Search Results for: popular

There Is Orthodox and Then There Is Jewish…

Assimilated Orthodox Jews

Assimilation is like a virus in many ways. It spreads primarily from close contact with those who are already infected, though casual contact is also dangerous. Carriers may exhibit a variety of symptoms, and may even be asymptomatic. Many get away with only mild cases of the disease – and tend to downplay it as a result – but many others suffer severe cases that lead to permanent damage and even spiritual death.

More parallels can be drawn, but let’s proceed to the main point.

We tend to think of assimilated Jews as those who have married gentiles. Until recently, that was the “test”; assimilation was equated with intermarriage. Most people would agree that Jews who are indistinguishable from gentiles, even if they marry another such Jew, can fairly be described as assimilated, though their chance of recovery is significantly greater.

The truth is that assimilation is a subtle and sinister disease. Even Jews who keep Shabbos, are strict about kashrus, and maintain the exterior trappings of a Torah-observant lifestyle can be infected with it. These cases are the most difficult to detect, which also make them the most difficult to cure. The intermarried Jew knows he is not living in the ways of his ancestors; he can have a sudden awakening and return. The assimilated Orthodox Jew can hardly be convinced by sage or even prophet that he is not in perfect health.

Here are four tests, in no particular order, to determine if you are an assimilated Orthodox Jew.

1) You live outside of Israel, with no intention to change that, and teach your children how important it is not to make a chillul Hashem.

The latter clause is not necessary for the assimilation aspect, but it sheds light on it. There is no greater chillul Hashem than the Jewish people living outside of Israel. This is irrespective of whether Moshiach has arrived, or the quality of life inside or outside of Israel. The definition of galus is the Jewish people exiled from Israel. It is a greater chillul Hashem for Jews to live in a pristine religious bubble outside of Israel than for them to live among idol worshipers inside their own land. This is because the banishment of Jews from their land is proof to the nations of the world that God has abandoned the Jewish people, or that He cannot protect them. This idea is emphasized throughout Sefer Tehillim.

So if you live in a nice Jewish community in the Diaspora and worry about making a kiddush Hashem in your interactions with gentiles, consider this. Your very presence there is the ultimate chillul Hashem; nothing else compares to it, and no amount of good behavior will make up for it. If this does not bother you, and you are not actively striving to rectify it, then you are an assimilated Orthodox Jew.

2) You take moral cues from the goyim.

Morality is not subjective, nor does morality evolve or progress from one generation to the next as does technology. That belief is incompatible with belief in God – Who alone determines what is right and what is wrong – and the Torah, where these determinations are immortalized.

Everyone lives by some type of moral code – even criminals, gangs, terrorists, and those who profess the vapid belief that there are no rules. As long as the world is populated by more than one person, there will always be rules. The only question is whether these rules will be based on the Torah, or invented by man. The morality of any particular rule or system is determined strictly by its fidelity to God’s objective truth.

Our very existence as Orthodox Jews is for the purpose of implementing God’s complete Torah in our land and spreading the basic Noahide teachings to the rest of the world. Moral enlightenment is supposed to flow exclusively from Torah to Jew to gentile, never the reverse. Knowledge of science and art may be obtained from a variety of sources, but when it comes to morality there is only one authentic source.

Many Orthodox Jews receive moral direction from gentile society. It is no coincidence that “new understandings” of a woman’s role directly parallel gentile movements awash with atheism, socialism, and a general rebellion against tradition. Orthodox Jewish women did not wake up one day and decide they are oppressed, kept down, unappreciated, abused, and erased by a barbaric patriarchy. These ideas seeped into the Orthodox world from impure sources and gradually poisoned people’s minds. Isolated cases of real crimes against women were sensationalized and blown out of proportion to create a false impression of a corrupt system, with the goal of undermining tradition and eventually burying it completely.

Sincere, well-meaning Orthodox Jews imported an impure goyish movement with a kernel of truth to address problems in Jewish society real, exaggerated, and even fabricated. The goyim decided there were to be new understandings of right and wrong, and the Jews followed.

The same is true with such causes as vegetarianism and veganism. Their explosion in popularity among Orthodox Jews directly followed new understandings of morality among “enlightened” goyim. These goyim believe that they are morally superior to those who eat meat, to the extent that meat-eaters are referred to as murderers. They have also decided that taking the life of a plant to sustain oneself is perfectly fine, based on arbitrary considerations. They simply make it up as they go along.

Needless to say, slaughtering an animal and offering it as a sacrifice on an altar is anathema to many Orthodox Jews, who maintain they want a Bais Hamikdash but seem to have forgotten what we actually do there. It’s not a Kotel with four walls.

Orthodox Jews who believe they are more moral than the Torah and those who transmitted it to us throughout the generations, based on goyish movements, are assimilated Orthodox Jews.

The same is also true with movements pertaining to “rights” of homosexuals and their ilk. A gradual erosion within the Orthodox world from the Torah’s clear positions on these issues, to eventual sympathy and even support for that which the Torah abhors, directly mirrors the “progress” of these movements in gentile lands.

We have lost the ability to be outraged by anything anymore, except at fellow Orthodox Jews who stubbornly cling to tradition in the face of new morality. Orthodox Jews are supposed to be the leading and most outspoken voice when it comes to moral issues, clearly and proudly articulating the view of the Torah. Instead, our voice is the very last to be heard, suppressed as long as possible, and then meekly attempting to reconcile the goyish morality of the day with the Torah’s eternal teachings.

