kinda weird, but I love it when Simmons/Witz tells Israelis to toughen up because Americans criticize everyone. So much for the tough-on-the-outside sabra? Maybe the real reason we don’t have peace in the middle east yet is because despite all the machismo of the Israeli image, Israelis aren’t really all that tough? Or maybe even because they are trying to live up to the image that American Jews on the right desperately want them to be? (Hey does that mean we can blame the occupation on all those kids who beat up Jewish kids in elementary school?)
On Monday, the Federation of Jewish Men’s Clubs (of the Conservative/Masorti Movement) posted a video to YouTube explaining the importance of having a welcoming website. Aimed at synagogues, the video was publicized by an email sent out by the FJMC.
What’s interesting about the video (and email) is that it never explicitly states something like, “synagogue websites should say, ‘Our synagogue is welcoming of all families, including interfaith families and families of diverse backgrounds.’”
Instead, it suggests:
Your congregation’s website is your most important tool to attracting today’s Jewish family. Your website’s ‘welcome’ must be obvious. It needs to greet the visitor in a meaningful and sincere way. For example, if you’re welcoming interfaith families, children and adults with different ethnic backgrounds, or gay and lesbian families, words like ‘welcome,’ ‘open,’ and ‘diverse’ need to be prominent and obvious.
Buzz words aren’t enough. If you’re welcoming of “interfaith families, children and adults with different ethnic backgrounds, or gay and lesbian families,” say so! Use those descriptive words! The video shows interfaith families (a family standing in front of a Christmas tree and a menorah!) and shows that we should be welcoming to interfaith families (the word “interfaith” on a doormat!), but doesn’t say to use the words on the websites.
It seems like the Conservative Movement wants to be welcoming of interfaith families, but doesn’t think it can outright say so. But it can. And should.
This is a great start. I appreciate that the FJMC is making this effort, and we all know that making changes in synagogues can be a slow and arduous process, but… Let’s just take it a step further.
What do you think? Watch the video and leave a comment:
Rabbi Steven Wernick, the new head of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, has made it clear that one of his priorities for the organization is outreach to Jews in their 20s and early 30s. As Conservative Jews gather for the USCJ’s biennial in Cherry Hill, N.J., December 6 — the first of Wernick’s tenure — and begin to chart a new course for the movement, it’s worth considering how best to go about pursuing this important goal.
Obviously, there are a lot of exciting possibilities when it comes to enfranchising and exciting 20- and 30-something Jews. But there are also some pitfalls that are common in efforts to reach this particular demographic. More »
Does this look to you like a serious reckoning with valid concerns, or like a stand-up act?
I have only a few moments to write this. I have to get back to memorizing page 32b of Tractate Sanhedrin, as I was instructed to do daily by my partners at the Jewish Enrichment Center. Thankfully, those anti-feminist Orthodox people don’t require me to wrap teffilin every day as they apparently did to that poor, unsuspecting Birthright Israel alumnus in Gal Beckerman’s article, “Birthright Alumni Center Tied to Haredi Outreach”. Then I would certainly have no time to put pen to paper. Fortunately, I have a moment off to respond…
It’s the first titillating paragraph of Rebecca Sugar’s “response” to mounting criticisms about the way she farmed out all Birthright NEXT programming in the New York area to the JEC, a haredi kiruv (ultra-Orthodox evangelism) organization.
Ms. Sugar, listen carefully. First, let me congratulate you on your writing style. You’ve hit heights of snark I can only spy forlornly through a dented telescope. Second, you’re missing the point:
The concern raised by Gal Beckerman and the editors of the Jewish Daily Forward, by David Kelsey, by Shmarya Rosenberg, and by yours truly and fellow Jewschool bloggers & commenters was not that Orthodox Jews can’t run pluralistic Jewish institutions that cater to, respect, and serve the entire Jewish community. Some of the best Hillel professionals I’ve ever met are Orthodox. I’ve seen Jews who affiliate in whole or in part with Orthodox forms of Judaism become valued leaders in Jewish social justice organizations like JUFJ, communities like Jews in the Woods, and educational projects like Limmud.
However, Ms. Sugar – and this is a big however — these individuals were honest, righteous frum men and women whose love of the wider Jewish community was broader than any partisan loyalties they held for their own brand of Jewishness. They were not flag-wavers or missionaries. They were not liars. They were not stealth kiruv workers.
The folks at The JEC are stealth kiruv workers. As reported by Gal Beckerman,
In conversations with the Forward, a handful of Birthright alumni have painted a picture of the JEC as a place where Orthodoxy [sic] is the end goal, though it is encouraged through slow, gentle steps that are often difficult to perceive. “If they had just said, if their whole mission statement was, we’re Orthodox Jews, we’d love to present this lifestyle to you and see if it’s for you, and then did the same exact things that they are doing, that would not bother me,” said David Siegel, who was involved with the JEC for two years and went on three of the center’s follow-up trips to Israel.
