Etan Golubtchik Attacks Jewish Modern Orthodoxy’s Response to Corona Mandates

Modern Orthodox Judaism Failed to be Either Modern or Orthodox During Covid

In light of Jeffrey Tucker’s recent article, among others, which criticized his tribe of elite libertarians for their failed response to the covid crisis, I would like to offer a detailed critique of my own tribe and its failed response.

It is important  to emphasize that the process of calling out one’s own tribe is quite painful. As others have stated, the realization that our role models and peers who were integral to helping us form our own worldviews and moral systems failed in the face of adversity can be a soul-wrenching experience.

Despite witnessing many of the horrors of the past few years, including unnecessary mass excess mortality and huge spikes in poverty rates on a global scale, the most painful internal scars I bear relate to the disappointment in those I once thought would stand in the breach with me to protect the vulnerable and young among us.

These were the ones whom I believed shared a world ethic with me based on our religion and the philosophy we studied together, yet they failed to demonstrate allegiance to these values. Through websites and apps like Brownstone, Twitter, and more I have been able to find others who held ethical standards similar to my own, but that can never truly replace what I lost when my own tribe let me down catastrophically.

What is Modern Orthodox Judaism?

The Modern Orthodox movement in Judaism, of which I had always considered myself a card-carrying member, can trace its roots back to 19th century Europe. Following Napoleon’s reforms, Jews were generally allowed and encouraged to leave their segregated villages and fully integrate into the modern industrial secular society. While many Jews were immediately drawn by this emancipation to leave behind many of the norms and requirements of an orthodox Jewish lifestyle, an opposing Jewish approach chose to reject as much of this modernity and emancipation as possible to help ensure a continuation of Jewish observance and traditions.

These polar camps represent the early formations of what are now considered the Reform and Reconstructionist movements on the one hand, and the Ultra-Orthodox movement, on the other. In between these opposing camps, the Modern Orthodox movement rose to the challenge of trying to integrate a fully Torah-observant lifestyle as much as possible into the new cosmopolitan secular society.

The proper philosophical nature and practical elements of balancing these two opposing lifestyles has been the subject of a pantheon of literature over the past two centuries, and a variety of paths have emerged across this wide spectrum of Jewish society. Major issues that Modern Orthodoxy confronts include integrating modern technology into Jewish observance, meshing breakthroughs in scientific understanding with Jewish and Biblical theology, and maintaining a high sense of commitment to Jewish values while generally interacting with the secular world.

This integration requires not only high levels of understanding of Jewish law and theology, but also a high level of understanding of science and modern culture. Modern Orthodox leaders, both lay and rabbinic, have therefore always had to be educated and knowledgeable at the highest degree in two separate, distinct, and often conflicting fields of study. This dual commitment to understanding was the only way the Jewish faith could be integrated with modern society.

Indeed, the most revered leaders of this movement for many years were those who held the dual advanced titles of both Rabbi and Doctor, demonstrating advanced education in both worlds. For example, Rabbis who are investigating the religious response to organ donation must have up-to-date knowledge of both the span of related Jewish law, including the broad subjects of death and murder, and the medical research on brain death and organ donation.

Similarly, Rabbis who attempt to advise on matters of Shabbat observance need to have an advanced understanding of electronic systems in order to understand what modern day marvels, like hearing aids, may or may not be used on the Sabbath, and if so, in what manner.

By its very nature, Modern Orthodoxy is intimately familiar with both the permanently unsettled nature of scientific thought, and the back and forth dialogue that is the backbone of legal discourse. The need to be well-informed and fully engaged with both modern science and religious values, always seeking to balance both, should have made the Modern Orthodox rabbis most prepared to handle the ethical and scientific conundrums that evolved in March of 2020.

Replacing G-d with “experts”

And yet, the Modern Orthodox Rabbinic leadership, both in the US and in Israel, were some of the earliest and most dedicated to the warped scientific framework and extralegal approach underlying obedience to the new rules of covid enforcement. Indeed, early on, the Rabbinical Council of Bergen County was one of the first religious institutions in the country to voluntarily cancel all religious services, claiming that Jews were religiously required to stay home, well before any government edicts were issued.