Can there be any greater sign of assimilation than that? Can there be anything more humiliating?

3) You believe interlopers in our land should be given control over any part of our land.

I recently saw a film by Ami Horowitz called Interview With A Murderer in which he interviewed a senior Hamas terrorist. He asked the Arab if abandoning any part of “Palestine” would be a breach in the promise between Allah and the Muslim people.

The Arab replied as follows: “You are talking about our rights. Why abandon your rights? There is no way that you can abandon part of your home, willingly. It belongs to all the Muslims. We are talking about the Holy Land here. It belongs to every Muslim in the world. I cannot give away, Abu Mazen cannot give away, Yasser Arafat could not give away, nobody can give away any part of it.”

If you are an Orthodox Jew, and you do not firmly echo this response, with “Jews” and the names of Jewish politicians substituted where appropriate, then you are an assimilated Orthodox Jew.

4) You have a problem with the mitzva to wipe out Amalek.

The Torah’s position on this is crystal clear. Shaul lost his kingdom and his life primarily because he took pity on Amalek. King David repeatedly emphasized his desire to pursue the enemies of the Jewish people, which are synonymous with the enemies of God, and wipe them out.

The latter is the leader we pray for three times a day, which presumably means we should vote for him in an election.

Today a great many Orthodox Jews want nothing to do with this mitzva. Since Orthodox Jews cannot simply do away with an uncomfortable or inconvenient mitzva as do their more “progressive” counterparts, they simply define them into irrelevance. Amalek is transformed from an actual nation of actual people to an idea – preferably an amorphous one – that must be abolished, particularly from inside ourselves.

See, dear gentile, we Jews are good – based on your definition, of course.

More traditional Orthodox Jews will maintain that Amalek does refer to actual human beings that we are commanded to wipe out, but we cannot possibly know who they are and we probably never will. Even if we did know who they are, due to a number of practical considerations we would not be allowed to do anything about it.

That may be true, but they say this with relief, not regret. If Eliyahu Hanavi delivered Amalek to them, gave them a sword, invited them to perform the mitzva, and assured them that no Jew would suffer for it, the Orthodox Jew would want nothing to do with it.

This Orthodox Jew is assimilated. The same Jew who would run to wear techeiles if he were confident that the opportunity to perform the mitzva had been restored should run with the same eagerness to fulfill another mitzva that has been denied us for generations. If you are an Orthodox Jew, how can you claim there is a difference? How can you desperately wish to remain exempt from a mitzva that is fundamental to achieving our national destiny? It is only through assimilation.

If you exhibit any of these symptoms, then I am afraid that you have contracted the disease of spiritual assimilation. Fortunately, with early detection and an honest assessment, the chances of a full recovery are high.

____________

www.chananyaweissman.com

https://www.facebook.com/etm.shabbatons

Mission Aside, Why Is Jacob DeHaan Considered Jewishly Respectable?

Why does the popular Charedi calendar (עתים לבינה) today mark the murder of a lifelong pedophile?!

As Wikipedia puts it:

Religious and anti-Zionist phase

De Haan rapidly became more religiously committed. He was angered by Zionist refusals to cooperate with Arabs.

At first he aligned himself with religious Zionism and the Mizrachi movement, but after meeting Rabbi Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, leader of the ultra-conservative Haredi Jewish community, he became the political spokesman of the Haredim in Jerusalem and was elected political secretary of the Orthodox community council, Vaad Ha’ir.

De Haan endeavoured to get an agreement with Arab nationalist leaders to allow unrestricted Jewish immigration into Palestine in exchange for a Jewish declaration forgoing the Balfour Declaration.

During this time it is alleged that he continued to have relationships with men, including Arabs from east Jerusalem. In one of his poems he asks himself whether his visits to the Wailing Wall were motivated by a desire for God or for the Arab boys there.

(Emphasis added.)

Gold Bug

Shavuos: Where’s the Gold?

King David famously said that the Torah is even better than gold. In one passage, he writes, “The Torah of Your mouth is better for me than thousands of gold (zahav) and silver” (Ps. 119:72). Later in that chapter, he exclaims, “I loved Your commandments more than zahav and paz” (Ps. 119:127).  In yet another passage, King David writes, “They [the Torah’s Laws] are more desirable than gold and much paz” (Ps. 19:11). In these few passages, we have so far encountered two words for “gold” — zahav and paz. In addition to these two words, we will find another three words in the Bible that refer to “gold”: ketem, charutz, and betzer. This essay will explore these five different words for “gold” and discuss whether or not they are truly synonymous. Various commentators will suggest that these different words connote different places in which gold is found and/or different hues of gold.

