Another Look at Greatness in Torah (Column 733)
The “Gedolei Hador” channel as propaganda that collapses the very idea of greatness
The column returns to the question of Torah greatness after being shocked by a YouTube channel that deliberately presents the “pure worldview” in the words of the “gedolei hador” themselves, not through operatives or rumors. Precisely that concentration undermines, for him, confidence in the very category of a “great Torah figure”: if these men are presented as ministering angels, perhaps the superlatives attached to the exemplary figures of the past were also inflated after the fact. He also wonders who the channel is for; if it is aimed at the broader public, the very assumption that this material is supposed to impress outsiders shows how detached its creators are.
From Maimonides on “separating from the community” to the question of counting Haredim in a minyan
Following a responsum that raised the question whether Haredim may be counted for a minyan, the column says that with respect to mainstream Haredism that truly believes in the “pure worldview,” the question has real weight, even if one should not generalize about all Haredim. It leans on Maimonides in Hilkhot Teshuvah, who describes one who “separates from the ways of the community” as a person who does not share the community’s distress and goes on calmly with his own life, and argues that this aptly describes a ציבור that demonstrates for draft evasion and lives off others’ budgets while others are killed and worn down. At the same time the column adds an important reservation: many Haredim are, in his view, effectively “children raised in captivity,” and it is hard even to identify who the “captors” are when their rabbis also seem trapped inside the same system. That is why he says these harsh claims need evidence, and here he focuses mainly on the logic of the arguments.
Before the content: the hosts build a halo of sanctity around banal claims
Before the videos themselves, the column dwells on the host’s role: not to present a question but to create an atmosphere of revelation in which the rabbi is served up as someone whose every word is “coals of fire” and cannot be challenged. The example of a Rabbi Moshe Hillel Hirsch video marketed as a “brilliant diagnosis” and a “golden answer” even though the content is banal supports the claim that the failure begins already at the level of framing. This halo turns seat-of-the-pants guesses and fragments of clichés into a “key to one’s spiritual future” and preemptively kills criticism.
Rabbi Moshe Hillel Hirsch presents Eretz Yisrael as a place where work is almost out of bounds
In the video on going out to work, the host takes it as obvious that every yeshiva graduate should stay in kollel for decades, that work is nearly outside the range of legitimate discussion, and that “righteous daughters of Israel” will not even agree to meet someone who goes to work. Rabbi Hirsch does not challenge those premises. Instead, he answers that the difference between Eretz Yisrael and the Diaspora comes from the Land’s greater holiness, so that in Israel there are “different laws and different obligations” from God. In his account, the tradition in the Land was to live off support from abroad, and if young men want to work it is not because they cannot learn but because of attraction to materiality. The column sees here not merely a Haredi social stance but a new theology: the holiness of the Land itself becomes a reason against work and in favor of institutionalized dependence on charity.
The appeal to the Land’s holiness collapses against Hazal, halakha, and history
The column argues that this move collapses from almost every angle. It contradicts Hazal figures who worked for a living in Eretz Yisrael, the Hatam Sofer’s praise of agricultural labor in the Land, the father’s duty to teach his son a trade, and Maimonides’ condemnation of living off Torah study. It also rests on historical ignorance, because the old “kollels” were distribution funds for the poor of Eretz Yisrael, not a model of mass lifelong learning. Beyond that, Rabbi Hirsch ignores the obvious fact that not every person is built for uninterrupted learning all his life, and even the Talmud recognizes people who do not see blessing in their learning. Most of all, the answer does not explain why such a spiritual principle would apply only in Israel: the column argues that the real roots of the kollel ideal are the reconstruction of Torah after the Shoah, separation from secular Israelis, and the possibility of relying in Israel on public funding—not “new obligations” delivered from heaven to Bnei Brak.
Rabbi Yigal Rosen reduces conscription to a statistic about who actually dies
In the video on the draft, Rabbi Yigal Rosen tries to show that even from the “Zionist” point of view there is no real complaint against the Haredim. He argues that only a small percentage of soldiers are actually in life-threatening danger; combat-support soldiers and even pilots are treated by him as outside the real discussion of risk. On that basis he recounts how he asked officers who demanded enlistment why they themselves were sitting in college rather than fighting, and when they answered that they were preparing the army for the future he compared that to yeshiva students preparing the next generation of the Jewish people. His conclusion is that the Haredim are at least like combat support, and therefore the talk about “the knock on the door” as a moral argument against them is, to him, a fairy tale.
Why the comparison between yeshiva study and combat support misses the real burden
The column argues that this logic ignores almost everything that matters. Even people who are not killed bear the burden of hundreds of reserve days, wounds, trauma, collapsing families, and loss of income, and those circles extend far beyond the number of fatalities. Combat support, pilots, and officers in training are not “sitting around doing nothing” but indispensable parts of the war effort, and at times they too take very serious risks. And even if one grants for the sake of argument that Torah study is a kind of “support,” it still makes no sense that an entire ציבור should be fully exempt from the more dangerous part of defense, and certainly not that this should apply equally to those who are not even learning. The comparison between a few officers in college and an exemption for hundreds of thousands looks to the column like a classic example of pilpul detached from common sense.
Rabbi Peretz Berman turns every success into a miracle, every failure into stupidity, and every critic into a “beast”
The column presents Rabbi Peretz Berman’s video as the peak of the mixture of stupidity and malice. Berman argues that anyone who thinks the pager operation or the successes in Iran came from human cleverness is a “fool”: if the army had intelligence, he asks, where was that intelligence on Simchat Torah? From there he concludes that the successes are only divine assistance earned by Torah learners, while the failures are attributed to the army and the government. He then goes on to analyze the pager operation itself as a “stupid operation” that no sane person would have planned, which the column sees דווקא as exposing his own extreme lack of understanding. From there Berman moves to sweeping slander: the critics are liars, impure, cheats, and “beasts,” and their children are thieves and murderers; even Religious Zionists are explained not through substantive disagreement but through the Talmudic theme of an am ha’aretz hating a Torah scholar. In the column’s eyes, what is exposed here most sharply is not only ignorance but a total negation of any interlocutor.
From the collapse of “daat Torah” to the claim that this is a sect that has broken away from Judaism
From these examples the column concludes that this is not a matter of fringe slipups but the official speech of those regarded as the leaders of the Lithuanian Haredi public. That is what undermines, for him, the myth of “daat Torah,” and even brings him to painful questions—almost heretical ones in his own description—about how one should relate to the great figures of earlier generations: people who may indeed be able to teach Ketzot at a high level turn out, the moment they step outside the narrow yeshiva track, to be repeaters of clichés devoid of criticism, empathy, and reality-testing. The column explains this through a combination of ideological detachment from reality, deep anxiety about conscription, lack of general education, lack of self-critique, and a culture of reverence that breeds smugness. The gravest weakness, in his view, is the inability to understand that the criticism of non-enlistment and non-work also arises from real moral and civic distress, not only from hatred of Torah. He therefore ends with a sharp claim: this is not merely another stream within Judaism but a sect of Torah scholars without understanding, and watching this channel strengthens, in his eyes, even the questions about whether they should be counted for a minyan.
Several times in the past, and most recently in column 722, I dealt with defining “greatness in Torah,” and to what extent many of those regarded in the Haredi public as “great Torah leaders” (gedolei Torah) can, in my view, be considered learned scholars but do not merit being adorned with the title “great Torah leaders.” I return to this painful subject because in recent days I came across several videos on a YouTube channel called in Hebrew, “Gedolei HaDor – Degel HaTorah Movement Channel.” A word of warning up front: this channel is for the strong-hearted only. It is an extremely difficult viewing experience (this is absolutely not written in irony; I still haven’t recovered from the shock).
It is a collection of quite a few videos of prominent rabbis from the Lithuanian (Litvish) Haredi community, gathered in one place to present the most distilled picture of the Haredi outlook as articulated by that camp’s leading Torah figures. The videos I saw there present a genuine horror show, combining malice, stupidity, and unimaginable detachment. I have heard such pearls in the past from Haredi rabbis—some even leading figures—but here there is a distilled concentration that constitutes an unusual and unique phenomenon and therefore deserves attention on its own.
These videos were chosen to present things straight from the horse’s mouth: not secondhand, not rumors, not slips of the tongue, not from political operatives or journalists, but directly from the mouths of the so-called greats of the generation. This is deliberate, organized Haredi public advocacy whose editors presumably selected the very best for the sake of the campaign’s success. The mix of elements I noted above stirred extremely harsh feelings in me. If these are considered great Torah scholars, then an average middle-schooler is Moses himself. And if there are hundreds of thousands of Jews—some outstanding Torah scholars among them—who regard this set of people as the greats of Torah, I completely lose faith in everything I’ve been told about the greatness of anyone. Who knows whether the Chafetz Chaim, R. Akiva Eiger, Maimonides, Rav Ashi, Rabbeinu HaKadosh, R. Akiva, Moses our teacher, Abraham our forefather, and all the figures on whom we were educated were in fact paragons as we were told? Perhaps they, too, were leaders of the “Degel HaTorah movement” of their time, and the superlatives spoken about them bore no relation to the vacuum within them and what comes out of their mouths? These rabbis too are presented to us here as ministering angels, every word of theirs the living word of God. Watching parts of this horror show is a tried-and-true prescription for loss of faith (and again, I write this in complete seriousness).
Another point I couldn’t figure out is: to whom is this channel addressed? As is well known, members of the in-group are forbidden to watch YouTube (though perhaps there is already a “kosher” YouTube?). It seems intended for the non-Haredi public. That is, this is the presentation chosen to express the essence of greatness in Torah and the light of faith before the general public—to magnify and sanctify God’s name. This is yet another angle that demonstrates their lack of understanding and detachment from reality. They apparently think these things are supposed to look good, persuasive, and impressive in the eyes of the broader public (see below the superlatives accompanying the videos). Is this real?! I pinch myself and can’t believe it.
In recent days, in the Q&A, someone quoted an instruction from his father that Haredim should not be counted for a minyan, due to their detachment from the people of Israel at large (see there for actual halachic arguments). Let’s leave the generalization aside for a moment and focus on the Haredim of the mainstream—those who truly and sincerely believe, or at least declare that they believe, in the malicious and detached nonsense labeled there as “the pure outlook.” At least with respect to them, I think this is an argument that indeed has real substance. He spoke of separation in the sense of kashrut certifications and the like, but I believe the separation displayed in these videos is far more substantive.
It is worth citing here Maimonides, Laws of Repentance 3:11:
“One who separates himself from the ways of the community—even if he commits no sins—rather, he separates from the congregation of Israel, does not perform mitzvot together with them, does not share in their troubles, and does not fast in their fasts, but goes on his way as one of the nations of the world, as if he is not of them—has no share in the World to Come.”
(Yes, I know: the point there is “separating from the public,” not about “the world” per se.) In Laws of Mourning 1:10, Maimonides speaks of one who separates from the community in the sense of casting off the yoke of mitzvot (that exists here too, but it does not distinguish Haredim from secular Jews). Yet here it is clear that this is not his intent. Maimonides here speaks of separating from the public in the sense of not sharing their troubles and not joining their fasts, proceeding complacently as if one were a gentile. When the public is in distress, he lives his life with utter indifference (think of a smug Goldknopf type). Someone who carries on as usual and marches in the streets to assert his right to evade service, desecrate God’s name, and live off a dwindling public purse—while others are killed for him and support him, groaning under the security and economic burden—so that he can protest against them and defame them to maximum effect. This Maimonides is an encyclopedic description of current Haredi conduct.
I did write in my response there that in my opinion most Haredim are “captured children” (tinokot shenishbu), and therefore their judgment should be lenient. On the other hand, their captors certainly should not be counted for a minyan, for they are wicked villains. But it’s unclear who the captors are! It is evident that many of their own rabbis are also “captured children” (judging also by their level of argumentation; see below). I have written in the past that Haredim are captive to themselves—a captivity very difficult to escape—and therefore I do not know upon whom, if anyone, this ruling can be applied.
