Home › Archive for Question of The Week › Page 3

Question of The Week

And For an Offering … I Will Sacrifice My Soul

Posted on by — 2 Comments ↓

Vayikra 5774-An installment in the series of adaptations
From the Waters of the Shiloah: Plumbing the Depths of the Izhbitzer School
For series introduction CLICK
By Rabbi Dovid Schwartz-Mara D’Asra Cong Sfard of Midwood

Speak to the children of Israel and say to them: When a man will bring near, from [among] you,( meekem) a sacrifice to the Lord; from animals, from cattle or from the flock you shall bring your sacrifice           

–Vayikra 1: 2

When he brings. [The pasuk is not discussing an obligatory sacrifice, in which case it would have said, “a man shall bring ….” Rather,] the pasuk is speaking here of voluntary sacrifices [and thus says, “When a man …brings a sacrifice”]. — [Toras Kohanim 1:12]

from animals: but not all of them. [The phrase therefore] excludes the case of animals that have cohabited with a human, as an active or a passive partner. – [Toras Kohanim 1:17]

from cattle:  [The phrase] excludes an animal that has been worshipped [as a deity].

from the flock: [This phrase} excludes muktzah-an animal set aside [i.e., designated for sacrifice to pagan deities]. — [Toras Kohanim 1:18]

–Rashi ibid

Several sefarim from the Izhbitzer school pose a grammatical question about this pasuk ; Why the garbled sentence structure with the verb appearing before stating the subject precisely? The syntax of the sentence ought to have been “When a man from among you will bring near?

What follows is a sampling of the wide array of answers that are offered:

Referencing the famous drasha-derivation of a Halachah from close textual readings, of the gemara ( Sukkah 41B): “and you shall take lachem-to yourself–from that which belongs to you”, Rav Leibeleh Eiger  understands the odd placement of the word meekem – “from (among) you”, to mean that the real sacrifice is not from ones property / livestock, but from oneself. After all, the pasuk need not mention that the donor of the sacrifice is from “among” the Jewish People as the entirety of the Torah is addressed to an exclusively Jewish audience. Rather, the pasuk seeks to convey the concept that the “stuff” of the bringing near/sacrificing is from “you”, from the very being of the donor.

Many people tend to compartmentalize their lives.  Their attitude is that they “owe” G-d the performance of mitzvos and the avoidance of transgressions.  However, if something in their lives; be it a thought, a word or action is Halachically / morally neutral; a devar reshus– something we are neither commanded to do nor to avoid; then we are, so to speak, free agents, we are on our own.  As long as something is Halachically permissible then, the thinking goes, we ought to “go for all the gusto”, take full advantage of all permissible pleasures and thus, live life to its fullest.

This may be a pervasive attitude but it is not an authentically Jewish one.  At the beginning of Parashas Kedoshim the Ramban famously condemns it as being the mind-set of a nahval birshus hatorah– a vile lowlife with the Torah’s imprimatur and “seal of approval.” Rav Leibeleh teaches that the nearness and the sacrifice of what is termed a korban derives mainly from meekem; giving up something of yourself, leaving some pleasure on the table, some of the great deals unconsummated or some adventurous experience unlived.

This, he maintains, is what Rashi is referring to when he explains “the pasuk is speaking here of voluntary sacrifices,” that a generosity of spirit and volunteerism grip the worshippers heart so that he is prepared to strive for the paradigm of  “sanctify yourself with [i.e. by giving up some of] what is permitted to you.”

There is a well known argument between the Ramban and the Rambam as to the main underlying reason for the mitzvah of the korbanos-sacrifices in general . Per the Ramban (Vayikra 1:9) korbanos are meant to be an audio-visual aid to the teshuvah process of the sinner offering the korban.  The animal being sacrificed becomes a stand-in; a substitute for the donor.  When observing the sacrificial process the following types of thoughts and emotions are supposed to run through the heart and mind of the donor:  “There but for the grace of G-d go I. By offending my Creator and the transgressing His will I have forfeited my right to exist.  If justice was not tempered by mercy it is my own throat that ought to have been slashed, my own blood collected and sprayed, my own skin flayed from my body and my own viscera or limbs immolated on the altar.”

