By Chana
I was reading the section of last week’s Hamodia on Rav Steinman and the Gerrer Rebbe’s trip to the US, Canada, & South America. One of the many interesting responses R. Steinman made to shailas was concerning whether it is OK to distort or water down Torah for the benefit of non-religious Jews (kiruv). His response was firmly NO. He said we should not change Torah in any way when we represent it to non-religious Jews, and if that means they become disinterested, so be it; maybe they will become interested later.
I understand this as I think it is morally correct to represent Torah honestly, it is not Kavodik to do otherwise. Also, it is misleading and many baalei teshuva have complained about this. I know of a few schools that tried this approach, (stressing mainly the fun that a frum person can have) and later abandoned it.
Our family has had difficulty in certain areas of frum life, but the lifestyle was never represented to us in any false manner. Actually, we were mekareved by Hashem Himself–that is, we never heard of Aish or other kiruv organizations until we were frum for many years, and we also never had an individual who set out to be mekarev to us. B”H, there were friends who took an interest in the various places we have lived. Still, we came to believe a higher standard of behavior would be found in certain religious institutions, and were very dismayed to find this not to be the case. Our children quickly sensed strong inconsistencies and reacted strongly. I don’t know what we would have done if someone had, in fact, warned us about the hard facts ahead of time.
I suppose Rav Steinman’s position leads to a critical look at the strategies of kiruv. It seems OK to try to interest an otherwise disinterested person, but without minimizing the real demands and struggles. On the other hand for people like us, who were self-motivated, maybe a kind of “Intervention kiruv” is necessary, one that will bring to light the realities of frum life which the highly motivated but naive newcomer may miss, and stumble on later……..
Yaakov–
Okay, a pircha on the kal vachomer.
I said I couldn’t find a place that the Chofetz Chaim speaks about it explicitly. I recall that he writes not to speak LH “al cheiro,” “kol ish Yisrael,” and the like.
I’ve always heard that there’s no issur to speak LH about a gentile by Torah law. Rav Gottleib seems to agree, from what I remember hearing on his tape. And Rav Kanerik agreed with our assumption that there’s no issur when he pointed out Rabbeinu Yona’s approach.
So what’s the makor? Maybe it’s mefurash: The Torah says: ×œ× ×ª×œ×š רכיל בעמיך Don’t go as a talebearer in your nation. Do we need a midrash or gemara for this, it’s mefurash!
Do you agree?
Re: Mike Stern and my current occupation:
Your server is down or something, I couldn’t reach your webpage. Please contact the Beyond BT administrators for my email.
David,
But we don’t find the Chofetz Chaim making this point. In Klal 8 Halachot 5-7 he speaks about apikursim and rashaim gamurim that are excluded from ameicha because they are not doing “maaseh amcha.†Clearly, kol shechein, non-Jews are excluded.
Is that so? A non-Jew who does the sheva mitzvos is contributing positively to Hashem’s plan, whereas the Jew who is a rasha gamur is actively opposing it.
You find in the Mishnah in Sanhedrin Jews who were excluded from Olam Habah, as well as non-Jews too. The gemara, followed by the Rambam and others, learn from here that righteous non-Jews have a place in Olam Habah (otherwise what’s the hava amina to mention those non-Jews who don’t). Therefore, I’m thinking, non-Jews who are righteous are higher than Jews who forfeit olam haba. Therefore, can you make the kol vachomer?
I was a co-director of Aish HaTorah’s Essentials (introductory program), and I taught in the Essentials and Intermediate program, from 1994- 2002.
Did you know Michael Stern? Are you in kiruv now? (Email me if you don’t want to share publicly — with the vast Beyond BT audience and behyond.)
“On the story of Rav Zecharia ben Avkilus
Don’t presume we all know it. Could you please flesh it out?”
