Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It’s been a few years since I wrote here, but I can see some of the same voices making the same noises.
It would be useful for the chareidi oilem in E’Y to take on a part of the burden that it can see fit and control – for example, take on the entirety of fire fighting services. Direct national service to that, and control the environment. Or some of the para medical services. Or some of the needs in hospitals. But don’t be reactive – take initiative and take responsibility.
The alternative is that in a few short months or years, an aroused electorate, who have just sacrificed their children in this Milchemes mitzva, will reverse every financial gain the Netanyahu aligned chareidi parties have achieved in terms of budgets. And you will look at this “shmad” of the greatest amount of learning in the history of Am Yisroel being done right now on the dime and the backs of those whose sons and daughters also sacrifice their lives to protect you, as a distant memory of bounty and good fortune. At that point you’ll have the luxury of pointing to those people who resent you and say “see, see, I told you they hate us!” but you’ll have a fraction of the resources and you’ll still be bleeding away the achdus of the whole Am, as well as the goodwill that helps fund your existence. Congratulations on making your own challenges bigger and more difficult.
And finally, if you can’t or don’t want to see the difference between “koichi v’oitzem yodi” and doing one’s hishtadlus, you haven’t been paying attention to anyone or anything going on around you for decades and fundamentally don’t understand your environment. That can’t be beneficial for you. You still have my tefillos for your full teshuva and greater understanding.
I don’t even know where to start. 1, Som1, do you think we are all ignorant? I’ve been interacting with politicians for three decades. Of all persuasions. I’m neither a democrat, nor a socialist. I have voted for conservative candidates and will do so again when there is one to vote for. You think Trump is a conservative?
SOm1, your answer on trade is completely nonsensical. I don’t think you understand what you are talking about. For example, on Aluminum – the US does not have and cannot make the raw materials in anywhere near needed quantities. It is a raw material, a resource extracted from the ground. They can only get it elsewhere, primarily from Canada. But Trump saw fit to put a tariff on Aluminum from Canada, even though a) he just signed a new free trade deal OF HIS OWN MAKING with them, b) It will raise prices for US manufacturers of anything using aluminum, because Canadian producers aren’t going to just eat the cost increase, they will pass it on to the people who buy their aluminum, which now costs them more to export. And as the manufacturers in the US pay more, they will have to either raise their prices, or lose profit margins. which do you think they will choose? c) the countries who were slapped with arbitrary and useless tariffs have all established their own equal and retaliatory tariffs on US materials or goods coming in to their countries in response. So their economies are looking elsewhere to buy cheaper goods not affected by counter-tariffs, and US producers are selling less of their product to these countries. The net effect of Trump’s trade grandstanding costs American jobs, decreases American exports, increases the trade deficit he always complains about, increases prices for American consumers, contravenes his own trade agreements and thus reduces both sales and personal income taxes collected by the US government…Nothing about Trump’s trade actions as described is capitalist – it is interventionist policy, just like command economies in the 20th century used, to their detriment and ultimate demise. It does absolutely nothing to protect America, American jobs, American prices. It has embarrassed and likely hurt the reelection chances of republican governors across the country, whose state economies depend on Free Trade with their largest trading partner (for most of them, that’s Canada).
There simply isn’t any way to defend his actions on this that makes any sense. Please don’t embarrass yourself any further. Stop trying.
As I wrote and you both ignored, its not about Biden (who, for the record, condemned riots and looting, repeatedly, and even Trump doesn’t accuse him of being a socialist (just of being weak and thus potentially controlled by socialists – who couldn’t even manage to seriously influence their party’s platform at the convention, as powerful as they are). I don’t need to be convinced that conservative politics (for me, of the moderate sort) are better for all of us. Throwing mud at Biden is irrelevant to me – and to increasingly large numbers of the American electorate. I’m not basing my opinion on Biden’s strengths and weaknesses. I know he is not ideal. Its simply a matter of what a piece of work the President is, how he has failed the American people and betrayed its allies, how he has spread his immorality around him like a virus, how he shares no values with any competent military commander I have ever met or read about, and how his incompetence in handling COVID has cost too many lives.
I don’t even know where to start. 1, Som1, do you think we are all ignorant? I’ve been interacting with politicians for three decades. Of all persuasions. I’m neither a democrat, nor a socialist. I have voted for conservative candidates and will do so again when there is one to vote for. You think Trump is a conservative?
SOm1, your answer on trade is completely nonsensical. I don’t think you understand what you are talking about. For example, on Aluminum – the US does not have and cannot make the raw materials in anywhere near needed quantities. It is a raw material, a resource extracted from the ground. They can only get it elsewhere, primarily from Canada. But Trump saw fit to put a tariff on Aluminum from Canada, even though a) he just signed a new free trade deal OF HIS OWN MAKING with them, b) It will raise prices for US manufacturers of anything using aluminum, because Canadian producers aren’t going to just eat the cost increase, they will pass it on to the people who buy their aluminum, which now costs them more to export. And as the manufacturers in the US pay more, they will have to either raise their prices, or lose profit margins. which do you think they will choose? c) the countries who were slapped with arbitrary and useless tariffs have all established their own equal and retaliatory tariffs on US materials or goods coming in to their countries in response. So their economies are looking elsewhere to buy cheaper goods not affected by counter-tariffs, and US producers are selling less of their product to these countries. The net effect of Trump’s trade grandstanding costs American jobs, decreases American exports, increases the trade deficit he always complains about, increases prices for American consumers, contravenes his own trade agreements and thus reduces both sales and personal income taxes collected by the US government…Nothing about Trump’s trade actions as described is capitalist – it is interventionist policy, just like command economies in the 20th century used, to their detriment and ultimate demise. It does absolutely nothing to protect America, American jobs, American prices. It has embarrassed and likely hurt the reelection chances of republican governors across the country, whose state economies depend on Free Trade with their largest trading partner (for most of them, that’s Canada).
There simply isn’t any way to defend his actions on this that makes any sense. Please don’t embarrass yourself any further. Stop trying.
As I wrote and you both ignored, its not about Biden (who, for the record, condemned riots and looting, repeatedly, and even Trump doesn’t accuse him of being a socialist (just of being weak and thus potentially controlled by socialists – who couldn’t even manage to seriously influence their party’s platform at the convention, as powerful as they are). I don’t need to be convinced that conservative politics (for me, of the moderate sort) are better for all of us. Throwing mud at Biden is irrelevant to me – and to increasingly large numbers of the American electorate. I’m not basing my opinion on Biden’s strengths and weaknesses. I know he is not ideal. Its simply a matter of what a piece of work the President is, how he has failed the American people and betrayed its allies, how he has spread his immorality around him like a virus, how he shares no values with any competent military commander I have ever met or read about, and how his incompetence in handling COVID has cost too many lives.