In light of this Ramban and extending the concept that, even after using the animal as a surrogate, the essential offering of the korban is still meekem-from you, the Izhbitzer and Rav Leibeleh Eiger argue that it follows that any Halachic limitations applying to the animal would apply to the donor as well. These limitations are the pasuks way of explicating ways and means to achieve the goal of sacrificing oneself through “sanctify yourself with [i.e. by giving up some of] what is permitted to you.”

Just as the animal is invalid for sacrifice if it was used for immoral purposes so too the donor must sacrifice meekem; of his pleasure-seeking, and purify himself from his baser animal instincts that drive his libidinous tendencies. Just as the animal is invalid for sacrifice if it has been worshipped, so too the donor must sacrifice of his ego-gratification and cleanse himself of lording it over others and being domineering over others or making himself salient above others in any way. Just as the animal is invalid for sacrifice if has been dedicated/set aside-huktzah as a sacrifice for idolatry, so too the donor must sacrifice of his social-networking with parties that have dedicated themselves to causes antithetical to the service of HaShem, the root of sadness and depression, and the donor must lose any sense of awe and self-abnegation towards anything worldly and temporal.

By not maximizing his own self-actualization and sacrificing of his lusts, of his glory-seeking, of his need for social approval and of his worship of temporal worldly matters the korban will be meekem, from the essential YOU.

~adapted from Toras Emes Vaykra D”H Adam (the first)

Mei HaShiloach II Vayikra D”H Adam

See also Bais Yaakov Vayikra Inyan 23

Shabbos … the Great Unifying Principle

Posted on by — 2 Comments ↓

Vayakhel 5774-An installment in the series of adaptations
From the Waters of the Shiloah: Plumbing the Depths of the Izhbitzer School
For series introduction CLICK
By Rabbi Dovid Schwartz-Mara D’Asra Cong Sfard of Midwood

Moshe gathered the entire assemblage of the Bnei Yisrael , and said unto them: ‘These are the words which HaShem has commanded, that you should do them. Six days creative activities shall be done, but the seventh day t shall be holy day for you, sabbath; a day of complete respite for HaShem. Whoever actively creates in it shall be put to death.

-Shemos 35:1,2

And let every wise-hearted person among you come, and make all that HaShem has commanded. The Mishkan-tabernacle, its tent, and its covering, its hooks, its vertical boards, its bars, its pillars, and its sockets. The Ark etc.

-Shemos 35:10-12

 All that is called by My Name, and whom I have created for My glory, I have formed him and even made him.’

– Yeshyaya 43:7

 Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: Betzalel [principal artisan of the Mishkan] knew how to bond and combine the letters through which heaven and earth were created.

-Brachos 55A

How did Moshe gather everyone together, and forge them into a unit? Why is the commandment of building the Mishkan preceded by the commandment of Shabbos?

The Maharal of Prague explains that anavah-humility, is rooted in pashtus-generic simplicity and the lack of any specialty. There is a certain infinite quality to simplicities non-delineation. Simplicity specializes in nothing in particular and so; can be everything at once. Committed to nothing, simplicity enjoys infinite possibilities. This is how the Maharal explains the hanhagah Elyonah-Divine administration of the cosmos, expressed in the theological concept of “Wherever one discerns the Holy blessed One’s Might and Greatness there one will find His Humility.” (Megillah 31A) The Humility/ Simplicity IS the Greatness/ Infinity. Considered more deeply, this is the basis of monotheism. It is the Divine “property” (for lack of a better word, for this word implies specialization, chiseled-definition and constraining lines as well) of anavah that “makes” HaShem k’vyachol-as it were, both the undivided “One” and the encompassing “All.”

The roots of human ga’avah-ego and egotism, lie in the self-perception of individuality and specialization. That which we specialize in is what makes us salient and exceptional. “I am what YOU are not. I am capable of what you are incapable of, or, if your are capable of the same, I can do it better than you can.”  We are proud of what sets us apart and so; what separates and divides us is our pride. As any manager will tell you, a major part of teamwork is the surrender of ego.  There is nothing more ego-deflating than to feel that one is a fungible, interchangeable part in a larger entity, a mere cog in the machine. But for collective entities to coalesce and integrate the balloons of ego must first be deflated.