Sorry – I wrote that comment too quickly. From the Soncino translation (Gittin56a) (this begins with the story of kamtza and bar kamtza):
The destruction of Jerusalem came through a Kamza and a Bar Kamza…The destruction of Jerusalem came through a Kamza and a Bar Kamza in this way. A certain man had a friend Kamza and an enemy Bar Kamza. He once made a party and said to his servant, Go and bring Kamza. The man went and brought Bar Kamza. When the man [who gave the party] found him there he said, See, you tell tales about me; what are you doing here? Get out. Said the other: Since I am here, let me stay, and I will pay you for whatever I eat and drink. He said, I won’t. Then let me give you half the cost of the party. No, said the other. Then let me pay for the whole party. He still said, No, and he took him by the hand and put him out. Said the other, Since the Rabbis were sitting there and did not stop him, this shows that they agreed with him. I will go and inform against then, to the Government. He went and said to the Emperor, The Jews are rebelling against you. He said, How can I tell? He said to him: Send them an offering and see whether they will offer it [on the altar]. So he sent with him a fine calf. While on the way he made a blemish on its upper lip, or as some say on the white of its eye, in a place where we [Jews] count it a blemish but they do not. The Rabbis were inclined to offer it in order not to offend the Government. Said R. Zechariah b. Abkulas to them: People will say that blemished animals are offered on the altar. They then proposed to kill Bar Kamza so that he should not go and inform against them, but R. Zechariah b. Abkulas said to them, Is one who makes a blemish on consecrated animals to be put to death? R. Johanan thereupon remarked: Through the scrupulousness of R. Zechariah b. Abkulas our House has been destroyed, our Temple burnt and we ourselves exiled from our land”
The word for “Scrupulousness” is anvisoniso (usually translated modesty). It’s unclear if R Zecharia ben Avkilus is being blamed (for being excessively modest/scrupulous, i.e. he should have let the animal be sacrificed even though it was unfit for a korban to save the situation) or if he’s being praised. The maharshal understands that RZBA acted correctly and he says that even though his actions led to the destruction of the beis hamikdosh, it’s a yehareg v’al yaavor to allow halacha to be misrepresented.
I wonder: we are mostly BTs here. We all made the decision to become observant, because of or in spite of how Torah was presented to us. Would anyone like to comment on that process? Was Torah watered down? Did you have friends in yeshiva/at the Chabad house/in the beginners’ minyan who heard something that turned them off? Or, alternately, do you know someone who was chozer betshuva and then left when she came to feel she was ‘sold a bill of goods?’ I’m curious about others’ experiences.
Thank you,
I have a question innappropriate for the blog. Through the administrators could you send me your email adrress?
>>“based on Rabbeinu Yona, because one would be exercizing the bad character trait of tale bearing.â€
Would you be kind enough to provide the mareh mokom?
A pleasure. I asked Rav Avraham Kanerik, Mashgiach of Yeshivas Chofetz Chaim in Yerushalyim the question about speaking LH about a gentile, and he answered that Rabbeinu Yona in Shaarei Teshuvah writes that LH is a “middah ra’ah,” bad character trait, not just a halachah or a din. Based on Rabbeinu Yona’s approach, we must say it’s ussur to exercize the bad middah.
Also how do you get hebrew charachters to appear on the blog?
I have Windows XP. You have to select this option in Control Panel first, in Regional and Language Options, click on Languages tab, and then change the details in imput language to add Hebrew language options on the keyboard. Hold down Alt and press Shift, and your keyboard shifts to Hebrew. Pressing Alt-Shift brings you back to English. Also, you’ll get an icon on the toolbar for HE and EN.
בהצלחה!
You can get stickers to put the Hebrew characters on your keyboard, or make ’em yourself. You can get a map of the Hebrew keyboard here (as well a free touch typing tutor): http://www.senselang.com/Typing/Hkeybord.html
Chaim, sorry I hadnt read Yaakov Astor’s post (#15) which explained nicely what I trying to say – that we can repackage a lot of ideas if necessary. I’d like to reiterate David Schallheim’s (#20) important point not to say something that’s not going to be heard.
Can maybe sum up with a moshol. That we need to make ourselves into the best keilim for Torah that we can. Now, I dont know at what point it happens, but we also need to really understand the person/ group we are dealing nd what they can be m’kabel. At this point, with some chochma we may have to reduce our Torah into their keilim. And it may well be that the danger is saying too much than saying too little. Should we skip out difficult halachos or sections in Tenach in a lesson? I dont know – maybe there are specific answers for different issues. But if we find that there’s a long list of halachos, hashkofic and Tenach issues we cannot handle, maybe it means that our own keilim still need some developing.
“based on Rabbeinu Yona, because one would be exercizing the bad character trait of tale bearing.”
Would you be kind enough to provide the mareh mokom? Also how do you get hebrew charachters to appear on the blog?
Yaakov:
>>what halacha were you referring to when you wrote: “Would you include the halachah concerning lashon hara about a non-Jew…�
The Torah says: ×œ× ×ª×œ×š רכיל בעמיך Don’t go as a talebearer in your nation
A non-Jew is excluded from בעמיך. There is no issur by Torah law, but as I mentioned, it’s clearly wrong, based on Rabbeinu Yona, because one would be exercizing the bad character trait of tale bearing.