The Jewish concept of acting Lifnim Mishurat hadin, acting beyond the requirements of the law, was used as the basis for imposing extra requirements on congregations from this point and through today. Every time a new seasonal wave developed, these same rabbis were first to blame their own flocks for the inevitable spread of a sub-microscopic airborne virus, referring to them as stubborn for not achieving the impossible, and using similar terminology G-d used to express disappointment in the Biblical Israelites.

Yet these rabbis were never able to bring a single example of another disease that was eradicated from existence using this methodology, nor show where biblical literature directs us to try to control complex chaotic natural processes, other than through prayer and repentance. Independent critical analysis, including the acknowledgment of contradictory evidence, was sorely lacking from a rabbinate that previously prided itself on this very quality. Instead of engaging in rational discourse and providing a calming platform, the rabbinic leadership chose to perpetuate the fear and panic that was so rampant in the media.

Unfortunately, the previous reverence of elite university credentials as a demonstration of high-level integration with modern society led to an ironic trend of elevating credentialed “experts” to a near prophet-like level. The repeated failure of many of these experts and their models to scientifically predict anything in advance never seemed to register as problematic once this prophet-like status was granted.

A group of self-identified “Jewish Faucis,” those with both a medical degree and rabbinic ordination, put themselves at the center of many communal religious decisions. Rabbi Dr Aaron Glatt, head of infectious diseases at Mt Sinai hospital, for example, made a name for himself by issuing constant Facebook messages and emails to the Jewish community, explaining how successful or not their social distancing had been during the repeating seasonal waves.

At no point did he bother to explain why countries like Sweden, or states like Florida and Georgia were indistinguishable in nearly every all-cause mortality and morbidity dataset, while he repeatedly declared anyone who disagreed with him as a purveyor of sheker, lies evil in the ways of G-d. Similarly, WhatsApp groups were created by rabbis so they could coordinate the strictness of their responses and the uniformity of their positions across the globe, not allowing room to discuss scientific evidence that in any way conflicted with their established opinions.

The ultimate irony of this approach is that obedience to an individual to make decisions, rather than relying on verifiable independent sources, is one of the key ways Modern Orthodox Jews distinguished themselves from their Ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic counterparts. Da’at Torah, a practice of the Ultra-Orthodox, encourages individuals to search for answers and direction on all life topics specifically from Torah leaders, like Hasidic Rabbis.

This practice has widely been criticized by the Modern Orthodox for its lack of intellectual seriousness, and due to the fact that Judaism does not require unquestioning obedience to anyone but G-d himself. Ironically, this exalted level of obedience for decision-making on all topics that was not granted to Hasidic rabbis was instead laid upon supposed “experts,” like Drs. Fauci and Birx, or Rabbi Dr Aaron Glatt.

In April of 2020, Rabbi Dr Yitz Greenberg even panned the Ultra-Orthodox’s reliance on magical ideas like “natural immunity” during covid, as opposed to the Modern Orthodoxy’s more scientific reliance on “experts.” As documented elsewhere, the Ultra-Orthodox communities were doing community antibody studies as early as April 2020, similar to the works of Drs. John Ioannidis and Jay Bhattacharya at that time, and had familiarized themselves with the accomplishments of Anders Tegnell in Sweden, who seemed to be the only public health figure in the OECD who adhered to pre-2020 WHO pandemic guidelines.

To this day, I am still unsure how Greenberg, or anyone else in the Modern Orthodox community, believed that if we just obeyed the “experts” and stayed home, then a few quadrillion viral particles would magically disappear from circulation.

When the novel vaccines came along, the Modern Orthodox community again displayed its complete disinterest in independent research or verification. Yeshiva University, for example, was one of the first universities in New York to establish vaccine mandates, and continued enforcing boosters through the 2022 school year, despite the public and vocal resignation of the top approvers at the FDA.

All of this occurred while the University was making an international name for itself fighting in the name of religious freedom at the US Supreme Court. Ironically, while theoretically granting vaccine exemptions for religious freedoms, YU’s top rabbi proclaimed that it was a biblical obligation to obey the supposed majority of doctors and be vaccinated for covid-19, thoroughly undermining that potential exemption for most of YU’s Jewish students.