The Izhbitzer explains that when a craftsman works to produce something it is intrinsically a distinctive, one of a kind item.  Produced by his own individual mix of perceptions, tastes and faculties; it is as unique to him as his fingerprints and the antithesis of a mass-produced article.  As our sages expounded “just as their faces are dissimilar so too are their attitudes and perceptions (deos) divergent.”(Midrash Tanchumah-Pinchos) This is true even in as rarified and superhuman a “craft” as prophecy. As Chazal taught “No two nevi’im-prophets prophesize in the same style.”(Sanhedrin 89)

Logically, custom-made items should not be able to dovetail or interlock. Yet;  although the Mishkan was fabricated by individual craftspeople, each proud of their own unique talents and style, the individual components that they crafted were stitched, hooked, inserted in sockets, ringed or staved together to form a seamless whole. Oblivious to it at the time they plied their supposedly unique, inimitable specialties; they all conformed to the precise specs of a master plan. The Mishkan reduced one-of-a-kind artists to molds and die casts in a mass production assembly-line. When the Mishkan was complete and all could see how harmoniously everything fit together this observation raised their consciousness of the siyatta diShmaya-the Divine assistance that worked It’s Will through them.

They experienced a collective epiphany that it was HaShem, not they, who had actually built the Mishkan.  They came to realize that they were no more than the proverbial garzan b’yad hachotzeiv– the ax in the hands of the lumberjack. The ax is an integrated implement uniting blade, handle and the pegs that bind them.  Even if the ax was composed of sentient beings the blade could still not lord it over the handle or the pegs for none could accomplish their task or fulfill their role without the others. Moreover, even when their tree-felling missions are accomplished , the humbling realization that “axes don’t  fell trees … lumberjacks do” would unite them in their true, cooperative, integrated identity as the lumberjacks implement, rather than as free-lancers working on their own.

The Izhbitzer asserts that Shabbos is the key to this awareness.  The Shabbos concept lies at the core of every mitzvah performed l’shemShamayim –purely for HaShem’s sake with no ulterior motives whatsoever. He goes so far as to say that they are synonymous, that intent l’shemShamayim IS Shabbos by another name. I’ll attempt to offer a possible explanation for the Izhbitzer’s enigmatic axiom.

The Midrash teaches that the Divine Will for creation is described as nisaveh lo dirah b’tachtonim –He yearned for an abode amidst the lower spheres. (Tanchumah Naso 16) This seems odd. HaShem is transcendent, Existing outside of time in non-chronological terms; so how can any given time play host to HaShem? HaShem is omnipresent, Existing outside of place in non-spacial terms; so much so that Chazal tell us that HaShem is nicknamed HaMakom-The Place, because “He is the Place of the cosmos, the cosmos is not His place” (Bereishis Rabbah 68) so how can any given location serve as His abode? Yet … we also know that kedushas haz’man and kedushas hamakom – sanctified time and space are real, not delusions. HaShem’s dwelling place within the lower sphere of time is Shabbos. He ceased creating on the seventh day for His Will, that all of creation declare His Glory, had been done.

When, in perhaps the ultimate act of halicha b’drachav- imitatio dei, shomrei Shabbos cease their creative activity, they bear witness to the veracity of the Torah’s Genesis narrative. More than that, they bear witness that the creative activity of Genesis could cease because the goal of creation had been achieved. HaShem had his abode in the lower spheres in a cosmos in which every infinitesimal component part, and the grand macrocosmic whole that is greater than the sum of its parts, declare His glory.  And so, every mitzvah performed l’shemShamayim, for HaShem’s Will and Glory alone, is yet another iteration of Shabbos; the accommodating time in the hospitable place in the lower spheres that provide HaShem k’vyachol, with a glorifying abode.

How did Moshe congregate everyone?  How did he instill unifying humility in the hearts and minds of the formerly prideful, specializing craftspeople who, collectively, built the Mishkan for the Shechinah-HaShems Divine Indwelling? By first commanding them to observe Shabbos and by making the Shabbos concept clear to them.