But we don’t find the Chofetz Chaim making this point. In Klal 8 Halachot 5-7 he speaks about apikursim and rashaim gamurim that are excluded from ameicha because they are not doing “maaseh amcha.” Clearly, kol shechein, non-Jews are excluded. However, you would have to make the diyuk, he doesn’t write about non-Jews.
>>I can understand this to a point, but I think sometimes it can backfire, as others (myself included) can attest.
That makes sense to me. As in everything else, balance is the key. It takes a great sensitivity to see when a person is equipped to deal with delicate issues. And if we don’t deal with them, they are likely to errupt as festering sores at a later point.
Not every forum is appropriate for tough issues. Most of the time, people make real progress on difficult issues in a private, one-on-one discussion and not in a public “debate,” where people want to save face and not back down.
I inadvertantly missed your question about where I worked [my tendency to ignore parenthesis — you know — read the brackets, skip the parenthesis].
I was a co-director of Aish HaTorah’s Essentials (introductory program), and I taught in the Essentials and Intermediate program, from 1994- 2002.
Yaakov Grant
It is hard to take issue with you when you drop Rav Miller Z’L s name as he was A) A gadol and B) more successful @ Kiruv than any of us will in all likelihood ever be. But Torah hee v’lilmod ani Tasreech.
Why drop as loaded a rhetorical bomb as the word racism? Isn’t there another way of getting across the message of b’chiras yisroel w/o saying racism? Is Torah Judaism racist in the same way that Nazism and Japanese jingoism are Racist, merely rooting for different teams? Also considering the fact that from the early 70s until and including the infamous Durban Conference our enemies have relished the Zionism=Racism equation wouldn’t this cause the average secular Jew, who’s got the warm fuzzies for Israel to figure that he’s fallen in with an Islamofascist loving self-hating loony –bin?
Chaya-(In #34)
I commend you for coming back for more after you ran out. I’m just wondering out loud if you are the exception that proves the rule. Many other students in your place would never have come back to a Seminary/ Kiruv Organization that said/ taught something so off-putting. The typical thought process goes in one of two directions; “These folks are fanatical medieval madmen. Now I see how right my parents/siblings/friends who warned me not to get involved wereâ€. Or “This is way too much for me. I’ll never be able to swallow this religion whole. I’m already a fully cultural Jew. Why bother trying to become a 10-25-65% religious Jew. I’ll never be fully acculturated/ integrated anywayâ€.
You say that your teachers not shielding you from the truth helped you. Could we at least consider the possibility that this is more of a testimony to your inner mettle and open-mindedness than to the teachers’ wisdom in course of action? It made you grow and grow stronger. It might have destroyed or at least arrested the development of another person.
Yaakov,
HKBH chose us but also allows entry by geirei tzedek into our circle. A racist position would deny all entry.
Could it be that we never have to water the Torah down and cut out what we think is unpalatable for the the non attuned Torah mind?. Is it just a matter (but not a simple one!) of being sensitive to who we are speaking to or teaching. Often a very sensitive or potentially explosive idea can be presented with carefully chosen words and put into a wider hashkofic context fairly comfortably. I dont like it when I hear a speaker in a secular crowd skip over major yesodos in order to be PC. As Rabbi Avigdor Miller says, Judasim is racist – the fact that HKBH chose us is the number 2 principle of the Torah after yesh me’ayin.
It’s by no means easy to do and is definitely a life time’s task. But glossing over the truth which doesnt fit in with Western thinking is probably because we dont have a true Torah perpective ourselves of the issue in question.
I think RYK lived in Canada during WWII before he was rosh yeshiva in the US.
Rav Yaakov came to Torah Vodaas in 1945. I’m not sure if the war was still on or had just ended. If the latter, it’s possible my memory of the story was faulty. In either event, it makes sense that a man from Canada (Rav Yaakov was in Toronto during most of the war) would come to see Rav Yaakov in NY, whether toward the end of the war or shortly after it ended, because he was afraid Mashiach would come shortly.
David,
D) SE = That’s an extremely important point you’re raising, I’d like to sit with you for an hour after the class and discuss it with you. If you can’t make it today, give me your cell phone # and we’ll find a convenient time to meet. Now, getting back to what I was saying…
If it was on topic, or even a tangent that the rest of the group are really interested in, then go for it.
I’m on board with you regarding this, and it is consistent with what you said in post 10 about initially, at least, not bringing up possible stumbling blocks unless asked directly.
The truth is, though, that this type of by-design tendency not to disclose usually does not stop after the first day. It seems to me it is an almost unstated policy. Essentially, it’s goes: Don’t volunteer anything that might be problematic until it becomes a problem.