Most people in general are hypocrites. We are no different. But we don’t make public policy or state publicly that American women who (wrongly from the POV of orthodox Judaism) are following the law of the land and getting legal abortions should be punished (under what statute or law, federal or otherwise, I don’t know, but Trump said it in 2016).
Also, unlike Trump, most Orthodox Jews have a moral compass. When Trump was asked by Maureen Dowd in the Spring of 2016 if he’s ever been involved with someone who had an abortion, he refused to answer.
Ben Levi. It was a spencer troll (he’s done it before) and also immediately repudiated by Biden’s campaign. MAybe read the whole story, instead of the half Tucker Carlson wants you to read. That’s what I do when I see something that doesn’t smell right from the likes of Rachel Maddow. Don’t be a sheep and let someone else do your thinking for you.
“yichusdik Biden is putting on a good act now. He is a career liar and the radical left enemies are breathing at the gates. You have to be insane to give them power.”
Wow, 1, that is a well reasoned argument supported by facts. I guess I’ll change my mind now.
Could you, perhaps, address the issues I raised? Maybe the question about command, and endangering your troops. Or the one about COVID, even if only 0.1% is due to his lack of leadership. Or the morality issues? Maybe explain how his stable genius is helping the manufacturers who need aluminum, or the dairy farmers?
The assumptions here are breathtaking.
I am Canadian by birth and a Permanent Resident in the US. I have been a conservative for almost 30 years, since shortly after I was old enough to vote. I’ve worked on conservative campaigns, raised money for conservative causes, lobbied on conservative and “republican’ issues in Canada and in the US, met with Federal and cabinet officials and representatives, Prime Ministers, White House staff, and and congressional reps on these issues. I’ve fundraised for conservative candidates, and knocked on doors with them in their districts. Does anybody here who screams MAGA at the top of their lungs have these experiences and credentials? Who are you to call me or the many like me a socialist? You haven’t done the work; You probably haven’t even bothered to vote half the time.
People like me feel that this President, though he has done several things that were good for Am Yisroel, is in almost every other respect unfit to lead. He has no moral code or compass. Take, for example, his opposition to abortion. Good. Nu, who here isn’t, in all but the most specific circumstances? AH. But he was OK taking the Regeneron drug last week, made from human fetuses. For him, experimentally and with anecdotal effectiveness, it was OK. But for others, the product of abortions? Nooooo.
He is supposed to be the commander in chief. I know many people who have served in the US, Canadian, Russian and Israel militaries. Many of these commanded troops, if even only a handful. Others were senior officers commanding thousands. Not a single one of them that I know would have endangered the lives of his troops for a photo op like the President did on Sunday to his security detail. Not one. Do YOU know anyone who has command who would?
He is a serial adulterer. Admitted fact. He is a liar to both the IRS and to his bankers; documented fact. He cheats people who have done work for him, all the time, and dares them to sue him – I heard this firsthand from a lawyer who worked for him who was IN THE ROOM when he did this. A frum lawyer, a baal tzedaka, a Republican and community leader who vowed never to work for him again.
He abandoned the Kurds to die at the hands of the Turks because the tyrant of Istanbul berated him. The Kurds, who fought and died beside Americans. Who are friends of Israel.
He has not said a word to the Russians about putting bounties on the heads of US soldiers in Afghanistan. NOT. ONE. WORD.
That’s the morality issue.
He doesn’t understand trade. He puts tariffs on materials that the US doesn’t make enough of to look tough to his constituents, but because US manufacturers have to import these (now more expensive because of those tariffs) materials to make their products, all he does is raise prices for Americans, while also inviting the inevitable counter-tariffs. He has done this repeatedly. For a conservative this looks and sounds like counterproductive socialist policy. And yet you support him. Mazel Tov. You understand trade even less than he does.
For someone who declared that he would hire only the best, He has had a revolving door of senior and cabinet level staff. If Rex Tillerson, John Kelly, HR McMaster, Jim Mattis, Gary Cohn, and John Bolton were so terrible, why on earth did this brilliant stable genius hire them? And if they weren’t (Including several of the most revered military officers of the last half century) Why did they quit?
And, finally, COVID. He created multiple superspreader events, for his own campaign and his own edification. He has endangered every employee of the white house. It is small and cramped in much of the west wing, with not very good circulation. I know, I’ve been there. Have you, dear critics?
Herman Cain.
One man. who was at the Tulsa campaign event, maskless as he was encouraged to be, a few days before testing positive. He died on July 30th.
209,000 more have died.
If I grant you that 99.9% of his actions on COVID were right (and I do not, but for argument’s sake, lets say I did), that leaves 209 dead who his wrong decisions killed. 209. So far.
Charles Manson killed 9 people.
Jeffrey Dahmer killed 17 people.
Ted Bundy killed 30 people.
209.
Would you vote for someone who is responsible for 209 deaths he could have prevented, even if he didn’t kill them directly? Imagine someone who purposefully drove through 209 crosswalks again and again mowing down pedestrians each time. Perhaps not killing intentionally, but negligently driving that car.
Really, you’d vote for him?
Now, if there was a real Republican on the ticket, I wouldn’t even look at Joe Biden. And I worry about the left wing of the Democratic Party more than I have had to in the past. But he isn’t a socialist and if you paid attention at the Democratic convention, the Biden Platform that was adopted by the party rejected almost every significant socialist idea brought up. In fact, it was more pro Israel (surprising even me) than any Democratic platform in the last 30 years. And Kamala Harris among all of the other candidates aside from Mike Bloomberg and possibly Pete Buttigieg, was the most centrist and moderate, as far from Sanders et al as one could be in the party. You wouldn’t be able to tell, of course, if you just watch one sided news. (I watch or read Fox, CNN, Bloomberg and MSNBC). The spin is amazing.
As with most things, it comes down to not who you most want, but who will do the least damage. America is hemorrhaging. And conservatives like me can see it. I am neither a liberal nor am I “woke”, but there is absolutely no compelling reason to vote for Trump in November (including Israel; agreeing that he’s done good there, what can he realistically add that he hasn’t already done?) and too many reasons not to.
It is possible to look at this question and reasonably come to the conclusion that since Trump has done several positive things for Israel and against Iran and seems friendly to Jews, he deserves a Jew’s vote. I don’t dispute that. Should we only be asking one question, though?
Should Jews be voting for a serial adulterer?
Should Jews be voting for someone who overvalues his assets to banks and undervalues them to the IRS, thus defrauding both the banks and the taxpayers?
