Praying at the Grave of Franz Rosenzweig

This past February, I had the chance to visit the grave of Franz Rosenzweig in Frankfurt--not a pilgrimage site, but a place I was drawn to nonetheless. A week later, I was invited to join the editorial board of a project named for his adult education initiative, The Lehrhaus.

Fast forward a few months, and the site is ready to launch. To mark the launch, which coincides with the Yamim Nora'im, I imagine a prayer that I might have recited at Rosenzweig's grave.

Read about it here: http://www.thelehrhaus.com/commentary-short-articles/grave-franz-rosenzweig

ICYMI: A conversation about Jewish Presence on the Temple Mount

Over the past week, I had the privilege of hosting a conversation with Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer, Rabbi Yehudah Glick, and Professor Shaul Magid on my TOI blog, using the ReplyAll platform.

The conversation is now closed. I am reposting it below.

A Memory Jog on R. Barry Freundel, the RCA, and the Rabbanut

Jogging my memory by reviewing the whole history of the Rabbanut-RCA crisis that led to the revamping of the conversion system, I came across something significant (I collected the best posts from that era under the label "best of giyur")

In June 2006, Rabbi Barry Freundel and Rabbi Heshy Billet traveled to Israel on behalf of the RCA to meet and negotiate with the Rabbanut on conversion policy. There were some people close with Rav Elyashiv, notably R. Nachum Eisenstein and his Vaad Haolami Leinyonei Giyur, who wanted to make sure the negotiations failed so that the RCA is not recognized and so that a new initiative, the EJF, would be the address for conversions in the US.

To that end, they whispered some terrible things about Rabbi Freundel in the ears of Rabbanut officials. What is the worst thing they found to say about him, this group of rabbis with an interest in completely ruining Barry Freundel's reputation?

That his shul has a women's prayer group, even against the ruling of his rebbi, R. Hershel Schachter.
There are some important takeaways:

1. The man was 54 years old and had a squeaky-clean reputation. Not everyone loved him, but nobody had any dirt on him. There was nothing. [UPDATE: It seems that there was some bad behavior at the beginning of the 2000s, maybe earlier; this doesn't detract from the main point - that his reputation was squeaky clean.]
   
2. He enjoyed enough respect amongst his colleagues that he was selected to lead the negotiations with the Rabbanut.
3. The initial reports about bad and bizarre behavior - which certainly pointed to control issues but were not sexual in nature - would have been addressed within the context of a lifetime of exemplary behavior [by reputation if not fact]. I still think that I would have responded to his treatment of prospective converts as cheap or slave labor more harshly and removed him from conversion on that basis, but I understand why colleagues familiar with his reputation would have given him the benefit of the doubt and simply asked him to desist.
4. I do not claim to know how truly dark is the heart of any man, and I can't claim that I would resist the temptations of power if I had them. The moral of the story - the moral that I will keep coming back to, again and again - is that no person can be entrusted by our community with that much power over over another person.

My Profile of Joseph Cedar - and More

The most recent issue of Jewish Action features a large section on English-speaking olim to Israel. It profiles several communities and several olim who have had an impact on broader Israeli society. I was asked to write about being an oleh in Modiin, and was also asked to write two of the personal profiles. One - my profile of Rav Lichtenstein (scroll down)- was published. I also profiled filmmaker Joseph Cedar, but unfortunately the profile was ultimately left out, mainly because he simply does not consider himself an oleh. I really enjoyed my conversation with him, anyway. The editor has permitted me to post my profile of Cedar else here, so here it is:

Filmmaker Joseph Cedar has won awards and acclaim in Israel, Europe, and the United States, and has twice been a finalist for the Best Foreign Film Oscar. Yet the day before the Academy Awards, a Shabbat, he walked several miles to a media event and addressed the crowd from a seat to which a microphone had been affixed beforehand, while his fellow panelists used hand-held microphones. This might make him seem like an American Orthodox dream come true, yet Cedar himself often wonders if the same avenues would have been open to him had his parents not made aliyah in 1973, when he was five. He looks at American Orthodoxy and sees that it has largely given up on attempting this balancing act, either by leaving the religion to assimilate and pursue ambitions, or by withdrawing from the broader cultural and professional world into a more exclusivist religious environment. He credits his sense of balance to his parents and the environment they chose to raise their family: “Their move to Israel meant I grew up with a values system that turned out to be superior to the one I would have adopted had they not made aliyah.”

Cedar does not consider himself an oleh. Aliyah, implies choice, and, as he puts it, “Nobody asked me.” He does not even consider himself American-Israeli, as his social milieu growing up in Jerusalem’s Bayit Vegan neighborhood was almost entirely Hebrew-speaking. As Joseph and his five younger siblings grew up, even his parents’ home became Israeli. Yet American and world culture remained part and parcel of the home. “My parents exposed me to everything,” Joseph recalls, “not just American culture. The soundtrack of our house consisted of Broadway musicals, an American art form, but there were other things as well.”