At the same time, many Modern Orthodox rabbis, in the US and Israel, virtuously banned the unvaccinated, and most children, from attending synagogue on Judaism’s high holy days in late 2021, well after the head of the CDC publicly acknowledged that the vaccine did not stop transmission. As the two fundamental pretexts for coercing vaccination, that the vaccines were 100 perfect safe and that they protected others, have been universally accepted as misleading, there has still been no public retraction of hundreds of rabbinic decrees and pronouncements that one was religiously obligated to be vaccinated.

Integration into Judaism

Another way that Modern Orthodoxy has distinguished itself as a movement within Judaism, in contrast to the Ultra-Orthodox world, is in the religious value it associated with acquiring and appreciating secular knowledge and fully engaging in secular civic life. Becoming a medical doctor, or studying Greek philosophy and classical literature, became part of the religious experience, fulfilling the implied Biblical command to be involved in the world and know G-d’s ways. Accordingly, participation in civic life, both in Israel and the United States is considered the fulfillment of a mitzvah, with the simple acts of voting, volunteering, or public advocacy being fully integrated into the Jewish religious experience.

Patriotic flags were placed in synagogues prominently next to the Torah scrolls, and causes du jour were often integrated into weekly rabbinic sermons. Accordingly, during the declared pandemic, the narratives of “staying home,” wearing a mask, and being repeatedly vaccinated as part of one’s duty to society were also elevated to the level of religious obligation, on par with observing the Sabbath or keeping kosher.

Consequently, these narratives  became a rallying cry for condescension, with Modern Orthodox Jews exhibiting disdain for the Ultra-Orthodox, viewing their attitude towards these civic rules as a religious neglect, indicative of a backwards and even anti-progressive stance. The Ultra Orthodox community, which had compartmentalized its legal compliance and daily activities from its religious practice, never felt the same religious drive to comply with such requirements.

Not only did the Modern Orthodox community try to invoke religiosity into everyday secular life, but it has also often tried to integrate its Talmudic approach to law with its secular studies. Here too, one of the defining features of this movement, rigid adherence to the minutiae of religious law, was exploited in such a way that led to a quasi-talmudic infatuation with zero-Covid rules.

A famous Jewish joke recounts the story of an Orthodox child who spends time at his Christian neighbors’ house during the holiday season. The child frustrates his hosts by asking endless questions concerning the minimum and maximum height of their Christmas tree, the order in which they light the Christmas lights, how far the tree must be from the door, and so on, as all of these specifications are required for the placement of one’s Hanukkah menorah.

It is easy to see how covid regulations would fit into this system: The arbitrary, though hyper-specific rules of covid are reminiscent of Talmudic topics around Jewish rituals. The precise six feet of social distancing required between synagogue seats or where one stands in a grocery line recalls Talmudic laws concerning spacing required for farming or property delineation.

Separated pod areas in schools or synagogues delineated by six-foot, six-inch Plexiglass barriers are akin to the rules of what constitutes a barrier for the sake of building one’s sukkah. “Stopping the chain of infection” by contact tracing is equivalent to the laws concerning the spread of ritual impurity. How to calculate the 14-day quarantine period following a supposed covid exposure is even reminiscent of a number of Jewish laws around family purity.

However familiar the application of these rules became to Modern Orthodox Jews though, the transference of Talmudic style back and forth to the application of covid regulations makes a mockery of the Jewish legal process. Whereas the idea of the spreading of covid bears similarities to Biblical and Talmudic laws of ritual purity, this was completely disconnected from the realistic nature of disease spread. As such, applying Talmudic-style discourse and concepts to these arbitrary rules and regulations simply devalued core Modern Orthodox ritual observance.

In a similar vein, for those who study Jewish Talmudic law on a regular basis, the idea that one’s status can be defined by adherence to certain specific rules came naturally. As such, the observance of these rules took on a highly ritualistic nature. For example, the wearing of a mask in synagogue became a categorical ceremonial practice, with the mask adorned as one entered the sanctuary along with one’s prayer shawl, and immediately removed as one exited the sanctuary into the synagogue social hall for banter and the consumption of whiskey and herring.

Failure to comply with this masking rite often led to immediate eviction from many Modern Orthodox synagogues. In my own synagogue, for example, the rabbi publicly berated me when I finally refused to wear a mask during Israel’s sixth wave in March of 2022, as he compared this failure to comply to not wearing a yarmulke. [The yarmulke is typically worn by Orthodox Jews as a reminder that G-d is above us watching at all times, and therefore we should act accordingly.]