The harsh things I have written thus far require evidence. I shall not repeat points relating to the draft obligation and the foolish arguments invoked to justify evasion. I have already dealt with all that. Nor will I touch here on the ridiculous conceptions and hypocritical declarations about who and what sustains the universe, and whether the army is suitable for Haredim or not. These are general “facts” and metaphysical declarations that are difficult to test rationally. I won’t even repeat why, even if all those arguments were correct, they would not exempt anyone from conscription. Nor will I venture into the deranged assumption that only Haredi Torah study saves and sustains us all. Apparently, those who study and enlist do not protect us (and therefore, if the learners devote two or three years to the army and then return to their studies, this will allegedly destroy the state). I also won’t address arguments regarding those who do not learn; they too, of course, “sustain the state” by not enlisting. I have discussed all that before.
Here I want to focus mainly on the arguments, since logic is easier to critique and to subject to rational scrutiny. To that end I chose three sample videos (and one side example) so that you can get a sense of the quality of the arguments and the arguers. I remind again: the speakers are the heads of the most central Lithuanian Haredi yeshivot (I’ve written more than once that leadership of the Lithuanian public is usually given to heads of yeshivot, and I’ve explained the problems in that; here you can see it with your own eyes). These videos were chosen at random (what I happened to hear lately). The channel is full of additional pearls; simply reach out your hand and pick.
About the framing: the moderator and his role
I chose to begin with a video dealing with a relatively neutral question: entering the workforce. The speaker is Rabbi Moshe Hillel Hirsch, the current leader of Degel HaTorah—that is, by all accounts a very central Haredi leader. It is worth noting that he’s from abroad, so you might expect his words to be a bit more sane and balanced than is common among those considered the greats of the Holy Land. But first I cannot ignore the moderator’s role and the framing of these videos.
Most of these videos open with a moderator. For those unfamiliar, you must understand his role. It is a bit like moderators at academic conferences, but here on steroids. His job is to present the speaker as an angel of the Lord of Hosts, whose words are like burning coals straight from the Divine, against whom no mortal may dissent. His role is to “set up” the “gadol” (great one) and to wrap the person and his words in an aura of sanctity. Essentially, it’s a preface of fire and smoke before the giving of the Torah.
To get a feel for it, look at the title and descriptions beneath this video, also of R. M. H. Hirsch. The superlatives are utterly detached, especially in light of the content. The title is “The Gadol HaDor, Maran HaGaR”M H. Hirsch, in a brilliant insight.” At the bottom of the video, the following description appears:
“The great mystery of the yeshiva world: Why do ‘prodigies’ fall while others flourish? In a brilliant, sharp, and clear insight, the leader of the generation, Maran Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Moshe Hillel Hirsch, shlita, deciphers the root difference between eternal success in Torah and decline after the yeshiva years. The words were said in response to the moderator’s question at the mighty event—the Bnei HaYeshivot Conference (5785), with the participation of the Council of Torah Sages, great heads of yeshivot, and tens of thousands of bnei Torah. Among those present: Rabbi Yitzchak Azrahī, Rabbi Tzvi Danziger, Rabbi David Cohen, Rabbi Aryeh Levi, Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Kook, Rabbi Eliezer Yehuda Finkel, Rabbi Yehoshua Eichenstein, Rabbi Daniel Arenfreund, Rabbi Chaim Peretz Berman, Rabbi Shimon Galai, Rabbi Rafael Gefen, Rabbi Itamar Garboz, Rabbi Daniel Wolfson, Rabbi Avraham Moshe Ziskind, Rabbi Hezekiah Mishkovsky, Rabbi Yigal Rosen, and Rabbi Bunim Schreiber. In his golden answer, Maran reveals the two paths… Watch now the full response and receive the key to securing your spiritual future and eternal edifice in Torah.”
Note that the entire Lithuanian rabbinic leadership is seated there, and the colossal genius, the Gadol HaDor, at a mighty event, offers a genius innovation before all Israel, solving the most mysterious riddle in the yeshiva world. Needless to say, anyone who hears his words receives the key to securing his spiritual future and an eternal edifice in Torah. I warn you that when you listen to the content of the video you are in for a disappointment. The “mystery” turns out to be a cute question anyone might raise, and there are far greater ones. And the answer you hear is banal and superficial, entirely predictable, very partial, unexamined—mere gut feeling. Of course there is something to it, but any child in kindergarten asked this question would give a similar answer. But I won’t go into that specific video. Now we move from the framing to the three videos I wanted to discuss.
First video: R. M. H. Hirsch on going to work: the moderator and his role
In this video, the moderator opens with a simple premise (part of the “pure outlook”): a yeshiva student finishing a “large yeshiva” is supposed to continue in kollel for decades (ten years is for the weak). I remind you that in Haredi education, all educational institutions are “large yeshivot.” There is nothing else. In other words, the simple assumption is that every graduate of Haredi education—every Haredi person—is to sit in kollel for years and God forbid not go out to work. This with no distinction as to suitability, numbers and proportions of learners, livelihood issues, the question of who will support this parasitic world, etc. “The concept of work is outside any discussion,” the moderator intones in his golden tongue. He adds that “kosher daughters of Israel—99% of them—are not willing even to meet a boy who goes out to work.” I assume that the dozens of percent of Haredim reported to us as working (whenever they’re accused of not working) are all married to that 1% of girls who do agree to meet such “criminals.” To this small man, the matter is puzzling. It might be acceptable to permit annulling Rabbeinu Gershom’s ban (on polygamy) to preserve the purity of the outlook and allow a man to marry several wives. But where did our rabbis find a waiver for the prohibition of a married woman such that one woman is married to several husbands? This is a bold halachic innovation by the adherents of the “pure outlook” (or perhaps a great miracle occurred—six husbands in a single womb). But perhaps it’s just me; after all, going out to work is, as is well known, a matter of “be killed and do not transgress,” and perhaps it overrides the prohibition of a married woman.
All this, of course, is entirely obvious and needs no elaboration. And Rabbi Hirsch, sitting there hearing this collection of foolish nonsense, does not open his holy mouth with even a single comment to that clanging gibberish. But now our moderator raises an enormous difficulty: why is it not like this abroad? The “seraphim” there (and remember, R. Hirsch himself is from abroad) do permit mortals to go out to work (heaven forfend). The moderator notes that abroad it was customary throughout history (no less!—apparently Volozhin was founded in Aram Naharaim in the third millennium BCE—or on day zero of Creation) that after yeshiva one goes to work. And the question: how is that possible? Moreover, the matter becomes sharper in light of the decrees and the millstone of livelihood that the Zionists (the wicked) impose upon our excellent boys. He presumably means the “decrees” whereby the budget granted to each Haredi family that does not work (and whose daughters won’t even meet someone who works) is increased by only a few thousand shekels and not more. Indeed, they have placed over them a king whose decrees are as harsh as Haman’s (the Attorney General and the High Court). Truly, this riddle is second only to the previous greatest of all riddles. But fear not: R. M. H. Hirsch cracks this one as well.
I hope that merely raising the initial notion that a struggling yeshiva boy might suffice with ten years in kollel and go to work—even though it will immediately be rejected out of hand—won’t corrupt the young flock watching this video at the mighty event (oops, YouTube is forbidden, so all is well).
Rabbi Hirsch prefaces by saying that he has explained this many times to people abroad who asked him this question. In other words, don’t think he was caught off guard and couldn’t find an answer, so he pulled something out of his sleeve. Not at all! This is a well-formulated doctrine for many years, and it has apparently withstood all the intellectual challenges raised by listeners in the past. That is, the answer we are about to hear is the pinnacle of a long intellectual process—the fruit of a lengthy intellectual “evolution.” You are surely biting your nails to hear what Maran answered. Listen now to the answer received straight from on high—and let your soul live.
“The Land of Israel is a holy place, and a holy place has different laws and obligations from the Holy One, blessed be He,” opens Rabbi Hirsch. And his proof is straightforward. From time immemorial, Jews ascended to the Land from around the world and made a living through various kollelim (i.e., fundraising abroad). All the problems that arise today, he says, exist only because of excessive focus on materialism, heaven forfend. Instead of continuing to live off charity as they always did (since the third millennium BCE) and as befits all residents of the Land, people seek comfortable lives—criminals that they are. And why do boys want to leave (the yeshiva and kollel, to go work)? You’ll be surprised: it’s not because they don’t want to learn, but only because of the pull toward materialism. Therefore it’s important to internalize that everything is only Torah and to increase our disdain for this world (see column 693 on defining Harediness as “citizens of the World to Come”).
There are so many absurdities here that it will be hard to address them all. I’ll start by noting that R. Yohanan the sandal-maker, R. Yitzhak the blacksmith, R. Yehoshua (who was a charcoal-burner), and their colleagues had not heard of the Holy One’s unique demands of the Land’s residents. They did not know that in the Land of Israel, by virtue of its holiness, one must only learn and not work, heaven forfend. The Hatam Sofer also hadn’t heard of this principle when he wrote that working the land in the Land of Israel is akin to learning and performing the Torah. All the Torah commentators who speak of the transition from the wilderness to the Land—requiring us to cease being eaters of manna and begin to work the land and connect to this world—also did not know of this principle. In fact, the Torah itself, when imposing land-dependent commandments, had no knowledge of it. Or perhaps it spoke only to gentiles living here (resident aliens, of course), because the Jews in the Land of Israel—none of them is supposed to work in the field or anywhere else. And what of King David, who went to pasture sheep here, in the King’s palace in the Land of Israel? Is he normal?! An ignoramus—better he should stick to murmuring Psalms and not dare give a general shiur.
According to his thinking, we should be an entire country of righteous people sustained by international schnorring, with none of us working. What about the categorical imperative—i.e., that the behavior cannot be universalized? It is impossible to maintain an entire state whose citizens do not work. But leave aside the categorical imperative he surely never heard of. What will happen in messianic times when all Jews ascend to the Land and lose their license to work for a living—whom will we schnorr from then? Oh right, from the nations (and the verse will be fulfilled in us: “Strangers shall be your shepherds”).
And what about the duty to teach one’s son a trade? The matter of a trade appears in dozens of rabbinic sources, most of them Tannaitic—i.e., composed in the Land of Israel. What, they didn’t know that trade is simply needless bitul Torah? And what of Maimonides on one who intends to live off Torah study (and even the Kesef Mishneh there—on whom those who permit themselves not to work rely—writes that many tried and did not succeed; i.e., even he only permits it after the fact)?
His explanation regarding the “kollelim” is ignorance of historical facts. People ascended to the Land not necessarily to learn Torah but to live and be buried here. The “kollelim” in question supported not specifically Torah learners. They distributed charity funds. Simply put, the Land’s residents in the past were poor and lacked work and livelihood, so Diaspora Jews supported them. The term “kollel” used in that context refers to a charity fund, not a place sustaining mass Torah study. That is not the term’s current usage.
And what does Rabbi Hirsch think of those who cannot learn all day for their entire lives? Oh, that’s simple: he claims there are no such people. Even those who want to go out to work do so only because of their craving for materialism. In essence, everyone is built for 24×7×120 study. Do you have a greater detachment from reality? Our Sages themselves say: one who does not see blessing in his learning after five years will never see it (Chullin 24a). According to Rabbi Hirsch, such people do not exist at all. So whom does the Talmud speak of?!
And I didn’t understand the answer to the initial question. Does the principle that everything should be Torah and nothing else not apply abroad? There, must one not disdain this world? That is the purpose of our creation—so what difference does it make whether we live in the Land or abroad? What is the connection between the Land’s holiness and the centrality of Torah among the aims of our creation and the vanity of this world?! Every child knows that when the Hazon Ish established the centrality of kollel study at the expense of going out to work, he did so not because of the Land’s holiness but to preserve Torah after the Holocaust—and probably also to distinguish from the secular here. That is likely also why this directive was not adopted abroad, since the fear of gentile influence is lower there. Ah, there is another reason, of course: foreign countries are not suckers who will support all the idlers who don’t work. Only here did they find their useful idiots who fund them. But these overly simple explanations eluded R. Hirsch’s holy spirit as it roams the supernal firmaments.
Finally, I wonder about R. Hirsch’s statement that in the Land of Israel the obligations from the Holy One are different. Where exactly did God say that? We did not learn this in the Torah of Moses; it is not taught in the Prophets, nor triply stated in the Writings—but rather in the words of his prophets in Bnei Brak, whose every word is a burning coal. They innovate exalted teachings—and due to their holiness they do not violate “Do not add” or “Do not subtract.”