Though he envisions a primarily Israeli audience when he makes his films, he acknowledges that this exposure, plus the additional years Joseph spent living in the US – as a student at NYU and when his father, a renowned molecular biologist, was on sabbatical – helped him consider a broader audience. His first two films (“Time of Favor”, 2000, and “Campfire”, 2004) explore aspects of the religious Zionist culture in which he was raised. They were acclaimed in Israel, but registered mild interest outside. His third film (“Beaufort”, 2007) examined the futility of Israel’s military presence in Lebanon. It won awards at major international film festivals. “Footnote” (2011), Cedar’s most acclaimed film, to date, is set in Hebrew University’s Talmud department and depicts the petty rivalries, competing theories, and sense of futility that characterize arcane academic disciplines. It won the award for best screenplay at Cannes and, like “Beaufort”, was an Oscar finalist.

Cedar made aliyah young enough to become a full-fledged, unhyphenated Israeli, a home-grown insider, but one who has been enriched by the culture, values, and religious sensibilities of his parents’ home. In this vein, he reminds us that the most profound way that Anglo olim make a difference in Israel is through their children and unborn generations who will be part of the Jewish future in the Jewish state.

Books, Articles, a Commentary Review, and Pesach and Summer Plans

It has been a while since my last update, but there’s lots to tell. We’ve got books, articles, and travel plans.

Let’s start with the travel plans. If you don’t have Pesach plans yet, please consider joining the Fischers on a riverboat cruise along the Danube River, where Pesha and I will be scholars in residence. In addition to shi’urim on Pesach themes, we will be discussing some fascinating aspects of Austro-Hungarian Jewish history. Check out a list of some of our topics. If you decide to join us, please mention my name in your application. We will also be in the US this summer, for the first time since 2011. If you are interested in bringing one or both of us in as a scholar-in-residence during July or August, please let me know.

I haven’t written a book (yet), but I’ve had a hand in a few that have come out recently. During the summer, Rabbi Benny Lau’s Jeremiah: the Fate of a Prophet appeared, and next week, Rabbi Eliezer Melamed’s Peninei Halakha: Laws of Pesah is scheduled for publication. Both are published by Koren/Maggid, and I edited both volumes. In the case of Rav Melamed’s work, it is the first of a projected 15 (!) volume series. Two volumes on the Laws of Shabbat and two volumes on the Laws of Prayer (one specifically geared toward women; sponsorships are available, so please be in touch if you are interested) will appear in the near future.

A copy of Prof. Moshe Halbertal’s Maimonides: Life and Thought should be arriving in by mailbox any day. I had a small hand in this volume as well, having translated a chapter that originally appeared in Hebrew. I look forward to sinking my teeth into the rest of the volume.

Last but not least, The Iranian Talmud by my brother-in-law Shai Secunda is hot off the press. He and I have collaborated on articles, but this one’s all his (though he graciously mentions me as a “valued interlocutor” in the acknowledgments). We are absolutely thrilled for him!

There have been quite a few opportunities for me to write articles lately, with more on the way. A few months ago, New York’s Jewish Week gave me the opportunity to express some thoughts on Rav Ovadia Yosef upon the occasion of his passing (there has also been some interest in translating R. Benny Lau’s book on R. Ovadia; once again, there are sponsorship opportunities. Contact me if you are interested). More recently, the same publication gratified my penchant for pot-stirring by publishing my article on get­-withholding, in which I buck conventional wisdom. The backlash has been milder than expected, at least for now.

The most recent issue of Jewish Action has a section on “out of town” communities. They asked me to write an article on building a college campus community. It’s a short piece, but I managed to make some points while also sneaking in some veiled cynicism.

Most recently, I reviewed Ari Shavit’s My Promised Land for Commentary. It is very exciting for me to be published in such a venerable and well-regarded magazine. Hopefully this is not the last time. The review is paywalled, but one blogger posted a fairly extensive excerpt.

A few articles I translated have appeared as well: some of R. Dr. Avie Walfish’s recently posted material on Mishna Mo’ed and an important article by R. Eliezer Melamed on domestic partnerships and Jewish marriage in Israel. You may have also noticed that the Jordan Valley has been in the news a lot lately, in context of the ongoing negotiations between Israel and the PA. I’ve been helping my sister, Elana Diner, with her blog about life in the Jordan Valley called “(Jordan) Valley Girl.”  Check it out!

It’s Tu Bi-Shvat in less than a week. To help you prepare, take a look at an article I wrote last year and a Tu Bi-Shvat “Haggadah” that I compiled a few years ago, which divides the “Seder” by time period.

Enjoy!

Maran zt"l

If the present torrent of articles and retrospectives about Maran Ovadia Yosef continues for another year, we will still not have anything close to a full picture of the man. They will still be writing about him in a thousand years.

Some of the articles have been excellent. Some less so. Most at least granted that his enduring greatness was in the realm of Torah and halakha, and while they did not ignore his notorious outbursts, they saw it as part of a much greater whole. My own attempt to capture what I can in 800 words will appear in this week's Jewish Week. As an organizing device, I look at three distinct meanings of the term "ga'on" and apply each of them to Maran.