In another surreal take, a lay leader of one of Israel’s synagogue movements posted an article explaining that the synagogues would continue to enforce mask-wearing in the time period between when mask mandates were announced to be ending and between their actual expiry three days later, completely oblivious of the scientific absurdity of such enforcement in the face of the need to follow ritual procedures. These rabbinic responses ironically demonstrated that the purpose of the mask was to implicitly remind us at all times to be obedient to the ritualistic rules of public health, regardless of the nonsensical manner of application.

Failure of Perspective

The lack of independent critical thought also led to a lack of perspective. Historically, pandemics were especially dangerous for Jews, as they were often blamed for the spread of disease and suffered consequences accordingly. As secular media sources, including the New York Times and the Washington Post, decided to label the entire Ultra-Orthodox community as disease spreaders, Modern Orthodox publications and leaders demonstrated little hesitation in joining the fray.

Even though such libelous allegations have historically proven to be baseless, the mere accusations triggered Jewish massacres numerous times throughout history. Unfortunately, while the Ultra-Orthodox seemed to be singled out much more than other groups who chose to act independently, like the Amish, Israeli Arabs, or other NYC minorities, their fellow Orthodox Jews not only didn’t come to defend against these anti-Semitic statements, but often joined wholeheartedly, demonstrating little knowledge of the history of nor acknowledging the potential effects of such accusations.

Most frustrating in witnessing these community-wide systemic failures is that there are thousands of pages of Talmudic legal discourse over the past 2,000 years related to the topics of how to act during a pandemic. As King Solomon stated, there is nothing new under the sun, and this supposedly “novel” pandemic is actually quite precedented. There exists extensive Talmudic discussion on whether one is permitted to kill, cause harm, or even steal from another in order to save oneself.

There is legal discourse on how to define a potential murderer or pursuer that may be coerced, as well as how to define what is considered “life-threatening danger” that releases one from other biblical obligations. There is legal dialogue around how much of one’s personal wealth they are permitted to put at risk in order to save the lives of others. There is extensive legal discussion around when a doctor can be relied upon for all manner of topics, including classifying the cause of death, or if they can declare something safe without any long-term data on which to rely.

There is a historically prescribed mathematical calculation of how one would declare an official pandemic that would require extra prayer and fasting (rather than the cancellation of prayers), a number to which the 2020 covid pandemic never came close. There is even legal precedent on how to treat worn apparel which some people consider protective from disease, though has never demonstrated to be successful at doing so scientifically. All of these legal discussions were summarily ignored by Modern Orthodox rabbis in the face of covid-19 and the wild speculations that the world was facing a cataclysmic disaster.

The lack of intellectual integrity involved in researching both the scientific basis and Jewish legal precedent for pandemic rules is indicative of a much greater failure in the Modern Orthodox community. Rabbis who were previously known to study complicated matters in depth for weeks on end before developing solutions to modern problems relative to modern day practice demonstrated no interest in researching primary sources on covid, relying solely on media and highly biased “expert” sources when faced with panic and uncertainty.

A movement built on the concept of excelling in both the secular and religious realms of thought has shown that it has achieved neither, instead degenerating into simply another community trying to coerce its own form of morality. As part of a greater global trend, a growing matter in Modern Orthodox circles was the increasing need to accept all natures of Jews and other faiths as they are, in many ways the antithesis of the communal coercion of morals normally associated with the Ultra-Orthodox ghetto mentality, yet in the end they proved no different, except in which virtue-signaling morality they chose to coerce.

Conclusion

Unlike other religions, Judaism’s holiest of days are focused on the idea of repentance, on both the personal and communal levels. Jewish repentance generally requires three things: acknowledgement of fault, an attempt to make amends, and a commitment not to err in the same manner again. We are nearing our fourth Yom Kippur since Modern Orthodox rabbis began their campaign to integrate Covidism with Judaism, and we have only been met with silence.

I have not heard any public acknowledgement of fault or error, despite the fact that every single empirical dataset has shown that the lockdowns and imposed coercions achieved minimal, largely immeasurable benefits, while incurring significant measurable harm. I have not heard or read anyone admit that the Ultra-Orthodox/Swedish approach was based on actual scientific precedent, rather than their own. I am not aware of any attempt to make amends for the horrors committed on a generation of Jewish children, now suffering from increased suicides, mental health crises, rampant addiction, and significantly lower educational achievement.