I can understand this to a point, but I think sometimes it can backfire, as others (myself included) can attest.
On the other hand, I thought of a source in the Gemara for withholding information. It’s in Shabbos (31, I belive), where Hillel was approached by three potential converts. The third one told him he was interested in wearing the garments of the Kohen Gadol (if I recall correctly). Unlike previous two, Hillel converted him on the spot and later read to him the passage that only the Kohel Gadol could wear the garments. This seems to be a clear source for not disclosing everything at first. (The other two cases suggest differently, so obviously it is not a blanket rule, just one potential approach, one that Hillel poskined appropriate for the third convert).
Having said that, I think it’s important to be as emesdik as possible as early as possible.
One last thing, David. You said in post 10: “Would you include the halachah concerning lashon hara about a non-Jew in your presentation, or just not deal with it (unless asked directly)?”
Then in a later post you said: “If you taught from Sefer Chofetz Chaim you’ll never encounter that Halachah. (Please, someone prove me wrong, but I’ve learned it cover to cover a dozen times and I never saw it). You’d have to make a diyuk: only ish Yisrael, but not…
“So why in the world would you bring it up and take the chance of turning someone off? The Chofetz Chaim doesn’t even mention it explicitly in the definitive work on Hilchos Lashon Hara!”
David, what halacha were you referring to when you wrote: “Would you include the halachah concerning lashon hara about a non-Jew…”?
I think we just have to do our best and give people the dignity of going through their own process. As a newcomer to Torah, I once ran, RAN out of a very honestyly and sensitively presented shiur on homosexuality. I simply could not accept anything about the Torah’s position. It was years before I could. Now my attitude is much like the one Ora articulated so beautifully. I have internalized the Torah view now, but that only came from putting it on the back burner and focusing on other things, not by (A) wrestling with the issue head-on or (B) being shielded from the truth by my teachers.
Speaking of handling topics delicately with newcomers, what about homosexuals?
Anyway, sadly, I have a gay relative, I hope she won’t be there……
Chana – what about those Jews who don’t keep Shabbos? That’s also assur. As Ora said, the person is one thing, the behavior choice another. (I’m not arguing desire; an FFB who gets married late in life has desires too, and manages to not act on them. As far as I know the halacha addresses actions, not desires.)
We’re feeling pain in various ways because Israel is not yet governed according to Torah principles. The question is what, under the circumstances, can be done now to prevent the government from condoning, promoting, or even funding any public immoral behavior. I emphasize “prevent”, not just “say something to express displeasure”.
Chana: We can accept and empathize with homosexuals, and just not with their behavior. I know that for the standard liberal Western mindset that’s not enough, but it is a good place to start the conversation. Make it clear that we don’t hate gays, we love them as we love all of our fellow Jews. Only their behavior is unacceptable.
If someone is open to discussing more, I would get into the idea of forbidden relationships in general. Why forbid people who love each other from being together, what could the deeper meaning be? This also connects naturally to concepts like taharat hamishpacha–none of us have complete freedom to do what we want, when we want. Also, you could point out that there are gays who choose to live Torah lives (as in the movie “Trembling before G-d” if you’ve seen it). Clearly, there are gay people who believe that Torah is worth giving up their natural desires for. That says a lot about Torah, especially to someone from secular society.
As for the “Pride” parade, I think it’s worth pointing out that even if this weren’t about homosexuality, it would be unacceptable. The parade is blatantly sexual, and the religious community would be making efforts to prevent it even if it wasn’t about gays. Would we allow (chas v’chalilah) Mardi Gras in Jerusalem? Or, more accurately, a straight “Love Parade” in which scantily clad couples would walk around kissing, dancing together in the streets, and yelling slogans about their sexual preference? Obviously not. The fact that the parade openly promotes homosexuality makes it that much worse, but the violations of modesty and appropriate behavior are a basic problem that would exist even without the gay issue.
I’ll probably be having this whole conversation a few times in the next few weeks, trying to talk some friends out of going. In support of the religious establishment, I think they’re just afraid of violence. After all, there were stabbings last year, G-d forbid the same thing should happen again.
To say something pertinent to the general topic, I think that all topics can and should be discussed honestly, even with beginners. The important part is to approach the topic with tact and to be genuinely open to what the other person is saying. You won’t convince people to discard their lifelong non-Torah values right away, but at least you can show them that there is another way of seeing things, and it isn’t as hateful or close-minded as they may have thought. If the conversation is conducted in an open and sensitive manner, I don’t think that anyone will be turned off. Of course, in a classroom setting this would need to be handled differently. In the seminary I went to last year, there was a seperate “controversial issues” class (not its actual name) that covered things like homosexuality, abortion, and intermarriage. I think that’s a good idea for all BT institutions, although preferably on the intermediate and not beginner level, and as an optional course, because some people just aren’t interested.