The crush of people at the levaya was suffocating, the eulogizers were barely audible from where I was, cell service in Ge'ulah was not quite ready for half a million people, many of whom were taking pictures, etc. Yet I am glad I could go and I'm glad my son Rafi (9) was able to come with me. It was a lesson in kevod ha-Torah that we may never see the likes of again. That is why I wanted my son to be there with me.

Last I spoke to Rav Benny Lau, we were trying to convince a publisher to commit to a translation of R. Benny's biblio-biography of Rav Ovadia, Mi-Maran ad Maran. The publisher's concern is that there will not be much of an audience in English. I'm considering launching a kickstarter campaign to raise the money for the project. Would you buy the book? Would you contribute to the campaign?

Ironic Orthodoxy and Other Notes on the Pew Study

Several years ago, I posited the existence of an emerging group that I called "Ironic Orthodox." I characterized this group as being quite comfortable within Orthodoxy, but largely non-ideological, even skeptical of systematic ideologies. Later, I posited that this group tends to welcome non-observant Jews into their communities without judging and without a hidden kiruv agenda. I noted that this could be discerned a little bit among members of my generation (I was born in 1976) but to a greater degree among those who came of age after the turn of the millennium. That is, my wife and I noticed that this type of attitude was more typical of our students than our peers.

I think the data contained in the new Pew study bears this out. This has to be qualified by a caveat. Whereas the overall snapshot of American Judaism is large enough to be statistically meaningful, once we start looking at cross sections like Modern Orthodox Jews between the ages of 30 and 49, the sample sizes become much, much smaller and their predictive value wanes significantly. Only 154 Modern Orthodox Jews (the segment I'm most interested in, for obvious reasons) TOTAL were surveyed, further divided into 4 age cohorts. Unsurprisingly, the largest margins of error pertain to the Orthodox (p. 119 of the study). Some of the results simply scream "small sample size." So I'm taking a lot of these observations with a grain of salt, especially when broken down by age cohort.

If you haven't yet seen Alan Brill's observations on the study, that's the place to start. A good part of his discussion centers on the graph about Orthodox retention rates:

A lot of hay is being made from the increase in retention rates (though some are simply looking at Orthodoxy's 48% retention rate as a static figure). From 22% retention among the Jews of the Silent Generation to 83% among GenY/Z. As the survey (and BZ) notes, it's possible that this doesn't reflect a generational shift but a steady attrition rate from Orthodoxy throughout life. And yet, I find it difficult to believe that 19% of dropouts from Orthodoxy leave after they turn 65.


The more significant data comes from what lies below the top line (and hopefully Pew will give us the tools to drill down even more specifically). Forget about the % of dropouts and look at where they went. Specifically, look at whether they joined another denomination, or became "non" (non-denominational, non-religious, or non-Jewish). Among those age 65+, a solid majority (58%) joined another denomination. 19% went "non." In subsequent generations, you have something of an ebb and flow with regard to becoming "non" - 32% of Boomers, 26% of GenXers, and 16% of Millennials. I can't really explain the spike in conversion out of Judaism amongst ex-Orthodox Boomers or the spike in non-denominational affiliation among ex-Orthodox GenXers (when nobody left Judaism completely, apparently). It's strange and non-linear, and I suspect that it is statistical noise.

When it comes to joining other denominations, though, the decline is linear and consistent. And astounding. From 58% among the Silents to 28% of Boomers to 17% of GenXers to 1% of Millennials. You want to know why the ranks of Conservative Judaism are shrinking, it's because they are no longer picking up Orthodox dropouts in any significant numbers. This passes the eye-test as well. I was a college campus rabbi at the school that gets more day school grads than any other outside of New York. I know plenty of Orthodox dropouts, and very few of them joined other denominations.

Orthodox retention does not necessarily imply greater observance among young Orthodox Jews. Rather, as I speculated in the aforementioned posts, Orthodox Jews who leave observance are remaining, by and large, within the Orthodox orbit. They are the analogue of the Israeli datlashim who, as the saying goes, "want their kids to be ex-Orthodox like them."

We would thus expect that younger Orthodox-raised Jews, though more likely to remain Orthodox, are less religiously observant than their parents. Unfortunately, there were very few specific questions about religious practice, and what we have is not segmented by age and denomination (hopefully they'll publish tools to rectify that), so it is impossible to prove my hypothesis. The closest we get is 17% of Modern Orthodox saying they do not keep a kosher home (that is well beyond "eat fish out" Orthodoxy) and 19% handling money. [While it's a neat theory, I do not accept BZ's contention that this jarring statistic about money on Shabbat is the result of misunderstanding the question, which contained a double negative. 19% of Modern Orthodox answered the question thus, and Modern Orthodoxy is the best-educated segment of the Jewish population according to the survey.]