Nor has there been any attempt to make amends to those who were forced to lose their businesses and livelihoods, the elderly who were forced to deteriorate and perish without the accompaniment of family and friends, the young adults doomed to years of loneliness and despair, or those who incurred injury commonly associated with taking the barely-tested novel vaccines, all supposedly in the name of following Orthodox Jewish practice as decreed by these rabbis.

In order to regain trust in this model of Judaism, there must be a commitment by Modern Orthodox leadership to never go down this path again. This leadership must reclaim public influence and pastoral direction to rabbis who model its original ideals, who consider the effects of uncertainty and the ramifications of their decisions, and who do not relinquish control to doomsaying “experts” at the expense of rational thought and well-intentioned discourse.

The covid crisis in 2020 was not a scientific one, if there is such a thing, to be considered only by narrow-minded subject-matter experts. Questions we were confronted with included: How do we act in the face of adversity? How do we treat outsiders or those within our own community, when struck with fear and panic? Can and should the physical, financial, psychological and developmental well-being of the young and vulnerable be sacrificed for the uncertain benefit of a select older few? Who do we turn to when faced with the uncertainties of an oncoming possible natural disaster?

These challenges we faced as a society were theological and ethical in nature, the wheelhouse of religious and community leaders, as they had been for thousands of years prior. Answering these questions required humility, patience, perspective, and proactive rather than reactive decision making.

Modern Orthodoxy, with its history of trying to integrate modern science with allegiance to Torah values and G-d, was uniquely primed to evaluate balancing scientific uncertainty with faith-based morality. Instead, though, its leaders abdicated their responsibilities, outsourcing the academic analysis to supposed “experts” without any critical analysis, and failing to view this new challenge in the context of Jewish history, case law. or the general ethical guidelines outlined in the Torah. Hopefully, Modern Orthodox Judaism will soon begin the introspection required before facing our next challenge together in the coming future.

From The Brownstone Institute, here.

Corona Vaccine Skeptics: Right From the Start

Response to Rabbi Steinberg

Someone who refuses to take a drug for any reason, especially under such a cloud of darkness, is not a criminal. He is responsible. Opinion

Good News! the English Coronation Went By Without Undue Incident…

Quoting Wikipedia on Richard I (slightly edited):

Richard I was officially invested as Duke of Normandy on 20 July 1189 and crowned king in Westminster Abbey on 3 September 1189. Tradition barred all Jews and women from the investiture, but some Jewish leaders arrived to present gifts for the new king. According to Ralph of Diceto, Richard’s courtiers stripped and flogged the Jews, then flung them out of court.

When a rumor spread that Richard had ordered all Jews to be killed, the people of London attacked the Jewish population. Many Jewish homes were destroyed by arsonists, and several Jews were forcibly converted. Some sought sanctuary in the Tower of London, and others managed to escape. Among those killed was Jacob of Orléans, a respected Jewish scholar. Roger of Howden, in his Gesta Regis Ricardi, claimed that the jealous and bigoted citizens started the rioting and that Richard punished the perpetrators, allowing a forcibly converted Jew to return to his native religion. Baldwin of Forde, Archbishop of Canterbury, reacted by remarking, “If the King is not God’s man, he had better be the devil’s”.

Offended that he was not being obeyed, and aware that the attacks could destabilize his realm on the eve of his departure on crusade, Richard ordered the execution of those responsible for the most heinous murders and persecutions, including rioters who had accidentally burned down Christian homes. He distributed a royal writ demanding that the Jews be left alone. The edict was only loosely enforced, however, and the following March further violence occurred, including a massacre at York.