“Each and every one of them on a person-to-person level is totally open to helping you understand life, spirituality, growth, relationships; anything you want to talk about, they’re open about it,” said another Birthright alumnus, who asked to remain anonymous. “The issue for me was eventually after spending a lot of time there, it became apparent that they did have an agenda to try and get me to incorporate Orthodox practice into my life. And that became awkward.” After he started individual studies with a rabbi, the situation became strained. “Eventually they wanted me to start memorizing sections of Talmud even though that was not something I was interested in doing,” the anonymous alumnus said. “They wanted me to start wrapping tefillin. I didn’t want to do that, either. And instead of just saying, all right, do your own thing, they kept bringing it up and pressing the issue.”
This would not be a problem if there were other Birthright NEXT providers in the NY area — but the JEC is the only authorized provider of Birthright NEXT programming in that largest BRI alumni community in the world.
This would not be a problem if the JEC were open about its Haredi affiliation, kiruv goals, and connection to Ohr Somayach — but it’s not.
This would not be a problem if the JEC supported Birthright’s non-Haredi alumni in their diversity of Jewish styles and nurtured their personal paths of Jewish growth — but Jewish growth only means one thing for the JEC.
This would not be a problem if the JEC didn’t sponsor extreme right-wing political speakers under the guise of Jewish educational programming — but we’ve already reported on that here.
It comes down to the simple proposition that the Birthright program is not supposed to be a kiruv scam, Ms. Sugar. And no false accusations of Ortho-bashing, no matter how cleverly worded, can distract from that truth.
Want to experience a stealth-haredi political hack job in the guise of an educational talk about health care reform?
Then have we got an event for you! RSVP at the New York Birthright Next website for September 9th’s ”Q&A with Grace-Marie Turner, President of the Galen Institute“!
This media darling and shill for the pharmaceutical industry will be happy to take a few hours out of her busy lobbying schedule to educate you on ”what is happening with health care reform and what you need to know about the bill before Congress”!
No, there is nothing unseemly about this arrangement at all. Just like there’s nothing untoward about having all Birthright Next programming in the largest BRI alumni community in the world be under the sole jurisdiction of an ultra-Orthodox kiruv organization.
What’s next? A weekend at Ohr Somayach with Orly Taitz?
If you’d like to tell the fine folks at Birthright Israel what a great job their Birthright Next providers in NYC are doing, here‘s their contact page.
There’s been something of a debate backstage at Jewschool this week as to whether or not it’s appropriate to post things we find on the web without comment. This, however, defies comment:
I will note that this sort of thing might be the answer to the alleged “boy problem” we’re hearing about in shuls these days. I should add that BZ strongly encourages everyone to enjoy the rap break that happens around the three minute mark.
Almost two years ago, silkscreen artist David Arfa sent out the call for submissions for MezuzaZine, which is exactly what its name implies — a zine (that is, a photocopied do-it-yourself magazine) that tells everything you need to know about a mezuzah.
In Arfa’s words, MezuzaZine is “a 12 page Do-It-Yourself mitzva guide that contains hip and authentic articles and images about mezuzas.”
Of course, you could just go to our site about mezuzahs and read up on it. But, if you’re old-school or looking for a different approach or just want to see a different sort of art form, Arfa’s printed up 200 copies of it — and probably has done some wild design work or special printing — and is selling them for just $1 to cover his costs. Arfa asks: “Would you like to get your hands on a printed copy? or maybe even help distribute? I am trying to cover the printing costs by selling each for $1- there are 200 copies. Let me know if you want one or a bunch and let’s make a deal.”
The zine features original work by Rabbi Jason Miller, Jeanette Friedman, Ketzirah, Ari Fornari, as well as an essay I did about writing love letters to God.
This is a really cool little project, and I really hope it gets all over the place. There’s nothing like people getting inspired by random things in Judaism and making it their own, and that’s exactly what David did with this zine. There’s a preliminary website, too — but, as of now, only the print zine has the full spectrum of articles. To find out how you can get a copy, or help distribute, drop David a line to find out how you can throw in a buck.
This past weekend, Be’chol Lashon (In Every Tongue), a project of the Institute for Jewish and Community Research sponsored a conference in San Francisco of Jews and Jewish identified ethnic groups from around the world. Many of these groups are not formally Jewish, the descendants of anusim and xuetas. Some are Jews officially, although not always accepted with open arms by the so-called “mainstream,” such as the Ethiopian Jews, or the Abayudaya. And then there are the Jewish communites whose faces and color don’t fall within the stereotypes of what a Jew looks like – as if there was any such thing: the Jews of India, Jews who are of color who converted, or whose parents did.