The most common Hebrew word in the Bible for “gold” is zahav. Along with its Aramaic counterpart dahav — which is explained by the Hebrew ZAYIN morphing into an Aramaic DALET — this word appear more than four-hundred times throughout the Bible. The Talmud (Yoma 44b–45a) states that there are seven types (or grades) of zahav: regular zahav, zahav tov (“good gold”), zahav Ophir (gold imported from Ophir, I Chron. 29:4), zahav mufaz (explained below), zahav shachut (“beaten gold,” I Kgs. 10:16–17 and II Chron. 9:15–16), zahav sagur (“fine gold,” this term appears eight times in I Kgs. 6–7, II Chron. 4 and 9), and zahar parvaim (“gold from a Parvaim” or “gold whose color resembles cow blood,” II Chron. 3:6). A similar tradition about seven shades of gold in King David’s blonde hair can be found in Tikkunei Zohar (Tikkun #70). [For an alternate list of the seven golds that replaces regular zahav and zahav Ophir with zahav tahor (“pure gold”) and zahav mezukak (“refined gold”), see Shemot Rabbah §35:1.]

Rabbi Aharon Marcus (1843–1916) explains that the root of the word zahav is ZAYIN-HEY (or perhaps even just the letter ZAYIN alone) which means “this,” because something shiny and sparkling like “gold” calls attention to itself. Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim (1740–1814) similarly explains that zahav is derived from the biliteral root ZAYIN-BET which means “flow,” because when one refines gold, the unalloyed gold simply “flows” away from its impurities. [Interestingly, though zahav literally means “gold,” Ibn Janach and Radak write that the word zahav can be borrowed to refer to anything pristine and clean (see, for example, Jer. 51:7 and Zech. 4:12).]

A popular etymology of the word zahav argues that it is a contraction of the phrase zeh hav (“give this”)—an allusion to gold’s role as legal tender. This explanation is cited by such luminaries as Peirush HaRokeach, Rabbi Todros Abulafia (1247–1306), Rabbi Binyamin HaRofeh Anav (a brother of the author of Shibbolei HaLeket), the Maharal of Prague (1520–1609), Rabbi Eliezer Papo (1785–1828), and more.

The Torah describes the Pishon River as circumscribing the Land of Havilah, reporting that the especially good gold is found there (Gen. 2:11–12). In explaining those passages, Nachmanides explains that this “good gold” in found in the sand and on the shores along the Pishon River. Based on this, Rabbi Shlomo Aharon Wertheimer (1866–1935) writes that the word zahav is related to the word zav (“flow”), and denotes the type of gold found near “flowing” bodies of water.

Havilah is probably named after a person named Havilah son of Joktan (son of Eber), who was a brother to someone named Ophir (Gen. 10:29, I Chron. 1:23). The name Ophir also appears as a place name for the location from which both zahav (I Chron. 29:4, I Kgs. 9:28; 10:11; 22:49, and II Chron. 9:10) and ketem (Isa. 13:12, Ps. 45:10, Job 28:16) are brought. Rabbi Pinchas Eliyahu Horowitz (1765–1821) writes in his Sefer HaBrit that Ophir refers to the South American country Peru, where large deposits of gold are supposedly concentrated in the Andes Mountains and in the many rivers that flow across its jungles. Others identify Ophir as someplace on the Indian subcontinent, with the legendary lost city of Atlantis, with the Phillipines, and even with Australia. Nonetheless, the accepted understanding amongst scholars is that Ophir is somewhere in the Arabian Peninsula or in the Horn of Africa (i.e. Ethiopia). Rabbi Yosef Chaim of Baghdad (1832–1909) identifies zahav Ophir as “white gold” (perhaps platinum, or an alloy of gold and some other white metal) which he claims is found in Russia. The American archeologist William Foxwell Albright (1891–1971) identifies Ophir with Punt in Somalia.

The word paz appears nine times in the Bible. Although most commentators understand paz to mean “gold” (as Radak to Ps. 19:11 writes, it specifically means “good and unadulterated gold”), others disagree: Ibn Ezra (to Ps. 19:11 and Song of Songs 5:11) explains paz as a “precious stone,” while Rabbi Moshe David Valle (1697–1777) explains that paz refers to “royal jewels” that happened to be made out of gold. As Rabbi Wertheimer puts it, paz is the best type of gold in the world and is the most rare form of gold.

Rabbi Pappenheim explains that the two-letter root PEH-ZAYIN — from which paz is derived — refers to “fast movement.” Thus, when the Bible describes King David as being mifazez before the Holy Ark (II Sam. 6:16), this refers to him furiously dancing in honor of the Torah. Based on this understanding of the root, Rabbi Pappenheim explains that the word paz refers to extra pure gold which shimmers in the sunlight as though it were dancing. He also explains that the adjectives mufaz (I Kgs. 10:18), me’ufaz (Jer. 10:9), and ufaz (Dan. 10:5) all refer to shiny gold that has a glistening and glowing glimmer. [Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (to Gen. 49:23–24) notes that there ought to be a connection between mifazez and paz, but confesses that he does not know what it is. See also Rabbi Hirsch’s comments to Ps. 19:11.]

Others (like Ibn Janach and Radak) explain that the triliteral root PEH-ZAYIN-ZAYIN is separate from the word paz, and refers to “strength.” They explain mifazez as referring to the “strength” and “vigor” with which King David danced before the Ark. These commentators explain that when used to describe gold, mufaz and ufaz refer to gold that is especially unalloyed and thus “stronger” than other, adulterated types of gold. Radak explains that me’ufaz means “from [a place called] Uzaf,” which is identified by Targum (there) as Ophir (possibly because the ZAYIN of Ufaz is interchangeable with the REISH of Ophir).