He should really have said this: Friends, we fear corruption, and besides, here in Israel there are suckers who fund us by the billions. Therefore we call upon everyone to live off charity despite the moral and halachic prohibition involved. But Rabbi Hirsch prefers to invent folk tales that plant this in the Land’s holiness versus the impurity of the Diaspora, to invent new obligations and prohibitions from God known only to today’s greats (and not to the greats of earlier generations—who spoke of “decline of the generations”?!), perceived through their crystal eyes. It is very hard for me to believe he himself believes this drivel. Needless to say, his listeners of course answer “amen,” for his words come from on high; not only that, they immediately go out and disseminate these exalted pearls on YouTube to merit all the viewers.
So far we have mainly seen foolishness and detachment (though at such a level that we cannot ignore a dash of malice). But we have only begun. Now we move on to the next video.
Second video: Rabbi Yigal Rosen on the draft
In another video, Rabbi Yigal Rosen, head of the Or Yisrael yeshiva in Petah Tikva (formerly “Mizrachi,” heaven forfend), explains to us the distortions and errors of the Zionists who demand that Haredim enlist. The subject is the draft, but from a different angle, so I’ll address it nonetheless. My aim, as noted, is to examine his logic.
The moderator opens with a question: what do we answer ourselves about the fact that some return from Gaza in coffins and not from the yeshivot? Rabbi Rosen answers that from “our perspective” (the Haredi one) there is nothing to talk about. But even from their perspective (=the wicked), there is no argument here. He opens his learned analysis with a question: How many, do you think, among all soldiers are in mortal danger? He claims that for every combat soldier there are about 9–10 support personnel. From those ~10%, subtract the Air Force pilots because none of them die. So let the IDF first send the Air Force and the support personnel to Gaza before coming with claims against the Haredim. He then equates support personnel with “jobniks” (=his translation: people who do nothing). Finally, he tells that officers from one of the colleges came to him, and when one of them timidly raised (apparently owing to the rabbi’s sanctity and sublime wisdom) the question why they [Haredim] don’t enlist, Rabbi Rosen asked them why they themselves sit in college and don’t enlist. He says they were stunned and couldn’t answer (for the unfamiliar, this is a classic trait of tales about wicked “maskilim”: the maskil is always dumbstruck before the rabbi’s wisdom; how had he not thought of it himself?!). Then, in his kindness, Rabbi Rosen helped him—“open for him”—and explained that they are in college to prepare the army for the future. “But that is exactly what is done in yeshiva,” he immediately adds: caring for the next generation of Israel. QED. Well, to anyone who knows the genre, it goes without saying that in the end they accepted his words (his note: when you speak their language, they understand [those dimwits]). His conclusion: the claim that the wicked Zionists constantly fear the knock on the door is bubbe-meises. It concerns a very small minority; therefore there is no claim whatsoever against the Haredim. They are at least like support personnel (and that’s only by the wicked’s own view; by ours, of course, they are the main combatants).
There is no need to say that the logic here is rather shaky. Again, a talented rosh yeshiva who delivers brilliant learned lectures presents empty, vapid pilpulim that any child can see through. This is a wonderful illustration of pilpul divorced from common sense—an essential feature of Haredi [non-]thinking. It’s somewhat embarrassing even to address them in detail, but I will nonetheless do so briefly:
- He of course ignores the hardships of those soldiers who do not risk their lives directly: people in reserves for hundreds of days, whose families are crushed, who also suffer loss of livelihood. He also ignores relatives who have lost loved ones and worry for other relatives (note to him: the relatives and friends of 10% of the soldiers are not 10% of the country’s families but far more). Beyond the dead, there are also physically and mentally wounded. None of this exists among Haredim and it exists in many more families than the number of soldiers who are directly at risk (which is itself not negligible).
- I once read that the ratio of combatants to support personnel in the IDF is among the best in the world. You cannot conduct warfare without support personnel, and the claim that they are all idle and do nothing is demagoguery at its worst (I don’t claim the IDF is efficient and free of hidden unemployment, but that is true of every large organization. If Rabbi Rosen has a solution, I invite him to propose it—actually, to implement it first in Haredi kollelim). If you transferred the support personnel to Gaza, we could not conduct the war.
- Air Force pilots number in the mere hundreds. A negligible number; there is no point even mentioning them in the overall picture.
- But if we are already speaking: pilots do take serious risks. Strikes in Iran and Yemen carry real danger of capture or death (he might interview them about how they feel before such a mission), as do helicopters extracting wounded from combat zones. The fact that none have fallen thus far does not mean no risk; it means they are professionals who operate well. This too is demagoguery. Note as well: even in infantry and engineering the actual percentage of the fallen is very small.
- Why compare to the percentage at risk out of all soldiers, rather than compare Yeshivat Or Yisrael to a given hesder yeshiva, for example—where the percentage is much higher (and the percentage of combatants is far higher)? On the contrary, let all of Or Yisrael enlist in Golani to improve our situation and the ratio of combatants to support personnel. Ah, he can of course say that Haredim are also support personnel (all of them? even those who don’t learn?).
- But I don’t understand why Haredim should not contribute their share to that small percentage that is at risk. Why should they be completely exempt from that risk and all be only support personnel? This speaks also of those who do learn—but certainly of those who don’t.
- Even for those who are learning, preparing Israel’s future can also be accomplished with 68 years of life devoted to learning, not only 70. Yeshiva students who enlist contribute no less to that preparation for the future. So at any given moment there are thousands of learners, and there will be ten percent fewer because they are serving. Is that the precise “minyan” of learners required to prepare the next generation?
- The comparison of needs is also absurd. If the army truly could not manage without those officers in college, perhaps it would send them to Gaza. But it cannot, because then we would lose the next war. Without pilots, it is certainly impossible; sending them to be infantry in Gaza is ridiculous. Likewise for support personnel. But without all Haredim (here the exemption covers hundreds of thousands) we truly cannot manage in Gaza. Is there justification to invest in the next generation if this generation is in real danger? Does he truly mean that even in real danger one must set aside people to learn Torah? If an avrech or an avrech’s child is critically ill, is he permitted to go to a doctor? Or must he continue learning as “support personnel for medicine”?
I suspect that in a major shiur he delivers in the yeshiva he would not dare present such foolish arguments (I have heard genuinely fine ideas from him), but at a “giving of the Torah,” as is known, not a bird chirps and no one asks or wonders. There is not even a single innocent little girl there to ask: why? (Well, girls are in any case forbidden to think and learn.)
Third video: From the pearls of Rabbi Peretz Berman—about us
In the next video, Rabbi Berman, a rosh yeshiva at Ponovezh, deals with questions of fallen soldiers and military successes—but above all, he deals with us. I’ll only note that at Ponovezh every ram (lecturer) is called rosh yeshiva, so I don’t know his exact status. But it is the flagship Lithuanian yeshiva, so in any case he is a central rabbi. I must preface with a sampling of the superlatives beneath the video:
“In a riveting speech delivered at the Bnei HaYeshivot Conference (5785), Rabbi Berman holds up a searing mirror to the entire system and reveals the truth behind the war over drafting yeshiva students… This is a speech that dismantles all false claims, grants immense power and strength to the world of Torah, and makes clear once and for all why there is no place for dialogue. Watch the full remarks that will not leave you indifferent.”
Indeed you will find it hard to remain indifferent in the face of this torrent of malicious and detached stupidity.
Here the moderator centers the question of Haredi involvement in what is happening in the state. He explains that soldiers are being killed, and the feeling is that Haredim are like Australians, disconnected from what is happening here (see the Maimonides cited above).
Rabbi Berman opens by saying we are dealing with fools who don’t understand the world in which they live. They don’t even know that on Rosh Hashanah everything is decreed. You might think, as I did, that he means not literal foolishness but ignorance of Torah and Judaism. Before I show you that this is not what he means, I’ll say that even if that were his intent, calling it “foolishness” is a detachment from reality. Not everyone who thinks differently from you is a fool (especially in light of his pearls we shall soon see). But fear not: as you will immediately see, he is speaking of real foolishness—i.e., lack of intelligence. They (=the wicked and foolish) take pride in the beeper operation and in the successes in Iran. But that’s all nonsense. What’s the proof? Simple: where was their intelligence on Simchat Torah? What, at one moment they have intelligence and at another it shuts down? Impossible. Therefore it’s obvious that none of this is about intelligence and ability. It’s all divine assistance (in the merit of Torah learners, of course). QED.
For some reason, this exalted genius is not at all bothered by the opposite question: why did God help in Iran and in the beeper operation but not on Simchat Torah? So perhaps it is not God or Torah study? Well, His ways are mysterious—unless we have an idea of what is happening anyway. Only when the matter is “my strength and the might of my hand” do we have conclusive proof that it is God and Torah learners. But the thesis is unfalsifiable: if something works systematically, that too will not prove that the actions were ours. For this reason he can claim Torah study sustains us, but there is never a need to examine the learners when there is failure. Failures are ours; successes belong to God and to the Torah learners (Haredim only, of course).
The possibility that there are failures in the world—and that brilliant, surprising plans succeed because of the skill of their authors—does not cross his mind at all. Want to see this? Here comes the continuation.
Now the genius moves to a brilliant analysis of the beeper operation (so who says there’s no “Daas Torah”?! Here is a rosh yeshiva who is a commander and strategist more wondrous than all our generals. Fortunate are we!). This is his proof that everyone there (in the army, the ISA, and the government) are fools. Listen: it is such a stupid operation that even a children’s fantasy author no one reads wouldn’t dare imagine it (because it’s so idiotic). Why? Simple: it’s a plan where, for twenty years (I don’t know whence the number), they would make sure each person had a phone, and of course hundreds of people know about it—and despite that, the idiots rely on no one in Lebanon discovering it. In addition, whoever wants and decides to activate it, according to them, will be able to do so precisely at the right moment—not a moment earlier or later—and hit all the phone carriers who will just happen to have them on them. Moreover, in a country of one hundred million people (Lebanon has grown somewhat), with wise and clever people like ours—and somehow we presume they are all fools and no one will catch our plan or discover it. He concludes: “Even the biggest fool wouldn’t do such a thing.”
Must I explain anything here? Is there anyone who cannot see that we are talking about a certified fool who can barely be counted for a minyan (not by the Haredi criterion—by the criterion of a deaf-mute and a fool)?
I will only note that it’s a pity the Haredi ministers weren’t in the loop; otherwise they would surely have consulted with Rabbis Landau and Hirsch and with him, and would have received a clear directive to drop this nonsense. In any event, God did us a kindness and saved us from ourselves—causing this idiotic operation to succeed nonetheless. Fortunate are we. I only wonder whether, in this genius’s view, God is involved only in stupid operations, while clever ones are done without His help? Are clever operations indeed carried out by humans? It seems that in his view the salvations by God come only when we are truly foolish. Understand: if everything is in His hands, what difference does it make if we were foolish or not? The only important question is how they learned in Ponovezh that day, no? Whether the plan was stupid or smart—it really doesn’t matter.
I’ll spare you the wonders of “saves from missiles,” which, in the view of fools, are natural; but every child understands they are solely the hand of God (but not the events of Simchat Torah—remember: successes are His; failures are ours. Don’t be foolish Zionists; every child knows this). Along the way he releases surprising theological information: once, God would not perform open miracles because that would negate our free will (for some reason at Sinai, the Golden Calf, and the splitting of the sea this didn’t quite work—but those are trifles). But today He can do open miracles because the fools don’t understand anyway that everything (i.e., the successes—not the failures, of course) is only from God.
After these pearls, Rabbi Berman moves to more directly vilify (yes, it’s possible—if you wondered) all those who speak out against the Haredim. Here are some pearls: they are all (!) liars and frauds, wicked and impure, who seek only to uproot Torah and holiness and to multiply impurity in Israel. All (!) their children are thieves, criminals, and murderers. They are all (!) beasts walking on two legs; there is nothing between them and animals. He already established the bestiality of their stupidity above, of course.
In his words he also explains that they all (!) arrange cushy jobs for themselves in Unit 8200 and Army Radio, and none of them truly serve in the army (not willing to wet their finger for the army—in his golden phrase; perhaps he means service in Shayetet?!…). Note: he does not make the correct claim that there are also non-Haredim who dodge service and run to Army Radio or evade conscription altogether (and again, without 8200 there is no war and no victory—but the fool doesn’t understand that; we already saw this pearl in Rabbi Rosen above). He makes a different claim: that all those who accuse the Haredim are draft-dodgers and do not serve. And here the son asks: so who does serve? The Haredim don’t, and those who accuse them also don’t. So who does? I also don’t think those serving in combat units refrain from accusing the Haredim. There are the reservists’ organizations and “Shvut Ra’anan” and its friends. These wicked ones stand at the head of the accusers of the Haredim—and yet they fall in droves.