Just as HaShem did not bless and sanctify the seventh day until all the work was done, until the cosmos was complete and perfect so too He would not allow His Shechinah into the Mishkan until it was complete and perfect. Had one peg anchoring the curtains of the Mishkan’s courtyard been missing or not engineered according to specs, the Divine Indwelling would have remained in the upper spheres. How then could the fabricator of the aron habris-the Ark of the Covenant have felt superior to the peg maker?  One and all the artisans and craftspeople had been an implement, the ax wielded by the Divine Lumberjack.

 ~adapted from Mei HaShiloach Vayakhel D”H Vayakhel
Nesivos Olam-Nesiv Anavah 1

Get Beyond BT via Email

Enter your Email Address


Thinking Inside THE Box(es)

Posted on by — 7 Comments ↓

Terumah 5774-An installment in the series of adaptations
From the Waters of the Shiloah: Plumbing the Depths of the Izhbitzer School
For series introduction CLICK

By Rabbi Dovid Schwartz-Mara D’Asra Cong Sfard of Midwood

HaShem spoke to Moshe saying: Speak to the children of Israel and have them lift an offering up to Me. Take My offering from anyone whose heart stirs them to give.

-Shemos 25:1

Make an Ark of Shittim-Acacia wood 2 ½ cubits long, 1 ½ cubits wide and 1 ½ cubits high.  Envelop it with a layer of pure gold; it should be covered on the inside and the outside, and make a gold lip all around its top. 

-Shemos 25:10,11

Betzalel (the chief artisan constructing the Tabernacle) built three Arks; two of gold and one of Acacia wood.  All had four walls and a floor but no roof (i.e. the “Arks” were boxes, open on top).  He inserted the wooden one within the exterior golden one and the interior golden one within the wooden one.  He then coated the upper lip with gold. As such (the Acacia wood Ark) was covered on the inside and the outside. 

-Rashi ibid

None of the furnishings of the tabernacle were made exclusively of gold other than the Menorah. (but I’m puzzled) Once a golden Ark was made, why was a wooden one necessary? 

-Ibn Ezra ibid

Several peculiarities distinguished the Aron HaBris–the Ark of the Covenant from the other structures and furnishings of the Mishkan-tabernacle. The specs for its dimensions were in half, rather than in full, ahmos-cubits. Unlike the Menorah it was not made of solid gold but unlike the other wooden Mishkan structures and furnishings coated with metal, it was composed of three substantial inlaid boxes, akin to Russian nesting dolls, rather than plated with a paint-thin coating of gold or copper.

The Aron HaBris was the vessel for the Luchos HaBris–the tablets of the covenant and so it serves as a powerful allegory for human bearers of the Torah, talmidei chachamim-Torah sages and, in a larger sense, Klal Yisrael-the Jewish People. Chazal drew a metaphorical lesson from the design and structure of the Aron HaBris: Rava said (the fact that the inner and outer boxes of the Ark were composed of the identical substance [gold] teaches us that) “any talmid chacham-Torah sage, whose interior is inconsistent with his exterior (i.e. who is insincere or hypocritical, who lacks yiras Shamayim-the awe of Heaven) is no talmid chacham at all.”(Yoma 72B)

Based on this homiletic precedent the Izhbitzer School provides many insightful interpretations about the design and structure of the Aron:

The Izhbitzer taught that in order to acquire Torah a person must view himself as incomplete without the Torah that, as was the case with the measurements of the Aron, that they’re only “halfway” to completion and fulfillment. On the other hand, if one only has an intellectual curiosity about Torah similar to an academic interest in other disciplines HaShem will not allow him to become a receptacle for the Torah.  If a person feels as though he can live without Torah, he may study and contemplate it for years, but he will never truly absorb it.