The word ketem appears nine times in the Bible. Although Ibn Janach first defines ketem as “jewels,” he concludes that it more likely means “gold” — which is how most commentators explain the word. Like zahav, ketem is also said to be imported from Ophir (see above), and according to Dr. Chaim Tawil the very word ketem is said to be derived from the Akkadian word kutimmu and the Sumerian word kudim which mean “goldsmith.” [Interestingly, Rabbi Moshe Ibn Ezra (1055–1138) writes that the word ketem in Job 31:24 actually means “silver,” even though he agrees that elsewhere it is a synonym for “gold.”]

Alternatively, ketem is derived from the Hebrew root KAF-TAV-MEM, which also means “stain” or “dirtied” (for example, see Jer. 2:22). Rabbi Pappenheim writes that both meanings of ketem are actually derived from the monoliteral root KAF which refers to “hitting.” He explains that KAF-TAV specifically refers to “beating something through repeated rubbing,” such that ketem refers to especially pure gold whose malleability allows it to beaten into something very thin. Since such fine gold is especially eye-catching, the term ketem was borrowed to mean anything which noticeably sticks out, such as a “stain” or “dirt” on an otherwise pristine background.

The Modern Hebrew word katom (for the color “orange”) is derived from the same root as ketem, and the Modern Hebrew word tapuz (for the fruit “orange”) is a contraction of the Hebrew phrase tapuach zahav (literally, “Golden Apple”) — an expression found in Prov. 25:11. The English word orange, by the way, is related to the word Hebrew/Aramaic etrog/trunga, as both are derived from the Old Persian word narang and refer to various citrus fruit. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the initial o- in the English form of this word is probably influenced by the place name Orange, famous for the House of Orange.

The word charutz in the sense of “gold” appears six times in the Bible. This word is actually the standard Phoenician (Tyrian) and Akkadian word for “gold,” so some scholars claim that Hebrew borrowed the word from those languages. On the other hand, Rabbi Marcus explains that since the root CHET-REISH-TZADI refers to “cutting / digging with a sharp instrument,” gold is called charutz because it is dug up from underground. Indeed, Rabbi Wertheimer writes that the word charutz refers to gold found by “digging.” Rabbi Yishaya of Trani (1180–1250) explains that gold is called charutz because the pursuit of gold makes people “diligent” and “industrious,” which are alternate meanings of the Hebrew word charutz.

Psalms 68:14 refers to something called yerakrak charutz (“greenish charutz”), which Menachem Ibn Saruk explains is a type of gemstone. However, Dunash Ibn Labrat and others explain that charutz refers to “gold” (see also Tosafos to Nedarim 32a) such that this term references greenish gold (perhaps a reference to electrum or gold alloyed with cadmium). Indeed, Radak also defines charutz as “gold,” while noting that some say that charutz refers to gemstones.

The Israeli archaeologist Dr. Shmuel Yeivin (1896–1982) wrote (under the pen name Shebna) that the words in question reflect different colors of gold (usually depending on what other metals are present in the alloy). In fact, the Mishnah (Yoma 4:4) teaches that on normal days, the firepan used for the incense in the Holy Temple would be made of greenish gold, but on Yom Kippur, they would use one made of reddish gold. Yeivin thus explains that zahav is yellowish gold, ketem is reddish gold, and charutz is greenish gold. That ketem refers to something reddish is hinted to in the Mishnah (Niddah 8:1) which uses the word ketem as a “blood stain.” Indeed, gold alloyed with copper — known as “Red Gold” or “Rose Gold” — boasts a reddish color. Additionally, Yeivin argues that the word paz focuses on the shine/luster of gold, without regard to its particular hue.

The last word in our discussion is betezer. The debate concerning this word centers on a specific verse in which Eliphaz the Temanite tells Job that man’s best hope is to repent “and then you would have a betezer on the ground and Ophir [i.e. gold] with the rocks of the brooks” (Job 22:24, see also Job 22:25; 36:19). Ibn Janach, Radak, and Gersonides explain that the word betezr in this context refers to “gold.” However, other commentators disagree with this assessment and explain the word differently: Ibn Ezra (there) writes that betzer is “silver,” while Rashi (following Menachem) writes that it is a “stronghold.” Rabbi Isaiah of Trani explains that betezer does not actually mean “gold,” but is still related to gold because it refers to the crude ore which, when refined, can yield gold.

Gut Yuntiff,

Reuven Chaim Klein

Beitar Illit, Israel

P.S. I published an article in the May 2020 issue of Babel Magazine (for language enthusiasts and scholars) about our work with synonyms in What’s in a Word? You can access the article here if you are interested.

Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein is the author of the newly-released work God versus Gods: Judaism in the Age of Idolatry (Mosaica Press, 2018). His book follows the narrative of Tanakh and focuses on the stories concerning Avodah Zarah using both traditional and academic sources. It also includes an encyclopedia of all the different types of idolatry mentioned in the Bible.

Rabbi Klein studied for over a decade at the premier institutes of the Hareidi world, including Beth Medrash Govoha in Lakewood and Yeshivas Mir in Jerusalem. He authored many articles both in English and Hebrew, and his first book Lashon HaKodesh: History, Holiness, & Hebrew (Mosaica Press, 2014)  became an instant classic. His weekly articles on synonyms in the Hebrew language are published in the Jewish Press and Ohrnet. Rabbi Klein lives with his family in Beitar Illit, Israel and can be reached via email to: rabbircklein@gmail.com

Reprinted with permission from Ohr Somayach here.