>>Speaking of handling topics delicately with newcomers, what about homosexuals?
Rav Aharon Feldman has a very sensitive and sensible approach:
http://www.jerusalemletter.co.il/archives/March24,1998/homow.htm
Speaking of handling topics delicately with newcomers, what about homosexuals?
In the secular world we are bombarded with messages to accept, empathize with and support the efforts of gays to mainstream. As a frum person there is no issue: it’s assur, period.
Today I was reading the Arutz7.net news about the “Gay Pride” parade scheduled to take place in Jerusalem in a few weeks. I find this VERY frightening, almost as frightening as when Jews expelled a whole community of Jews in Gush Katif. It seems that we are being called upon as frum Jews to stop this from happening, to stand up against the secular pressure for true Torah values. In the news report, various religious leaders were taken to task for their complacency, for not vehemently drawing the red line.
Anyway, sadly, I have a gay relative, I hope she won’t be there……
On the story of Rav Zecharia ben Avkilus
Don’t presume we all know it. Could you please flesh it out?
“I understand this as I think it is morally correct to represent Torah honestly, it is not Kavodik to do otherwise.”
On the story of Rav Zecharia ben Avkilus, the yam shel shlomo famously says that it’s a yehareg v’al yaavor to misrepresent halacha. Others disagree, but that gives a sense of the gravity of the issue at least for halacha.
“R Kaminetzky, zt’l, because he was afraid Mashiach was going to come and here he was with a non-Jewish wife. He approached Rav Yaakov in the Beis Midrash with his talmidim surrounding him, and after describing his situation said that if the Rav said he should divorce her he would. Rav Yaakov told him to go back to Canada”
I think RYK lived in Canada during WWII before he was rosh yeshiva in the US.
Chaim G : its one direction two sidetracks – I was just comparing alcohol to torah both need watered down versions first in order to get used to the heavier stronger concepts on empty stomachs /souls .the only glitch is that for torah ther is long term investement..and the need for understanding of heavy stuff on an empty stomach which is rough.
My point was though that I dont understand and was questioning rabbi schwartz’s point of -in the beginning all the truths are not able to be processed all at once.(he has a great comment #19 on the “Uninspired” post” that explains his point way better . and david schallheims point #10 on this post “tellin everything thats true and telling only true things” ). My other point is that all truths should have the ability for first time user processing as there is no sequential set order as to when any of the truths actually being applicable literally or figuretively to individual in question .
For example the heavy concepts on marriage and any complicated related material if this would be presented in a how to love judaism power point presentation ratings would go down cuz its too hard to comprehend but needs right away understanding. i guess you could start off with some light why jewish way of marriage is so beautiful drinks but then the heavy unflavored drinks/laws gotta come right after but obviously dont know who would stay for that.for those already married though – they would need to be knowing all the strong truths and laws involved even though its way too heavy for the untrained soul .
If its a truth then by default it should be able to be processed emotionally even on an untrained soul empty stomach.So the concept of integrating and processing all the strong truths in the beginning after first couple watered down flavored concepts/drinks is obviously needed.cuz one is bound to run in to a strong truth before its properly taught.
So maybe the probem is in the actual need for proper marketing and teaching as opposed to it being a do it yourself project.
Bob Miller: – The alcohol/torah analogy was too good to pass up. The comparing and contrasting possiblities are endless on a thousand different levels and angles.
>>How do you respond? Do you:
A) Say this is the “Jews and Gentiles†class.
B) Say it is not true.
C) Try to explain it, maybe try to turn it into a positive.
D) Something else
D) SE = That’s an extremely important point you’re raising, I’d like to sit with you for an hour after the class and discuss it with you. If you can’t make it today, give me your cell phone # and we’ll find a convenient time to meet. Now, getting back to what I was saying…
If it was on topic, or even a tangent that the rest of the group are really interested in, then go for it.
David,
Excellent points. All well taken. Yasher kochacha!
Here’s a scenario. How would you handle it. You’re in front of your class. All of a sudden, perhaps in context, perhaps not, someone says, “Rabbi, I heard that a Jew is allowed to say LH against a non-Jew, but not visa-versa.”
(Or, what is clearer, “A Jew cannot collect interest from a Jew, but can from a non-Jew.”)
How do you respond? Do you:
A) Say this is the “Jews and Gentiles” class.