Should Jews be voting for someone who abandons his allies, like the Kurds (who are friendly with Jews and Israel), at the behest of an antisemitic despot (Erdogan)?
Should Jews be voting for someone who will not acknowledge nor react to the Russians putting a bounty on the killing of American soldiers in Afghanistan?
Should Jews be voting for someone who sets up tariffs on materials that are scarce in the US (aluminum) coming from an ally (Canada) when there are no local sources to take up the slack, forcing US companies to spend more and charge more to make anything that needs aluminum, thereby ultimately costing the consumer more and accomplishing nothing? Demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of international trade? (The same can be said about dairy, steel, semiconductor and other import/export fields where he has wielded tariffs in ways injurious to US producers and consumers).
Should Jews be voting for someone who describes veterans and fallen soldiers as losers and suckers?
Should Jews be voting for someone who is considered a danger to democracy by three of the most respected Generals in the last 50 years, all of whom worked for him and left their positions?
Should Jews be voting for someone who five recent Chairs of the Joint chiefs of staff feel is unfit for command, and who was rebuked (in a letter to all Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine and Coast Guard) by his own Chair of the Joint Chiefs for using the Army to clear a peaceful demonstration?
Should Jews be voting for someone who needed the threatened resignation of his Jewish commerce secretary to be forced to condemn neo nazis instead of describing ‘good people on both sides’ after Charlottesville?
Should Jews be voting for someone who refuses to pay his bills to tradesmen, lawyers, and other professionals and dares them to sue him? (First person experience of this from two frum Jewish sources, one a well known major 5 towns philanthropist and Republican)
I am not getting in to issues of immigration, whether there is or isn’t systemic racism, policing, respect for the law (what we call dina demalchusa dina), environmental protection, or even the efficacy or failure of his response to COVID. It isn’t my intention to expect that everyone will vote as I do or will have the same political perspective. Do what your conscience demands of you. But I do think that anyone with the privilege of voting needs to consider not only the OP’s question, but the impact of the answers to all of these other questions on Jews and all other Americans as well.
May your disdain for life and health be elevated to love for your fellow Jew; May your ignorance of the national responsibilities of Am Yisroel be replaced with hakoras hatov for the streets, the hospitals, the electricity and water, the post and the regulations that govern maaseh vematan, and of course for the young men who put their lives on the line for every jew every day. Of course, living in medina hakedosha of Monsey, that probably means nothing to you, but it means something to the God fearing inhabitants of Israel, or it should.
The government of Israel started off well but has handled the pandemic for the last 4 months awfully. I make no excuses for incompetence; but your implicit accusation is that they want to uproot Torah and are using this to do so.
You think too much of yourself. To the extent that it doesn’t interfere with their lives, doesn’t ignore the shared responsibilities of citizenship, or cause a spread of a deadly virus, THEY DON”T CARE what you believe or how you practice. Neither the government nor the individuals who are not chareidi have the time, energy, inclination or incentive to try to erase Torah. In fact here is more Torah being learned by more people -subsidized in many waysby the medina THAN AT ANY TIME IN JEWISH HISTORY. And you think they are trying to destroy Torah?
May you be blessed with more clarity and may HKBH take the blinders of sinas chinom from your eyes.
GadolHadorah, Yes, and the school is now known as SAR, and both its preschool/primary/elementary school as well as its High school are growing and thriving, and were able to bring the whole community (from centrist O all the way through to Open O), well beyond their own families, together during covid this past spring.
That is BH the nature of RIverdale’s community. Other Torah observant communities, both Chareidi and Modern Orthodox, have other models for success.
Some of you may have forgotten, but we Jews don’t create or measure success and growth by literally or figuratively stepping on the backs and heads of others to claw our way to some fantasy of supremacy.
We Jews help and encourage each other. Act like a Jew, not a barbarian.
As Charlie can attest, the RIverdale MO community also has the fast growing Riverdale Minyan, The bustling YI of North Riverdale, as well as a couple of diverse shtibelach, and the Whitehall minyan.
What sets it apart – from most communities, is that almost without exception, the entire community comes together on issues of community wide importance. On these there is little daylight between HIR and RJC and TRM and YI of North Riverdale. When it came to setting guidelines for the community during COVID, virtually every shul/community. delivered the collective guidance.
MO communities that aren’t riven by ideological battles, or, that can rise above them, will grow even stronger.
And all of those on the right who criticize them or their weaknesses certainly still seem ready to take their big cheques for their mosdos.
Has anyone who makes the “Lincoln was a Republican, and thus the republicans today are somehow more tolerant, less racist and better people than the democrats” argument actually learned about his politics?
Did you know he corresponded and was on friendly terms with Karl Marx? That he championed the rights of labor and workers over businesses? Does this sound republican to you?Like Marx, he believed, and I quote “things ought to belong to those whose labor has produced them” – the means of production and consequent wealth, in Marxist terms.
His inaugural address didn’t talk about tax cuts, or closed borders, or trade wars. It talked about labor and capital. “Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
In other words, Lincoln was unambiguously a socialist. Does today’s republican party lay claim to that?
It is sad indeed for America that the Democratic party is fighting a civil war between moderates and radical progressives, and the moderates aren’t winning, while the republican party, which would ordinarily get my vote, has destroyed its credibility through its enthusiastic embrace of populist demagoguery, insensible policy on trade, taxation, gun rights and health care, while playing defense for a confused and incoherent foreign policy which alienates friends, empowers enemies, and has simply weakened America.
Just because the man who freed the slaves was a republican in the 1860s, doesnt mean that the republicans of today share anything more with him than a name.
It has literally been years since I posted here. I look at these “reasons” and “explanations”, and I shake my head. ‘plus ca change, plus c’est le meme choses’.
HKBH brought this upon the world just as he brings every wonderful and every terrible thing. He has a ketz in his plan and this is part of the path towards it. If there is anything to learn from it, perhaps it lies in these things that have become self evident during this time.
1. The hedonist on the beach and the illui in the beis medrash can have few things in common beyond having two arms and two legs. But one thing they do share is that willful ignorance of vinishmartem meod lenafshoseichem can kill either one of them. It is each person’s responsibility to safeguard their health and that of their loved ones, to do their own hishtadlus in this respect. It isn’t a matter of communal guidance from someone else who isnt a medical professional or not listening to one. It is a commandment mideoraisa for each one of us. The consequences of not taking this personal achrayus are rachmono litzlan abundantly and horrifically clear.
2. Generosity is vital, but gratitude is paramount. We say thank you to HKBH every day. He sends us sustenance, inspiration, food, medicine, treatment, first response. He sends us the means to offer help to the deathly ill through donating plasma. If someone sent you a gift through a shaliach, would you not thank the shaliach?