But fear not—he reaches the “Mizrachi-niks” too, and actually compliments them. They are not all wicked—rather, more ignoramuses. They are afflicted with what our Sages called “the hatred of the am ha’aretz for the talmid hakham.” The demand for a draft is so absurd that it can have no explanation other than hatred of Torah scholars. Those outstanding Torah scholars who sit on the railings or in yeshivot for dropouts are also the objects of the amei ha’aretz’s hatred. You may wonder whether they are truly Torah scholars—how dare you. As Haredim, they are exempt from the draft; therefore it is clear that each one is a “talmid hakham.” Otherwise, how would he be exempt under the clause “his Torah is his trade”? Use your head, you bunch of amei ha’aretz. Of the three videos, I think the last expresses malice in the most distilled form. In the first two, it is more detachment and stupidity than malice.
Conclusion
The four videos I chose here are a random sampling. You can watch almost any video on that horror channel and see whether my description here holds. Note that this unsettling display does not come from political operatives or fifth-rate Haredi spokesmen, but from those considered there to be the greats of the generation. It is a collection of hollow clichés—of course with not a drop of originality or innovation among them—but that is the lesser problem. These are low-level arguments laced with lies and with a magnificent, malicious detachment from reality—smugness without any basis, in a spirit of “I and none else,” repeatedly reinforced by the “Yamim al y’mei melech” dances. How is it possible that such people are considered great Torah scholars? How is it possible that they ensnare hundreds of thousands of fine Jews, some of them genuine Torah scholars? How is it possible that they present embarrassing arguments that, were they to present them in a major yeshiva lecture, the students would pelt them with their etrogim and laugh at them in the mikveh or the dining hall (you should know: Haredi yeshiva boys are very critical and sharp—even cynical)?
We are dealing with people whose intellectual capacities are not in doubt. The lectures they deliver in their yeshivot are likely complex and beautiful, and their Torah knowledge is likely broad. So what can cause them to descend to such a low level of discourse in every other field? How is it that intelligent people, when they merely step a bit aside from analysis of the Ketzot, reach unfathomed depths? I think the myth of “Daas Torah”—that whoever engages in Torah with devotion and persistence thereby acquires truth in every field and every word he says hits the deepest and loftiest truth—shatters here before the eyes of anyone willing to look soberly. As I wrote above, this truly arouses heretical thoughts. I honestly wondered, again and again: who knows how we should relate to the greats of past generations? Were they, too, technicians of the Ketzot without horizon or depth and without a moral spine? Did they, too, act with smugness on the basis of clichés they never seriously examined? I very much hope not—but who knows.
What stares out at us from these videos is the result of detachment from reality (which among Haredim is an ideology and a parameter that determines Torah greatness) combined with acute anxiety (when the winds of conscription enter the Haredi world, it deeply worries them and drives them to hysterical defensiveness), all woven together with narrow, constricted thinking devoid of any general education—and, of course, accompanied by a total absence of self-criticism and of audience critique (which is usually very critical and sober—but when they reach these subjects, they fall silent). All this means that when these people deal with something not written in Rashi script, they descend to depths of shallowness—which also presents their Torah as an empty vessel. Their detachment from reality enables their political operatives to persuade them that their words are exalted and impressive and should be disseminated widely. Thus, from this heap of conceptual trash they create a fervent YouTube channel, and it is evident they are convinced no listener will stand before this exalted wisdom and not become Haredi on the spot.
It may be that the habit whereby every person must hear their words, lick their plate with zeal, and dance before them “Yamim al y’mei melech” as if they were ministering angels leads them to smugness (evident in all these videos), and to the feeling that there is no need whatsoever to examine the arguments they present. I have little doubt that none of these people has ever reflected on the basis of his outlook, examined counter-arguments, and seriously weighed what he believes. He merely repeats clichés he has been force-fed, except that from his mouth they suddenly become some great light. It seems their analytical abilities stand against them as well. Such a person is used to great admiration (often deserved) for the lectures he gives (more accurately: delivers) in the yeshiva, and perhaps that admiration leads to arrogance and smugness and the sense that in every field he touches his words shine like the firmament. Of course, all others simply don’t understand the simple truth; thus, it’s no wonder that in their eyes anyone who thinks otherwise is either a fool or wicked. Otherwise, how could he fail to accept truths so absolute and clear? Poor fellow (a very common expression—truly touching—in the speech of such people).
These fellows are so detached from reality that they are not even capable of understanding that the criticisms against them in the areas of conscription and entering the workforce do not come from hatred of Torah scholars or a war against Torah, but from acute distress and a rational analysis of reality. It is important to understand that even if someone does not accept the arguments for conscription and for the importance of going to work, I would still expect at least that he understand his non-Haredi interlocutor and his point of view: that the critic is not living his entire life solely to destroy the world of Torah, but that he has a few other concerns (for example, wondering how and from where he will continue to support through his labor the parasitic world of Torah and defend it, and how he and his family will cope with the hundreds of reserve days yet to come). In the eyes of these rabbis—like any ordinary child in kindergarten (I have written many times about Haredi childishness)—anyone who is against him is wicked or wishes him ill. He has no ability to understand that there is another side. This is a kind of collective psychopathy, for empathy for the other simply does not exist there (see columns 493 and 709). Such empathetic understanding of reality—and of the people, ideas, and movements operating within it—is a minimal foundation without which it is impossible to conduct an intelligent discussion. But they are incapable of it.
In conclusion, this channel is nothing less than astounding, and the experience of watching it shakes me to this very moment. I now understand that we simply do not belong to the same religion or the same Torah. These are Torah scholars without sense—of whom the Midrash says a carcass is better than they. It is a sect that has split off from Judaism while choosing to preserve a few of its trappings. I think the questions about counting them for a minyan gain further force in light of what we have seen here.
Discussion
I watched some of the clips; it really is a horror show of unimaginable intellectual darkness. Pity those who follow them. And about them and those who heed them it is said: so-and-so who studied Torah — see how evil his deeds are, etc.
Apparently.
Apparently Rabbi Michi overlooked the Rambam’s words, where he distinguishes in the law of destroying idolatry between the Land of Israel and outside the Land. In the Land there is an obligation to pursue it and destroy it, to leave nothing; but outside the Land, only wherever one happens to find idolatry. And that is enough for the understanding.
And I was only waiting for your remark about the fact that they use chatgpt to write the accompanying text for the videos.
God, I would have liked to be a pixel on the computer screen to see what format they used.
Prompt*
A nice distinction. I liked it.
What does the Sabbatical year have to do with an omelet? Is anyone disputing that in the Land of Israel there are different laws than outside the Land? Maybe I am not wise, but at least regarding me it’s not true that “that is enough for the understanding.”
I have to note that Rabbi Rosen, in his message (which I also think is wrong), did not say that we don’t need all the combat-support personnel etc., and that they too are needed in the army. His main claim was that when asking who is endangering lives, you can ask that not only about the Haredim but also about an ordinary jobnik (who is needed). Apparently this comes from the assumption that we have two levels: one who risks his life and one who doesn’t, and since Rabbi Yigal Rosen is perhaps connected to the traditionalist public, he can guess that many traditional and religious people will think Torah study is beneficial and important, and therefore he will claim that it is like a jobnik who does not risk his life.
I wrote that and even explicitly addressed this very argument.
Regarding the concern you raised about previous gedolei hador — were they too detached, and did they think this way about everything that wasn’t in-depth learning, like these gedolei hador?
I may perhaps reassure you that indeed, since the establishment of the yeshiva world, the gedolei hador have specifically become roshei yeshivah, unlike in the past when the gedolei hador were mainly city rabbis. A Lithuanian rosh yeshivah today is a rather isolated person who speaks with no one except in conceptual Torah study, and therefore a disconnect can arise that did not exist in the past. Today there are no responsa of the gedolei hador, only books of lectures on the classic tractates, which also stalls the renewal of Torah writing in the Haredi public.
It is no accident that the gedolei hador in the past were often also great men of faith, and you can see that their faith-oriented writings still influence people to this day, and they were apparently more connected to the public. One can list the Maharal, the Ramban. You can also find this in the Hasidic world, which works more and encounters the outside world more, and there too the Rebbe is not the rosh yeshivah (it passes from father to son, which may be even worse, but you can definitely see that the first rebbes of many Hasidic dynasties were certainly people of thought), such as the author of the Tanya and the Sefat Emet and R. Tzadok, etc.
Therefore one can say that your concern is a concern regarding the gedolei hador only of the last generations, thank God.
“And the claim that they’re all idlers who do nothing is demagoguery at its worst…. If they transferred the combat-support personnel to Gaza, we couldn’t wage the war.”
That is a quote from the clip; he explicitly says there are such people who do things, and it is clear that they are needed to run an army.
At the time I asked you exactly about the point with which you opened here. Is the Torah really so hard-hearted? And I recalled that Jeroboam too was the gadol hador (and Doeg and Ahitophel and many more of the same kind). Maybe we need to launch a bus campaign — Jeroboam too was the gadol hador…
Among us Haredim, they settle for little… Someone who knows how to chatter through a few sugyot in a tractate from Nezikin is considered a great Torah scholar. And so it is in almost every profession: whoever knows how to play a keyboard (especially those programmed with bouncing automatic accompaniments…) and can perform a few chord progressions (usually connected to the jazz genre) is considered a genius in music. Over time he asks himself, if so, then why shouldn’t I also be a conductor? All this while he does not know the fundamentals of music! And the world of golems bows before him as if we were dealing with Mozart or Bach, etc.
Likewise, whoever has some knowledge in plumbing, electrical work, electronics, etc., will be called an expert or technician.
When it comes to matters of medicine, who is more of an expert than the Rebbe? And if not the Rebbe himself, then one of his Hasidim. (Yes, there are exceptional individuals like Rabbi Firer who have vast experience, but most of them simply babble whatever comes into their heads.)
I enjoyed the terminology “Ketzot technician.” For years I’ve been using the term “keyboard technician” for wedding musicians.
It reminds me of Leibowitz’s words about the Haredim, when he said they are a cult and a kind of pathological development of Judaism.
Haredi society is, truly and sincerely, an Orwellian society.
The past is erased from its head with a wave of the hand whenever it suits the politruks who run it.
After all, most of those called gedolei hador there are old enough to have lived here in the pre-Begin era, and they surely remember that
exemptions from enlistment were limited, and married Haredim served in the IDF, which was then much more secular than it is today.
The absurd claim that a Lithuanian man a priori does not work began in the days of Rabbi Shach in the 1980s.
The institution of the kollel and the yeshivah was not so mass-based, and not every Haredi child with a pulse called himself a yeshivah student, and not every young man who had just put a ring on someone’s finger was called an avrech and sent to rot in some kollel.
Not even in the Land of Israel with its special privileges.
And in general, if in the Land of Israel one need not work, then why are Haredi women sent to work in very, very secular places, much more than the IDF? Let them sit at home and let the money come out of the toaster.
Therefore, as I once wrote here and you (Rabbi Michi) disagreed with me, this society is already in an advanced hedonistic and nihilistic stage.
Nothing interests it except preserving its comfort. For that purpose it will use the most absurd excuses imaginable.
Regarding what Rabbi Rosen said — it is also worth speaking about the basic assumption of his whole argument: his entire argument implicitly assumes that the statement “IDF soldiers are being killed and you are not” is a statement demanding that the Haredim *die* in the name of equality. And then it makes sense to say, for example — why us, and not pilots/jobniks/officers in professional academic training? As if the army has an interest in distributing the risk equally in the name of justice, and if we happen to find a way to contribute to the war effort without risk, then in the name of justice and equality we should deliberately endanger those people. Without such an assumption there is no logic whatsoever to the claim “send the pilots to Gaza.” Why should we send them to Gaza? I have here a person who underwent grueling and very, very expensive training so that he can fight *without* taking the same kind of risk as an infantry soldier, and so that he can enable other soldiers to fight at much lower risk, so in the name of justice and equality let’s kill him. *That is the basic assumption of his argument.* It is that insane. Needless to say, nobody wants Haredim to die. The interest is that they contribute to the war effort, and the issue of death is only an argument showing why shirking that effort is parasitism of the very worst kind, because it expects others to risk themselves for them. The only argument that could have worked here is “we are like jobniks, because we study Torah and in this way we actually send the soldiers divine energy that enables them to win.” With that you cannot argue rationally, and one can only argue (not all that hard to argue, but one can) with the hidden moral claim: “If I believe I am contributing to you and you do not believe that at all, is it moral to force you to exempt me from the duty to contribute also in your way (which does not contradict my way), when it is clear that you pay a heavy price for it and I do not?” And that is even if, out of unclear charity, we assume that the Haredim really believe this — and reality shows they not really, and that is enough for the understanding.