‘Lost Causes Are the Only Ones Worth Fighting For’ – Chananya Weissman Elaborates…

Why Should We Bother?

I’m human. Sometimes I get frustrated when it seems that no one is even listening, and my motivation to keep trying starts to sink. What’s the point of sitting down and writing another article? It’s hard work, I get more flak than appreciation, this isn’t my job, and I don’t get paid to write. I don’t need to do this.

Even the pats on the back do little to recharge my batteries. Since I don’t really care if people don’t like what I have to say, it’s only fair that I shouldn’t care very much if they do. My goal is to actually make a difference, and you don’t accomplish that by telling people what they already know or what they want to hear. You do that by pushing uncomfortable buttons. When you push those buttons, most people will push back.

If I wanted to be popular, I would stick to safe themes, like “let’s come together in times of crisis”, “drive safely to reduce traffic accidents”, or “don’t forget your child in the car”. If I wanted to be REALLY popular, I would write articles for secular audiences criticizing the Orthodox community, and I would write articles for Orthodox audiences encouraging secular Jews to return to their roots. I do just the opposite. I tell the Orthodox world to take responsibility for its own problems instead of looking for scapegoats and to put Torah principles before social expectations. I tell secular Jews to stop embracing their enemies and hating their own, and to return to an authentic Jewish lifestyle.

As a result, I’ve managed to unite secular and Orthodox Jews – a very rare feat – in disliking me. Even worse, it’s very rare to receive evidence that I’ve actually managed to get through to someone who didn’t previously agree with me, that I moved the needle ever so slightly in the right direction. I have no interest in preaching to the choir; I want to make a difference. If I’m not making a difference, why bother? If you can’t change anyone’s mind, why keep trying? Who needs the tzorus? Why continue to care?

Thankfully, this doesn’t faze me as much as it used to. Over the years I’ve learned to reinforce my motivation to keep trucking along, no matter what, and I’d like to share what I’ve learned to help you do the same. I know I’m not the only one fighting the good fight and trying to accomplish what seems impossible. We need to keep at it, even if it seems like no one is listening, it’s a waste of time, and we’d be better off not bothering.

Here’s what I remind myself when the yetzer hara (sometimes disguised as other people) tells me to stop trying to change the world.

1. Even if you don’t get through to anyone, ever, you still have to try. The Gemara relates that during the destruction of the first Beis Hamikdash, there were elders who kept the entire Torah. Initially they were to be spared from the punishment, but they were prosecuted in Heaven for failing to rebuke the public, and marked for death. The angel Gavriel tried to defend them. He said that he knew with certainly that the people would have rejected their rebuke. Hashem replied as follows: “If that was revealed to you, was it revealed to them?” (Shabbos 55A)

It may indeed be true that you will not get through to a single person. Depressing as that may be, it does not absolve you from trying. Even if you can’t save anyone else, at least by trying you are saving yourself, and your conscience can be clear.

2. Your efforts might bear fruit in ways you will never know about. I used to remind myself of this when I taught kids who came from homes with weak to no levels of halachic observance. It is unreasonable to expect them to change dramatically before your eyes, even if you are the most passionate and dedicated teacher. At the same time, it is self-defeating to believe that your efforts have no impact simply because you see no concrete evidence. You may well be planting seeds that will only blossom many years later, and you might never find out about it in this world.

Just because you don’t receive positive reinforcement doesn’t mean you aren’t making a positive difference. In fact, your efforts are all the more noble precisely because you persist without your batteries being constantly charged.

Another way your efforts can bear fruit is by strengthening other people who agree with you but feel marginalized. This was my mission when I started EndTheMadness nearly two decades ago – not to change the minds of those who are violently opposed to my ideas, but to educate the ignorant and strengthen those who agreed with me but felt trapped in a system that wasn’t working for them.

Maybe you won’t be the one to directly inspire the change. But maybe you will inspire someone else to speak up because you did, and the change will ultimately happen because of the spark you ignited. You might not get the credit you deserve, but this too makes your efforts all the more noble, and no less important.

3. It’s not your responsibility to finish the job, but you’re not free to absolve yourself from it (Avos 2:16). In all aspects of life – all of them – the results are not in our hands.

Jews are always in the minority, and clear-thinking, Torah-true Jews are a tiny minority within the minority. It is entirely impossible according to nature of the world for us to win the ideological wars being waged all around us.

Don’t let that discourage you, though; that’s the way it’s supposed to be.

If we were more numerous and powerful than our adversaries, it would mean little for us to be victorious. It would certainly not demonstrate that we are on God’s side. No, we are supposed to be outnumbered, with the game fixed against us, where victory is a natural impossibility. When we ultimately are victorious – and we will be – it will be unmistakable that God fought for us as we fought for Him.

We have to remind ourselves that just as God granted victory to the few over the many in physical battles in the times of Chanuka and many other occasions, so He will grant victory to the few over the many in the ideological battles that we must fight. It is not our responsibility to calculate the likelihood of success before raising our voice. That is a trap of the yetzer hara for us to give up and surrender – and his only hope to defeat us.

It is God’s job to win the battle for us, in the time that He sees fit. It is our job to continue to show up for battle, to never surrender.