Wikipedia on the Massacres at London and York (1189–1190):

Richard I had taken the cross before his coronation (3 September 1189). A number of the principal Jews of England presented themselves to do homage at Westminster; but there was a long-standing custom against Jews (and women) being admitted to the coronation ceremony, and they were expelled during the banquet which followed the coronation, whereupon they were attacked by a crowd of bystanders. The rumor spread from Westminster to London that the king had ordered a massacre of the Jews; and a mob in the Old Jewry, after vainly attacking the strong stone houses of the Jews throughout the day, set them on fire at night, killing those within who attempted to escape. The king was enraged at this insult to his royal dignity but was unable to punish more than a few of the offenders, owing to their large numbers and to the considerable social standing of several of them. After his departure on the crusade, riots with loss of life occurred at Lynn, where the Jews attempted to attack a baptized coreligionist who had taken refuge in a church. The seafaring population rose against them, fired their houses, and put them to the sword. So, too, at Stamford Fair, on 7 March 1190, many were slain, and on 18 March, 57 were slaughtered at Bury St Edmunds. The Jews of Lincoln saved themselves only by taking refuge in the castle.

Isolated attacks on Jews also occurred at Colchester, Thetford, and Ospringe.

A significant loss of life occurred at York on the night of March 16 (Shabbat HaGadol, the Shabbat before Passover) and 17 March 1190. As crusaders prepared to leave on the Third Crusade, religious fervor resulted in several anti-Jewish violences. Josce of York, the leader of the Jews in York, asked the warden of York Castle to receive them with their wives and children, and they were accepted into Clifford’s Tower. However, the tower was besieged by the mob of crusaders, demanding that the Jews convert to Christianity and be baptized. Trapped in the castle, the Jews were advised by their religious leader, Rabbi Yomtov of Joigny, to kill themselves rather than convert; Josce began by slaying his wife Anna and his two children, and then was killed by Yomtov. The father of each family killed his wife and children, before Yomtov and Josce set fire to the wooden keep, killing themselves. The handful of Jews who did not kill themselves died in the fire or were murdered by rioters. Around 150 people are thought to have been killed in the incident.

(Something is off about the above story.)

Oh, and one hundred years later, in 1290, King Edward I expelled all the Jews from England.

But that’s all in the past…

The USSA Censored Even TRUE Non-Narrative Corona Stories…

“True Stories … Could Fuel Hesitancy”: Stanford Project Worked to Censor Even True Stories on Social Media

While lost in the explosive news about Donald Trump’s expected arrest, journalist Matt Taibbi released new details on previously undisclosed censorship efforts on social media. The latest Twitter Files revealed a breathtaking effort from Stanford’s Virality Project to censor even true stories. After all, the project insisted “true stories … could fuel hesitancy” over taking the vaccine or other measures. The effort included suppressing stories that we now know are legitimate such as natural immunity defenses, the exaggerated value of masks, and questions over vaccine efficacy in preventing second illnesses. The work of the Virality Project to censor even true stories should result in the severance of any connection with Stanford University.

We have learned of an ever-expanding coalition of groups working with the government and social media to target and censor Americans, including government-funded organizations.

However, the new files are chilling in the details allegedly showing how the Virality Project labeled even true stories as “anti-vaccine” and, therefore, subject to censorship. These files would suggest that the Project eagerly worked to limit free speech and suppress alternative scientific viewpoints.

Taibbi describes the Virality Project as “a sweeping, cross-platform effort to monitor billions of social media posts by Stanford University, federal agencies, and a slew of (often state-funded) NGOs.”

Continue reading…

From Jonathan Turley, here.

Corona: Crazy Or Evil?

Craziness According to the Torah

Contrary to popular belief, the greatest pandemic of our time is not Covid (whatever that even is), but mental illness. Everyone but you and me seems to be mentally ill these days, and I’m not so sure about you.

If you believe what you hear, all of the following groups of people fall into this amorphous, ever-growing classification:

People who are hesitant to take vaccines

Vaccines are indisputably the reason humanity has made it this far, the only explanation for why certain illnesses have ceased to ravage the population, and our only hope for a healthy future. There is nothing even to discuss. Hence, anyone who has the slightest qualm about becoming a pharmaceutical pin cushion must be insane.

Considering the fact that the overwhelming majority of the population is done taking Covid boosters, and never would have taken them in the first place without being relentlessly brainwashed, bribed, bullied, and blackmailed, that’s a lot of crazy people.

People who believe the official narrative

According to many people who are hesitant about vaccines (among other things), the vast majority of their counterparts developed something called mass formation psychosis. In other words, they’re nuts. Psycho.

Mass formation psychosis is just as invisible and difficult to detect as Covid – there isn’t even a PCR test that one can pretend means anything – but it spreads, well, like crazy.

