A Perversion of Judaism…Yet Again

A Perversion of Judaism…Yet Again By Sherwin Pomerantz Early Monday morning, en route to Tel Aviv I noticed that the street leading up from Shmuel Hanavi Street to Mea Shearim, the ultra-orthodox enclave in Jerusalem, was closed off. I asked our intern whom I picked up at that corner if he knew why? Perhaps a famous rabbi had died and they expected a huge turnout for the funeral, or similar? He had no idea, nor did I. As it turned out, it was not that at all. Rather, beginning at 4:45 AM Monday morning, some 5,000 members of Jerusalem’s ultra-orthodox community gathered in the neighborhood’s centrally located Shabbat Square for a protest meeting to object to any change in the laws here that would force religious students to serve in the Israeli Defense Forces. For those not in the know, the existing Tal Law, which provided exemptions from military service to the thousands of otherwise eligible young people studying in religious school (i.e. Yeshivah), has been determined to be unconstitutional by Israel’s Supreme Court. Work is now underway by the Plesner Committee appointed for this purpose, to draft a different law relating to this population. The new law will, presumably, result in a large percentage of this population having their exemptions cancelled and then be drafted, just like every other Israeli citizen. While the overwhelming majority of Israel’s populace is in favor of eliminating these carte blanche exemptions except for those relatively few students who really do have the potential to become significant rabbinic leaders, the religious community sees this as a direct threat to their values and, of course, like everything else in Israel, their power as well. So what happened there on Monday morning? The participants donned sackcloth, put ashes on their foreheads and sat on the ground reading psalms and lamentations, much as one would do on the 9th of the Hebrew month of Av when we remember the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Really? Is the potential drafting of Yeshiva students equivalent in importance to the destruction of the Temple? I suppose some people think so although logic would dictate otherwise. But Rabbi Shmuel Auerbach, one of the spiritual leaders of Degel HaTorah said during the protest that, "We must give our lives against the drafting of yeshiva students [to the army]. In an issue that belongs to the heart of Israel, there are no compromises." And Rabbi Auerbach is generally thought to be from the “central stream” of that community, whatever that means. Earlier today an orthodox rabbi for whom I have a great deal of respect, when he heard about this incident termed it a “perversion of religion,” as indeed it is. Judaism has great respect for the rule of law and minutiae associated with the adherence to law. The halacha, the body of law that governs our actions is clear about so many issues and, for the most part, its observance actually celebrated the strength of our faith. For example, I attended two weddings this week that were called for 6:45 PM and where the rabbis in both cases insisted that the weddings begin before 7:20 PM (i.e. on that “day”) else we would need to wait until 8:45 PM when it was fully dark so that the wedding could take place on the “next” day, in order for there to be no question on which “day” the wedding was actually held. To me, that kind of detail glorifies religion and its observance. But 5,000 people sitting on the ground in Shabbat Square protesting the possibility that otherwise qualified people should be exempt from the military, the very same military whose members put their lives at risk defending the safety and security of those who protested so that they can observe their religion as they see fit is, without a doubt, a perversion of our faith. And frankly, those who pervert the faith in the name of guarding that faith cannot be considered by logically thinking people as guardians of the faith but rather as destroyers of that faith.