B) Say it is not true.
C) Try to explain it, maybe try to turn it into a positive.
D) Something else.
I look forward to your response. (And where did you teach, if I can ask?)
Perhaps Beyond BT can contact Hamodia in Brooklyn to help find out more details from the reporter. My hunch is that the question to Rav Steinman was general, so the answer was, too.
Steve Brizel: Unfortunately the article went the way of old newspapers, however to my best recollection there were no specifics mentioned. Does anyone still have HAMODIA from 2 weeks ago or remember reading this?
Yaakov–
Your explanations are beautiful and inspiring. And I have no doubt that Torah is true and that everything can be explained well. You do explain things very well, yasher kochacha!
The point is to be smart and pick your battlefield. I taught in the exact venue you describe for eight years and I can tell you that nothing kills a class like the scenario you are describing. The new guy is all hot and flustered about the chauvinism you’re exhibiting. He didn’t expect it, he’s taken off guard and his defenses are up. Meanwhile, everyone else is getting bored and looking out the window. “Oh no, here we go again. Another tangent about the chosen people. Third time this week. Gevalt!”
And the new guy is hearing things he is simply not prepared to accept, and rejects your calm and reasoned explanations out of hand.
There is a time and place for everything. A class entitled “Jews and Gentiles†is the time to talk about the differences and the purpose for it, historical role, etc. There is special chesed for Jews, such as the prohibition of interest in a loan, that doesn’t apply to non-Jews, etc. Someone comes to such a class because he wants to hear what you have to say; he’s listening to your point of view.
If you taught from Sefer Chofetz Chaim you’ll never encounter that Halachah. (Please, someone prove me wrong, but I’ve learned it cover to cover a dozen times and I never saw it). You’d have to make a diyuk: only ish Yisrael, but not…
So why in the world would you bring it up and take the chance of turning someone off? The Chofetz Chaim doesn’t even mention it explicitly in the definitive work on Hilchos Lashon Hara!
>> They migtht easily and very well say to themselves my teachers avoided it because they are afraid of it, because it’s a weakness, because Judaism is biased and thus untrue.
I don’t think this is a risk at all. It’s much more dangerous that we’d lose a potential BT because he unnecessarily heard something he couldn’t swallow.
Later on, he’ll think: “Oh, it’s only a issur by Torah law to speak LH about Jews, I can relate to that.†BTW, everyone agrees it’s wrong to speak LH about non-Jews because you’re reinforcing a negative character trait.
The klal is: Just like it’s a mitzvah to say something that is heard, it is also a mitzvah not to say something that is not heard, as the Shulchan Aruch says concerning rebuke (see Hilchos Yom Kippur, OH 608:2, Rema, MB and Biyur Halachah).
Repeat after me—
no more allusions to drugs and drinks.
I’m reading this thread and I’m mystified again. I thought we came to an understanding at the end of the “Bacon” blog. This isn’t a case of being too embarrassed to ask a question. It’s another Quixotic “He jumped up on his horse and rode off in all directions”
Am I to conclude that you weren’t that committed to change in the first place? You seem to have succumbed to the first whiff of a Martini Olive.
These days, people in kiruv can’t successfully baby adults for long by shielding them from sensitive topics. Information, misinformation, and disinformation on these topics is so widely and freely available that some of it is bound to reach the new BT. Why create the possibility that the BT’s first exposure to such issues will come from the anti-Torah side? Or even from the Torah side in a poorly communicated fashion?
Rabbi Dovid Schwartz: – great post # 19 in “Uninspired” in relation to the fickle concept of Truth marketing and packaging you forgot the powerpoint presentation though for the individual tripping on truths he wasnt aware of .
If you believe in hashem its a given that the Torah is all truth 613 proof ……..
Also, there is the concept that drinking all the heavy truths in one large mixed shot in a pretty crystal clear shotglass, with a resounding cheers can cause irrational thinking and behaviour due to soul intolerance/overload (aside from the no mixing factor) . So basically your overall point is that its best to drink the knowledge of torah one shot at a time and be careful with taking your first shot on an empty stomach of heavy gemarah concepts 100 proof vodka right away.Cuz that would not sit well with the unaccustomed light drinking soul .