The Izhbitzer’s younger son, the Biskovitzer Rebbe, explains that the reason for the three individual inlaid boxes was to demonstrate the Torahs intrinsically hidden nature.  It is not merely that the true meaning of the Torah’s narratives, mitzvos and teachings often eludes us; the proverbial “riddle wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma,” but that there are three barriers that must be transcended and pierced in order to perform the mitzvos fully. The following impediments prevent people from committing themselves single-mindedly to the service of HaShem and, thereby, transforming themselves into abodes for His Divine Indwelling:

1.  So many millennia have come and gone and so many “end times” have been predicted without the long-awaited dawning of the messianic era-kalu kol hakitzin.  The dispiriting sense of hopelessness in Mashiach ever actually arriving cools our ardor for the mitzvos.

2.  The leadenness of our natures steers us towards undemanding, path-of-least-resistance, mitzvas anashim melumadah-rote performance of the mitzvos.  Bringing a sense of awe, wonder and freshness to the performance of mitzvos time after time is very challenging when we’ve been trained to do the mitzvos from our earliest youth.

3.  The burden of our past sins weighs us down.  We feel humiliated before HaShem and utterly convinced that our relationship with Him has been irrevocably broken.

The Biskovitzer explains that the midrash (Shemos Rabbah 33:3) interprets the pasuk “I am asleep but my heart is awake” as an allusion to these three barriers. “I” may be insensate to the end of days, but “my heart” — the Holy Blessed One, is awake, maintaining and stoking the very last embers of longing for the messianic era within me.  “I” am deadened to the vitality of the mitzvos by my robotic, by-rote performance but “my heart” — the merit and legacy of my forefathers, who were trailblazers and who were forever breaking new ground, is awake.  “I” am anesthetized and alienated by the ether of guilt wafting malodorously from the incident of the golden calf, but “my heart” — HaShem, my Merciful Father, refusing to give up on even the most wayward of sons, is awake.  The Holy Blessed One called for me to build the Mishkan.  If the alienation caused by sin was truly irrevocable would HaShem ever have invited me to participate in the building of an abode for His Divine Indwelling?

He cryptically concludes that, of the three boxes, it is davka the wooden one that symbolizes the impediment of sin-engendered guilt feelings and especially, on a national level, the guilt engendered by the incident of the golden calf. Puzzling, because the Midrash Tanchumah that he cites (Parshas Vayakhel 8) says the Aron was made of Shittim wood to atone for the sin committed at Shittim. This is an apparent reference to the sin of licentiousness with the Moabites that occurred at Shittim and not referring to the sin of idolatry of the golden calf (that occurred at the foot of Sinai).

[A more direct reference might have been the Midrash Tanchumah from our own parshah (Terumah:10) that states; HaShem told Moshe “they committed a folly (shtus) and angered Me with the calf; let the Acacia wood-atzei Shittim come and gain atonement for their folly.”  The problem with the latter citation is that the Acacia wood in question is that of the mizbayach-altar and not of the aron.]

Rav Tzadok, the Lubliner Kohen, asserts that the essential aron was the one that was made of wood.  Unlike inert-mineral gold, wood came from a living, thriving, flourishing tree.  The Torah itself is referred to as “the tree of life.”  The atzei Shittim box in the center represents the ardent, almost libidinous, yearnings for Torah-chamidu d’Oraysa that are the necessary prerequisite for the acquisition of the Torah’s wisdom (cp Rambam Isurei Biah 22:21).  While the sincere awe of heaven, represented by the interior and exterior golden boxes, contains, defines and sublimates the unbridled, wild infatuation represented by the wood.

Elsewhere the Lubliner Kohen notes that during the creation of Heaven and earth, the darkness preceded the light.  He postulates that every personal or national advancement towards greater spirituality and “the light” must be preceded by, and grow out of, a darkness.  It was not simply that the Shittim wood of the Aron atoned for the sin of the calf it was that the dark sin of the calf was an indispensable precondition that engendered the light of the Aron and, as the epicenter of its sanctity, the entire Mishkan!

The sin of the calf was motivated by Klal Yisrael’s desire for a palpable sensory-perceivable Elohim that would lead them.  While directed towards the calf this desire was something dark and sinister.  But the radiance and illumination of the Mishkan — a place where HaShem’s Indwelling was palpable, and the only site where all “seekers of HaShem” went to find what they sought (Shemos 33:7), followed and grew out of the darkness of the calf. Through the atzei Shittim, the shadowy “shtus” of the calf became part and parcel of the Aron’s and Mishkan’s radiance.