“The Jewish community keeps talking about the crisis of intermarriage and the crisis of declining numbers, but meanwhile you’ve got people with Jewish heritage, spiritual seekers, Jewish communities of historical significance, and the Jewish community is doing nothing to help them,†says Gary Tobin, the institute’s president and a longtime advocate of greater openness to those outside the Ashkenazi mainstream.
According to institute research, at least 20 percent of American Jews are racially and ethnically diverse. But old stereotypes about what “real Jews†look like persist, Tobin says.
“Instead of worrying about people being ‘lost’ to intermarriage,” he wonders, “why aren’t we extending our ideological borders to include all these people who are so interested in joining us?â€
Personally, I think it would be completely fabulous if the descendants of the anusim made a formal return, and the Ibo and Lemba formally converted. Welcome! Join the party!
And of course, for those that are us, we should move mountains to bring them close and help them.
Safed’s Chief Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu wrote in an article … “it turns out that Olmert is more corrupt than we thought.”
“So what shall we do? Elect another prime minister without faith? Another one without credibility? Another one without values?…when will we wake up and realize that we need a prime minister with a kippa?”
“We need a prime minister who acts based on genuine faith and values.
Um. Hey, I’m a rabbi myself, and I even occasionally wear a kippah (rather than a hat), but I’m just not quite sure this would solve the problem. Especially since I’m pretty sure that Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu wasn’t promoting say, Rabbi Andy Sacks, or R. David Golinkin, as a solution to the problem.
I dunno. I could be wrong. PM Sacks, has a kind of a nice ring to it….
Yeah, okay. A PM with a kippah. That would definitely solve all our problems. No more corruption. (Anyone want to do a quick google on rabbi, Israel, corruption charges?)
Recent postings on the uterus problem (see here) have been right to question the tshuvah that recently was issued from the bowels of the CJLS. I’m sorry that I got scooped on this because it’s a long standing argument that I have been having with my teachers (whom I respect very much, despite our disagreements) for years now. First of all, here is the URL for the actual tshuvah. I recommend reading it.
Secondly, I want to give kudos to Rabbi Jill Jacobs’ and Rabbi Jason Miller’s comments on the post at jspot. Both of them note that there need to be more social supports put in place for people to have children, Rabbi Jacobs noting:
–Would rabbinical students be more willing to have kids while in grad school if the rabbinical schools offered on-site child care?
–Would it be easier for Jewish women professionals (and men) to participate in professional conferences (such as the RA, from which I just returned, and where I bumped into a few poor women trying to nurse on the floor of the bathroom), if these conferences offered nursing rooms, child care, or other accommodations? (a shout out to the Wexner Foundation for being a leader in this regard)
–Would Jewish women professionals be able more easily to “have it all†if more Jewish institutions offered flex time, family health insurance, on-site child care, and paid for child care when the mom or dad is on the road?
And Rabbi Miller adding:
— not just for the women. As a 26-year-old rabbinical student whose wife was working full-time, I often felt the challenge of sitting in a class while bottle-feeding my baby son. An on-site day-care facility at JTS would have been an important resource.
(Although I do want to note that I can’t imagine why any women were nursing on the floor of the bathroom, since the hotel in question is luxurious to the point of ridiculousness, and the WC had an anteroom with, I’m told, quite comfortable chairs and, I’m told by a nursing friend, the heat turned way up so that it was a perfectly comfortable place to strip down and nurse if necessary. Of course, the very luxuriousness of the hotel was apparently rather a sore point amongst the many, many Conservative rabbis who lack large convention stipends or, indeed, any, such as those who aren’t pulpit rabbis, or who are, but whose pulpits are more modest, say, under 500 members. A sore point indeed). More »
Since I began working in the Jewish community, I’ve heard this advice again and again, and it never fails to get my ovaries in a twist, not least because of the implied (or explicit) criticism of professional women (never of professional men) who postpone childrearing to accommodate their career goals. I say: if the rabbis are so committed to making this a communal issue, the rabbis should raise the children. In fact, given their comfortable salaries and high communal status, they have no excuse: they should be adopting and converting children by the dozen.
According to Ha’aretz, another challenge to the Chief Rabbinate has popped up. Last month I blogged on the reaction to the scandalous no-heter for shmitta matter(and here); a group called Tzohar had announced that it would simply go around the Rabbinate. Well, they’re at it again.
45 rabbis from Tzohar and an unspecified smattering of the Religious Kibbutz Movement in response to the chief rabbinate’s policy of making conversion ridiculously difficult have said that they will simply go around it in this as well.