There are two questions though A) should the torah shots/drinks/lectures be watered down like the free drinks they give at casino’s.(alway get beer (pirkei avos) cant water that down). “watered down” imbibing is not the most popular concept around but sometimes the only way for light drinkers to pretend they are drinkers- in order to become real drinkers(torah scholars) (great sequential alcoholism/torah scholar track)…… ,and then once they get the hang of alcohol (torah) and get used to side effects you can go for the real shots and the 100 proof vodkas/gemarrahs.So its not really a question of yes or no watered down its more like an overall watered down version for starters only, just to see what it really feels like – in order for the body to get used to the concept and change which is always hard … It may be a good idea to start with the candy flavored green apple smirnoff and peach absolute flavored pretty colorful mixed cocktails at Dave and Busters or a really exciting Pirkei Avos lecture (with drinks).
You cannot start off a drinking (Torah ) career with six shots of Jagermeister (insert hard gemarrah concepts here) . You can start off with the smirnoffs and absolute vodkas with all the good flavors ( pirkei avos and basic prayer definitely iggeres haramban prayer ) which is a figuretive watered down version of what the torah really is and then go for the real stuff like “strive for the truth” but the real stuff should never be watered down ever .
But wait for anyone still reading there is one small problem with the not being ready for the whole truth – sometimes you stumble upon truths that youre unable to comprehend or handle . And that just puts everything right back to the glass filled to the brim and keep refillling perspective. So really ALL THE TRUTHS should be able to be processed and integrated at all times cuz u never really know when your goin to be bumping into them.Sometimes happy hour is only featuring the unflavored vodkas and the bitter tasting whiskeys…………… and lets not forget that its no more watering down after the decision has been made………..this would probally call for a spiritual life bartender ….what happens if you cant afford the tips or the spiritual bartender is too busy……
Would you include the halachah concerning lashon hara about a non-Jew in your presentation, or just not deal with it (unless asked directly)?
I’m not exactly sure which halacha you are referring to but if you are talking about a heter to say LH about a non-Jew where no such heter exists for a Jew I’m not so sure you don’t broach the subject as soon as it is relevant, including the first time talking to a potential BT.
I don’t think we should be afraid of anything, certainly not the truth.
Conversely, what happens when this person finds out this halacha at some later date, and concludes it’s really part of a constellation of halachos that reflect the fact that Jews can treat non-Jews differently in some circumstances? They migtht easily and very well say to themselves my teachers avoided it because they are afraid of it, because it’s a weakness, because Judaism is biased and thus untrue.
If Torah is true, then every seeming weakness is really a strength. The fact is that, according to Torah, we Jews do often have to treat fellow Jews with a little greater respect than others — even as we have to show great respect to others too. This, ultimately, has to do with areivus and/or bechiras Yisrael, IMO. Either way, these are fundamentals of the religion. If a kiruv professional can’t explain how Jews should treat each other as family or the concept of being chosen, then what is he doing in kiruv? (Of course, if we are talking about a non-professional, then it’s valid to not get into conversations you do not feel confident you could explain Torah properly.)
E.g. It’s day one. A guy walks into class right off the kotel. He sits in a class. The rabbi is talking about LH. He gets to the halacha mentioned above. Before the new arrival puts his hand over his mouth aghast, the teacher goes off into the exceptional ahavas Yisrael Jews are expected to have for each other, and how this does not contradict the exceptional respect Jews are expected have toward non-Jews, a respect that is usually far more demanding than common culture acknowledges. Just as you would treat a brother or sister or mother or father differently than a stranger on the street you treat a fellow Jew with certain curtousies that you wouldn’t others (while still treating others with generally greater respect that normative society does anyway).
Or you launch into an explnation of bechiras Yisrael, and how Jews have been chosen for an historic mission. Etc.
The point is that if it’s emes you can and should be able to turn any seeming weakness into a strength, into a good argument. If you don’t believe it’s emes or are not capable of explaining it, why are you giving the class to this new arrival?
I really don’t like the idea of withholding anything, of feeling afraid to explain anything in Torah. Sooner or later a potential BT will find out and the results can be devastating. Maybe you don’t have to hit him over the head if a sticky point doesn’t fit in naturally with the conversation, but I don’t think shy away from anything, even from the beginning.
When teaching children Torah we sometimes bump into some areas where not everything should be taught. I recall one rebbi in a school where I used to teach, telling me that he translates “Ona” (the husband’s halachic obligation to have relations with his wife) as “time”. While that may seem like a falsification of the truth, it is a true translation of the word. He told me that one day those 6th graders are going to learn the real intention of that term. When they do, he wants them to realize that despite his not being completely open (does a 6thgrader need to get into this?), he was still teaching them true things. After all the mitzvah of Ona is about the husband and wife spending time together.
One other one such thing I remember him teaching like this was the laws of the 5 things prohibited on Yom Kippur. He skipped the issue of marital relations and simply called eating one of the 5 and drinking a separate one.