 ~adapted from: Mei HashiloachII Terumah D”H Kol Middos
Neos Deshe Terumah D”H  v’Ahsu (the first)
Pri Tzadik Terumah inyan 8 page 152
Resisei Laylah inyan 24 pp30–31

REVISED 5:30 PM EST 1.30.14

It’s Summertime – Any Good BT Related Books to Recommend?

Posted on by — 42 Comments ↓

This was first published Jan 15, 2008
Any other books to recommends since this was post was last republished?

Dear Moderators,

I have so enjoyed and learned from your blog over the past few months. It seemed to appear to me at just the right time in my progress as a BT. Thanks for providing this invaluable resource for all of us.

An acquaintance of mine with a Reform background has expressed interest in my process of becoming observant and might be considering becoming a BT as well. I have been asked for book recommendations and, while I’ve read several helpful and interesting books, I know that not everyone is affected in the same way by the same type of book. I don’t believe there’s been a post on Beyond BT asking for readers to comment about their favorite BT-related books, but I think this would be a great idea. It could be a type of “question of the week” and let readers comment with the title, author, and a few words about the book.

What Ramifications Have You Found in People Having Different Spiritual Levels?

Posted on by — 7 Comments ↓

Michtav Mi’Eliyahu, Mesillas Yesharim and many other Torah seforim discuss different spiritual levels.

A ramification of this idea is that different people will be effected by different degrees to various activities such as going to a busy beach, watching TV, or walking through parts of Manhattan. Some people will avoid these activities and some are comfortable with them. In my neighborhood, certain respected Rabbi’s will not enter a mixed gender Kiddush. Many people feel that going to a secular college will be detrimental to their children’s spiritual growth.

What examples have you seen of people on different levels following different practices?

Have you experienced any changes in the things and places you avoid as you’ve grown spiritually?

Have you met or read writings of people who don’t seem to believe that different people are effected spiritually by different situations?

Some Life Questions for BTs (and FFBs)

Posted on by — 2 Comments ↓

1) Do you have a Rav with whom you can discuss life issues?

2) Does your spouse have someone to talk to?

3) For men – do you have a learning seder of some length every day?

4) Are you still focused on growing in your Yiddishkeit?

5) Are you integrated into your community?

6) Do you participate in communal chesed (which increases your integration)?

7) Are you active, by making calls and networking, in your children’s shidduchim?

8) Are you putting effort into choosing High Schools for your children?

9) Are you thinking about post High School choices for your children?

10) Are you working on improving your Tefillah?

Major Problems Facing the Jewish People – 2008 and 2013

Posted on by — 89 Comments ↓

This post is from 11/18/2008. From the comments back then it looks like we’re facing many of the same problems. Which is not so surprising, since 5 years is not really a long time from a Jewish History point of view.

What are the Major Problems Facing the Jewish People?

Choose up to 3 and list your own.

A greater than 50% intermarriage rate in the US.

The threat of nuclear Iran.

A focus on materialism.

The tuition crisis.

Assimilated Jewry.

Inadequate education facilities.

Ignorance about Judaism.

Apathy about Judaism.

Potential curtailing of religious freedoms.

The anti-Israel sentiment on American campuses.

Islamic terrorism.

The division between observant and non observant Jews.

Anti-semitism.

A fractured Orthodoxy.

The Pain of Being Attacked

Posted on by — 6 Comments ↓

It seems there’s a bigger cultural war going on between Torah Observant Americans and the Israeli Long Term Learning community, than there is between Non-Observant Israelis and the Israeli Long Term Learners. On the blogs and the comments we’ve been reading, the attacks both ways have been relentless and often vicious.

As BTs we’re often subject to a more subtle type of attack, it’s often not in your face, but it’s there and painful nonetheless.

In a question of the week from 2008 we asked “Are BTs Treated as Second Class Citizens?“. Many of us from BT friendly neighborhoods like Kew Garden Hills, Passaic and out of town communities did not feel particularly mistreated.