According to Ha’aretz,
That position ignores the plight of the more than 300,000 immigrants from the former Soviet Union who are not Jewish according to halakha. If the recommendations of the interministerial committee on conversion to expedite the process are not implemented soon, the rabbis are expected to establish the proposed conversion courts. That would represent another stage in the undermining of religious-Zionist rabbis of the Rabbinate, following struggles over marriage, kashrut and shmita in the past several months.
The latest steps began about six months ago with a conference of the Joint Conversion Institute, which prepares most prospective converts in civilian and military frameworks. After the head of the institute, Prof. Benjamin Ish-Shalom, announced that the requirements of the religious courts kept many graduates from completing their conversion, 45 rabbis agreed to officiate in religious courts that would convert the graduates, even without recognition from the Rabbinate. Most of the rabbis, the majority of whom who prefer not to be identified, are associated with with Religious Kibbutz Movement and the Tzohar rabbis’ organization.
Of course, it will be interesting to see how this plays out int he marriage arena, since the Chief Rabbinate is almost certain to refuse to allow these converts to be married in Israel – causing these folks to suffer fromthe same problems that Reform and Conservative/Masorti converts have had to deal with for years. More »
This Jewish Week article, which LastTrumpet already posted, is making my head explode for all kinds of different reasons. So I’m posting a line-by-line fisking of the article, to attempt to enumerate all the things wrong with it, though I’m probably just scratching the surface. Unlike previous articles I’ve done this for, where the problems were primarily with the frames invoked by the reporter, this article has at least five distinct categories of things wrong with it:
Destructive framing by the Jewish Week reporter (inappropriate for a paper supposedly committed to objective journalism)
Self-destructive framing by Reform movement personnel quoted in the article (inappropriate for an organization supposedly committed to Reform Judaism)
The Jewish Week reporter creating a narrative unsupported by the facts
Problematic attitudes and policies by Reform movement personnel
Poor tactics by Reform movement personnel demonstrating a complete ignorance of adolescent psychology
I am particularly disturbed because I have writtennumerousapologetics for Reform Judaism (as I understand it), defending it from ideas that I believe to be misconceptions, and now official voices of the Reform movement are making statements that affirm all of those ideas.
David Kelsey hasbeenposting about how OU/NCSY is pursuing an agenda of recruiting liberal Jewish teenagers to Orthodoxy. When I read articles like this, sometimes I wonder whether URJ/NFTY is stealthily doing the same thing. Maybe they’re not doing it on purpose, but if they were, it’s hard to imagine how they could be doing it more effectively than what they’re doing now: getting kids excited about Judaism, and then when the kids explore different options to build Jewish identities for themselves, responding with frames that affirm Orthodoxy as the standard against which all Jewish movements are defined. Every time a NFTY or UAHC/URJ camp alum ends up in the Orthodox world, it is viewed as an isolated incident (Rabbi Yoffie says “Some people may want to go and become either Conservative or Orthodox. So be it.â€), but the numbers are so great that it is time for the Reform movement to do some cheshbon hanefesh about this systemic phenomenon. I have already considered some of the sociological causes in “Profile of an ‘Unaffiliated’ Jew”, and this post points out some of the ideological causes. More »
I have previously questioned whether NCSY’s control of the 170 Jewish “Student†Union clubs operating in the public high school system, and which are used to recruit students to NCSY activities, is understood by parents or the average teen who stumbles in on the pizza party these clubs throw. I apparently underestimated the problem. It appears that the NCSY/JSU relationship is unclear even to students in leadership positions at these clubs.
On the NCSY message board, “Sheistyfalafel†asked,
“I’m president of a JSU at my school. I was wondering the relationship between JSU and NCSY. Is JSU part of NCSY or what? I know a lot of people are interested and don’t get clear responses.â€
“Rabbi Jack†Abramowitz, NCSY’s director of national programs, answered,
“That’s definitely a question for JSU, which I can’t answer because I’m not them. But what is it that you would have them write on their page? “We oversee some clubs [editor’s note: MOST] that are run by NCSY and others that are not?â€
See, NCSY wants to disclose this information, they just can’t come up with a way to do so accurately. Let me attempt to help a brother out. How about disclosing the “dean†of JSU is Rabbi Steven Burg, and a little blurb about who he is, including disclosure that he the leader of NCSY as well? How about disclosing the NCSY positions most of the “cool advisors†have outside of the JSUs within the descriptive bios about them that somehow never include this information?
“Sheistyfalafel†asked, “Why isn’t this information on the JSU page?”
Thousands of Orthodox students will soon head off for their post-high school year of study at a yeshiva in Israel.
What about those public school students who you send to yeshiva who are not completely Orthodox?