I have, Rabbi Michi, what may perhaps be a scoop for you: 90% of the Haredim, no matter from which circle, would agree with every word you wrote, provided their opinion is not made public. If there is one commandment that in Haredi circles they transgress with particular devotion, it is the commandment “do not be afraid of any man.” That instruction was indeed given only to judges, but everyone violates it by their own reasoning (stringently, perhaps they too are included) … after all, if they express their true opinion publicly (including rabbis and opinion leaders!), their great-grandchildren won’t be accepted to the yeshivot and seminaries!!!! In my opinion, instead of the fear of Heaven resting upon them, what rests upon them is fear of the neighbor-lady (the “a” pronounced like “ay”) — what will the neighbor say about him and how will he look in public. That is the principle that guides all their conduct and worldview.
Regarding what things were like in previous generations, I have always thought there is a fairly high chance that we glorify the legendary names — tannaim, amoraim, rishonim, etc. — and turn them all into superhuman figures as a result of two things:
1 – A natural human tendency to believe that people of our own generation are not “like people of old.” This happens regarding athletes, politicians, military men, writers, movie stars, etc. So too regarding the great Torah scholars of previous generations. In specific cases this may be justified, but for the most part I think it is fantasy and longing for the past.
2 – A conscious decision by the shapers of opinion over the generations to turn the great figures of earlier generations into people whose greatness we cannot imagine. Without this, why would we take their halakhic rulings seriously hundreds and thousands of years after they were given? Turning Hazal and the rishonim into supermen allows us to persuade ourselves that even when it ostensibly seems to us that certain determinations of theirs have long since ceased to be relevant (or are downright ridiculous), if they were supernatural, then they probably knew that what they determined would remain relevant even מאות years into the future. Thus we made a huge issue of the decline of the generations and ignored, for example, the fact that the rishonim had far less “material” in which to specialize, etc. Why would anyone want to study a sugya in the Gemara dealing with a woman’s testimony at the expense of other productive things he could be doing, if it is merely what people of the second century CE thought, even if they were Torah scholars? Unless they were really angels.
Hello Rabbi Michi,
Your words are correct and incisive, but they do not penetrate the heart because of the wild style.
It’s a shame; you could have said these things in a more restrained way, and then their impact would have been immense.
This is a cult, of course, with all the pathology implied by that. I think a good interpretive way to begin understanding it is to look for parallels to such societies in the world. I am of course aware of the problematic nature of such comparisons, but in my opinion the usefulness of this approach still exists. And here there is a surprise: my gut feeling is that in the modern world (certainly in the one before it) it would be hard to find a phenomenon parallel to this cult outside Judaism. There is, after all, something authentically Jewish in the Israeli Haredi world that developed here. This is neither a compliment nor an insult, but probably simply a statement of fact. Needless to say, there are worse pathologies outside Judaism, but as our greatest poet said: there may be women more beautiful than she, but none as beautiful as she.
It is important to note that great Torah scholars in the past grew out of a background of self-sacrifice for the love of wisdom and Torah, and did not have the supportive framework that great Torah scholars have today — an environment of a “society of learners” whose default is to sit in kollel all day. In the past, presumably the great man had to overcome the difficult hurdles of poverty and lack of legitimacy before becoming known as a “rabbi.” Therefore it is more likely that there was in him and in his personality some added value of human greatness, beyond the intellectual one. Today, by contrast, when the whole environment supports and even pressures the yeshivah student to “become great” and continue learning — there is no guarantee that one who indeed did so is anything more than a conformist slacker, devoid of human force. Precisely those who leave the press of this society — they are usually made of different stuff. (As you wrote in the past.) Hence: the disaster of greatness in Torah grew hand in hand with the establishment of the “society of learners” and the giving of fixed stipends to them — exactly as the Rambam predicted. That said, and this is a question worthy of a whole column — who can guarantee us that great spirits in the general world do in fact enjoy some advantage over the masses and over naive reason? What is the benefit at all of studying and reading words of wisdom, philosophy, general thought, if the result is that there is no agreement about anything? We see with our own eyes that sophisticated intellectuals turn out to be absolute idiots in all matters relating to politics (see the artists’ letter about Gaza, the Kaplan demonstrations, and the antisemitic musings throughout the world). Here the question is addressed to you — in what way does all your wisdom lead you even a little bit closer to truth, if thinkers on a similar scale to yours (and there are not many) can, at the other end of the universe, argue — by virtue of their wisdom and erudition — exactly the opposite of you (!) regarding the biggest questions of all — the existence of God, the nature of justice, and the meaning of life? At times it seems that all knowledge is merely a shell for consolidating the inner point that was already dictated in advance. Hence the sharpest riddle of all rises up: what can convince you, when you look in the mirror, that you yourself are not some “gadoyl” in disguise?! (I am not asking cynically. I really think this is something that requires personal clarification from everyone who invests in the study of wisdom.)
See my columns on peer disagreement.
A nice argument.
The problem is that the current gedoylim of the Haredi public did not grow up in a climate where Torah study is the default.
Maybe in another 30 years.
You may have reservations about the way human reason works, and yet you would agree that there are pretty good and logical reasons not to cross a busy road with your eyes shut. Rabbi Michi tried to point out this, and it seems to me he succeeded quite easily, that these videos belong to the category that tries to convince us there is no danger in crossing the road in the way I described.
Hedonism is a surprising accusation against a society that lives in poverty by choice in order to prefer ideology.
I know this will sound strange,
but Haredim are willing to kill everyone around them for the sacred right to eat cholent or fly to Lizhensk during a pandemic, for example.
Their hedonism is not expressed in eating caviar or driving a Rolls-Royce,
but from their perspective their material daily routine must continue even during a nuclear attack.
Haredi society strives to go on enjoying all the privileges of life in a Western country while making a continuous effort to give back as little as possible.
Have you ever encountered a Haredi whose allowance was not approved?
Have you ever encountered a Haredi for whom the bus to Meron was not comfortable enough?
Have you ever seen their reactions?
This is a society convinced that all the pleasures of the world are due to it for free.
That is a kind of hedonism.
Haredi hedonism.
One can say many bad things about the Haredi gedoylim. But to win the current “war” (the quotation marks are intentional, because the government does not really want to win) it is enough to listen to Moshe Feiglin: “Conquest, expulsion, and settlement.”
How many soldiers does it take to shut off water and electricity to the vile Gazans?
https://he.mishpacha.com/%d7%94%d7%97%d7%a8%d7%93%d7%99%d7%9d-%d7%94%d7%9d-%d7%9c%d7%90-%d7%94%d7%91%d7%a2%d7%99%d7%94-%d7%94%d7%9d-%d7%94%d7%a4%d7%aa%d7%a8%d7%95%d7%9f/
I remember reading the book “The Great Ones” — the personalities who shaped the face of Haredi Judaism in Israel. The book surveys all the rabbinic figures who shaped “Haredism” as it is today. In the last part of the book, the scholars discuss rabbinic figures who went beyond the boundaries of Haredism and also influenced the Israeli public, such as Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rabbi Yosef Elyashiv, Rabbi Zion Abba Shaul, and Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. It is hard not to see the abyssal difference between the figures mentioned above and those called “gedoylim” today, whom I call “puppets on strings.” Since those figures passed away, the Haredi public has been in a process of degeneration and has not succeeded in finding rabbis who can fill their void in Torah greatness and leadership, and also as people who conducted a dialogue with the Israeli public and knew how to reach compromises with it on various issues. The Haredi public today appoints over itself people who have almost never gone beyond the boundaries of Bnei Brak or know the Israeli public and know how to conduct a dialogue with it. Sad.
I identify with these words so much. The question is what place these “great Torah scholars” have in the world of halakhah. And by the world of halakhah I mean the weak [health, money, etc.] — who sometimes [and I emphasize “sometimes”] do not deeply understand the distress of the person asking them.
What is more immoral, to stay at home or to send a child to risk his life for the whims of post-Zionists such as Yitzhak Goldknopf and Aharon Barak, whose children are sitting in air-conditioned rooms in Tel Aviv at best? How is it possible that the religious-Zionist public is silent about this?! Is it good to die for Aharon Barak and Asa Kasher?!
Five minutes ago I heard on the radio Yisrael Porush saying that if the possibility is not arranged for every deserter who wants to fly to Uman, they will shut down Ben-Gurion Airport.
That is how they live.
Others will die in pandemics.
They will die in Gaza.
They will do hundreds of reserve-duty days.
And they will fly to Uman.
Woe unto you if not.
This is unrestrained Haredi indulgence.
It is a kind of hedonism.
And I am left wondering the following — the host does not study in kollel; what he does is a scam. He receives a salary and pays tax according to the law. He is one of those men whom a Haredi girl would not even agree to meet (supposedly). This channel is not intended for the general public, and not even for the in-group. This channel is aimed at pleasing the sponsor so that he will keep donating and there will be a salary for the host. And the rabbis speaking there too — their words are aimed at pleasing the major donors. Not you — you are a possible competitor in the donations market.
This is the sad result of a commercial version of the Judaism of Yosef Karo.
Thanks, I’ll read it!
Fantasies are nice, but they are not a plan of action.
Rabbi Michi, your words are sharp and thought-provoking, but they sometimes miss the historical, halakhic, and social depth of the Torah world:
1. Greatness in Torah and Torah scholars: Hazal (Hagigah 15) warn against “speaking ill of Torah scholars.” An outside perspective does not always grasp inner depth. Sometimes דווקא humility and peace of mind — not a “brilliant” performance — are signs of genuine greatness that is evident in halakhic ruling and in educating generations.
2. Going out to work: Rabbi Yishmael (Berakhot 35) says, “Conduct yourself in them according to the way of the world” — but Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai chose exclusive study, and halakhah creates a space between worlds, as explained by the Rambam (Laws of Torah Study ch. 3). It is not clear to you that the current dosage is a mistake. And one who dismisses immense spiritual creativity in favor of sociological data misses the point.
3. **Enlistment and military service: You will not find a sweeping “duty to enlist” in the Torah. Hazal are careful that not everyone goes out to war (Deuteronomy ch. 4), and in times of spiritual danger they even allowed exemption (see Mishnah Sotah). The intensity and prayer of the learners protect no less than a sword.
4. **Earning a livelihood at the public’s expense: The Gemara (Nedarim 62) speaks of “the pride of Jacob which he did not labor for,” and the Rambam himself recognizes value in exceptional individuals who study regularly — “the tribe of Levi” — who separate themselves for the sake of the whole of Israel (Laws of Shemittah and Yovel). And throughout history the Haredi world was not based on laziness, but at times on wondrous self-sacrifice.
5. Personal criticism and casting doubt: The abundance of criticism — even if justified — raises questions: why do you not find even one virtue in the immense Torah creativity that grew here? Might this stem from an uncomfortable personal encounter rather than from a quest for intellectual objectivity?
6. Empathy and building society: “Judge every person favorably” (Avot). Building the people of Israel is a shared challenge — and sometimes “neither your honey nor your sting” is not a slogan, but a moral responsibility.
I wish that you would try to see the beautiful sides of Haredi society as well, and not build your spiritual world mainly on criticism of it.
With blessing,
A seeker of truth and knowledge.
Rabbi Michi, your words are sharp and thought-provoking, but they sometimes miss the historical, halakhic, and social depth of the Torah world:
1. Greatness in Torah and Torah scholars: Hazal (Hagigah 15) warn against “speaking ill of Torah scholars.” An outside perspective does not always grasp inner depth. Sometimes דווקא humility and peace of mind — not a “brilliant” performance — are signs of genuine greatness that is evident in halakhic ruling and in educating generations.