But some of the comments revealed a different story. A story of how painful and dehumanizing attacks of any sort can be. Here’s 2 comments combined from that thread, which hopefully will cause us to pause a bit before entering full attack mode, and possibly prevent us from blogging or commenting with vile and contempt against those with whom we disagree.

Here’s the comment from the Second Class Citizen thread:

There are deep-seated attitudes that run against BT’s. First of all, you can never ever breathe a word that the FFB world isn’t perfect – that could be lashon hara – but they write articles about BT’s in Mishpacha all the time that run with the assumption that you can say *anything* you want about BT’s.

Once they ran an article about how BT’s struggle as mothers because they weren’t raised in large families themselves. They interviewed a few (3 or 4) BT’s who spoke about their struggles as mothers. I wrote a letter about how unfair this was – that they should have balanced the letter with storied from BT’s who are great mothers, and FFB’s who struggle. They never printed that letter.

About a year later, they printed an article about divorce. In the article, they mentioned that in Israel 15% of divorces involve at least one partner who is a BT. Then they went on to say, “You would think that divorce is a problem confined to the BT community, but…”

I wrote back a letter – which they did print this time. In my letter I mentioned both articles above. I mentioned how if 15% involve at least one BT, then some of those divorces also involved an FFB – and 85% involved no BT’s at all, so why would we think divorce is confined to the BT world?

Also, if at most 15% of divorces are BT – that doesn’t mean 15% of BT’s get divorced – just as it doesn’t mean 85% of FFB’s get divorced. It means among people who get divorced, these are the proportions. So since some BT’s are married to FFB’s, we could say it’s really 10-15%. Well, if 10-15% of the chareidi world in Israel is BT, then you would *expect* 10-15% of divorces to involve a BT. The statistic is meanless unless we know the proportions of BT’s in the population. So, for example, if 20% of chareidi Israelis are BT’s – then a BT is LESS likely to get divorced than an FFB.
Read more The Pain of Being Attacked ›

Are You Still A BT?

Posted on by — 4 Comments ↓

In common parlance, a BT is someone who became observant later in life. By that measurement, once a BT, always a BT. This usually means that we have to handle delicate situations with non-frum relatives, have lived a more secular life at some point, and we made a clear choice to become Torah Observant.

Another factor that makes you a BT, is that a some point you were deficient in Torah knowledge. This deficiency can be overcome, and it’s always a marvel to look at Rabbi Akiva and the 24 years he spent learning intensely, on his road to becoming perhaps the great Halachic Authority in the past 2,000 years. Of course we don’t need to learn exclusively for 24 years, but if we want to learn at high levels of Torah understanding, we have to make great efforts and put in a lot of time.

The third BT factor that comes to mind is integration into the community. To some, the ability to make people think you’re not a BT, as long as you don’t talk in learning, is a great worthwhile accomplishment. Others feel that as long as you’re a well functioning member of your community, it doesn’t matter if people know you’re a BT. Whereas others are proud to be a BT with all the accomplishment and positive growth orientation it brings. They’re not looking over their shoulders worrying about what others think.

So, are you still a BT?

Will you be comfortable if you’re known to be a BT your entire life?

Are you working on diminishing any aspects of your BT-ness?

Have You Ever Read or Recommended “This is My G-d” By Herman Wouk?

Posted on by — 7 Comments ↓

Although dated February 21, 2012, we just recently stumbled upon this article, Modern Times which describes the publication of Herman Wouk’s wildly popular This Is My G-d in 1959.

Rabbi Yitzchak Kirzner zt”l recommended this book for a first exposure to Judaism and after giving it to a friend, he exclaimed that this was the first book you gave me that I could actually get through.

Have you ever read the book?

Have you ever recommended it?

What did you like or not like about it?

Who’s Cracked the Code on Frum Finances?

Posted on by — 97 Comments ↓

After reading “Financial Realities in the Frum World”, “Introducing Your Children to the Financial Realities of Frum Life” and “Changing the Language of the Tuition Debate” – there were many questions, some answers and nothing really conclusive other than there needs to be a change in “the system”.