3. What you do choose to do impacts others. What you choose not to do impacts others. If you choose not to socially distance, YOU are responsible for the consequences, not the person or the rov or the kol koreh who told you to ignore it, just as surely as the pastor in Louisiana or the partygoer in Daytona. Spreading the virus if you had an opportunity to avoid doing so is a transgression. It’s a perfect example of a Laav she’ein bo maaseh. And while you can go learn gemorah makkos to determine if you are chayyav malkus for it or not, you’ll have to answer to HKBH at the end of your days about the lives you may have taken.
4. There is tremendous chesed being done on behalf of those who are mourning, those who are old and infirm, those who are housebound, those who simply need someone to talk to because they are alone and scared. This has brought out the best in us and we should all be proud of our community for always giving, especially b’eis tzoroh.
5. Suffering is a terrible thing. It is terrible for everyone. The playing field is level, now. HKBH has determined that the tzadik and the bulvan are both potential victims. In some things all of HKBH’s creations are the same. So, please remember. Pride does not have to be Gaivah.
I’m sure there are many more lessons to learn that have nothing to do with sheitels, or mamzeirim, or anything else. You want an explanation? HKBH is the beginning and the end, and all he does is for a reason. He doesn’t share that with bosor ve’dom, not anymore. Learn what you can from the experience, but don’t have the arrogance to think you know the reason.
It’s amazing. As the French say, plus ca change, plus c’est les meme choses – the more things change, the more they stay the same. I’ve been pretty quiet here for a long time, not having as much time to interact. but this caught my eye, because Rav Teichtal’s sefer – the sefer of a Gadol who was not saved from the Shoah-with its svaros and innumerable sources and the emotion of one seeking HKBH’s rachamim in a terrible time, has made a huge impression on me. But I see that nothing has changed. Joseph is up to his old tricks. Something nagged at me in reading his long winded reply, so I did a little checking. His post is plagiarized – without attribution even to the site, let alone the author, from his old standby, the frumteens website, indexed and posted at frumteendex on Sunday, August 27, 2006. Aside from the judgementalism leveled against the Kodosh R’Teichtal HYD, Isn’t it ossur to do what you just did, Joseph? I’ve been told that R’Moshe Feinstein considered plagiarism an issur Mideoraisa. I’m looking for the source as I write.
If you want to have a discussion of the halachic validity of R’Teichtal’s work, it is valid to say he was in the minority of Eastern European Gedolim of the pre war period. So saying his sefer isn’t halachic, while incorrect in my personal view, could be true, but using that logic one would also have to say that minority views in mishna and gemara or in disputes between rishonim or achronim that aren’t the ultimate halacha are also “not halachic”. Are you prepared to say that? Sounds disrespectful to me, but I guess I’m not well versed enough in the halachos of respecting talmidei chachomim to know for sure.
But to say it is not serious? This great man wrote from the depths of the gehenom of the ghetto, pleading for yeshuas hashem, and you, Joseph, in your holiness, wisdom and experience have the temerity to say it is not serious? I’ll be sure to be mispallel for you this RH so that you might in some way earn HKBH’s forgiveness for this haughtiness.
May HKBH have rachmonus on his children, and may we witness the conclusion of the geulah bimheiro biyomeinu.
Thanks, I’m surprised I missed that
Wow, visiting the kedoshim who gave their lives to save Jews. Sounds reprehensible. Could lead to, who knows, hakoras hatov or ahavas yisroel! We wouldn’t want that now, would we?
DY, I think you might be deliberately obtuse here. I didn’t offer an opinion on whether the mosdos should take money from a thief, a mechallel shabbos, or someone who doesnt adhere to tznius. That wasn’t my point at all. My point was and is about the posters HERE, and what they say about the pollution of the machne by people in the 5T and elsewhere who don’t dress in a tzniusdik fashion. About whether THEY are so outraged by this breach of communal tznius that they will demonstrate that outrage by not taking money from the “guilty” parties THEY are talking about, or asking the mosdos and leaders they are aligned with to demonstrate their righteous outrage in the same way.
You turned it into something else, and set up my “hypocrisy” deflecting attention from my point. I won’t be obliged to satisfy your deliberate reluctance to address my point.
Neville – his question was answered. See my response above.
And so, in the willingness to take funds from those who are not adhering to standards here publicly proclaimed as the measure of whether a community is being polluted or not, my question has been answered too.
DY, I have done, though I am working for a great Jewish organization that is not directly in the kiruv field at the moment.
In most cases, I would not turn it down. As I indicated above, I do not put myself, my community, my employer(s) or my ideals on a pedestal, and proclaim them to be the standard by which others should measure if they want to be considered “frum” “heilige” “erliche” Jews. So without that baggage, I can make a nuanced determination, with the input of the halachic authority of the organization, with my conscience, with the standards set by the board of directors of the org, and with the law of the land. Because I am not trumpeting my actions as the gold standard (or indeed the standard for anyone other than myself) I won’t suffer from that aroma of hypocrisy that is so hard to avoid once one has stepped in it.
Please don’t be disingenuous, DY. I didn’t say it was stolen, I said it was “like” buying an esrog with stolen cash in that it comes from an impure source. That it is dirty. And respectfully, DY, I’m neither being ridiculous, nor deserving of such a shot. Its a serious moral question.
And before you ask how I would act, that’s not the point. I don’t hold myself or my element of the community up as a standard far above others. These posters do exactly that, so, I’m putting their morals to the question that their posts engendered.
Truly don’t know if the OP is a troll or not.
And, objectively speaking, Individuals in the 5 Towns and many other places have an obligation to themselves and to HKBH to make better choices in what they wear, no doubt.
Some of the comments from righteous, heilige posters here from communities and environments that justifiably see the immodesty here described as a pollution that must be stopped from infecting their community, they make me wonder…
Are your mosdos still soliciting funds from these families who don’t meet your standards? Are the Baalei Tzedoko in the 5 Towns, among the MO and CO who wouldn’t get the Omud, let alone an Aliyah in your shuls, still among the most important and substantive donors to your Yeshivas, your seminaries, your schools, your camps, your community safety nets? Because from my experience, they are exactly that, and they have been for a very long time.
Do you not find taking their money whilst proclaiming they are polluting the morals of am Yisroel to be even slightly hypocritical?
It seems to me, that if you have the courage of your convictions, it is dirty money. Its like buying an Esrog with stolen cash, and your mosdos are better off and purer if you don’t ask for or take their money.
So, the next obvious step for those who take this issue as seriously as they post about it, is to go to those who collect for these communal mosdos, even to the roshei yeshiva and manhigim, and DEMAND that they stop taking this filthy lucre.
Who’s first?