2.Going out to work: Rabbi Yishmael (Berakhot 35) says, “Conduct yourself in them according to the way of the world” — but Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai chooses exclusive study, and halakhah creates a space between worlds, as explained by the Rambam (Laws of Torah Study ch. 3). It is not clear to you that the current dosage is a mistake. And one who dismisses immense spiritual creativity in favor of sociological data misses the point.
3. Enlistment and military service: You will not find a sweeping “duty to enlist” in the Torah. Hazal are careful that not everyone goes out to war (Deuteronomy ch. 4), and in times of spiritual danger they even allowed exemption (see Mishnah Sotah). The intensity and prayer of the learners protect no less than a sword.
4. Earning a livelihood at the public’s expense: The Gemara (Nedarim 62) speaks of “the pride of Jacob which he did not labor for,” and the Rambam himself recognizes value in exceptional individuals who study regularly — “the tribe of Levi” — who separate themselves for the sake of the whole of Israel (Laws of Shemittah and Yovel). And throughout history the Haredi world was not based on laziness, but at times on wondrous self-sacrifice.
5. Personal criticism and casting doubt: The abundance of criticism — even if justified — raises questions: why do you not find even one virtue in the immense Torah creativity that grew here? Might this stem from an uncomfortable personal encounter rather than from a quest for intellectual objectivity?
6. Empathy and building society: “Judge every person favorably” (Avot). Building the people of Israel is a shared challenge — and sometimes “neither your honey nor your sting” is not a slogan, but a moral responsibility.
I wish that you would try to see the beautiful sides of Haredi society as well, and not build your spiritual world mainly on criticism of it.
With blessing,
You accidentally signed with your real name instead of “chatgpt.”
A truly strange message, especially when it comes from someone who refers to himself as a seeker of knowledge. I’ll respond briefly.
1. In a place where there is a desecration of God’s name, one does not accord honor to a rabbi — especially not to a Torah scholar who lacks understanding. Indeed, it may be that outwardly they are complete idiots, while inwardly they are pure in understanding and great in spirit. They conceal that very well.
2.What does the Sabbatical year have to do with an omelet? The claim there was that in the Land of Israel the Holy One, blessed be He, demands that we not work. What have you brought in here Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai and Rabbi Yishmael for?
3. How did you get to a discussion of the duty to enlist, which I did not enter into here? Of course your claims there too are absurd, when we are talking about a blanket exemption for all Haredim. And the protection of these corrupt learners may cause us to be defeated. It certainly saves no one.
4.The Rambam does not write that the tribe of Levi is supported by the public. But I will not enter here into a discussion of that Rambam because that is not the issue.
5. My topic here was criticism of their distorted logic. I did not provide here a survey of the virtues and flaws of Haredism. Nor did I describe the clothes they wear.
6. I do not have an ounce of empathy for a psychopathic public devoid of empathy. Nor should there be any such empathy.
Thanks for the good wishes. I wish for you that you would replace sticky and absurd apologetics with substantive arguments (which do not exist on these issues).
I didn’t find the link there, but at least I corresponded with Michi-bot and was exposed to the subject. Still, there is one point there that wasn’t handled (as stated, according only to what I was exposed to from Michi-bot alone — and correct me if I’m wrong): what happens with an ordinary person like me? I see myself as someone who, for several different reasons, among them chiefly the shortness of my grasp and the shortness of what can be grasped (and other reasons as mentioned), is unable to enter into the thick of the beam and decide on my own who is right, and I have no choice but to rely on those greater than I am (you can call it, for all I care, even blindly; once I heard Mr. Bunim say a joke: what is the difference between a Hasid and a Litvak? A Hasid, if his rabbi told him to jump off the roof, would obey immediately and jump, whereas a Litvak would also obey but would first check whether his rabbi had not lost his sanity; and I would add that if the student were from the third path, he would first ask his rabbi to demonstrate how to do so, on the basis of “attending upon Torah scholars is greater than learning from them”). I have no choice, Michi, but either a. to follow my inner intuition, or b. to take surrounding circumstances into account and then decide. I’ll tell you honestly, Michi: I know you both personally and through your books for decades, and I also know R. Bunim Schreiber likewise (he was rabbi in a community where I lived for at least 10 years until he became a rosh yeshivah and moved to Jerusalem). Hand on heart, Michi, if I’m thinking in business terms, in terms of calculations of the World to Come, what should I bet on? When I stand before the heavenly court, I don’t have even a gram of fear that they will ask me why I followed R. Bunim and not Michi) as opposed to the reverse: if I follow you, I am more than afraid that I’ll lose all my share and be judged for generations upon generations in… may God have mercy). That is on the side of my inner intuition. There is no way to fight it or try to deceive myself about it; that’s clear to you. And what are my secondary considerations besides inner intuition? I look at you and at him. In terms of greatness and knowledge in Torah, there is no doubt that you are not even on the scale when matched against him (like the worn-out Haredi phrase: he puts you in his little pocket). The man knows Bavli, Yerushalmi, Shulhan Arukh, Mishnah Berurah, and much more by heart, and has already managed to write analytical books on all the tractates of the Talmud. By contrast, in matters of knowledge in the physical sciences taught at university, the pendulum swings in your favor: you have a degree, whereas R. Bunim was not exposed to that material at all — but among us, as stated, that is not necessarily a disadvantage; some would say it is bittul Torah. This is not the place to check and elaborate. It would certainly be funny to rely on you because of your knowledge of physics. And if we move to wisdom of everyday life, I have seen him and you; in that you are more or less equal. And in terms of the analytical and philosophical abilities of both of you, I have no ability to decide until I see a meeting between you, and even then I, the lesser one, am limited. I’ll only say that for my own part (limited as I am), I can say that R. Bunim has a younger brother named R. Shimon Schreiber, and my amazement at his philosophical abilities exceeds that which I have felt for anyone I have ever known — perhaps even more than for R. Bunim. But as stated, I am limited in my ability to decide regarding someone greater than I am. (By the way, they have a third brother called R. Yosel Schreiber, about whom I heard from a friend that R. Bunim himself said he is greater than he is; I know nothing when it comes to giants.) So what is left for me now? To examine and decide only on the basis of external matters (besides intuition): where did you come from, and what are the validations of your successes? Clearly I give extra weight to someone who was conceived and born in holiness and grew up in Torah and all his days has been immersed in Torah, over someone like you who is a ba’al teshuvah. Understand: if I follow you, when I look at myself in the mirror I will have to swallow so many strange frogs (out of respect for you, Michi, I won’t write them; I’m sure you are smart enough to understand what I mean) in order to think there is any need to fear your positions. So if someone like me, who knows both of you and your positions for many years and seeks only the truth, finds it clear that I have no need to worry about you and your teaching, what shall we say of the younger flock who do not know you and the great figures of the Haredi public? In my opinion there is no chance for this entire enterprise, except perhaps among those who are secular or Reform or light religious, or Haredi dropouts. From your perspective, perhaps that is a success — at least to save the above; that too is something. Time will tell. But I assume, Michi, that there are others like me who seek and pursue truth, but they are a tiny minority of a minority, since they are not exposed to media as I am and are immersed only in the world of Torah, so with them the chances indeed approach zero.
Best of luck.
From the outside it looks as though the rabbis are crudely concealing the real reason and clothing it in a repulsive hashkafah that even a five-year-old would not accept. I really want to see a real debate between Rabbi Michi and an important Haredi rabbi, because they have grown accustomed not to debate and not to verify their words on the halakhic plane. Their rulings are political and blatantly contradict the views of great Torah authorities who said exactly the opposite of their outlook, such as the Hatam Sofer or the Avnei Nezer. The general exemption began in 1977 with Menachem Begin, who bribed them, and in the end the verse is fulfilled: “it blinds the eyes of the wise and distorts the words of the righteous.” The saddest thing is that already from 2012 they have considered themselves an ethnic minority like the Druze and the Bedouin, and have removed themselves from the category of Israeli Jews in order to receive budgets for Haredi education that does not teach core curriculum.
Although the subject here is not enlistment as such, it is present here both in the post and in the comments. I would like to bring to the rabbi’s attention an important piece of information on the matter from a person whom I trust, as do many others — a great Torah scholar who is also precise in facts and in conveying facts, even in places where others exaggerate a bit, not to mention rounding corners, which does not exist with him — namely Rabbi Yaakov Hadas, who knows all the Torah, both revealed and hidden (although he experienced a personal family tragedy, this is not relevant to the matter), who wrote a booklet Divrei Yaakov as an addition בתוך a book that was published not long ago called “For Me, Radin.” I am sure that even if this does not cause the rabbi to change his view on the matter, it is worthwhile for the rabbi to know this important fact, which may add perhaps a grain of understanding to the rabbi’s general perspective, like the well-known expression “use your head” (knowing real facts never hurts; I hope the rabbi will respect the fact that it took me a lot of time to type every single letter and not immediately belittle or delete it, even if I erred in judgment; my intention is good overall).
There, on page 775 and onward, I am copying the words exactly as they are, without any intervention, as follows:
Branch C
A. And the matter of people trying to persuade avrechim to go out to work joins what has existed in the last generation, where people from the heads of the government and its institutions have set themselves the goal of changing Haredi Judaism, and this combination causes an addition of bad things done by virtue of this.
B. And some years ago, I believe it was in the year 5775, a man from the very highest ranks of the defense establishment came to me to ask for a blessing regarding a personal matter, and I blessed him. Afterwards I asked whether he could do me a personal favor. What was it? Since, like all the public, I try, without a vow, to increase prayer for the welfare of the people of Israel and their rescue from every trouble and distress, yet Tosafot on Bava Metzia 106a explain that sometimes prayer in specifics is more effective than prayer in general. If so, it would help me to know what currently is the most severe security problem the Land of Israel has, because one says to me that the worst is the danger of Hamas, another says Fatah, another says Syria, another says suicide bombers, and another says ISIS, and I understand none of this and cannot rely on any of them. If he tells me, I can rely on his words.
C. And his reply was approximately as follows: all the problems you mentioned are from problem number two onward. Problem number one is something entirely different. I asked him, what is it? And he replied: an excess of soldiers in the army. End quote.
D. And I was very astonished to hear this, and I asked him what the great danger in that is. He replied that the days have ended when the natural effort for victory in war depended on the number of soldiers and the length of the rifles. Today things depend more on various developments, and the large number of soldiers causes the greater part of the defense budget to go toward funding the army, and afterward there are also expensive pensions, and there is no money for the things that really bring victory.
E. And he gave the example that in Operation Protective Edge, in which, sadly, many dozens of soldiers were killed, the reality was that the sequence of events was the kidnapping of boys in Gush Etzion and the disappearance of the kidnapped and the kidnappers for many days. To solve the mystery, many arrests of senior Arabs were carried out, and in response many rockets were fired many times from Gaza to many places, and therefore it became necessary to go out to war to stop the rockets. If the money had gone to developments, they could long ago have made a defense system that would prevent rocket penetration, so that the rocket fire would not have been any reason at all to go to war.
Branch D.
A. And I asked him, if that is really so, why don’t they change it, reduce the army, and solve the whole problem? He replied that there are several reasons for this, and the main one is that to reduce the army one must abolish mandatory conscription.
B. And if they abolish mandatory conscription, then there will be no way to change the ways of life of the Haredi public.
C. I was stunned to hear these words, and I asked him: is it so important in their eyes to change the ways of life of the Haredim that for this they agreed to abandon the lives of many?
D. And he replied that from their perspective Haredi culture is a more severe thing than a security problem. End quote.
E. When I told these things to several people, they told me that it is well known in the name of one of the heads of the Mossad or the Shin Bet from several years ago, who revealed that in their secret meetings they treat the matter of Haredi culture as a more serious problem than the Iranian nuclear issue. End quote. But I did not hear this from an authorized source, only from people in the public who said it is well known and also said the name of the speaker and his position.
Branch E.
A. After some time I told these things to a senior figure in the defense establishment, and he told me that everything is true, and that even in a simpler calculation one can understand how, without lack of money, they would not have gone to war.
B. And he explained that the very fact that in such a sensitive area where the kidnapping occurred there were no cameras is something inexplicable, and the real answer is the large number of soldiers in the army, which consumes the budget in a terrible way that causes such failures from lack of money.
