Thursday, October 11, 2007

When Adding to the Torah Leads to Subtraction!

bs"d
 
Is this post or blog into Rabbi Bashing.  Let me assure you that this is not our objective.  I myself had an excellent Torah education from a Bais Yaakov in Queens (A modern chareidi hashkafa (philosophy)  orientation.   My dear aunt and her family  treated me as their own and even one step beyond when I was in Israel living Kiryat Arba (a "Zionist stronghold").  They happen to be Satmar Chasiddim. My Hakoras Hatov, appreciation to my Satmer aunt knows no bounds and I feel I can never truly repay her for the kindness she did to me when I was living as a Single Girl in Eretz  Yisroel.   She and her husband z"l and their children are beautiful Jews and I am proud to be their relative.    My brother and family are well known and liked in the Chareidi circles.  I admire and I am even envious of the Chareidi lifestyle of unsurpassed enthusiasm for the Yomim Tovim Jewish  Holidays, their lack of distraction of an alien western culture glorifying baseball and football and basketball.  Their lack of exposure to negative influences from TV.  I envy so many fine middos I see in their children, honoring their parents and taking care of their siblings.  Yes I could go on and on... They are the product of a fine Chareidi education. 
 
This having been said, I also see a negative trend that is disturbing to me.
 
 I personally am very disappointed with some of the recent rulings coming from the Chareidi camps in Eretz Yisroel.  They banned a Chasidic Concert with Avraham Fried that was supposed to be separate seating with separate entrances.  They banned Simchas Beis Hashoeiva celebrations also for "tznius" reasons.  This sounds like chumras over chumras (restrictions over more restrictions).  What D'Orayta (Commandment written in the Torah) do we transgress  for this "transgression" of possibly meeting someone of the opposite gender over the Mechiza (Divider between the sexes)?  Or even in the vicinity thereof?   Doesn't the Torah itself specifically calls for Hakhel (a gathering) that includes the entire family, men women and children.  My husband tells me that the halachos (laws) of Mechitza (dividers between genders)  actually come from this sugia (Talmudic passage)  Why be even frumer (more righteous) than the Eybeshter (G-d).  They banned higher education degrees for women.  One that adds to the Torah is bound to detract from the Torah.  On the other hand, so many D-orayta's (Biblical Commandments) were violated with the expulsion of Gush Katif and these Rabbanim were Silent.  Positive expressions of true Simchas Yomtov (Holiday Happiness) were stifled due to these rulings.  If they keep these rulings up, then they and their halachos(rulings, will be irrelevent.  Is Rav Shteinman behind these "modesty" rulings?  I was told by the director of Lev L'achim that when asked how to respond to the expulsion of Gush Katif, Rav Shteinman responded that "its Nisht Inzere Sugia" (Not our Business).  Is this true?  Why is Agudath Yisroel of America choosing to follow the Psak of Rav Shteinman.  Apparently, Rav Eliashiv, is unwilling to give a psak w/o the haskama (agreement) of Rav Shteinman.   Is it forbidden to ask what are the considerations that went into these halachic rulings to be Silent regarding our rights to Eretz Yisroel, and to be Silent when such pain was inflicted on the residents of Gush Katif. The Silence continues now as well when the decree is to divide Jerusalem and disregard the destruction of Har Habayis and to destroy the beautiful flourishing communities of hundreds of thousands of beautiful Jews many times the number of residents of Gush Katif.  How were/are they complicit with the gov't policies.  Did educational subsidies or stipends  have a role in their decision to be Silent.  If so, then isn't the halacha (directives) based on political considerations and not Daas Torah(Torah way)?  A statement for Eretz Yisroel is Daas Torah!
 
