Q&A: Haredism
Haredism
Question
Hello Honorable Rabbi,
I saw a letter published here on the site 6 years ago, which someone responded to and brought up from the depths of the past. In the letter, you complain about the intellectual closed-mindedness customary in the Haredi public, and on the other hand I saw responses advocating that same kind of closed-mindedness and intellectual hegemony. I responded in that thread, and copied it here in order to bring the issue to the surface.
I would like to know the Rabbi’s opinion on this issue of limiting the earning possibilities of the Haredi public for the reasons mentioned here.
As always, the path that seems best is the middle path.
Rabbi Michi is certainly right about the current situation among the Haredi public. As a Haredi person, I can say that every point the Rabbi raised about the Haredi public is correct and precise. The leadership in this public does indeed encourage ignorance and contempt for anything that is not purely Torah. This, of course, leads to enormous ignorance, to the point that young men in the yeshiva where I studied (Hebron) in their twenties do not know that the earth revolves around the sun, do not know how to multiply a two-digit number by another without needing a calculator, and of course some of them do not know the letters A-B-C.
In the end, the interest is twofold: both avoidance of independent thinking that can ask questions and raise doubts, and also… preserving the straitened economic condition of the public!!!
Yes indeed, a low socio-economic condition requires dependence on and receiving support from the other parts of the public, and thus anchors the dependent person even more deeply in that rut that rejects criticism and any expression of healthy skepticism.
This situation allows those few who are economically or socially established to do whatever they please, and any criticism of them will be considered an attack on the honor of Torah of some rabbi who supports them politically, and will be accused of desecrating God’s name. Meanwhile they—by which I mean certain heads of kollels, yeshivot, and community leaders—often cause emotional and financial harm without any justification, all in the name of “the Torah view.”
But on the other hand, completely exposing children to all sorts of views and ideas does indeed often lead to leaving religion. (As an aside: Rabbi Michi’s approach, which is based on logical and consistent thinking, is in no way heresy. And anyone who claims that is simply unwilling from the outset to accept the possibility that he may be right. It is impossible that the Holy One, blessed be He, would demand of us not to investigate and ask questions, for in that case Judaism would have no advantage over any other worldview or religion.) What should nevertheless be done—and this also seems to be what Rabbi Michi meant—is to give full public legitimacy to those who have questions, and to be willing to discuss things with them rather than dismissing them out of hand with opaque arguments about the evil inclination and heresy.
And on the other hand, there is no need to introduce ideological ideas and methods into the educational sphere. (This does not refer to general studies, which absolutely should be introduced, and urgently.)
On a personal note, I must mention Rabbi Michi’s blessed work in establishing this site and his willingness to discuss anything.
The site has helped me personally a great deal. And since I am Haredi, I have no possibility of discussing topics of faith, Torah and science, and more, with my friends and acquaintances—both because it is rare to find a Haredi person with sufficient education, and because of a real fear of total social rejection. (Children not being accepted to institutions, being thrown out of the kollel, being labeled a heretic, and so on and so on.)
Answer
I didn’t really understand the question. I wrote my opinion.
Discussion on Answer
In my opinion it’s a bit complicated.
Clearly there is a desire in the background for control and to keep people boxed in, but that also comes from reasons tied to the Haredi outlook and not only from arbitrary considerations of power and self-interest. Haredi ideology understands that people have an urge to open up, and that it is important to keep people closed off and not allow it. If you don’t limit them, they will open up, God forbid (which of course is factually true). In short, it’s not only power and self-interest but also a genuine ideology.
Beyond that, there is clearly an inertia by which what was initially post factum turns into ideal policy from the outset. That happens a lot (see, for example, the shtreimel). Therefore even when something began in a period of hardship, there is a tendency to perpetuate it even when the situation changes. And as is well known, “the new is forbidden by the Torah.”
I’d be glad if someone would demonstrate and explain what is meant by “the new is forbidden by the Torah.”
Rabbi, is this a proper way to make someone Haredi—by not giving them the tools that ordinary Jews are given? In your opinion, is there any connection to the statement: “Wisdom among the nations—believe it; Torah among the nations—do not believe it”?
Originally this is a prohibition on new grain. By way of paraphrase, the Hatam Sofer used it to reject changes and updates in Jewish law. People use it to reject a change that in principle is possible, just out of fear of reforms and so on. I gave an example of that here.
In my opinion, no. But I’m not Haredi. The question of “wisdom among the nations” is not relevant here, because the discussion is not about whether science or any other field of knowledge is correct or not.
By the way, Haim, the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around.
What is your definition of Haredi? And how do you define yourself?
Are you talking about your example of the shtreimel?
Does the Rabbi think it makes sense that Jewish law would have the power to uproot the Torah, while in another situation, for example, the Hatam Sofer could think to reject changes and updates in Jewish law?
Does the Rabbi think there is room for Jewish law to determine what clothing to wear and what color and so on? Assuming it’s not shaatnez?
Aharon, in my opinion there is no truth or falsehood here. It depends where you place the origin of the axes (I wrote about this in some post).
Moshe, it’s hard for me to answer that briefly. Haredi has two meanings: the opposite of Zionist, and the opposite of modern. I am both.
I don’t think anyone thinks that the shtreimel is a halakhic determination.
I didn’t understand the question whether Jewish law has the power to uproot the Torah.
So then, what is its opposition to Zionism, and how is its opposition to modernity expressed?
You wrote that you already gave an example of “the new is forbidden by the Torah”—I didn’t find it.
If we have found halakhic power to uproot Torah, why would the Hatam Sofer have a problem rejecting changes and updates in Jewish law?
Is the prohibition of new grain time-dependent?
It opposes new values and involvement in new fields and areas external to Torah.
The example I gave was about going out to work.
As I wrote, the principle that “the new is forbidden by the Torah” is applied where halakhically one can make a change. Otherwise you wouldn’t need the Hatam Sofer for that. “The new is forbidden by the Torah” is not coming to say that one should not permit selecting on the Sabbath or eating pork.
At the time of the Temple, the new grain was forbidden until the omer was brought (the day of waving).
Does the Rabbi mean that he is Zionist in the same sense as the Zionist movement, which was also founded by many secular people whose intention was to create a new kind of Jew—a secular national Jew—or does the Rabbi mean that he is Zionist in the sense that he encourages people to live in the Land of Israel? If so, many Haredim also encourage that.
If it is like the first case, does the Rabbi recite Hallel and celebrate Independence Day?
Thanks in advance.
Mainly the second. Though I also support refreshing Judaism, as is well known.
There is a difference between living in the Land of Israel (that too Neturei Karta do) and establishing a state.
There are many Haredim and also Religious Zionists who think as I do, except that this has no political-social expression. The third way. I’ve written about this more than once.
I definitely think Hallel should be recited. As for celebration, it is a national holiday, not a religious one. Each person according to his feelings.
The question is whether the Rabbi also thinks that the reason the Haredi public does not study a profession and blocks the option of an honorable livelihood is not because of the important value of preserving Torah, or any other consideration that may have been valid (perhaps) at the time the yeshiva world in its current format was founded, but rather only because of considerations of political control?
Or am I completely mistaken?