Judging from recent years, many of them will contract what is derisively referred to as Flipping Out Syndrome, or FOS, a troubling malady that pits teenager against parent in a seemingly endless cycle of friction and misjudgment.
Rabbi Burg writes about this phenomenon as if NCSY is against this. In fact, NCSY encourages such behavior even domestically, and has for years. NCSY has long promoted increased religious observance as a form of rebellion.
At a typical NCSY Shabbaton (weekend retreat), the Havdala (a ceremony ending Shabbat) always loomed large. A short celebration involving a multiwicked candle, wine and a spice box, Havdala is usually a quick affair. But at NCSY events, leaders would pass around the candle, asking kids to say something meaningful when the candle was passed to them. The kids’ stories generally involved nonobservant youth who became observant, thanks to the NCSY. And inevitably, those teens and preteens would elaborate on the sacrifices they made for their faith: enduring hostility from their parents; refusing to eat at their parents’ not-kosher-enough home; refusing to spend weekends at their non-Shabbat-observant home.
As disturbing as these narratives might have seemed (they certainly bothered me), the NCSY encouraged them. The organization openly disregarded parental concerns and prided itself on the courage of children who could make a complete lifestyle change overnight — the consequences be damned.
Note that Kress’s primary concern is not already Modern Orthodox Jews who become more religious, but rather, secular/liberal Jews who become Orthodox.
Yet Rabbi Burg does not address those concerns at all, even though he is writing for the JTA, a newswire that services community Jewish newspapers nationally, and those newspapers service a predominantly liberal and secular Jewish readership. But strangely, Rabbi Burg restricts the conflicts to those between already Modern Orthodox Jews and their Orthodox parents.
Let us be clear. The conflicts engendered by NCSY’s recruitment of liberal and secular Jews to haredi baal teshuvah yeshivas – which until recently, were all but the only yeshivas they sent such Jews to, never mind the dominant ones – is hardly limited to a disagreement over a specific vitamin’s kashrut acceptability. In fact, such issues may of very minor concern for most secular Jews overall compared to the larger ones they face.
But what Rabbi Burg did not address is the larger issues facing liberal and secular Jewish parents and their high school graduate teens.
The conflicts created from teens adopting the ideologies of the haredi institutions NCSY guides them to include (but are not limited to): A rejection of scientific method, in accordance with the haredi leaders they report to; a postponement of college indefinitely; a rejection of secular education as a worthy goal in itself; a rejection of full-time secular college; a preference for maximum halachic (Jewish Law) compliance (hardly restricted to kashrut); acceptance of stringencies not recognized as halacha outside of the ultra-Orthodox; anti-Americanism; encouragement of restrictive haredi garb; a rejection of friends and even family members who aren’t Orthodox; a contempt for Modern Orthodoxy; a belief that haredi leaders are near-infallible, an acceptance of inferior status within the ultra-Orthodox because of their niddah conception and non-Orthodox background.
It is unfortunate that Rabbi Burg did not address these concerns of secular and liberal Jewish parents. He is certainly aware of them. NCSY and the Orthodox Union have taken tremendous pride in recruiting their children to haredi yeshivas and seminaries. And NCSY has expanded the public school population they serve tremendously. They control over 170 clubs in our public schools. Rabbi Burg is the “dean†of the Jewish “Student†Union.
But perhaps that isn’t the point. Those parental concerns aren’t really any more valid now than they ever were for NCSY. Because they aren’t Orthodox.
At least Modern Orthodox Jewish parents have some leverage over NCSY. After all, the parent organization is the Orthodox Union, a right-wing Modern Orthodox organization, even if its youth group leans haredi. NCSY has been careful to offer already Modern Orthodox teens Modern Orthodox options because Modern Orthodox parents insisted on that.
But secular and liberal Jewish parents have no representation, and no voice. Additionally, they usually do not understand the difference between Modern Orthodoxy and ultra-Orthodoxy. Jewish parents think it is their kid, their kid’s specific baal teshuvah yeshiva/seminary, their kid’s specific rabbi.
NCSY has taken advantage of their naivety and trust consistently and effectively. The concerns come after the fact, not before. They don’t require addressing. At that point, NCSY already got what they wanted.
Even in this attempt to appear moderate in a Jewish newswire that primarily services secular and liberal Jewry, NCSY’s leader utterly ignores the concerns of secular and liberal Jewry.
In a recent post on Jewschool, I explained the issue of Ben Niddah (Jews whose souls are considered by the ultra-Orthodox to be defiled by menstrual blood. Such a category includes the vast majority of liberal and secular Jewry) in the baal teshuvah world, and why this encourages and justifies discrimination against Jews from liberal and secular Jewish backgrounds who join the ultra-Orthodox ranks.