Time to Boycott Alice Walker

Time to Boycott Alice Walker By Sherwin Pomerantz Today’s papers in Israel carry a story about Pulitzer Prize winning author Alice Walker’s refusal to allow Yediot Books in Israel to publish a Hebrew version of The Color Purple. Why? Read it for yourself. “It isn’t possible for me to permit this at this time for the following reason: As you may know, last fall in South Africa the Russell Tribunal on Palestine met and determined that Israel is guilty of apartheid and persecution of the Palestinian people, both inside Israel and also in the Occupied Territories. The testimony we heard, both from Israelis and Palestinians (I was a jurist) was devastating. I grew up under American apartheid and this was far worse. Indeed, many South Africans who attended, including [Bishop] Desmond Tutu, felt the Israeli version of these crimes is worse even than what they suffered under their white supremacist regimes that dominated South Africa for so long.” She then added “It is my hope that the non-violent BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) movement, of which I am a part, will have enough of an impact on Israeli civilian society to change the situation.” You would think that a prize winning author who has benefitted from the best that America has to offer regarding education and opportunities for professional growth would be able to internalize a few basic facts, to wit. • That apartheid is an official government policy of segregation based on race, similar to what existed in the United States during the earlier years of Walker’s life and certainly existed in South Africa as well before the elimination of such restrictive laws there. • That contrary to the opinions of the supporters of the BDS movement, Israeli Arabs are not excluded from voting, from serving in parliament, from using the same public facilities as Israeli Jews, or any other activity under which they would be excluded if this were, indeed, an apartheid state. • That the Russell Tribunal in South Africa (http://www.russelltribunalonpalestine.com/en/), by its own admission and the comments of non-biased observers, has as its only purpose to support the right of self-determination of Palestinian Arabs by casting Israel in a negative light. • That Bishop Desmond Tutu, in spite of his having been awarded the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize (or perhaps because of it? Quite amazing what happens to people after they receive this award.) has become an unabashed critic of Israel’s actions and even existence and is certainly not a person whose opinions on this issue can be cited for any justification other than to portray Israel in a negative light. And, of course, the list goes on. Historically, Walker was married to a Jewish man when the 1967 war broke out, felt at that time that while Israel had a right to defend itself but it had no right to hold on to the lands it captured during that period. Building on that she ultimately decided to participate in “Freedom Flotilla I” as well, the sequel to the earlier flotilla which sailed from Turkey and which included the now-famous Mavi Marmara. Of course, her ire is not reserved just for Israel. In an interview in Foreign Policy magazine last year she said “I think Israel is the greatest terrorist organization in that part of the world. And I think, in general, the United States and Israel are great terrorist organizations themselves….. (The US) has terrorized people around the globe for a very long time.” Well, quite frankly, if she is so hot to support boycotts as a means of acting on her convictions, to which she has a right even if we disagree, we also have the same rights. I’m not sure how many more books Alice Walker will be writing in the future, but two can play this game. I, for one, would never again by a book by Alice Walker nor spend any serious time reading her material. Someone who can create a position by blindly taking facts and conveniently twisting them for her own purposes, does not need my support nor does she deserve it. We should do nothing less.

Shield Your Eyes Lest You….What?

Shield Your Eyes Lest You….What? By Sherwin Pomerantz Picture this. You’re an Israeli entrepreneur (a wonderful example of startup nation) who’s worked for four months to get an appointment with a potential client in Manhattan who has the potential to double your business volume if things go well. The woman you are meeting is the CEO of one of the largest fashion design houses in New York City and you have developed a piece of software that will help her beat the competition, season after season. While it took a great deal of convincing and dozens of Skype calls and other contacts to schedule the appointment, you are feeling pretty good about the prospects. Sadly, given your family and professional responsibilities, the only choice you had was to take the red eye from Israel, landing at JFK at 5 AM with little time to rest up before the 11:30 AM appointment in the city. So, you rent a car, check into the Hilton Garden Inn at the airport, rest up a bit, shower, change clothes and off you go for the drive into the city. 35 minutes later (traffic was fairly light) you’re on the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway approaching the exit to the Queens-Midtown Tunnel and there you see it. A bright red billboard with Hebrew lettering that says (translated for this blog) “Dear Jew: You are entering a dangerous place. Shield your eyes.” The last three words are repeated in English as well, just in case there are those in America (sic) who don’t read Hebrew. What to do? Do you turn around and go back to Israel so as not to be blinded by the dangers in front of you in Manhattan? Do you put a blindfold on as you exit the tunnel in New York and promptly drive into a wall or another car that you could not see because you were shielding your eyes? And if you only take the warning half-seriously and actually make it to the hard earned appointment, do you make sure not to look either left or right so as not to, God forbid, see one of the models dressed in less than modest clothing? And for sure, you don’t want to look your budding prospect in the eye, do you? What a dilemma eh? One has to wonder where the sponsors of the sign believe they are living. Do they really believe that Manhattan is such a den of iniquity that Jews are better off not going there? And what about those who have jobs there? Are they supposed to resign their positions? Are the dangers of Manhattan so great that community or private philanthropic funds can be justified to erect such a sign? Aren’t there better uses for the up to $25,000 per month that it costs to use this advertising medium? And if, indeed, it is so dangerous to one’s moral fiber to enter Manhattan, might not the better message be something like: “Jews, your place is in Israel, Come home!” Actually living in Israel we are used to this type of thinking which manifests itself in separate sections for men and women in retail stores in religious neighborhoods. Or, during the holiday season, fences which are erected on busy streets in parts of Jerusalem so that the men can walk on one side and the women on the other. Sort of enforced shielding of the eyes as it were. But warning people about the moral dangers in Manhattan? Are there less of those in Brooklyn? Or, for that matter, any large city in the US? Will the next sign we see be on the highway leading into Ben Gurion Airport warning people that America is dangerous and they should shield their eyes? Is there no end to this insanity? Perhaps Nietzsche was right when he said “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs it is the rule.” Woe to all of us if this type of close minded thinking becomes the rule rather than the exception. (A picture of the billboard can be seen at http://truthpraiseandhelp.wordpress.com/tag/congregation-yad-moshe/) According to news articles the billboard is sponsored by Congregation Yad Moshe which seems to be associated with New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind.