Joseph, Joseph, Joseph. Still plagiarizing from Frumteens without attribution. I thought you were beyond that already.
Neville –
Thank you for your clear response. I’ll agree that rhetorically, my anecdotals and yours balance or cancel each other out; but I’ve also looked at and referred to the two most important studies on Orthodox Jewish identity in the past two decades, maybe ever, and I haven’t found evidence to bear out what you are saying, while finding evidence that even when an individual’s level of observance is lessening, he still identifies as observant.
I don’t agree that usage immediately adapts definition. If I accept that the shifting usage is not deliberate and self serving , it still fits into several of the categories of Blank’s typology for semantic change. I’m not a linguist, so I can’t get more specific; I couldn’t say with confidence which is likeliest; but one of the things that is accepted across the board is that the change is almost always an evolutionary process, one which does not happen in the space of a few years. Your example using the word that has now entered the common lexicon has taken over 100 years since it came into less parochial use.
As for your assertion about how the Modern Orthodox (who as you know are not monolithic in their views) use the term chareidi, Yes, I have encountered it used negatively, but I have encountered that in centrist orthodox contexts too. Importantly, it is uncommon, in my experience. For myself, I think all of these subsets are ridiculous. One is observant or one is not. One may be stricter in one’s obervance, or less so. One may be more inclined to follow or adhere to the worldview and practice of one manhig or another, but that is more precisely defined, in my opinion, as a function of identity rather than observance. Which leads back to my point that when the word “frum” has been conflated with other variables which give it rather more meaning than a description of a standard of halachic practice, it doesn’t reflect anything more than the preferences and prejudices of the user, even if these are unconscious.
As for offense: I know who I am, where I came from, and who I’ll have to give account to in the future. I’m neither threatened nor offended by what you call yourself. You can call yourself an angel or a broomstick if it makes you happy. Not my business. What you call others? Well, if your sense of self identity depends on how you define others rather than how you define yourself, you’ve got bigger issues than my concerns with linguistic precision to deal with.
Neville, I’m not addressing the other elements of the issue posted about because though I am confident in my perspective on the IDF and the participation of eligible draftees, I don’t feel it is necessary or useful to try to convince others on this issue that I am right and they are wrong. I respect most of the opinions I have seen in this thread even though I disagree with several.
You seem to think that its just semantics, that these words are defined by their anecdotal occasional usage, and “whether I like it or not” there has come to be a trend to define modern orthodox out of the definition of “frum”.
Well, the modern orthodox aren’t doing so. In almost 50 years of being in and around Orthodox communities ranging from chassidish to yeshivish to modern orthodox, I have never encountered a single individual who said I am observant but not frum. Further, nothing in the massive surveys by Pew in 2013 and Nishma in 2017 indicates that MO self define as specifically “not frum”. Even the smaller proportion moving left in the surveys maintain their self identification. And the use of the phrase, “too frummie” doesn’t just suggest but actually means that it is a different point on the spectrum THAT THEY ARE IN that is being described as less desired.
There has come to be a trend? Perhaps a trend among those who prefer to be vocally judgmental about others and insist on a definition that incorporates unzer and andere thinking. But not a trend among those, as you said including chabad, for whom achdus and building on common interests are paramount considerations.
Orwell warned about the misuse, abuse, and abduction of language. It’s something that those in or seeking power, especially totalitarian regimes do to covertly shape opinion and assert supremacy. It is disheartening to see it being done within our community without (I hope) nefarious ends but similar disregard for truth and clarity.
“outed” “MO” “anti-frum” “extremist”
Neville, its not the precision or clarity I’m seeking that has been triggered. Clearly something she said triggered YOU, otherwise you wouldn’t have used these provocative and contextually negative terms.
Language evolves. Facts don’t. That which generations have deemed to be frum practice remains so, thus using the term to describe something different isn’t evolution, it’s falsehood. As some might say these days, its Fake News. Now, I don’t know if you intended it with arrogance, or innocence, or ignorance. Or all three. I assumed innocence, so I wrote questioningly but not confrontationally above. If you’d like to disabuse me of my being don l’kaf zchus, please, continue with the sarcasm.Neville Chamberlain – Please, tell me, who gave you the right to arrogate exclusive use of the word “frum”? For generations the word has meant “observant”. It has encompassed the entire spectrum of halachic Jewish practice. Yeshiva bochrim – frum. many, many soldiers in the IDF, frum. Mrs. Sara Levine, frum. You, frum. Me, frum. students at BMG, frum. Students at YU, frum. Students at Bais Yaakov, frum. Students at Frisch, Moriah, or BPY, frum. chasidim -frum. dati-tzioni-frum.
To paraphrase a line from a children’s movie from many years ago ” I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Language is elastic. when one twists it to promote or achieve one’s own ends, it eventually reverts back to its original shape and meaning. Frum is frum, and beyond that we are all still responsible for one another even beyond the definitions of observance. Responsible for the ol of learning torah, and responsible for the ol of defending am yisrael physically as HKBH has made possible and essential. And shockingly, the two responsibilities are NOT mutually exclusive. hundreds of thousands of FRUM Jews have done both for longer than the medina has even existed.
And every single one of us, every Jew, should have Hakoras Hatov for the fallen, HYD, who demonstrated this, every day of their service.
@whitecar, lol. I’ve been posting here since 2008, but not so much lately.
The moment one begins to write, they form their own perspective, and deliver it even when they fervently want to be objective. There is essentially no such thing as complete objectivity in writing news, commentary, or headlines. To expect it is unrealistic, to demand it is foolish, and to consider it disgusting, well, considering the examples you brought of Berlanders and Lev Tahor, I think your disgust is misdirected.
And as far as it goes, there is some degree of objectivity attempted by the editors. I can recall posting something that wasn’t very flattering about the actions of a particular Rebbe of a particular chasidus many years ago, and even though their editorial bent was not particularly favorable to that chasidus and that Rebbes shitos (including, aptly, his direction on “how to think”), they wouldn’t post my comment, feeling it was disrespectful. Though I disagreed, I respected their prerogative and their standards.In all seriousness, it may be that many who ascribe to a world view where they turn to others for not only halachic and hashkafic guidance but also for guidance in “how to think” are particularly sensitive when they see such coming from a media source.
It may seem obvious but it might be worth considering gathering all the halachic and hashkafic guidance you can, then gathering multiple perspectives on news that is relevant to you, and then FORM AN OPINION OF YOUR OWN BASED ON ALL THE POSITIVE INFLUENCES AND OBJECTIVE FACTS that you have at your disposal.
I think and hope that’s what YWN has in mind.