DL
Thanks. I was guilty of yet another example of “interchangeable” g’dolim stories. I should be more careful and do more thorough fact checks lest folks become suspicious of the historicity of these anecdotes.
David Schallheim – I related much the same idea from Rabbi Avrohom Jacobowitz in comment #19 on “Uninspired†from 2.8.06. I really enjoyed the LH example and Rav Gottleib’s pithy way of distinguishing between truth that’s whole and the whole truth.
Quick clarification:
That mezuzah story involved Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky and took place in the 50s after R. Mordechai Kamenetsky took Rav Yaakov on a tour of the newly opened South Shore Yeshiva.
I heard a tape from Rabbi Gottleib (many years ago, I hope I represent his view accurately) in which he discussed the “truth” factor in kiruv. He made the distinction between telling everything that’s true, or telling only true things.
The example he used was the laws of lashon hara. These laws are incredibly inspiring for a non-frum Jew. A whole system to protect people’s honor. Wow.
Would you include the halachah concerning lashon hara about a non-Jew in your presentation, or just not deal with it (unless asked directly)?
The idea is that we must never falsify the Torah, but we may be guilty of turning someone off to Torah by presenting he or she with information they’re not ready to handle yet.
There’s no kavod in sheker. If there’s kavod it’s because it’s the emes.
Nail on the head.
Very, very good post, especially in light of some of the people I’ve spoken to who were turned off after becoming BTs by the realization they were lied to.
I once heard (I admit never reading it) that Rav Moshe zt”l wrote a T’shuva to a kindergarten morah who wanted to know if it was mutar to lower the mezuzah on her classroom door to a height where it would be kissable by her young students as they filed into the room. Rav Moshe, after proving the halachic impermissibility of this, ends the Responsum with a piece of advice. Not only, he opined, is it bad Halacha but bad Chinuch. One ought to lift the child up to reach and kiss the mezuzah. This will “wire” the young child to the important lessons that A) WE must raise OUR standards to those of the Torah rather than lowering the Torah’s standards to meet our limitations and B) That the Torah elevates those who exert themselves to observe it.
For an old comment of mine pertinent to this thread see the archives “Uninspired” from 2.8.06 comment #19
I agree wholeheartedly with the article, but disagree with the main reason given: “it is not Kavodik to do otherwise.” The main reason, IMO, is, as the author herself experienced, is the disappointment when the truth is found.
Let me share a shocking story I heard from one of my rabbeim. He conveyed that during WWII an intermarried Jew came all the way from Canada to see Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky, zt’l, because he was afraid Mashiach was going to come and here he was with a non-Jewish wife. He approached Rav Yaakov in the Beis Midrash with his talmidim surrounding him, and after describing his situation said that if the Rav said he should divorce her he would. Rav Yaakov told him to go back to Canada to his wife and try to learn about Torah as much as possible do as many mitzvos as possible.
Needless to say his talmidim in attendance were shocked. How could he give such advice? The guy was ready to divorce his non-Jewish wife.
In response, Rav Yaakov said — “And what if Mashiach doesn’t come right away? He would have divorced her, regretted his decision, blamed Torah and been further away than he began.”
That’s emes. Emes to Torah. Emes to the person whom Rav Yaakov gave the advice. It’s also expression of his sensitivity to the desperate person coming to him. He could have told him anything. But a gadol is interested in emes, in what is really best for the person standing before him.
It’s not about kavod. There’s no kavod in sheker. If there’s kavod it’s because it’s the emes.
That’s also the way to deal with the difficulties and disappointments of becoming frum. We’re not doing it for the kavod, for the glitter, for the sugar. It’s for the emes. And sometimes you have to go through a lot of stuff to get to the emes.
David–I would hazard a guess that the kiruv org told you not to mention the prohibition of carrying not to misrepresent Torah, but so that these people would not be carrying b’meizid.
Just curious-what specific examples of either watering down Torah or glossing over issues were mentioned in the above referenced article?
One kiruv organization that I was involved with told me not to wear a black hat to davening. They also told me not to mention or discus eruvin or the prohibition against carrying on Shabbos to non-frum people.
Any untruth said on purpose to “sell” the Torah of Truth is a betrayal, whether the “customer” finds out or not. Most likely, he or she will find out and will need a lot of fortitude to stay on course.
Kiruv is not a matter of meeting sales quotas.
Avraham Avinu did not start to proselytize until he was convinced of the fallacy of all the idolatry and ideology of his time (and maybe even of future times even though there was no one to influence except himself).
I propose one reason we water down Torah or anything else is because we aren‘t convinced ourselves.