This increase in Orthodox non-observance is not an anomaly. Outside of the US, Canada, and perhaps Argentina, Orthodoxy is the default expression of Judaism, and a wide spectrum of observance is tolerated and expected. It was the norm in the US as well until the post-WWII migration to suburbia. I believe we are witnessing the beginning of a shift back to an American Orthodoxy that tolerates non-observance. It does not bode well for other denominations.

Some other notes on the study:

• Modern Orthodoxy has emerged as an elitist movement. It accounts for 3% of American Judaism, but it is the best-educated and has the highest percentage of high-income earners. Its adherents are most likely to understand that Judaism is BOTH ethnicity AND religion (a more sophisticated and correct understanding of the reality). No group puts more of a premium on ethical life, intellectual curiosity, Israel, or community. In the aggregate, Modern Orthodox espouses more "essentials" of Jewish identity than any other segment, and it is not even that close. It is clear that a multiplicity of emphases and core values is characteristic of Modern Orthodoxy (p. 57). As we know, it is hard to balance so many essential values. So you might expect this segment to be small but high-achieving. This, of course, is a double-edged sword.
• There were a few cases where the question and the analysis are incompatible. For example, there was a series of questions to the effect of, "Are you still Jewish if you X?" In the analysis, it was posited as "is being Jewish compatible with X?" These questions only make sense if you presume Judaism to be a religion, not an ethnic/national/cultural identity. Obviously belief in Jesus is incompatible with being Jewish in the religious sense, but one who believes in Jesus can still be a Jew. These questions are thus simply restatements of the question about whether Judaism is a religion or a culture.
• Thus, Ultra-Orthodoxy, the segment most likely to view Judaism solely as a religion, deviates from everyone else when it comes to "work on Shabbat" being incompatible with being Jewish. Ultra-Orthodox seem to be most willing to consider someone non-Jewish for a particular belief or practice. Interestingly, Ultra-Orthodoxy has highest % of those who say being critical of Israel is incompatible with being Jewish. (Ultra-Orthodoxy and Reform have a similar % on that question, as do Modern Orthodoxy and Conservative). That said, the two segments of Orthodox Jews are most likely to think that believing Jesus is the Messiah is compatible with being Jewish. So even within Ultra-Orthodoxy you have a significant number who believe that a Jew is a Jew is a Jew (Yisrael af al pi she-chata).
• Another confusion exists where a question asks about denominational identification, but the results and analysis speak of affiliation. Identification and affiliation are very different things. As BZ points out, there are lots of people who identify as Reform Jews who do not affiliate with Reform institutions. I would contend that there are also significant numbers of people who affiliate with Orthodox institutions who do not consider themselves Orthodox Jews. In fact, the term Orthodox is an exonym, as internally we talk about "frum" and "Shomer Shabbos." That is, orthodoxy does not view itself as a denomination (and I suspect that some of the non-denominational "just Jews" in the survey are frum). There's a lot more to say about identity vs. affiliation (particularly, I can affiliate without pigeonholing my "identity"). Perhaps another time, when I can convince someone to pay me for writing about it.
• Jews of no religion are consistently called secular and cultural Jews. These categories exist, but I think that most of these folk are ethnic Jews. Ethnicity implies both culture and lineage, and is a good descriptor of what many American Jews are.
• Time for a fast break of interesting tidbits gleaned from the study:

• Only MO truly believes that the Israeli government is making sincere peace overtures.
• There are an estimated 5.7 million halakhic Jews in the US, of whom 4.4 million identify as Jewish.
• On a related note, there are twice as many out-converts as in-converts. Such is the life of a minority culture. 
• Among Jews age 50 and under, Orthodox and Conservative are virtually neck and neck in terms of numbers. Among Jews over 50, there are three times as many Conservative Jews as there are Orthodox Jews. 
• The growth of Orthodoxy is attributable almost entirely to the growth of Ultra-Orthodoxy.
• Only 1% of Jews in their 20s are Modern Orthodoxy.That doesn't make sense. Small sample size, I suppose.
• More Christians than Conservative Jews believe that God gave Israel to the Jewish people. It's close, though. Reform is not close.
• College attendance doesn't significantly correlate with attitudes toward Israel. So much for that myth. 
• For Modern Orthodox, the most widely accepted essentials of Jewish identity are, in descending order: Ethical life, Israel, Jewish law, Holocaust, community, justice/equality, intellectual curiosity, food, sense of humor.
  For Ultra-Orthodox: Jewish law, ethical life, community, Holocaust, food, justice/equality, Israel, humor, intellectual curiosity. The biggest difference is that Ultra Orthodoxy bumps Israel down and bumps food up.
• 2/3 of Ultra Orthodox say they can converse in Hebrew. Not buying it.
• Orthodoxy outpaces others in terms of donations, memberships, Hebrew literacy, education, etc. No surprises there.
• In favor of accepting homosexuality: Ultra Orthodox: 20%, Modern Orthodox:  50%, Conservative: 80%. Those numbers work out pretty neatly.
• 81% of Modern Orthodox Jews attend religious services at least monthly, as opposed to 71% of Ultra Orthodox Jews. That's because, as every frum Jew knows, Ultra Orthodox women tend not to go to shul.
• Roughly the same percentage of Modern Orthodox, Ultra Orthodox, and Reform Jews attended non-Jewish religious services last year. But when it comes to Christmas trees, 4% of Orthodox have them, (really?) and 30% of Reform.
• More Jews by religion (43%) thnk humor is important than Jews of no religion. Is it possible they were joking?