4. A Jew who really believes that God runs the world, and who really believes that every word of the Torah is true, never loses his hope. Sometimes, in spite of everything, you really will reach people and witness a change. But you can only do that if you keep trying. What a shame it would be to put in a massive effort and then stop right before the finish line, simply because you didn’t know it was just one more step forward.

Maybe all my efforts to this point didn’t influence a single Jew to leave galus. Maybe all my efforts to this point didn’t bring about the various other changes I’ve tried to achieve. But one thing you can bank on is that I’m not going to stop trying. If you’ve been fighting the good fight as well, I hope you won’t stop either.

One last push, and we might just get there.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Rabbi Chananya Weissman is the founder of EndTheMadness and the author of seven books, including “Go Up Like a Wall” and “How to Not Get Married: Break these rules and you have a chance”. Many of his writings are available at www.chananyaweissman.com. He is also the director and producer of a documentary on the shidduch world, Single Jewish Male, and The Shidduch Chronicles, available on YouTube. He can be contacted at admin@endthemadness.org.

Does Republishing Articles AGAINST SODOMITES Violate My Host’s ToS?

A call to stand for Kedusha

by Rabbi Chananya Weissman

Where are our leaders?

I’m writing the article that other rabbis don’t want to write because they are afraid of backlash and controversy. I am less afraid of backlash and controversy than being challenged by the Heavenly Court for not writing it. My rabbinic colleagues should be as well, or they are in the wrong profession. Positions of leadership should not be staffed by followers, no matter how scholarly or pious they may be.

To those who find this mussar offensive enough to react to it, I ask one simple question: why does the previous paragraph offend you to the point of reacting, while gay parades through the streets of Jerusalem do not? Why does criticism from an insignificant person like me raise your ire, but the foisting of perverse relationships and gender distortions into our society, media, schools, and legal system doesn’t seem to bother you at all?

If you believe that by ignoring these threats they will eventually go away, the opposite has proven to be true. If you believe that responding to those attacking Torah norms will grant them legitimacy, they have profited far more from your cowering silence. If you are worried about losing your job, I ask you to reconsider what your job actually is. If you are afraid that you will be prosecuted simply for speaking out, I assure you that you still have that privilege, for now. Your ability to speak out has already been eroded, and criminalizing the expression of Torah-true views is definitely on the agenda of those pushing the envelope. It will be much easier to maintain this privilege if you fight for it now than it will be to regain it when it is taken from you.

You also fail 100% of the times you choose not to try.

Why should we care?

This brings me to the following Midrash Rabbah from the introduction to Eicha, section 22. Reish Lakish derives from pesukim throughout the neviim that the rampant avoda zara which was the main reason for the destruction of the first Beis Hamikdash was a movement that gradually took over the nation. At first some people worshiped avoda zara in secret, and no one objected. They proceeded to worship avoda zara behind the door, and no one objected. The avoda zara movement spread to the roofs, then the gardens, then the mountain tops, then the fields, then the intersections, then the public squares, then the cities, then the main streets, and ultimately into the Holy of Holies itself.

Every time the envelope was pushed further, there was an opportunity for the leaders and concerned citizens to protest, and each time they were silent. It is for this reason that the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed, our people were exiled, and we have been lamenting our fate ever since.

This idol worship “movement” bears more resemblance to the traditional-family-destruction movement than you might realize. Chazal teach us that the Jews knew full well that there was no substance to avoda zara, and they only desired it as a ploy to permit sexual immorality in public (Sanhedrin 64A). Indeed, avoda zara was often associated with redefining such behavior as a sacred act, much as today’s “progressives” rename and reframe abhorrent acts to make them sound noble. There is nothing innovative about today’s version of the movement; Koheleth teaches us that there is nothing new under the sun, and today’s gender benders and family deconstructionists are no exceptions. This sort of thing has been going on since the earliest generations.

In the times of the Beit Hamikdash the leaders looked the other way as avoda zara spread throughout the land. When it was still considered a shameful act, they dismissed the practitioners as trivial outcasts, hardly a threat worth their attention. When it emerged from the closet, they still didn’t bother addressing it. They had their shuls, their shtiebels, their Batei Midrash, shiurim to prepare and ceremonies to attend. When it became a full-fledged movement that gradually overtook society, they no longer dared protest. They huddled in their shuls, their shtiebels, and their Batei Midrash and convinced themselves that dealing with matters of national concern was not their job and not worth the consequences.

Before long the tables were turned, and those who dared object to avoda zara found themselves in the crosshairs of those who had taken over, and they suffered the consequences. Message sent to everyone else who might have a problem with it, and message received.

Not only was the Beit Hamikdash destroyed because of this, but also the 480 shuls in Jerusalem, each of which had a seminary (Midrash Eicha, introduction section 13). The rabbis who stayed silent and excused themselves from what went on in society lost their shuls and their positions anyway.

With very few exceptions, the rabbis of our time have followed this erroneous course of inaction while this hefkeirus movement has spread throughout the land, growing more bold and insatiable as the voices of protest have become few and faint. Shall we suffer the same fate again?

Responding to the accusations

Those who dare to speak out against the hefkeirus movement are typically accused of hypocrisy and hatred. These accusations should be easy to deflect, but those standing for Torah-truth tend to be ill-equipped to deal with criticism, and come across as foolish when placed on the defensive. The media has a never-ending thirst for opportunities to make observant Jews look foolish and hypocritical, and unfortunately we play into their hands time and time again.