In an essay in the Jerusalem Post, Rabbi Shafran seeks to minimize the problems of baal teshuvahs marrying into haredi families, even as he calls for an increase of such marriages. That is, unless the haredi family doesn’t want to, which just happens to usually be the case. He writes of an anecdotal case where a baal teshuvah (a person from a non-Orthodox religious background becomes haredi) named David marries into an ultra-Orthodox family. This is offered as a situation where a boy meets a girl, nothing more. But we should immediately have some questions even to this singular anecdote. Does the girl’s family have any known converts or baal teshuvahs in her lineage? Is “David†from an exceptionally wealthy family? If the answer is yes to either situation, this story is useless even as an anecdotal case, as in the former situation, the lineage of the ultra-Orthodox family is marred in the eyes of other ultra-Orthodox Jews, and in the latter case, the drawback issue of Ben Niddah was literally compensated for by a tangible positive–wealth, which is rare in the ultra-Orthodox world, particularly in Israel.
Rabbi Shafran writes,
David’s new in-laws were enamored of both him and his parents, and overjoyed at their daughter’s marriage. They hoped, moreover, that their example might perhaps, in a small way, inspire other traditional Orthodox Jews to entertain the possibility of such matches from outside their own community.
That’s very sweet, but it is also a concession that it does not happen very often.
The importance of “family” – i.e. the “pedigree” of a current and well-established Orthodox background – is an understandable concern for many, to be sure; and there are other Halacha-related issues that also come into play in such cases. To some, such concerns may even be paramount, and that stance is their prerogative.
This is an allusion to the Ben Niddah issue.
At the same time, though, it cannot be denied that there is something real and valuable that is gained, too, when an observant Orthodox Jew from an Orthodox family marries an equally observant Orthodox Jew from a different background – gained by the latter, by the former and by the Jewish people as a whole.
Some haredim might in fact deny that the observant Orthodox Jew from an Orthodox family gains anything valuable. But even if they do, what they will more likely be concerned about is whether or not said “benefit†is worth the cost and the risk of bringing in an outsider from a foreign background. Clearly, most do not believe this to be a compelling tradeoff.
“They had hardly been the first “ultra-Orthodox” Jews to welcome a baal teshuva and his family into their own.â€
They were not the first. And just as those before them did not change the norm, so too this family will not change the norm. And I’m not saying that this should be the norm. I don’t believe that it is usually appropriate for Jews from liberal and secular backgrounds to marry Jews from insular ultra-Orthodox ones. But then, I don’t believe ultra-Orthodoxy is appropriate for most Jews from liberal and secular backgrounds to start with. However, I certainly accept their choice, as well as the ultra-Orthodox right to recruit adults (as opposed to recruiting underage Jews under false pretenses), provided it is done candidly, and without deception, and they understand issues such as Ben Niddah going into haredism. Which they usually don’t. As I noted previously, the issue of Ben Niddah is not revealed until the recruit is far into the haredi “teshuvah†process. It is concealed, and even here, Rabbi Shafran does not directly address the issue of Ben Niddah, a status that justifies discrimination against and bolsters negative stereotypes about baal teshuvahs. And it is precisely why most haredim from normative haredi backgrounds will never feel a need to eliminate a general negative bias towards baal teshuvahs. All else is wishful thinking, an exception that proves the rule.
If Rabbi Shafran felt this was not such a difficult problem, he would not have been afraid to address the Ben Niddah issue directly. Well, defending a quasi-caste system to liberal and secular company based on the premise that a soul is tarnished by congenital defiled menstrual blood is certainly an undesirable task. But not addressing it directly is really no defense at all.
It should be understood that the issue of Ben Niddah is not pragmatically an issue in the Modern Orthodox world. Since it is not halachically binding, the Modern Orthodox world has little use for casting aspersions upon the masses of Jewry today. This is an ultra-Orthodox outlook, and generally the further right-wing one goes, the more intense the theologically based aversion to “b’nai niddah†becomes.
Never the less, all haredi outreach organizations seeking to craft haredim out of Jews from secular and liberal Jewish backgrounds are concomitantly creating “b’nai niddah.â€
The concept of a Jewish quasi-caste system surely seems something foreign and far away to the mainstream secular and religiously liberal Jewish community, which increasingly is giving a nod to the more visible success of instilling Jewish identity and Jewish engagement to teens that the Orthodox outreach groups offer.
But is Ben Niddahism really that far away?
The haredi organizations that attempt to assimilate baal teshuvahs into communities which view them as B’nai Niddah include (but by no means are limited to): Aish HaTorah Jerusalem (at least all branches in Israel), Ohr Somayach (all branches including Neve Yerushalayim), and Kol Yaakov.