The Origins of a Common Myth about Religious Jews

A few weeks ago I had the opportunity to give a crash course in Judaism to a group of new (and veteran) personnel at the Philippine Embassy in Tel Aviv. Officially called a "Jewish cultural sensitivity seminar" by the Philippine Foreign Ministry, the idea was to go through the Jewish life cycle and calendar, give an introduction to the diversity of religious observance and belief, and address basic concepts, mores, and ideas they are likely to encounter. There were open questions throughout, and the entire event was quite talmudic in progressing associatively and following tangents.

The most interesting part was definitely the discussion about areas of Jewish law that a gentile in Israel is likely to encounter: bishul akum, Shabbes goy/ amira le-akum, sale of chametz before Pesach, and stam yeynam. The point was not to be thorough, but to give some context and perhaps avoid what might become an awkward situation (they appreciated my dramatization of a bunch of religious Jews inviting a gentile into the room so they can all say "Don't you think it's hot in here?").

The most interesting question was a version of the old hole-in-the-sheet myth, but one that confirmed what I have suspected for a long time. The questioner brought up the subject and then described the sheet, saying that a Filipina domestic saw such a thing in someone's laundry. It was clear that the object described was a tallit katan - good old-fashioned tzitzis. A rectangular white garment with a hole in the middle. I had long suspected that this myth originated when someone saw tzitzis on a clothesline. Now it's pretty much confirmed.

So I explained to my audience that it's a myth and how it most probably originated. I also noted the size of the hole in a tallit katan and thanked the questioner for the implied compliment.

The New Chief Rabbi: One Week, Two Controversies

Last week the newly minted Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi Lau was embroiled in a controversy for using a racial slur when moralizing to a bunch of yeshiva students about cutting class to watch basketball games (he referred to the basketball players as "kushim" a slur that does not have the historical baggage of the n-word, and has only been a slur for a few decades, but, with all due respect to Yaacov Lozowick, is clearly and blatantly a slur of which there is no way he was unaware; maybe I'll have another post on that word). When confronted, he said he was joking, but did not apologize.

Now it is being reported that Rabbi Lau was caught cheating (this hasn't even been reported in English yet) on a written semikha exam 20 years ago. It should be noted that there are a lot of unanswered questions about this report, but it is backed up by R. Dov Lior, a rabbi of significant stature who has very little to gain and an awful lot to lose by lying about this.

Here in Israel, we don't even need steroids scandals.

A Proposal for Modiin's Future

Now that Modiin has no Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi, we have an opportunity. Instead of searching for a new Ashkenazic rabbi (in addition to the two Sephardic rabbis we still have, and because such searches are always political in nature and do not always take into consideration the needs of the city’s residents), I propose that the money for the Ashkenazic rabbi’s salary (c. 40,000 NIS per month!) be used to subsidize and encourage the hiring of community rabbis in Modiin.

It would work like this:  synagogue communities that have rabbis under employ will be eligible for a subsidy under the following conditions:

a.       These rabbis will be accessible to members of the broader community, particularly in their neighborhoods;

b.       No subsidy will exceed half of the salary that the rabbi already gets from his community;

c.        No community will be subsidized for more than 5,000 NIS per month.

d.       The rabbis of all synagogue communities – Chabad, Conservative, Masorti, Orthodox, Reform – will be eligible to apply for the subsidy.

As Anglos, we appreciate the value of cohesive communities with strong religious leadership. We know that the best way to build a rabbinate is not through political appointments from the top down, but by building supportive communities from the grassroots up. We know that eliminating the positions at the top and promoting communities as the basic building blocks of our civic society is the way to build a strong city, and ultimately a strong nation.

Municipal elections are coming up. Let’s put this issue on the agenda. Let’s make Modiin the site of a pilot program that every city in the country will want to emulate.

The Battle for Bourekas

The Israeli Rabbinate is going to start enforcing guidelines on the shapes of bourekas. Meat, dairy, and pareve pastries will come in different shapes.

This is ridiculous! This is a mockery of Jewish law! This is worse than a theocracy - it's a nanny theocracy!

Wait, it's an explicit ruling in Shulchan Arukh? Oh. Never mind. [Read the whole post here]

Double Vindication in the Fight against Modiin Bigotry

Many readers might remember that this past October, the city of Modiin closed the spacious and beautiful Anabe Park to out-of-town guests during Hol Ha-mo'ed Sukkot. The background was a minor incident the previous Pesach and an ongoing pissing contest between the respective mayors of Modi'in and its Haredi neighbor, Modi'in Illit.