The Lubavitch Rebbe addresses these points.  My husband and I are not Lubavitch per se.  But the Rebbe's halacha is logical.  When the Torah talks about Emunas Chachamim (Believing in our Sages) it says specifically that we must not deviate right or left from the Halachos (rulings)  if it's al Pi Tora (According to the Torah).  Why follow a Psak(ruling) blindly if it is quite clear that the Torah itself seems to clearly contradict and prohibits the ruling. We are not allowed to put an intermediary between us and the Torah and replace Torah with a "halachic"ruling that causes a violation in a Biblical Commandment. 
 
These are points of the Lubavitch Rebbe, zt"l

  1. The current situation in Israel is such that the duty to protest falls squarely on the shoulders of the Rabbis. This obligation falls upon all Rabbis who arbitrate practical matters of Jewish law, and especially those Rabbis who have at one time expressed an opinion on this issue, no matter where they are — whether in Israel or in the Diaspora.
  2. The ruling must be explicit and definitive, being the result of exhaustive consultation with present military authorities who have actual firsthand knowledge about these issues, and who express their opinions through purely security-oriented considerations, and not political ones.
    In order to save the Rabbis the trouble of researching the issues which are required for a ruling, the Rebbe informs us that he has already investigated the matter, and the conclusions are:
    1. Those involved in military affairs say that surrendering any portion of the West Bank and Gaza, places untold numbers of Jews in danger, G-d forbid.
    2. The past is well known (e.g., Golda Meir not listening to the Israeli Military Intelligence prior to Yom Kippur War).
  3. A ruling must be issued quickly, and a Rabbi must not wait until he is asked about the matter. Rather, he must see to it that the law is publicized everywhere — to the extent that "there will not be a single individual who has not heard of this ruling." This is because regarding these matters, "he who asks (rather than acts) is a spiller of blood, and the one who waits to be asked is contemptible" for not having publicized his opinion.[35]
  4. Similarly, one should publicize the decision of the "Great Assembly" of 1937 [36] which states that "it is forbidden to cede to a non-Jew, even a tiny strip of the Land of Israel." This should be publicised until the entire Jewish people are aware of this ruling.
  5. Every Jew, regardless of where he lives, is connected with every other Jews in the rest of the world. Therefore, according to Jewish law, he must protest any action taken by another Jew which is not in accordance with Jewish Law. Protest is required even if the forbidden action took place a great distance from him — because he is still obligated by the command, "Thou shalt not stand idly by thy brother's blood."
  6. At times the situation is such that there is nothing left to do but to protest. This is a precise indication that our task in this situation is to protest.
  7. The claim that protest will not affect the situation does not absolve any of the Rabbis, no matter where they are, from their obligation to publicize a clear ruling because:
    1. Who knows where we would be if no one were to speak up.
    2. Regarding the mitzvah to admonish one's fellow man, the Talmud says, "even one hundred times," meaning, if one unsuccessfully gave rebuke ninety-nine times, one is bound by Jewish law to engage in rebuke a hundredth time, for it could well be that the hundredth time will be decisive.
    3. The Rabbi must do his job and protest without fear, and without considering the reaction which may follow his ruling (such as being ignored); especially because this is an ongoing matter, which concerns saving Jewish lives.
    4. The obligation not to stand idly by while your brother's blood is being spilled, applies in every situation, even when one is uncertain that his protest will have any effect. Even if the chance that protest will assist is only one thousandth of a chance, or a fraction of that, one is obligated to protest, because this is the law in the Code of Jewish Law.
  8. Even if the majority remain silent, and those protesting are in the minority, nevertheless, the minority is taken into consideration.
  9. The Rabbis who remain silent cause the greatest damage. This is analagous to the Talmudic law concerning seventy Rabbinic judges who rule for or against a certain side, with one judge "abstaining." In such a case, Jewish Law requires the entire trial to be rendered null and void.
  10. The Rebbe's opinion is that were there to be a sustained protest, carried out with the greatest intensity — as the present situation clearly demands — it would eventually succeed, in the near future.

Thank you Izzy Kaplan for forwarding the material of the Lubavitcher Rebbe. 
Izzy Kaplan
416 256 2858



See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
Posted by at