NCSY directs secular and liberal American teenagers to all of these haredi organizations, and does not inform them or their parents about the issue of Ben Niddah, and how they wouldn’t assume such a status in a Modern Orthodox community. The Ben Niddah issue is just one of many problems that a baal teshuvah faces in joining an ultra-Orthodox community, but does not face when joining a Modern Orthodox community. There are so many others…the haredi rejection of scientific method, the haredi preference for maximum halachic (Jewish Law) compliance, the oppressive haredi garb (both for men and for women), haredi hostility to higher western culture, and socio-economic downward mobility. In the right-wing of the ultra-Orthodox world, who dominate the Israeli haredim and correspondingly comprise a large percentage of Israel’s baal teshuvah movement and its institutions, the work ethic itself is rejected.
Under its ecumenical front, the Jewish Student Union, NCSY is now operating in over 170 public schools. The primary youth group beneficiary of their work to whom students are directed is (no surprise), NCSY proper.
NCSY’s public school outreach organization, the Jewish “Student†Union, is increasingly funded by Jewish Federations throughout the country.
Although NCSY has been quickly creating and bolstering right-wing Modern Orthodox options to counter recent criticism that it has favored predominantly haredi options for their alumni from liberal and secular backgrounds, NCSY has declined to break their ties with these haredi organizations that offer a Ben Niddah status (and all the other problems) to their students upon successful integration into a haredi community.
It is ironic that a liberal and secular Jewish community that prides itself on its disproportionate role in the Civil Rights Movement apparently has no qualms about funding and facilitating a quasi-caste system for its own teenagers. Defenders will note that only a portion of the teens NCSY works with ever go to NCSY’s haredi partner institutions after high school. But what if a Jewish organization recruited black teens, and the most interested 5% of them were to become second-class citizens because of their birth status? Would that be okay? After all, it’s only 5%…the other 95% don’t have that problem, and they get so much out of it.
It is inconceivable that the mainstream Jewish community would greet such am operation with anything less than outraged protest. But apparently, not for our own. Not because we don’t care about our own, but because we simply don’t understand how real this stuff is to the haredim, or that NCSY directs our teens to these haredi institutions, or that the Jewish Student Union is NCSY controlled.
NCSY is burning the candle at both ends. They are rapidly infiltrating our public school system, even as they continue to work with organizations and direct their alumni to haredi organizations that recruit Jews into haredi B’nai Niddahism.
NCSY has to choose one or the other. Or the mainstream Jewish community must make that choice for them.
Rabbi Furman established a “very successful†branch of Ohr Somayach (a quiescent fundamentalist outreach organization) in Johannesburg, South Africa, and was the head of Ohr Somayach Savoy until the shit hit the fan.
Amid a growing scandal, Rabbi Lewis Furman of Johannesburg, who was also a family counsellor and international speaker, is believed to have left South Africa for Israel where he is undergoing “rehabilitationâ€.
Furman — who is alleged by congregants to have been a “serial philanderer†— was forced to resign his position in South Africa and will not practise as a rabbi in this country again.
Of course, the haredi powers that be have insisted it is forbidden to talk about this scandal, and the Jewish newspapers in South Africa have so far declined to discuss this story. But…
“outraged members of the Jewish community, speaking on condition of anonymity, have accused the Rabbinate of “sweeping the matter under the carpet†and failing to be “transparent†about it.
They say Furman had a reputation as a “serial philanderer†who was caught out when he mistakenly sent an incriminating SMS to the wrong person.
Furman was apparently then confronted and assaulted by a cuckolded husband.
Still, the important things it that Rabbi Furman has the right hashkafas (philosophical and political outlooks). That’s why his tapes are still available from Ohr Somayach. Like this one on “Yetzer Hara – Friend or Foe?â€
Update:Failed Messiah connects the dots — South African Chief Rabbi Warren Goldstein who dismissed allegations as “unfounded speculation,” and attempted to silence discussion within the South African Jewish community (but still negotiated Furman’s exit) worked for Ohr Somayach.
There are many aspects of the haredi (ultra-Orthodox, as opposed to Modern Orthodox) baal teshuvahs experience that aren’t properly understood by the recruits of the movement. One of the many considerations that need to be understood better and earlier in the teshuvah process is the status of ben niddah, or child of impure menstrual blood. This is a child born to a woman who had not immersed herself in the mikvah, or ritual bath, prior to sexual relations, as is commanded by Jewish law.
Of course, the vast majority of liberal and secular Jewish women do not go to the mikvah prior to resuming sexual relations, and therefore most children of liberal and secular Jewish backgrounds are designated as “b’nai niddah.” In fact, the term BT (baal teshuvah) is today essentially synonymous with “ben niddah,” and this may be why the term baal teshuvah is employed more frequently in the haredi world for designating a newly observant member of the community than in the Modern Orthodox world. A BT does not just come from a different background as a haredi FFB (“frum,” or observant, from birth), but is also of a different status than an FFB. This is because there are negative personality characteristics associated with such a classification according to many ancient rabbinical commentaries.