To make a long story short, I went to the park on Sukkot and invited a Haredi family that I met at the entrance into the park as my personal guests (guests of Modi'in residents were allowed in). A Haaretz reporter happened to be there, and so I was in the Israeli press. The municipal spokesman even called me a "provocateur."

All of this information appears in news that appeared around that time, and I wrote two blog posts on the subject.

The story did not end there, nor did my (indirect) involvement in it. In the first place, the stupid exclusionary policy was lifted before Pesach. I'd like to think that my actions, the involvement of several Israeli civil rights groups, and the opposition of a majority of the city council contributed to the mayor seeing the error of his ways. Alas, according to local blogger Yaki Beja, it seems that the real reason for the change was the fact that the park's concessionaires were losing considerable business (ironically, it turns out that the park's upkeep was funded through the concessionaire dues, which means that a Haredi who came and bought a popsicle was in fact helping to fund the park). Whatever the reason, I'm glad that the policy was reversed, and I'm happy to have been on the right side of this one.

It gets better, though.

A week after the Haaretz article, a local paper ran a column by one Koby Or, which smeared a local attorney named Eli Fisher. Or assumed that the "Eli Fischer" in the article was this somewhat well-known local personage, and then he drew all sorts of wild conclusions about what Adv. Fisher was trying to accomplish by conspiring with a Haaretz reporter to manufacture a headline (it should be noted that Mr. Or, by his own admission, was in Eilat for Sukkot, far away from the action).

Although Mr. Or apologized in print the next week and made some modifications to the online article, Adv. Fisher, being a lawyer, sued Mr. Or and the publication that ran his article without editing it, checking facts, or asking for a statement from Adv. Fisher (or me, for that matter). The verdict was handed down a few weeks ago: Adv. Fischer won 36,000 NIS in damages from Mr. Or and the paper. Additionally, Mr. Or - who seems to be an old-school secularist type who is grumpy about anyone not like him coming along to do things differently - stopped writing for this or any other local paper. It is explained in the court protocols that Mr. Or quit the paper after it became clear that he would now be subjected to annoying little things like editing and fact-checking. To be honest, he's not that much different from today's armchair journalists who fact-check on Wikipedia, but whatever.

This has been summarized from a long blog post by Yaki Beja on the issue. He's got all of the courtroom drama. I'm just happy that a small battle in the fight against bigotry has been won. In any event, I'm going out for coffee later this week with my new friend, Eli Fisher.

He's paying.

Blowing out the Candles for Shalom Bayit

The Talmud says that the reason the Sages instructed us to light candles at the onset of Shabbat is shalom bayit, tranquility in the home. Of course, on the most basic level, this simply means that we should not sit in the dark on Friday night, since it is not conducive to the evening meal. Over time, especially when light became a permanent feature of homes, the act of lighting candles became ritual, something that one does even in a room flooded with light.

But what if lighting flames in the home harms shalom bayit?

This question describes what goes on in many families with autistic children, according to Frances Victory, who has interviewed such families for her dissertation. Here's her report, from the Jewish Week:

And during the interviews, some mothers of a child with autism said they could not light Shabbat candles because they were afraid their child would “play with it, blow it out, touch it, or throw things at it.” It never occurred to me that lighting Shabbat candles on a Friday evening might not be possible for every Jewish woman who wanted to.

I tend to agree with the mothers here. The underlying purpose of lighting candles is shalom bayit, and it would seem ludicrous to compromise shalom bayit - to introduce fear, anxiety, and danger - in order to light Shabbat candles. One may technically use electric bulbs - even fluorescent - to fulfill the rabbinic instruction.

One mother, however, figured out a way to preserve the customary candle-lighting while keeping her shalom bayit intact. Victory continues:

 One mother of a child with autism said this:
“We do light Shabbat candles and she (her daughter with autism) takes great pleasure in blowing them out. We do let her do that. She walks away when we light the candles but she comes back down when we sing Shalom Alechiem.”

It is worth reading the whole article. It is enlightening.

Ruth Calderon's Speech, Yair Lapid's Religion, the Temple Mount, and Tattoos

Events in Israel and around the Jewish world remain as interesting as ever, and I've tried to contribute a bit by writing when I have the opportunity (i.e., when I'm paid to write; can't afford the lucrative work-for-free opportunities).

Having been inspired by Ruth Calderon's inaugural Knesset speech, I contacted several Jewish media outlets about translating the speech, and the New York Jewish Week agreed that it would be important to get this remarkable speech in front of the English-speaking Jewish world. The translation, like the speech, was shared far and wide and was adapted as subtitles on the original speech. Here is a link to my translation:
http://www.thejewishweek.com/editorial-opinion/opinion/heritage-all-israel

Yesterday's events at the Kotel have drawn, as usual, a global audience, but as many of you know I have long advocated viewing the struggle for women at the Kotel and for Jews on the Temple Mount as fundamentally linked. So in addition to the standard articles, we have this from Matti Friedman, exploring the increasing relevance of Har Habayit. He quotes me at the end of the article and links back to a blog post I wrote on the subject last year. Here's hoping that attitudes continue to deepen, soften, and converge.