Then again, the psychos claim you’re crazy if you don’t believe the official narrative. The world is like a whodunnit; who’s the real crazy one?

Crazy conspiracy theorists

This is another intentionally ambiguous term that can apply to anyone who doesn’t trust the government and corporate media.

Do you believe the government ever tells a fib and the media dutifully promotes it? Crazy.

Do you believe they are covering up the truth about anything of importance? Insane.

Do you believe rich and powerful people collude to become even more rich and powerful? Lunatic.

Do you believe some of these people have nefarious intentions? That they might even be evil? Loco.

Do you believe elections might be rigged by people who will do anything to get power? And that these people will do anything to keep their power? Out of your mind.

Are you concerned that drug companies and their cohorts in high office rig the game in their favor, and have no regard for your wellbeing? You need to take your meds – their meds.

People who feel down, stressed out, overwhelmed, nervous, or otherwise unhappy

This must be a mental illness of sorts, which can be managed (never cured) with a combination of chemicals and psychotherapy. If your feelings improve, it’s to their credit, and you should continue. If your feelings don’t improve, you need more powerful doses of the former and greater supervision of the latter.

Either way, you are a certified mental patient for life. More bluntly, you’re crazy, with all that implies. Cherish the fact that you aren’t locked up in a loony bin and don’t complain.

Children who aren’t perfectly obedient and performing to expectations

There is only one explanation for this worth considering. It isn’t that school is boring, uninspiring, and downright stultifying, nor that sitting in place for hours on end having their brains washed isn’t most kids’ idea of a good time. It also isn’t that kids need to be kids, and they need to learn about the world (and how to behave) in a natural, organic way, which can be inconvenient when you have other things to worry about.

No, the only explanation for why your kid is daydreaming in the classroom, struggling academically, and misbehaving is because there is something chemically and mentally wrong with him. Drug him up and label him for life as being ADD, ADHD, OCD, on the spectrum, learning disabled, or some other moniker that is sure to make him feel better about himself. After all, his “disability” has a name, as well as a treatment plan to “manage his behavior” for the rest of his life. What joy!

Don’t worry; he can still live a full life – as long as he takes his meds religiously forever. And if the meds don’t work, or other problems mysteriously arise that have nothing to do with all those meds, we can give him more meds, more powerful meds, until we get that disorder in order!

And don’t worry about stigma, either; almost everyone is on mood-altering and mind-altering meds. It’s normal to be crazy! If you think you aren’t crazy, you must be in denial.

Now that the science is settled, let’s see what the Torah has to say.

The standard term in halacha for a crazy person is shoteh. The same word is often used pejoratively to refer to a fool or someone whose behavior is worthy of contempt. Whereas such people are legally responsible for their actions, a true shoteh lacks mental competence. Like a child, he is exempt from keeping the mitzvos.

Naturally this has tremendous ramifications. For example, a shoteh cannot effect a legal marriage or divorce, nor do we accept testimony from him. It is critical to differentiate between a true shoteh and someone who is merely eccentric.

The best example in Tanach of a crazy person is someone who was actually pretending to be crazy. David was on the run from Shaul, and fled to the land of the Plishtim. The servants of Achich, king of Gat, recognized the man who had killed so many of their people in battle, seized him, and brought him before the king. Desperate, David behaved like a lunatic in their presence, scraped on the gates, and drooled on himself.

Achish rebuked his servants: “Do I lack crazy people that you brought this one to be crazy by me?” (Shmuel I 21:16)

This indicates that a crazy person is someone who behaves in ways that defy all rhyme and reason, who has no understanding of appropriate behavior.

Indeed, Chazal explain that a shoteh is someone who engages in entirely senseless behavior, such as going out alone at night (it was different back then, though places like New York City and Chicago are turning back the clock), tearing his clothing, and sleeping in cemeteries. The Gemara acknowledges that such behavior does not necessarily render one a shoteh, for competent people might engage in such behaviors for specific reasons (see Chagiga 3B and related sources). The clearest indicator that someone is a shoteh is that he destroys valuable things that are given to him (Chagiga 4A), like a child who doesn’t distinguish between a rock and a bar of gold.