I believe that there are several reasons why the battle has been downplayed, some of which have been touched on here. The overarching issue is this. For good reason, the chachomim in the post churban and post bar kochba period recognized that the exercise of the national/peoplehood aspects of Judaism’s responsibilities was dangerous, potentially threatening the survival of the Jewish people. So they determined to emphasize the personal, familial, and congregational aspects. That involved a complete shift from the beis hamikdosh to the beis medrash, as the focal point, from the shulchan in the BHaM to the shulchan in the home, from the kehuna to the rabonus, from the meticulous performance of korbonos to the meticulous study of Torah shebe’al pe. (The question of re-emphasis now in a time of Jewish sovereignty in eretz yisroel is a very important one to grapple with)
Thus in framing the story – from the time of the first Seder we’ve always been about making these stories fascinating to our families – that which was relatable to the people had to be more about neiros and less about swords and battles.
A second possibility – ambivalence about the chashmonaim. By the time that the customs of chanukah were being formalized, the chashmonaim had usurped the kingship from the descendants of Dovid Hamelech, begun the process of hellenization, and essentially invited the Romans to become involved against the greek faction of Demetrius. It is not widely appreciated that the war with the Greeks and their Jewish supporters did not stop with the capture of the beis hamikdosh, – the Greeks continued to send armies into Judea, succeeding in killing several of the Macabi brothers in battle, and they occupied the Acra fortress overlooking the Har Habayis on the northwest themselves or through proxies pretty much until the Roman influence began. So the fruits of the “victory” were less clear and harder to demonstrate than the miracle of the lights.
Finally, it has long been my question about Chanukah – How much did the “victory” cost us? HKBH acts in history, and within his cheshbon this was a conflict between the urban and the rural, between the elite and the farmers, between the Yerushalmi kohanim who were hellenized and the outliers who were not, between the coastal cities and the hilltowns. It was a civil war, and like all civil wars, it had long lasting consequences. Because of the pushback by the Greeks, the ascending Romans got a foothold, which became a tyranny. It led to the churban bayis. Because the chashmonaim coopted the monarchy, every rebel movement for 150 years was led by a davidic claimant, including the one which eventually morphed into christianity, and we know how much that cost us, up until the present day.
Division has been our yerusha since the brothers sold Yosef into slavery. Chanukah and more specifically its aftermath seems to be yet another manifestation of that.
I’d love to hear a good reason to celebrate the victory as well as the miracle of the lights. I think its just as important, and the sovereignty of the Jewish people demands it. But history tells a harsh tale, so maybe we’re better off focusing on the neis of the lights until we can be unified AS WELL as sovereign, and bring the era of Moshiach tzidkeinu bimheira biyomeinu.
Joseph – did I say anything about Obama? I don’t care about Obama. I don’t need to hear Trump talking points about better than him or locking her up. I wont be gaslit by you into defending Obama either.
In a nutshell, not losing as terribly as you think you could have is not a victory to trumpet, unless you are so insecure that you need to convince yourself that something that is simply and objectively a negative referendum on your presidency is actually a thumbs up.
The most important statistics I shared were the huge net voter swing away from republicans across the board, even in districts they won, and the shift to democrats in the suburbs. You can temporize all you want, but I listened to several REPUBLICAN commentators this week who saw these issues as huge problems for them going in to 2020.
I frankly think the leadership of both parties are useless or worse. The only real hope I have coming out of this election is that more veterans were elected this time than at any time since 1946 and 1948. Those veterans learned how to work together for common goals on the battlefield, and they accomplished incredible things as a legislature.
There’s no joy for a sensible person in The Democrats picking up more than 35 seats IF neither party works with the other for the common good of the electorate. Those who govern have to do more than win elections. And every important piece of legislation even on Israel/Jewish issues (Jackson-Vanik, covert help for soviet, syrian and Ethiopian aliya, Iron Dome funding) happened because both parties worked together. The republicans didn’t play ball when they had both houses, and stymied themselves several times without the democrats help. Now the house is in democrat hands, I have no more confidence in them to avoid partisanship. They showed poor partisan judgement on how they handled the Kavanaugh evidence, and it blew up on them.
That being said, POTUS was simply wrong on the numbers when he claimed victory in the elections.
Fact: Democrats won control of seven governorships. The republicans gained one. 87 state legislatures held elections in 2018, and the Democratic Party gained control of at least 350 state seats and seven state chambers. Democrats gained unified control of seven state governments and broke unified Republican control of four state governments.
Fact: over 6 million more total votes for democrats than republicans in Federal races.
Fact: most seats picked up by democrats since the Nixon administration
Fact: about a 10% average shift to democratic candidates in ALL races, even those the republicans won. That is an incredible shift.
Fact: republicans got slaughtered in suburban electoral districts. democrats picked up at least 22 seats in this fastest growing element measured by population density. 121 million people live in suburban districts, and at least 83 million of them are now represented by democrats.
Fact: The republicans picked up one seat in the senate. NO ONE was predicting they were going to lose senate seats. Nat Silver, the noted statistician who tracked probabilities right up to the election, gave the Democrats only a 15% chance of increasing their Senate Tally. That is only 2% lower than the probability he calculated for the republicans to increase their house seats (17%) . So it is misleading to characterize accomplishing something you were 5 times more likely to accomplish than not as much of a victory.
Boruch Hashem for the return of Ruach Hakodesh. I’m glad that someone has such certainty about the ways and purposes of HKBH.
Also, glad someone is making the distinctions between unzer and andere. Somebody should. The murderers sure don’t.
.
.
.
.
I don’t know about the rest of you. To me the kedoshim were – are – all unzer.On second thought, Yerushalmit is probably right. I grew up in Toronto and definitely listened to Pirchei Choir music around that time. Im probably mixing it up with a London Boys Choir album I’m sure we had at the time. And I think it may have been just a year or two before the Miami/Toronto collaboration album.
I think it was the London Boys Choir, also known as the London Pirchei choir, maybe 1977 or 1978
Best I’ve used in a long time is the Rabbi Jonathan Sacks Hagaddah. Includes both commentary on the text and stand alone essays.
I’ll try to maintain the decorum that seems to be escaping you, K-Cup.
If it needs elaboration, I read Hitchens for years and years before he passed away, both his articles and his books. I studied Russell in school, read him in different contexts afterwards, and while I am familiar with several instances where he describes his approach in agnostic terms, I was also familiar with the scale he gave, which, it seems to me, is pretty close to absolute in its assertion of non-belief. I mentioned Sartre, and I could have used Camus as an example ( I have read much more of his work) , but as you know, not all those writers and philosophers described as existentialist were atheists, so I didn’t, for example, use Kierkegaard. As for “knowing a lot about existentialism” because I took two courses on it, I didn’t make that claim, and I don’t appreciate being gaslit.