Worse still, those who allow themselves to be interviewed by the secular press tend to be oblivious to the fact that behind the smiling faces are one-sided vultures on a mission to destroy them. Our people are seduced by the glory of the cameras and microphones, and fall right into their hands. We have to understand that these are not really interviews, but disputations against the Torah before a hostile court. They hunger for the fifteen seconds out of an hour-long interview that they can use to manipulate their audience and push their agenda. Those who cannot arm themselves with proper responses had best not provide sound bites to these sharks, and even those who can had best think carefully before indulging them.

Here are some of their favored accusations, and suggestions for how we should be responding to them. (More suggestions are welcome; this is not intended to be an exhaustive treatment.)

1. Why are you protesting this, but you don’t protest those who speak lashon hara or some other sin?

What they are really suggesting: Our motivations are not pure. Our protest is not really based on the Torah, but raw hatred. Hence, not only are we hypocrites, we are hate-filled people who should be demonized and, when they can further hijack the legal system, imprisoned. They hope to watch the religious Jew flail and stumble in response, proving that he really is a hate-filled hypocrite with no good reason to be objecting.

Response:

a) We don’t condone anyone who violates the Torah. We are protesting this group in particular because it is an actual movement. There is no movement to legitimize lashon hara, child abuse, spousal abuse, etc. While some sins, particularly lashon hara, are rampant and must be addressed through education and other communal measures, there is no movement to legitimize lashon hara, encourage those who are curious about lashon hara to explore it and join a popular movement celebrating it, or to otherwise grow and expand in the name of progress. Conversely, the hefkeirus movement has a far-reaching agenda that seeks to undercut the foundation of the Jewish people, it is organized and well-funded, and it is aggressively trying to take over our society.

b) The Chafetz Chaim is famous for addressing the sin of lashon hara. While that is far from his only contribution to the Jewish people, it was a mitzva he paid particular attention to. Does it make him a hypocrite for choosing one widespread sin to especially address over others? Would anyone call him antisocial or hypocritical for “specializing” in lashon hara when there were other communal issues that received less attention? Of course not. The very notion is absurd, and those who would make such an accusation would only do so as a sinister ploy to delegitimize voices of opposition – just as you are attempting.

2. Why does it bother you if two people love each other?

Response: What you are doing is reframing and redefining an abhorrent act by focusing on a very narrow aspect of this act and disregarding the inconvenient details. Just as selecting a 15-second sound bite from an hour-long interview to promote an agenda is technically accurate but in reality a sinister distortion of the truth, so is rebranding sexual perversity as simply “two people loving each other”. What you are attempting to do is a shameful distortion of the truth.

We have no objections in principle to people loving each other, of course not! But when these expressions of love go against the very foundations of God’s nature and God’s law, then we must object. The mere fact that an act is committed out of love does not purify the filthy or sanctify the profane. The same is true about adulterers who might love each other, or adults who might express their love for children or animals in inappropriate ways. The Torah is our moral guide, and God is the arbiter of proper boundaries for love and everything else.

3. But God made them that way. God must want them to be this way. They don’t have any choice.

Response:

This assertion is fundamentally wrong on so many levels! Let’s take it piece by piece.

a) Let us assume for the moment that there is a gene that determines sexual preference. We will do this simply for the sake of argument, as there is enormous evidence that homosexuality and other such behaviors are learned, often stemming from abusive childhoods.

To claim that because God made someone a certain way absolves them of responsibility for their behavior would mean the death of civilization. By your reasoning, every thief, every murderer, every rapist, every abuser can blame God for wiring him that way and earn the sympathy of his accusers. It’s God’s fault. God made him do it.

No society on earth, religious or secular, allows a genetic predisposition for any behavior or personality trait to be used as an excuse for behaving in an unacceptable way. There is also no other class of people that makes this argument to rationalize their behavior. So this is really nothing more than a sinister attempt to blame God – a God you don’t really believe in and whose authority you don’t accept – for the fact that you do as you please.

In so doing you have amputated the moral conscience from the human being. A sinner who feels remorse and guilt has hope for rehabilitation. A sinner who believes he has no choice, that God made him do it, nay, that God wants him to do it, no longer has hope. You act as if you are doing the sinner a favor by removing his guilt and separating him from his conscience, but you are in fact his greatest enemy, robbing him of his only chance to reconnect to his spiritual source. Your crime is greater than his. We can easily pity those who submit to their temptations, for all of us stumble at times, but how can we pity those who encourage sinners that they have no choice in the matter, and thereby to give up any hope of doing better?

b) You also assume that just because God made someone a certain way, He expects him to remain that way and follow all his natural impulses. How absurd! Were that the case, why would the Torah even need to be written?

Shall we assume that because a child is born uncircumcised that God wants him to remain that way? Shall we assume that one who is born and raised a miser shall refrain from giving charity? Shall we assume that one who has a cruel nature shall commit cruel acts, in accordance with God’s supposed will? You don’t really believe any of this, and if this is the best defense you have for those who engage in forbidden sexual acts, then you had best stop arguing on their behalf.

c) You claim they don’t have any choice. Not only does this fly in the face of the fundamental principle that all people have free choice, it is easily disproven. It is so easily disproven that you surely know it is a lie, and you don’t really believe it.