C. And he said that if there had been cameras there, then even after the kidnapping, within a few hours they would have found the kidnapped and the kidnappers, and in general it is possible they would not have carried out the kidnapping at all.
D. And I asked him, if so, why does he not publicize these things, so that the general public would know and strongly oppose such an injustice, that many people were killed for such agendas.
E. And he replied that anyone who dares publicize things in this direction immediately loses his role in the army and everything the army gives him, and people are simply afraid.
Branch V.
A. The above two senior figures who told me these things are very famous people in the country’s general public by virtue of their positions.
B. But it happened in some way that I told these things to a man who is also a senior figure in the security forces, but he is behind the scenes and not known to the public,
C. and he told me that besides the fact that all these things are true, there is also another matter here: if there had been a broader budget, it would also have been possible to prevent the entire kidnapping from the outset.
D. And he explained to me how it could have been done, but forbade me to publish the details.
E. Although in my opinion many who understand security matters can understand this by reasoning, nevertheless, since he asked, I did not write the details.
F. And what concerns us from all this is how terrible is their aspiration to change the Haredi public, and that they are willing to do everything for it, and therefore how careful one must be not to cooperate with them.
Branch VII.
A. Now, at the time these words are being printed in this book, in the winter of 5784, the reality has changed for several reasons, and perhaps the army does indeed lack manpower {but it is clear that the whole current situation was not mainly because of a lack of manpower but because of an error in the entire understanding of the matter}.
B. But this does not change what was stated above, that they have a fully formed objective to change the Haredi public, and for that reason alone they carried out enormous actions for many years to enlist Haredim. Therefore it is clear that even if now they have an additional reason, nevertheless when Haredim are handed over to the army there is no doubt they will do sophisticated things in order to change their way of life. And this was told to me by those in the know who are involved in these matters {for example, what is written above in the supplement after siman 5, branch A, part I, from סעיף 12 onward regarding the Haredi battalion — see there very grave things}. And the great main point is that even if the army lacks manpower, God forbid one should even entertain the thought of reducing Torah learners, because the best protection is Torah learners, and on the contrary, the current situation is a reason to increase Torah learners more and more. End of his words.
Mommy’s genius — did you ask ChatGPT to create apologetics for the words of the quoted fools? Well well, rabbis of the past warned against criticizing themselves — what intellectual honesty!
When one analyzes the Haredi response to the acute problems of the last 200 years, such as assimilation, the Haskalah movement, the drift toward socialism, etc., there is no escaping the conclusion: the “gedoylim” of those times as well were nothing more than grumpy old men who know how to chant verses, invent halakhic prohibitions at every turn, ask the public to recite Psalms with extra fervor and… that’s it. No special creative strategy whatsoever, unlike German neo-Orthodoxy.
A. From personal and unofficial research that I conducted, the percentages of fallen soldiers among Haredim are not significantly lower than those among secular people; the gap is made up, in this order, by the religious-Zionists and the traditionalists. Most secular people serve in combat-support roles or in the air force, Unit 8200, and the like, and hence the low number of casualties recorded among them.
I conclude from this that one may criticize the Haredim for not bearing the burden of the fallen, but only on condition that one directs the criticism at both the Haredim and the secular alike. Whoever acts otherwise is a hypocrite.
Do you really claim that pilots risk their lives when no Israeli aircraft has been shot down in the last 50 years??
The demand for equality in bearing the burden that does not touch on the question of casualties is a complex issue, but the Haredim ideologically believe that their role in the study hall is an important and critical combat-support role, and they truly believe they are bearing the burden.
As for all those semi-Haredi people lacking a framework, the only reason the Haredim oppose drafting them is the direct fear that it will damage their level of religiosity, and the fear that it will degrade the spiritual level of the Haredi public. One cannot fail to understand that fear..
B. In general, one cannot but agree with you that it is very embarrassing that people who display powers of depth and intelligence in Talmud stand behind such embarrassing arguments when it touches on worldview questions that threaten them, but it seems to me the answer is simple.
Although I keep in my heart an appreciation for you, in that unlike other rabbis you truly try to explain in proper logical form the reason for your belief in God, still, if you turn to the overwhelming majority of rabbis from all across Judaism — Haredi, religious, and perhaps even Conservative — and try to confront them with questions of faith, you will come up empty-handed and hear embarrassing and unintelligent answers. But this is not limited to religion.
When you come to the average academic and try to confront him with the question of releasing so many terrorists in exchange for a small number of hostages, at first you will hear stammering arguments that will later turn into meaningless fundamentalist slogans and a clear unwillingness to engage in proper logical discourse on the matter. The same applies when you try to explain to him why such broad powers for the High Court do not sit well with the original idea of democracy.
The point is simple: most people are not rational, or are only semi-rational. They may be very smart and intelligent, but when you press on their point of identity and try to overturn its logical or moral basis, you will discover before you a confused person who within seconds will become violent and fundamentalist.
I do not see the Haredim as exceptional in this respect, and I do not think they deserve the title of evil and stupid.
In my opinion this is classic irrationality when they face a threat to their identity, something that unfortunately happens to everyone.
I’m sorry you took the trouble to type all this. These are words of nonsense, and in the usual way of Haredi apologetics they rely on very solid and reliable information from an anonymous expert of world renown in the field, and the one who interviewed him is an exceptional prodigy who never lets anything unverified pass under his hand. And all this, of course, is completely the opposite of what we all know — but who are we, what is our life…
In fact, it would have been proper to delete this foolish propaganda, but I took pity on your request in light of the (unnecessary) labor you invested in typing it.
I disagree with that scoop.
There are many who identify with ideas and criticisms, but among them there are quite a few who continue to hold by those same “great Torah scholars.” It is not only fear of the neighbor-lady.
What is the Judaism of Rabbi Yosef Karo? Did he introduce a new kind of Judaism?
Hello and blessings, Rabbi Michael,
I am surprised there was no reference to the theological issue in the third video.
There a thesis was basically laid down that the Holy One, blessed be He, places ideas in the mouths of people in Israel without their doing anything, because all wisdom is a product of Torah study. And what is interesting is that there is here a total negation of human thought, human creativity, and in general of choice, toil, of one who acts together with God. In essence, everything that happens in the world, all the good that happens in the material world, is a product of Gemara study, of engagement in Torah study. And in fact all human actions, the person who performs them, is altogether being operated totally by the Holy One, blessed be He, so that he has no action that comes from his own power, but only from the power of the Holy One, blessed be He, who implants ideas in him. The entire idea of human action is null and void. This is a serious innovation…
Isn’t that so?
I have long dwelt on the same puzzlement as our Rabbi Michi regarding ridiculous hashkafic arguments coming from learned men and great Torah scholars, and although at first I tended to place the blame on the Haredi outlook, over time I came to see that the phenomenon exists among intellectuals of all kinds and methods, which forced me to seek the explanation in human nature rather than specifically in one particular camp.
Recently I reached a conclusion similar to yours, about the reaction to a threat to one’s identity (which also explains the sharpness and extremism in R. Michi’s columns whenever it comes to Haredim). I would add another point: even if the speaker agrees in his heart that there is some room for the opposing argument and that the matter is more complex than the way he presents it, he will never admit this publicly because he does not want to display any hesitation about the justice of the path, which could influence the inclination of those listening to him.
I agree that there is a great deal of absurdity in what was said in the videos, and Rabbi Haim Feivel Berman’s words in particular are very infuriating.
Even so, it would be better to approach the subject in a cool intellectual manner, without the nerves and anger that characterize this column (as they do the rest of the columns dealing with Haredim). It seems to me that if one really tries to understand what the other side wants to say, one can understand a bit more of the rationale behind the words, without any contradiction to the foolish parts that were said.
I listened to Rabbi Hirsch’s words, and as I understand it, he evaded a substantive answer to the question itself, probably for reasons of political correctness (“a thing not meant to be heard,” undermining the foundations of the Lithuanian Torah world, etc.). As I understand it, the distinction he mentioned between the Land of Israel and outside the Land was intended to provide a historical explanation for an existing phenomenon, and not as a reason to obligate the current conduct forever and ever (which he did not address). The main focus of his words was the issue of distance from materiality, which was intended to encourage the learners to cope with the difficulty of making a living.
Regarding the statements on enlistment, if we filter out all the nonsense and irritating rhetoric, we can find the main rational logic in their claim, which is blunting the sting of the argument “why aren’t your sons coming back in coffins?” In that they are right that the argument is a bit demagogic, because we all know there are publics very few of whose sons come back in coffins, and yet no one comes to them with such complaints, which means that the difference in the number of fallen is not the problem, but rather the very fact of evading enlistment in general. That is of course a correct and justified claim, but it lacks the emotional weak point of bereaved parents mourning their sons. (By the way, girls too almost never come back in coffins, and we have not heard the devotees of gender equality bewailing the severe discrimination…)
Likewise, there is much truth in Rabbi Haim Feivel Berman’s claim about haters of Torah whose entire aim is to uproot Torah and Judaism from the people of Israel. You don’t need to believe him; it is enough to read a bit of Haaretz, Yediot Aharonot, and several other sites representing that part of the nation in order to understand who they are and what they think. His arguments about the “mizrachniks” are of course greatly exaggerated, but it is hard not to wonder about someone who hates the Haredim more because of their blind attachment to mystical beliefs at the expense of others, than he hates the secular elite that does everything to be like all the nations — also at the expense of others. Is there not at least a little of the am ha’aretz’s hatred of Torah scholars in this?
In short, my intent is not to ignore the collection of nonsense and foolishness said in these videos, but to say that if one moves emotion aside and tries to understand what the other side’s message is, one can understand that there is a certain logic in it, even if in the final analysis they are gravely mistaken.
You can say many things about it, but not hedonism. That term simply has nothing to do with it.
It would be more fitting to call it exploitativeness, or a fanatical ideology that sees no one else in its path. But it has nothing to do with hedonism; the Haredim are as far from that as can be.
A small note:
If you truly wonder whether “the Hafetz Haim, Rabbi Akiva Eiger, the Rambam, Rav Ashi, Rabbi, Rabbi Akiva, Moses our teacher, Abraham our father, and all the figures on whom we were educated” were all like the rabbis mentioned in the videos, then you should worry that perhaps they are right and you are the one who is mistaken, instead of concluding from this that they are all infantile fools and only you are wise — no?
…And this in contrast to academia, where everyone expresses his opinion in complete freedom, except that the hand of random evolution led almost all of them to express the same positions?
He definitely addressed this outlook in several columns, regarding the strange “duty of effort” in that worldview.
Regarding your remark about attributing successes to the Holy One, blessed be He, and failures to us, I do indeed assume that this stems from thoughtless rhetoric unfortunately common among spokesmen of hashkafah. But on the substance of the matter, it seems to me that there is a theological explanation for this, based on the idea mentioned already in the Book of Lamentations and expanded by various thinkers over the generations, according to which evil in the world stems from the absence of divine abundance, and not from a positive influence of evil. From this follows the thinking that if we succeeded, then we connected to the divine abundance, and if we failed, apparently we did not manage to connect to it.
Of course, according to your view that there is no providence at all in our time, all this is irrelevant, but according to the traditional view, which is old, this is, as I understand it, the theological rationale behind these words.
This is the inconceivable gap between the level of the arguments in the Steipler’s book Hayei Olam and those in Kehillot Yaakov.
It is not true that there are no halakhic answers as to why Torah learners do not need to enlist; there is, for example, that of Rabbi Benizri, with very many sources and halakhic arguments.
But you are right that the main reason Haredim do not enlist is because the military structure gives a Haredi very little chance of remaining Haredi (and in fact of remaining God-fearing as he entered), and this is not the place to elaborate.
I am astonished at you, Rabbi Michi, that you do not see that those divrei aggadah coming forth from the mouths of our masters and rabbis, the gedolei hador, are really logically compelled!!!
If the gadol hador were to doubt for even a moment the sweeping obligation to take over, it would turn out retroactively that he was not the gadol hador. And since there are no reasonable arguments to purify this creeping thing, dry logic decrees that the gedolei hador will say precisely these things, as if possessed by a demon.
Moreover, this type of argument and the way they are presented have a great practical advantage. If the rabbis presented sophisticated ideas with deep explanations of the obligation not to enlist, their public, which is accustomed to learning, could examine the words as one examines any other scholarly move, and perhaps, Heaven forbid, arrive at different conclusions.