I’m actually not that interested in Dawkins. Referencing him and these others spoke to the point I was making to Oyoyoy, that’s all.
Also in the context of the discussion, these authors, and several more I am not as familiar with addressed the issue of belief within the context of the 20th century, its movements, its horrors, and the way in which most if not all of them built upon the religious, political, and social movements of the past – where the earlier generations of non believers and their philosophies resided. Hence their relevance in discussion of previous generations of thinkers.
As I indicated, I was responding to oyoyoy’s assertion that today’s atheists were at a low level. In the context that is escaping you, it is the corollary of the Jewish experience we are discussing. I thought he was talking about the philosophers who discuss belief and non belief, while he later clarified to me that he was talking about the average Joe, who we both agree doesn’t even think about belief enough to consider himself an atheist or not. We’ve come to a mutual understanding. You, however, seem to need to tear a strip off of me. I hope that it gives you some satisfaction.
Ah, K-Cup, aren’t we clever. Typing on my IPhone and I used Bertram instead of Bertrand, and dropped an L in his last name.
All of the authors I mentioned read the same authors of the past and have quoted them, on both the theistic and atheistic sides. I don’t need to compare if they are doing it themselves and involving past philosophies in their works. I would have thought that was obvious, but alas, no.
I’ve actually had the experience of hearing Christopher Hitchens speak in person – though it was about politics and not about religion. His adversarial report on Mother Theresa for thew Vatican in opposing her beatification was brave and eloquent. I read his columns in the Nation, Vanity Fair, and The Atlantic, and of the several books of his in my library, the best is “Why Orwell Matters”.
I’ve read almost everything Orwell ever wrote, and his “Politics and the English Language” has been influencing how I write for almost 30 years. I’ve even lectured on using its principles in current political advocacy to dozens of university aged participants in programs I have run. His novels are some of my most dog-eared paperbacks.
I only own one of Bertrand Russell’s books, “A History of Western Philosophy” but I have read several of his more well known books and essays on philosophy, science and his particular criticism of Christianity.
I admit that I haven’t picked up a book by Sartre since I was 25, but two university courses on Existentialist philosophy and its application in post war political discourse were enough to give me a good sense of his perspective on God.
As for Dawkins, I’ve only read “The God Delusion” and found it occasionally lucid but oddly misdirected. When he writes about God with every negative adjective he can think of, he’s describing Man and his choices.
Of all of these I found Dawkins the least interesting, most dogmatic, and most absolute. But when Russell describes himself as 6.9 out of 7 on the scale of atheism, I feel comfortable describing him as an atheist rather than an agnostic. I wonder where you get your scale.
Oyoyoy, It wasn’t clear that you were referring to the average Joe. I understand better now what you were saying. But I think many of the average Joes you are describing don’t necessarily fit the bill of atheist, or even agnostic, because they haven’t and don’t care or think enough to put the time in to actually articulate what they truly believe., and that’s sad. As an aside, I wasn’t advocating that you read what I read. For me, it has strengthened rather than weakened my emunah to, as Sun Tzu suggested, “know my adversary”. But I acknowledge that isn’t an approach advisable for everyone.
oyoyoy, You make the point that today’s atheists are at a low level. I find that curious. Do you have any evidence for your assertion? Because if you have read Bertram Russel, or Christopher Hitchens, Jean Paul Sartre or Richard Dawkins, you will find that though they come to dramatically wrong conclusions, and when specifically addressing the issue of HKBH make several dramatically wrong assumptions, these are among the most articulate and informed non-Torah scholars of the last 100 years. Russel and Hitchens especially, because unlike Dawkins they write about much more than atheism, and unlike Sartre they avoid existentialist philosophy and the determinist outcomes it presupposes. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of 20th and 21st century writers who are more articulate than Hitchens. Maybe George Orwell, but he was likely an atheist as well, certainly an agnostic.
My point is that you don’t have to diminish an individual’s acumen in comparison to earlier generations to conclude that he is wrong. He can be brilliant and utterly wrong, too. He can even prophesy and be inspired by HKBH, as Bilaam was, and be utterly wrong.
I agree significantly with Joseph here. As a nation we may aspire to more or better or higher levels, but we as Jews have, it seems, always recognized that we stand on the shoulders of Giants. I think it comes from our prayers and supplications that have always first reminded ourselves and depended on HKBH’s recognition of the Tzidkus of our Avos . That degree of humility though not always evenly held is a distinction that if other groups do so I think they have been influenced by the Jewish experience.
What, though, are the implications of the concept of Yeridas Hadoros? Are we capable of less? Are our needs more? Can we say that now when there are more Jews learning more Torah than at any time in our entire history, more Jewish Hashpo’oh on the Umos Haolom, and more inklings that the geula is nearing that we have descended to a level of tumah below our ancestors? Maybe. Maybe we are closer to the geula because we need it more now than ever. Maybe we need to measure ourselves against our potential, and that is where we are lower. Yes, there is more Torah being learned than ever, but what could we have accomplished, and not yet reached. Yes, there is more Jewish Hashpo’oh in the world, but could we not have accomplished more, brought more peace or more righteousness to the world?
I think that the most logical understanding of yeridas hadoros is this. Our potential grows, but our accomplishments do not keep pace, or even diminish. And with every passing generation, the potential gap grows, with our accomplishments as a Jewish generation achieving only part of what we could have and part of what our parents could have. We have more resources and opportunities now. How are we going to use them?
One does tshuva because one has transgressed. Has charata; owns the responsibility; and takes it upon themselves to be a better person and not revisit the transgression. One does NOT do tshuva because of financial woes, health problems, or financial abuse. That approach makes the individual relationship with HKBH transactional. While the national relationship with HKBH is by definition transactional, the individual one is not and cannot be. It is one of pure supplication, request, pleading for HKBH’s mercy and help. Not conditional, not with any strings, not with a promise based on circumstances.
A few months ago I was in a circumstance where my life hung in the balance, and not by a small margin. As I lay there on the hospital bed awaiting emergency surgery, I had the stark, clear realization that there is no bargaining with HKBH. “if you save me I’ll do this” “I’ll do that if I survive” There is no IF. HKBH had it in his power to save my life so I asked him for his mercy, and he granted it. And in giving me the gift of life, he gave me the opportunity to do more mitzvos. But not because I bargained with him, rather because its my responsibility as a Jew, just as it is to avoid transgression.
BH I have made a full recovery, and I am grateful every day for HKBH’s gift.
PS, Lightbrite, I don’t think you meant it this way, but I find it obscene to consider suffering from spousal abuse as a specific indicator to do tshuva. The person’s spouse is an abusive evildoer, who has full responsibility for what they do. Your assumption sounds too much like blaming the victim.