Who is a Rabbi?

Who is a Rabbi? By Sherwin Pomerantz This morning’s papers include an item about the decision of Israel’s Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar to do all in his power to reverse the state’s earlier decision to recognize some Conservative and Reform Rabbis in Israel and pay them with public funds, just as the Orthodox Rabbis are so paid. In an interview on Sunday with the Kol Berama radio station (aligned with Shas, the ultra-orthodox Sephardi party) he said the Reform and Conservative movements “uprooted all the foundations of Torah” and there’s a need “to explain the terrible damage that they wreak.” He went on to say, in a letter to the Attorney General, that “We view such a thing as the planting of the seed that will yield fruits that are not good fruits or kosher fruits, but that bear within them grave risks to the Jewish people from every direction. We know that the greatest danger to this generation is the assimilation that is eating into us and depleting us, and they give a hand, haphazardly and easily, to this terrible phenomenon, aside from what they uproot – actually uproot – from the foundations of Torah.” Last week Shas MK Nissim Ze’ev told the Jerusalem Post that the high court and the attorney general do not have the authority to designate as rabbis “people who falsify the Torah. This is the beginning of the destruction of the Jewish people in the land of Israel.” Really? Is this the major issue of our times? I find it strange that at a time in the history of Israel when we are faced with existential threats to our survival as serious as any in our 64-year history; when next door to us in Syria and Egypt we see political chaos that has the potential to destabilize the region and our security; when our strongest ally, the US, yields to pressure from Turkey to exclude us from an international conference on counter-terrorism; when Iran continues to develop its nuclear capability while simultaneously taking every opportunity to tell the world Israel should be removed from the face of the earth: and when our heroic military leaders are prevented from traveling to some western democracies for fear of being arrested as war criminals, that this is the time when some of our religious leaders choose to launch an internecine struggle to define who is a Rabbi. My father, z”l, was a manufacturers’ representative for most of his life. When selling the products of the companies he represented, he lived by a cardinal rule and that was if what he had to sell could not be sold on its own merits as a quality product with value to the customer, there was no benefit whatsoever to attempt to sell his product by demeaning the competition. Sadly much of the Orthodox leadership in this country has not learned that lesson. If Orthodoxy is the true faith, and if Orthodoxy is the best there is, then it should stand on its own two feet and not depend for its growth and sustenance on the denigration of other streams of Judaism. And what is it that is feared? In all of Israel today there just 30 Reform congregations and 50 Conservative groups, and this after 50+ years of existence in the country. These are not even statistically significant numbers. Why there are over 100 synagogues, shtieblach, and prayer groups just with a 5 sq.km. distance from where I live in Jerusalem. So what’s the fear? That the state has now officially legitimized non-Orthodox rabbis? Does anyone really believe that those who call these loyal Israeli citizens “Rabbi” will stop giving them the honor due a Rabbi because the state does not recognize them? Will they be given any more respect because they are recognized by the state? No. The issue here is one of control. The Chief Rabbis and their minions are obsessed with the issue of control: control of their followers, control of the state’s funds allocated for religious activities, and control over who is acceptable and who is not. The logic may be cloaked in the flowery language of the fear that the “other” will destroy Judaism, but the real reason is control, nothing more, nothing less. These same Rabbis who rant and rave about the destruction being foisted on Jewish continuity by the Reform and Conservative movements are very happy to take contributions for their projects from the adherents of those movements. When they take the high road and refuse the donations, then I’ll be ready to listen to the arguments which are today cloaked in a misplaced sense of sanctity. Until then, clearly the only motivating issue here is the fear of losing control, nothing more. Just one more reason, perhaps, why the position of Chief Rabbi no longer makes sense in Israel or anywhere else. It just may be an institution who time has passed.