The title “Gathering of yeshivah students in the presence of the gedolei hador” logically compels every word said in it; and in truth perhaps one could have dispensed with everything and left only the title, and all the rest is commentary.
I take back the word hedonism.
But this is utterly infantile self-indulgence.
They are no longer hiding it.
It is no longer Torah study.
No longer protection from the outside world.
You can all die, go to hell, fall apart.
We’ll fly to Uman, travel to Meron.
And Goldknopf outdid himself:
You simply can’t do without New York.
I did not follow the details of the discussion, but on the face of it there is no reason to take back the term. People travel there for pleasure and the experience, and that is hedonism. The fact that the pleasures in question are an experience rather than eating cake does not change the matter. It is not really different from chasing pleasures from a movie or a singer’s performance.
You grew up with them. You were even their representative. I myself remember the strange explanations about how the Haredi public is not an economic burden.
So how are you only “discovering” this now?
Okay, that’s just a sort of rebuke — what do I want from you. But the question is how this does not unsettle your self-perception. You were part of the Haredi public for many years, listened to this nonsense, and voiced it to your students from religious Zionism. You dealt with their good questions thanks to a very strong ability to win arguments. Doesn’t that unsettle your self-perception? That perhaps, in fact, your ability to understand reality is really not as high as you think?
1. Correct — this is a natural tendency among all human beings, and is known as “historical romanticism.” Of course, a society all of whose values and entire being are built on the past will tend to this all the more strongly.
2. It is true that the principle of “decline of the generations” serves as a means of ensuring the continuity of preserving tradition, but your remark about “studying a sugya in the Gemara dealing with a woman’s testimony at the expense of other productive things” assumes that Torah study is a “non-productive activity,” and that already has nothing to do with the greatness of the people of the second century, but with a materialistic worldview that sees little value in non-productive activities (or at least with a worldview that does not see importance in the very engagement with the Torah of Israel).
A very good question indeed, but do you not ask the same question regarding yourself and your view of the Haredi public? Perhaps your ability to understand their arguments and reality is not as high as you think?
I started reading and was horrified by the terrifying style of His Honor. I tried to continue for the sake of the search for truth, but I broke off halfway through because of the harsh labels. Such a shame, such a shame, such a shame. (And it doesn’t matter now if people say to me that they do it too, etc.; I’m responding to what I read, and if I were to read a Haredi rabbi speaking this way I would respond the same way. Enough already with such low formulations. Do we not have enough enemies at home and abroad?)
I always thought that the advantage of academics and people not committed to religious dogmas was that they discuss issues in a measured and moderate way, without the childish belligerence of “be killed rather than transgress” and “decree of religious persecution” that is prevalent in Haredi districts. But apparently at some stage emotion gets involved for everyone.
You wrote nicely, and these really are depressing and sad videos.
Only regarding Rabbi Hirsch’s assumption about the difference between the Land and outside the Land, I assume he means the famous Ramban on Leviticus 18:25 regarding the special status of Israel as the inheritance of God and “set up road markers for yourself.”
He doesn’t. First, it is a commentary on the Torah that has no basis whatever, and it is unlikely anyone would seriously build a worldview on it. Second, this Ramban has nothing to do with a prohibition on working in the Land of Israel. As for the claim itself that there is a difference between the Land and outside the Land, you do not need this Ramban. It is obvious and undisputed. But that is not relevant to the discussion.
The problem is far deeper, and its name is ‘Talmudic Judaism’ — that is, that post-biblical Judaism, with midrashim, tendentious interpretations, segulot, and maxims that almost completely displaced biblical Judaism.
When one relates with awe not only to the legal stratum of the Gemara, but to the subjective opinions of the tannaim and amoraim (who were altogether just the ancient version of today’s Haredi rabbis), this is the result: a twisted religion of ‘faith in the sages,’ leaning on stories and presenting a distorted view of reality. King David turns from a military commander chasing skirts into a Torah scholar, Joshua son of Nun is dressed up as a gadol hador learning 24/7, and every piece of nonsense of the ‘holy hashkafah’ originates in a chain of errors thousands of years old.
A good point. This is one of Michi’s deep problems: he enters a topic, and if he thinks he is right he will insult, ridicule, and trample the other side. By tomorrow morning he may already think differently, and then yesterday’s Michi is the fool, etc. etc., and everything with total certainty all the way to the end.
My advice to you and to the readers of the site: don’t get excited by the collection of expressions and curses. Examine the matter for yourselves, and never let someone else’s certainty lead you. I know it is easy to get swept up after Michi, all the more so because he almost always presents the other side as foolish, but do not forget that tomorrow he may already think differently, and once again he will present Buddha or something else as the truth, and once again everything with certainty and hot air.
You are actually proving my point. On a subject as acute as army enlistment, there is only halakhic treatment by third-tier rabbis (with all due respect to Rabbi Benizri’s Torah), while the gedolei hador and giants of halakhah in general do not even see a need to address the issue. Show me one Haredi whose halakhic source is Rabbi Benizri’s rulings. Didn’t find one? QED.
I’m sure the rabbi could write an entire column on this subject.
Indeed. That was an example that made the penny drop for me for the first time. Truly a strikingly paradigmatic example.
Ducho HaLevi and his friends foam at the mouth over Rabbi Yosef Karo because in Kesef Mishneh he provided a halakhic basis for the permission to make a living from Torah, contrary to the words of the Rambam. The Holy One, blessed be He, has many crazies in His world, and this group of crazy people is among the lighter cases.
Indeed, a nice distinction, but one plainly foreign to the matter. Anyone even slightly familiar with the Haredi doctrine knows that the commandment in whose name they evade service (in Rabbi Hirsch’s version and that of Degel HaTorah) is the commandment of Torah study. That commandment is a halakhic answer, if you missed the point. (And I would add that perhaps one need not discuss it at all in classical halakhic terms, since the leaders relate to the world of yeshivot and kollels as “it is time to act for the Lord; they have violated Your Torah,” and therefore Torah study overrides even a commandment that cannot be performed by others.)
God would not have spoken to King David if he had been “chasing skirts” (to put it mildly).
Fortunately, most people do not see any need to take your words seriously.
God really did not speak directly to David.
He spoke to him through a prophet! That shows David was important enough to Him.
Just as He spoke to Pharaoh and to Jeroboam son of Nebat and Ahab through a prophet.
Now that we’ve sunk to this level, what does Rabbi Berman think about the terrorists in his yeshivah?
David had the Holy Spirit even if not prophecy. “The spirit of the Lord spoke through me, and His word was on my tongue.”
A relative of mine, may he live long, likes to say that everyone learns about the present great rabbi from the late saintly rabbis, while he learns about the late saintly rabbis from the present great rabbi.
That relative studied Polish Jewry in the second half of the nineteenth century, and he claims that today they are repeating all their mistakes one by one.
Correction of a typing slip
Polish Jewry
Regarding Rabbi Rosen’s words, as I understand it he answered the very question he was asked — why they are endangered and even die, while we are not. And according to the question, the answer is correct — in the army too the absolute majority are neither endangered nor killed, because there are many rear-echelon combat-support personnel (more or less important — he certainly did not belittle all of them), and if so, according to the belief that Torah study helps the soldiers on the battlefield (which many readers of this site also hold), Torah learners are no worse than any combat-support person who does not take risks. I do not see a flaw in this answer to the question as asked. Precision matters.
I do agree that the question itself is not right to begin with, because one should not look only at those who die, and there are several other considerations beyond dying, such as the burden on reservists and their families, and the need for more soldiers, whether combat or otherwise.
How many times can I answer the same thing.
Sad.
There is another well-known Haredi great figure whose style of argument is like this:
everything is conspiratorial.
In his world, secular people are a metaphysical entity of absolute evil.
They cannot have substantive considerations,
good arguments, or anything of the sort.
And I am of course speaking about the Brisker Rav.
Very nice. Simple points, but there are those who need their eyes/ears opened.
I just want to ask a question or make a request. The Haredim are indeed ‘stupid,’ as stated, but simply speaking they are ‘good’ — that is, they think they are doing God’s will and are not lying to themselves. The secular elite are ostensibly ‘wise,’ but they, in my understanding, are ‘evil’ — that is, they are ‘one thing with the mouth and another in the heart’; they say A and do B. Let us take for example the issue of bearing the burden, the issue of bereavement. It seems that in percentages almost half of the fallen are religious-Zionist, and from the field it seems that most of the rest are traditionalists, meaning right-wingers, and indeed it is so understandable how many from the elite actually send their sons to combat units..
Very many people in the secular leftist public go to the army mainly for ‘personal development,’ ‘self-fulfillment,’ and even an experience. In contrast to the religious-Zionists, who go in order ‘to contribute,’ and likewise Haredim — many of them — because it is God’s will (indeed many also study for the next world, etc., but many because it is God’s will). And if it were clarified to them that God’s will is to enlist, I am quite sure they would all go to the most elite commando units.
What do you think about this? I think in general it is worthy of a column on the distinction between ‘a moral person’ (which in my poor opinion is judged more by motives and desires) and ‘a person who does a moral act’ (which in my poor opinion is judged by the actions). I hope I was clear..
I have written more than once about the distinction between the act and the actor (who should be judged according to his own method).
I don’t think the discussion here is about motives. The question is what one does in practice. Motives are entrusted to each person privately and are no one else’s business. The yeshivah students and their rabbis also do things and study for self-fulfillment. I have not done statistics, so I do not know how to deal with the numbers you refer to (though I suspect them very much).
The Haredim are doing wrong and distorted things, and it is true that many of them believe in them. But that itself is the claim that they are like captive children captured by themselves. Those who caused them to err are they themselves, and that is what the criticism is about.
Another amusing video about why Haredim do not need to work.
And as a wonderful bonus, one can also learn from the video (minute 2:10) about an a fortiori argument (perhaps this also fits as a response to column 735…).
Most of what you write here I agree with (despite a few small foolish things that you added on your own), and it didn’t trouble me because I’m already used to the heaps of nonsense from my own public.
Only the following passage troubled me: “Who knows whether the Hafetz Haim, Rabbi Akiva Eiger, the Rambam, Rav Ashi, Rabbi, Rabbi Akiva, Moses our teacher, Abraham our father, and all the figures on whom we were educated were really exemplary figures as we were told? Perhaps there too we are dealing with the leaders of the Degel HaTorah movement of their time, and there is no connection between the superlatives said about them and the vacuum that dwells within them and emerges from their mouths? These rabbis too are presented to us here as ministering angels, every one of whose words is the living word of God. Watching parts of this horror show is a sure recipe for loss of faith.”
Who really said so? I really have begun to lose faith in all the great figures of the generations, and where do you stop?
Why didn’t the rabbi answer?
What is there to answer a fool according to his folly?
“Clearly I give extra weight to someone who was conceived and born in holiness and grew up in Torah and all his days has been immersed in Torah, over someone like you who is a ba’al teshuvah.”
What nonsense. A. You are explicitly violating the Rambam’s words that it is forbidden to remind a ba’al teshuvah of his former deeds (= for example by reminding him that he is a ba’al teshuvah); B. “In the place where penitents stand, the perfectly righteous cannot stand.” A ba’al teshuvah is very beloved before God, in the words of the Rambam.
I assume the problem with the gedolei hador is that they study Torah as a profession, but hashkafah they do “on the way.” Therefore Torah study is perceived as something that requires analysis, but hashkafah is built on the foundations of “know what to answer” — that is, as a collection of tidbits and stories whose main purpose is to strengthen the listener’s heart. Rabbi Hirsch never asked himself, “Why don’t Haredim enlist?” The question he is dealing with is, “How can I come out looking good in an argument with someone who asks why Haredim don’t enlist?” And the result is accordingly. You won’t find a halakhic answer to the question of why they don’t enlist, because hashkafah has been detached from halakhah, and that is the root of the Haredi disaster. If the question of enlistment were a halakhic question, then the rules of a halakhic responsum would apply to the answer. But since hashkafah is above halakhah, then tidbits suffice — and on the contrary, woe to anyone who tries to use halakhah to produce hashkafah. That is how it turns out that the Haredi is busy running away from the trial that is military service, and fails the trial of “Shall your brothers go to war while you sit here?” No one asks himself whether the trial is whether they will prefer their own next world over the present world of other Jews, because the hashkafah is built on the foundations of those tidbits.