If gay people really cannot control themselves, how is it that they generally manage without any difficulty to commit their sexual acts in private, in accordance with the secular laws on decency? Why do they not impulsively commit sexual acts the very moment the urge strikes, wherever they may be and with whomever may be the target of their “love”? How do they manage to restrain themselves until they are alone together?

Clearly, they can control themselves. Someone who truly lacks any self-control had best be locked up, for they would be a danger to themselves and all they encounter.

The question, therefore, is the extent to which we can expect them to control themselves. The Torah has expressed God’s expectations on this matter quite clearly. Being that God created the sexual impulse, God created the world and all that is in it, and God has perfect knowledge, we must trust that God would not demand someone to control that which is uncontrollable, nor punish him for failing to do so. Hence, the only logical conclusion is that those with homosexual tendencies can most certainly control their behavior, they are expected to control their behavior, and they are responsible for their actions.

We do not deny that the challenge may be overwhelmingly difficult for some people, and we will lovingly support them and assist them however we can in dealing with the challenges they face. However, we can only do this for those who recognize that it is their responsibility, it is within their capabilities to rise to the challenge, and this is what God demands of them. We cannot support those who blame God for their behavior and reject any sense of personal responsibility and accountability.

4. But really, what’s the big deal what two people do in the privacy of their bedroom, so long as it is consensual and no one is being hurt?

Response:

This challenge is also based on false assumptions, and is nothing but an attempt to minimize the severity of the sin and cast us as religious predators.

First of all, as noted, this is not simply two people doing something in the privacy of their bedroom. This is a movement with a far-reaching agenda, celebrating perverse behavior, encouraging it, aggressively seeking to change social norms, hijack the education system, persecute and prosecute all those who stand in their way. If only this were two people doing something in the privacy of their bedroom! In light of this, we categorically reject your attempt to disarm us from defending all that we hold dear against this onslaught.

Second of all, as Jews we are responsible for one another. Even if this sinister movement disbanded, we would still be concerned about immorality inside the home, just as you expect us to be concerned about other sinful acts that are committed behind closed doors. Indeed, the argument that a crime was committed inside the home does not hold up in secular court. Spiritual crimes cannot be ignored simply because they are kept out of public view, especially those that by their very nature normally occur behind closed doors.

The laws of arayos are particularly emphasized by the Torah because they are the foundation of the Jewish family and all of society. You challenge us why we should care. How can we not care?

Furthermore, Chazal teach in multiple places that wherever gay marriage is enshrined in the law, God brings plagues and destruction that do not distinguish between the righteous and the wicked. We find this by no other commandment. We count on God to protect us when thousands of missiles are raining down upon our cities, that they should strike empty fields instead of causing indiscriminate destruction. We pray to God to protect us from plagues and pandemics that turn every breath we take into a potential death sentence.

This same God has some expectations of us as well. We want God to watch over us and protect us both inside and outside the privacy of our homes. Why should He do so if we allow all manner of wanton behavior to be committed in public and private, contaminating His land and corrupting His people?

Indeed, to turn a blind eye to behaviors that drive God’s protection away would be truly hateful toward those who engage in these behaviors and all those affected by them – which is everyone.

Just as the family and friends of alcoholics, drug addicts, and gamblers intervene to urge their loved one to stop engaging in behavior that is harmful to himself and others, we must do the same. This intervention is not always met with appreciation – quite the contrary – but we recognize it as a loving act by people who care.

It is the same here. Our intervention is not an act of hatred, but an act of love. We care about the people engaging in these behaviors and the impact it has on others. It would be convenient in the short term to let them do as they please without any objection, but knowing the destruction this brings on them on others, we simply cannot do so. If there were no consequences to their behavior, we truly wouldn’t care, but the consequences could not be more severe. We have no moral choice but to intervene.

Conclusion

Our ancestors allowed avoda zara to spread throughout the land, and they excused themselves from objecting. Their indifference led to the destruction of all we had.

Today, while thousands of people march through our streets celebrating the obscene, the overwhelming majority of rabbis and ordinary people are silent, uninterested and unwilling to stand for what is right.

I have no position of authority, no following, and little influence beyond the persuasiveness of my words. I have nothing material to gain from writing this, have no axe to grind, and derive no particular pleasure from inviting enmity upon myself for airing unpopular views. I can easily absolve myself from speaking up about this issue, as most others have done. If it were about me, I would not write this.

But it is not about me. It is about all of us, everything we have, and everything we wish to have. Preserving what we have and achieving what we desire does not come automatically.

I call upon my rabbinic colleagues to rouse themselves and spread Torah truth without shame or fear. I call upon my brothers and sisters to object to any attempt to spread a modern version of avoda zara in our holy land.

Finally, I call upon those who have been lured into perverse lifestyles and corrupt ideologies to take responsibility for their behavior and return to the Torah.

Let us truly be – as God declares us – a kingdom of kohanim and a holy nation.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Rabbi Chananya Weissman is the founder of EndTheMadness and the author of seven books, including “Go Up Like a Wall” and “How to Not Get Married: Break these rules and you have a chance”. Many of his writings are available at www.chananyaweissman.com. He is also the director and producer of a documentary on the shidduch world, Single Jewish Male, and The Shidduch Chronicles, available on YouTube. He can be contacted at admin@endthemadness.org.