Elsewhere on the Israeli scene, I analyzed Yair Lapid's well-known Ono College speech from over a year ago, in which he "conceded defeat" to the Haredim. It was a remarkable speech, which articulated a vision for a new type of Israeli secularism. In his tone, Lapid has certainly distanced himself from his father. But is that change merely tactical? Check it out:
http://www.jewishideasdaily.com/5979/features/yair-lapids-religion/

Finally, on a different note, I explore, in the New York Jewish Week, the ancient Jewish ban on tattoos. There is a talmudic argument about whether the ban is due to the perception of tattoos as a pagan practice or is simply not rational - whether as a taboo or divine fiat. I contend that this ancient argument continued through the medieval debate and continues to frame the contemporary debate as well. This was a fun article - it combines quotes from the Torah, Tanakh, Talmud, and Maimonides with references to Lenny Bruce, Amy Winehouse, Drew Barrymore, The Nanny, and Curb your Enthusiasm. I hope you enjoy reading it as much as I enjoyed writing it!
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/short-takes/tattoo-stil-taboo

A Note on Voting for "Threshold Parties"

Today's the day. I suppose most of my thoughts leading up to the election ended up on Facebook, not this blog. Alas, broken promises. Good thing I'm not running for office.

I suppose if someone is interested but is not "friends" with me on FB, they can subscribe to my public profile, as some 40 people have done. You'll be able to read and comment on the threads, some of which have been a lot of fun.
One final note that I think is of great importance, especially since popular blogs like Jameel's have taken the exact opposite line: a vote for a party that might not cross the electoral threshold is not a "wasted" vote, and is in fact the opposite - your vote may be worth even more than the average vote. 
If the party you most identify with is so small that it has no chance of passing the electoral threshold, it might be wise to vote for a party that doesn't fit as well but that will almost certainly be represented. However, if you most identify with a party that is polling close to the threshold - at the 1.5-2.5% range, your vote is in fact worth double. 
Chances are always pretty slim that your vote is the one that pushes your party's representation from X to X+1 Knesset Members. But in the case of the small party, your vote has the chance of pushing the party from 0 to 2 MKs. 
The entire equation - figuring out what your vote might mean for how the excess votes are distributed at the end, how it impacts other parties, etc. - is pretty complicated, but the basic calculation, especially figuring that a particular party is already in a border area between representation and non-representation, obviously mitigates in favor of voting for the small party.
So if you most closely identify with Kadima, Am Shalem, Aleh Yarok, Eretz Chadasha (borderline - polling at 1.4%), or Otzma Le-Yisrael (I have not seen numbers for Da'am), then that is you should vote for. Doing so is no more a potential "waste" of a vote than voting for any other party, where your vote has just as slim a chance, if not a slimmer chance, of bolstering Knesset representation of that party. 
Two side notes: 
1) I am not endorsing those parties in particular (if it were even possible to endorse all of them without suffering from multiple personality disorder). I am merely pointing out that you should not consider a vote for such a "waste". 
2) I am not taking a side on whether it is BETTER to have a multiplicity of small parties than a few larger parties. The bias of voters from English-speaking countries (and apparently Russians as well) is toward the latter, but over time, as I have come to understand Israel more intimately, I have come to embrace the multiplicity.  See this article about Einat Wilf's new book, which makes that very argument.

Why is there no Knesset Party for English-speaking Immigrants?

Actually, there is.
Which one?
All of them.
That's the upshot of my latest post at the Times of Israel: Don't Vote for the Anglo Candidate

Comments on the Globes Interview with Moshe Feiglin

This interview with Feiglin is fascinating on many levels. A few comments are in order:
1) I think his views on non-Jewish citizens of the State of Israel are simply horrifying. He argues here that it's not racist to want to make them second class citizens because deep down they know that they're second class citizens.

2) I am extremely wary of someone - anyone - who confuses "my ideas about Judaism" with "Judaism." It's one thing to disagree with R. Elyashiv or R. Ovadiah on some issue within Judaism. It's another to imply that their views are not really the "Jewish" view.
3) I am in almost complete agreement with him about education: parents, not ministries, should have control over a kid's education, and vouchers would be excellent. The one place I part company is on the issue of a core curriculum. Free public education is predicated on the idea that it will make more productive citizens, and thus it is legitimate to condition funding on the teaching of content that will indeed accomplish that goal.
4) He seems to be an advocate of "compassionate conservatism", in which case the interviewer's invocation of Ayn Rand was pretty stupid.
5) I'm not sure how he squares his economic libertarianism with his views on unrestricted school vouchers. I can understand a perspective that wants to completely abolish public funding of schools. I can understand an argument that only core subjects should be publicly funded, and that parents should pay for discretionary education. I can even understand (but strongly oppose) a state that attempts to completely control all aspects of education. I cannot understand a position that is in favor of public funding of education but opposed to any sort of governmental regulation of how that money is spent. That's the worst kind of welfare statism, and completely inconsistent with everything else Feiglin says.