Bnai Niddah are “corrupt and sinners.” They have a genetic disposition to do evil. They are prone to brazenness and rebelliousness, and do not treat great rabbis with the proper respect they deserve. Baal teshuvahs are not properly deferential towards great rabbis just because they were brought up with and retain vestiges of a liberal democratic approach to life and society. It is because their mother did not immerse in the mikvah, or at least, the BT’s unfortunate world view is exacerbated by the unclean bloodstains of menstruation on their souls.
These are considerations for haredim to not only refrain from marrying BTs, but also to refrain from marrying their children, as such a pagam (defect) is considered to be hereditary. Among other issues, there is enough of a discrimination problem that Beyond BT, a support website for established baal teshuvahs, openly discusses whether or not a baal teshuvah should hide his liberal/secular background.
So how does the haredi world continue to gain BTs who must accept his/her defective position in this quasi-caste system?
First of all, the b’nai niddah issue is delayed in terms of its explanation and understanding to haredi recruits. A BT is usually already well on his way into haredism before his status as a ben niddah is revealed to him. At that time, dismissive disclaimers from the “gedolim” about the status of b’nai niddah that are offered to the Baal Teshuvah to soften the blow. These disclaimers are offered every time the issue of ben niddah is brought up.
The majority of gedolim in my circle have dismissed the ben niddah concern nowadays. But the reasons they have come up with for doing so seem so strained. To paraphrase some examples from the same article:
The Steipler Gaon: The concern regarding a ben niddah’s character is merely statistical. If an individual shows good character, he is obviously an exception and the warning can be ignored.
Another opinion cited by the Steipler Gaon: The blemish of ben niddah is hereditary for an infinite number of generations, not just one, and in fact all of us are likely to have it (or some other blemish) somewhere back in our lineage. So we’re all on equal ground and have no reason not to marry each other.
Rav Moshe Feinstein: In many cases we can’t be certain the mother was truly a niddah mide’oraita, because maybe she went swimming after her period in a body of water that qualifies as a mikvah, and thereby became tehorah. (Rav Moshe does not discuss the fact that she would most likely have been wearing a tight-fitting bathing suit at the time.)
But how many exceptions are there? And how many women happen to go skinny dipping at just the right time? And are most haredim really willing to claim that somewhere along their yichus (lineage) something probably went wrong somewhere? Publicly, through marriage of a child to a ben/bas niddah? Even according to many who feel this is an issue that can be worked through, each subsequent generation will have to do so. Ben Niddah is the gift that keeps on giving.
So for the masses of haredim, the status of a “ben niddah” is a reality, even if it is not quite halachically mandated in terms of prohibition of union. They may be technically allowed to marry baal teshuvahs, but it is hardly advised. The relatively left-wing ultra-Orthodox and candid Rabbi Homnick once told a group of us how a child whose mother went to the mikvah was much more desirable to haredim even in terms of adoption.
It appears that The Gedolim (rabbinical leaders of the non-Chassidic haredi world) are not really dismissing the status of b’nai niddah, but only downplaying its role in the public discourse, which since the haredim are heavily in the recruiting business, makes a lot of sense strategically. A separate, lower class of Jew is still being created, but the lines are blurred just enough that its exact role and meaning can be obscured if one wants to see it through such a myopic lens, both in terms of the baal teshuvas themselves, and for normative haredim who seek marriage with them or their offspring (the latter situation arises more frequently than the former).
It is important that the issue of ben niddah is understood by liberal and secular Jews and their families when they are entering or considering entering haredism, not after the fact. They need to understand that in the eyes of many, they are not only second class citizens (forever) because they grew up in a secular or liberal environment, but that this status is justified by the circumstances of their creation, and should not be assuaged by the facile non-dismissals of the status of the baal teshuvah/ben niddah by select haredi leaders which many kiruv professionals, most of whom are haredi, will offer when pressed on the issue.
No, there is nothing unseemly about this arrangement at all. Just like there’s nothing untoward about having all Birthright Next programming in the largest BRI alumni community in the world be under the sole jurisdiction of an 
In Arfa’s words, MezuzaZine is “a 12 page Do-It-Yourself mitzva guide that contains hip and authentic articles and images about mezuzas.” 
Rabbi Furman established a “very successful†branch of Ohr Somayach (a quiescent fundamentalist outreach organization) in Johannesburg, South Africa, and was the head of Ohr Somayach Savoy until the shit hit the fan.
follow us on Twitter
follow us on Facebook
subscribe to our email