The Rambam in Hilchos Eidus 9:9 (also see the Tur Choshen Mishpat 35:9) elaborates as follows:

A shoteh is ineligible to testify according to the Torah because he is not liable to keep the mitzvos. A shoteh is not only one who walks around naked, breaks utensils, and throws stones, but anyone whose mind has been torn apart, and his mind is always distorted in a certain matter, even though he speaks and asks questions appropriately in other matters, he is ineligible and is considered to be in the category of shotim.

The Rambam acknowledges that even a shoteh may behave appropriately at times, but if he has taken leave of his senses, he remains a shoteh. The Rambam then contrasts this with one who suffers from epilepsy. When such a person experiences a seizure, he is ineligible, but when he is healthy, he is eligible. The Rambam notes that some people with epilepsy are not mentally competent even when they are physically healthy, and concludes that we must deliberate very carefully when it comes to accepting testimony from such people.

The Rambam continues in halacha 10 as follows:

Those who are extremely foolish, who don’t recognize when things contradict one another, and do not have basic understanding of things like ordinary people, as well as those who are terrified and impulsive in their minds, and who are extremely deranged – these are in the category of shotim. And this matter goes according to what the judge sees, for it is impossible to precisely define this in writing.

Although there are strong indicators that someone is a shoteh, it’s not always black and white, and every case must be examined on an individual basis. Sometimes we know it when we see it, but sometimes it’s complicated.

One thing that is very clear is that we cannot define someone as a shoteh for drawing conclusions that go against a supposed consensus. Today it is fashionable to label someone crazy for their beliefs about Covid, vaccines, and official narratives on a wide range of subjects. Some of these people might fall into the category of shotim depending on how they process information and jump to conclusions, but there is no doubt this would apply to a very small percentage of people, regardless of the veracity of their beliefs. After all, reasonable people can draw different conclusions even if some of them are terribly wrong at times. Being terribly wrong is not synonymous with being incompetent and crazy.

This is a vital point. Nowadays people can easily be diagnosed as “crazy” and stripped of their liberty like the lowest of criminals. Governments around the world weaponize “mental illness” against those whose beliefs may threaten their hegemony, but can’t easily be prosecuted for a crime. Labeling people as crazy is a most convenient way to stifle discourse and eliminate the most troublesome dissenters – all for their own safety, of course.

At the same time, liberally referring to people as mentally disabled absolves them of responsibility for their actions when a free pass is unwarranted. If we are to think of everyone who believes that masks and vaccines saved humanity as crazy, then we are denying their possession of free choice, and essentially giving up on them as people. These people are extremely wrong, and their ability to make responsible decisions has been seriously impaired, but they are not necessarily shotim in a legal sense. It’s critical to make this distinction.

Rav Moshe Feinstein makes this distinction in Igros Moshe Yoreh De’ah 1:235. This responsa concerns the case of a Jewish woman who had fallen prey to the Christian cult of scientology. She believed that it was forbidden to avail herself of medical treatment, but only to pray to “that man”. She had since passed away, and the question was if she could be buried in a Jewish cemetery despite becoming an apostate, for one of two reasons. The first reason was as follows: “Perhaps she should be considered a shoteh because this belief is crazy, since it prohibits medical treatment even though we see that their prayers to what they believe in do not help at all.”

Rav Moshe rejected this argument out of hand. He explained that all idolaters who worship wood and stone are behaving foolishly, yet they are still punished for their sins and executed. This proves that when a person does something because of a sincere belief – even if it is illogical – he cannot be considered to have lost his mind. Even highly intelligent people can be misled to believe in nonsense, or can misinterpret dreams and other such experiences, and become totally devoted to their faith, to the point of giving up their lives.

Again, these people are terribly wrong, and might behave in extremely irresponsible ways as a result, but they are not crazy. They are still responsible for their actions…and they can still potentially be persuaded away from their erroneous beliefs.

The Amalekites in power wish to leverage this designation to marginalize and eliminate those who dare oppose them, and sow discord among the citizens. The Torah, however, dissuades us from labeling and libeling the people around us as crazy, even if they hold “unacceptable views”. Our relatives and neighbors might be very wrong about things that we consider to be obvious, but that does not make them mentally ill.

It makes them human.

__________________________

chananyaweissman.com/

rumble.com/c/c-782463

Download Tovim Ha-Shenayim as a PDF for free!

If you received this from someone else and want to receive future articles directly, please send a request to endthemadness@gmail.com.