Israel Election Blogging?

I love Israeli elections. It's like color war on steroids. The debate is really robust and interesting, though there's also a lot of garbage, and the media often plays a big role in shaping perceptions of particular candidates.

I find myself regularly commenting and debating such issue on Facebook, so I've decided to start re-posting some of my longer and more analytic comments here. I think it'll be fun if you want to stick around for the ride.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I view the Likud as my political "home" in Israel and have for several years now. Just a few weeks ago (before the merger with Yisrael Beitenu), I paid membership dues to the Likud for the first time. That said, no political party or politician will be a priori immune to praise or criticism here.

More Provocations

Ha'aretz's "Anglo File" has an article in its weekend edition on Anglo (i.e., American, pretty much) opposition and discomfort with Modi'in's policy of barring non-residents from Anabe Park.

The article is here. Here's the bit where I'm quoted:

When Baltimore native Elli Fischer drove past Modi'in's Anabeh Park during the Sukkot festival this week, he witnessed firsthand an ultra-Orthodox couple being denied entry due to a controversial new policy that restricts holiday admission to local residents.

Fischer, himself a Modi'in resident, stopped his car and arranged to have the family of five admitted as his guests - but not before arguing with park officials.

"The policy is nothing but thinly veiled anti-Haredi bigotry," Fischer, a writer, translator and ordained rabbi, chided the park officials.

Last week, before the onset of the seven-day Sukkot festival, the Modi'in-Maccabim-Reut municipality decided to close the popular park to nonresidents of the three communities in its jurisdiction, citing "overcrowding." It's the latest volley in a saga that has pitted the municipality against the mayor of the neighboring Haredi community of Modi'in Illit, Yaakov Gutterman, who recently announced that its archaeological sites would be closed to non-Haredi visitors.

Fischer, 36, suggests the new policy is linked to an incident that occurred in the park during this year's observance of Passover, when a female performer at a concert was asked to step off the stage by Haredi members of the audience.

Nothing, he says, can justify the exclusion of citizens - a principle to which many among Modi'in's burgeoning Anglo community are particularly sensitive, he explains. "Americans in particular grew up with the legacy of the fight for civil rights as a part of our cultural DNA," said Fischer, who invoked the images of separate water fountains for blacks and whites in the United States. "I think it very much affects the way that we relate to issues of discrimination and bigotry, whether it's against Haredim, Arabs or African migrants."

ADDeRabbi, Agent Provocateur

For those not following along at home, my fair hometown of Modiin has barred non-residents from visiting its spacious and beautiful Anabe Park during vacations and on Hol Ha-Mo'ed. This is a result of a pishing contest between Modiin's Mayor Haim Bibas and Modi'in Ilit's Mayor Yaakov Guterman, plus it plays into a strong anti-Haredi (and occasionally anti-religious) sentiment amongst a minority of Modiin residents (a political party, Modiin Hofshit, ran on an anti-religious platform and got only a few hundred votes for city council).

The new policy upsets me greatly, and I wanted to see how the policy was being implemented generally. As I got in line to enter the park, I could see that a few cars ahead of me the line was being held up by a Haredi family insisting on entering the park. Since the new regulations allow for Modiin residents to bring guests, I went and invited the family in as my guests. After a while, the guards let us in on that basis. Serendipitously, a reporter from Haaretz was there at the time. Her report is here (Hebrew) and here (English - paywall). The paragraphs relevant to my story are:

As the argument continued, a Modi’in resident, Eli Fischer, decided to see whether everyone was really being barred from the park, or only those in ultra-Orthodox garb.

“He’s my guest, let him in,” said Fischer, in an effort to help Tirnauer, at first without success. The guards checked Fischer’s identity card, and then started questioning Tirnauer and his family about their relationship. One of the ushers called a municipal security guard to help.

“He’s not really your guest, he’s here to make a provocation,” the security guard told Fischer. But Fischer persisted after the getting approval of his superiors the security guard allowed Fischer and his new acquaintances into the park.

“The park is empty, and I wanted to see what would happen, since according to the instructions that were publicized, [the park] is reserved for Modi’in residents and their guests,” said Fischer. “I don’t know why they were questioning me.”

The municipality said that the confrontation involving Tirnauer and Fischer was the first to occur since the instructions were issued, claiming it was a planned provocation by the media.
“During all the days that entrance to the park was restricted, there wasn’t a single incident, except for one in which a visitor who isn’t a city resident came with a reporter to create a provocation and get a headline,” the municipality said.

 The Hebrew version also includes a Gemara that I cited for the benefit of the reporter, from Sukkah 27b:
"All Israel are fit to dwell in a single sukkah."