SO, RoC, in the face of factual statistical evidence from multiple sources well beyond the ICBS you present…opinions?
That’s a well reasoned argument.
Now, if you had said, it is my HOPE and BELIEF that Israel will shed its secular character in the near future, I would have no argument with you. I would likely applaud you. But to assert a “fact” and then ignore or dismiss evidence? Maybe its just me, but I have a hard time understanding your confidence.
RoC, when you brought this topic up in July 2016, I cited three studies and copious statistics from several sources including the ICBS that contraindicated your premise. Though a critique from Joseph convinced me to clarify one element of my conclusions (thank you Joseph) there was no material argument or evidence by any of the posters that challenged the facts. You even thanked me for bringing that info into the discussion, to quote you: “You certainly have contributed some quality analysis on this topic you deserve a blessing from the rabbi of crawley!”
So, RoC, what has changed? Is there new evidence that challenges the statistics?
Actually, Mdd1, I should clarify. though I indicated matrilineal descent wasn’t always followed in practice, I meant that Jewish men apparently did not always look only to originally Jewish women to marry, and in that respect didn’t always follow what we would expect. I did indicate that the evidence in mitochondrial DNA proves this, but I also said that these women would have converted, which didn’t and doesn’t impact matrilineal descent. I thought that was clear and it wasn’t. I apologize for my reactive post above.
Joseph. Genetics indicate to us what is inherited from the male side and the female side. It is not only possible, but indeed likely that traits like hair and eyes could be and were inherited from both male and female sides. There is no contradiction.
And DNA is DNA. it is HKBH’s building block for living things. It isn’t about some professor or another. It is willful blindness like you seem to be advocating here that leaves Jewish women carrying the BRCA genes who are more likely to develop breast cancer and other cancers without adequate knowledge, access to early diagnosis and early treatment, and ultimately a higher mortality rate than could have been avoided, because a professor is trying to make a name for himself with the latest theory. My mother z’l was such an individual.Mdd1, that is not what I wrote. I wrote that the admixture of non-originally Jewish female DNA (as evidenced through mitochondrial analysis, which only passes from the female side) would have been accomplished through conversion. I did not make the claim that matrilineal descent was not followed. Read carefully, quote properly, and if you can’t do either, please reconsider your participation in the discussion. The only thing that is outrageous is your willful misreading of my post in a lackluster attempt to discredit what you don’t like.
Read Jon Entine’s Abraham’s Children. The closest genetic relatives to diverse Jewish populations, both Ashkenazi and Sefardi, are Levantine Arabs, from Lebanon, Syria, Israel. Another issue, which we will have to reconcile with our received history, is that genetic evidence shows remarkable continuity among male inherited genes in Jewish communities over the last 2000 years, but significantly less on the female side, indicating that matrilineal descent has always been a command or demand, but not always been followed in practice especially in medieval and pre-medieval times, with significant conversion and influx of non Jewish women into the gene pool. Another thing that is delicate but we must understand is that there is a reason for chezkas kashrus among a community that was ravaged and assaulted over so many generations, and whose women were often subject to the worst depredations. If you are looking for a reason why non-“Semitic” features entered our gene pool, that’s a good place to start.
Even within organizations, its not a settled question. For example, from personal experience, NCSY had a debate and open forum at a staff conference six-seven years ago, with one side making the case for focusing on a few who will make a complete and quick change in their life to frumkeit, vs reaching exponentially more people and giving them the tools to make appropriate Jewish choices in ther lives, and guiding and moving them towards frumkeit if they are inclined to do so. Both sides were represented by some of the leading kiruv rabbis in the OU/NCSY orbit, and both made a good case for their side.
Any individual who finds good reason to increase their personal approach to Tznius will be fixing the alleged problem. Any group who wishes to educate on the matter will be successful if they do it with without being extreme, and by being compassionate. Any group who wishes to force another or cause social difficulty to another in an attempt to impose a different level of tznius may be able to blackmail or otherwise strongarm compliance, but will be damaging individual relationships with HKBH in the long term.
Here’s what the Lubavitcher Rebbe said in 5751, according to the Chabad.org discussion on tinok shenishba
“However when one stresses and emphasizes the disadvantage of those who are non-observant, also adding warnings of punishment and retribution, Heaven forbid, not only is this not the way to strengthen the keeping of Torah and mitzvos, rather it weakens observance and distances the non-observant from doing teshuvah.”
You’ve set up a straw man. Kiruv professionals and volunteers who are not of the same approach as you don’t lie, or say that which is incompatible is compatible. In my 25 years experience as both a volunteer and professional in kiruv and in other areas of Jewish professional work, What I have seen is that these professionals and volunteers, from Chabad to Aish to NCSY, see a process, not an abrupt black and white moment. They encourage Jews to take on one mitzvah at a time, and focus on what they ARE doing, rather than on what they are not doing, and the process brings those mitzvos that are most challenging in to discussion and then observance as well, in time. I know of several baalei tshuva who are very successful, who support mosdos from Kiryas Yoel to Yerushalayim to Los Angeles who have been mekarev in exactly this manner, and have grown in their frumkeit to the greatest heights; what’s more, because of their journey, they understand the need to keep striving, and have an incredible anivus about their yiddishkeit and their success . But hey, if you feel empowered to contradict the approaches of the Lubavitcher Rebbe and Rav Noach Weinberg, zichronom livrocho, be my guest.
The OP writes:
“Not long ago frum marriage partners put their best efforts into making a marriage work even they weren’t initially the most ideal match. In today’s disposable generation, people have less motivation to put in the work to stabilize & create marital harmony. Still, divorce came with a stigma & remarrying with someone of another failed marriage can be difficult. ”
Now, if the OP is speaking from personal experience, I can’t argue. But if the OP is making assumptions, He’s clearly not following the opinion expressed by Hillel Hazokein in pirkei avos (2:4).
There have been immature people in every generation. There have been those for whom commitment is meaningless in every generation. There have been people who lack seichel in every generation. Many of these brought these character weaknesses into their marriages, and what is worse is that they failed to take personal responsibility.
And there have been people of faith, commitment, and maturity who worked at their marriage and failed to sustain it – in every generation. Boruch hashem that they encounter others with more understanding and discernment than the OP who help them learn from their challenges and build a successful life with a new partner, of whatever age and life experience. The zivug and the happiness they build is what is important in strengthening their commitment to HKBH and to strengthening their community. Not some speculative calculus about their motivations.
“People have less motivation”?
Spoken like someone who is well intentioned, but better at speculation than certainty.
Mazal Tov!