The whole tuition debate brings to my mind a larger question – how are people making it through the major milestones of frum life and what are people earning that they can exist on a year to year basis?! The numbers boggle the mind & do not seem to add up. If it’s a challenge to pay basic bills and tuition is “killing people” – now add in summer camp?! Then there comes the major frum milestones of bar-mitzva, Yeshiva|Seminary, chassonas and post-chassona set-up – how are people accomplishing this? Credits cards, tzedukah, home equity or ?????

Being in IT, I earn a decent income, B”H – yet we are just barely scraping by with no real money to put away in savings. It doesn’t seem to me that the majority of the frum world is earning 100K – some are certainly earning much more and I believe that they are in the 10% minority. $200K seems to be a very real guestimate as the needed income based on being able to live a middle class lifestyle, afford tuition, summer camp and be able to put away a few thousand per year to save for the major frum milestones.
Read more Who’s Cracked the Code on Frum Finances? ›

Should Parents Make Potential Shidduch Lists for their Sons and Daughters?

Posted on by — 3 Comments ↓

It’s not uncommon for boys who are dating to have a list of girls who they are interested in. This is often because the boy’s parents get showered with resumes and a list is a good way of keeping control of the process. The list helps the boy and his parents organize the research of potential matches.

When my two married daughters were dating, I made a list of potential boys that they would be interested in dating. Many people thought I was crazy, as girls do not make lists. However, if I could give one piece of Shidduch advice, it would be to compile a list of potential dates for both your sons and your daughters.

To create such a list, you need to call whatever contacts you have in the various frum communities. You must be very persistent in this effort and call everybody you can think of, even friends of friends. Describe your son and daughter and ask the contact if they can think of anybody who might be suitable. Write every name on your list and start researching who might be appropriate, and who could arrange the shidduch. Then on a regular basis call the people who can arrange to ask about the potential date. Try to keep your list at 6 to 10 names at any time.

It’s important to be proactive in the dating process and make regular calls, and managing your list gives you a practical framework to be proactive. It makes the process much less haphazard.

Have you made potential shidduch lists for your sons?

Have you made potential shidduch lists for your daughters?

Would you consider making a list? Why or why not?

What Do You Do About Shiurim at Your Seder?

Posted on by — 16 Comments ↓

It’s Pesach time, and it’s time to start measuring the wine, matzah and maror.

Here is the shiurim links for the Star-K , Kof-K and OU. Here’s a link to a halachic discussion of the shiurim with the opinion of Rav Moshe Feinstein.

What do you do at your seder?

a) give out the more stringent measurements to each participant

b) give out a lenient measurements to each participant

c) discuss the measurements and let people take their own

d) say nothing and let people take their own

e) assume everybody at your seder knows all the halachos

f) other

What Changes in Kiruv Have You Seen Over the Years?

Posted on by — 36 Comments ↓

The Hamodia magazine ran an article titled “Whatever Happened to Kiruv? – Three Critical Changes in Today’s Outreach”.

Here are the three changes they spelled out:

1) The character of potential Baalei Teshuva has changed from someone looking to find themselves to someone looking to learn more about Judaism.

2) Kiruv is no longer the exclusive province of professionals, but is being undertaken now by “average” Jews.

3) The goal of Kiruv has changed from bringing Jews to full mitzvah commitment to simply keeping Jews identifying as Jewish.

What’s your take on the above mention changes?

What other significant changes have you seen?

Can We Commit to True Unity for Purim?

Posted on by — 10 Comments ↓

Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzato writes in “The Way of G-d”:

…Purim involved Israel being saved from destruction during the Babylonian exile. As a result of this they reconfirmed their acceptance of the Torah, this time taking it upon themselves forever. Our Sages teach us that “they accepted the Torah once again in the days of Achashverosh”. The details of the observance of both these festivals are related to the particular rectification associated with them.

To accept the Torah on Sinai we needed to be united as if the entire nation was “One Man with One Heart”. On Purim, when we re-accept the Torah, we once again achieved that unity in the face of annihilation.

The mitzvos of the day, charity to the poor, giving gifts of food, a meal with family and friends give us actions leading to unity. But we also need to be united in thought and emotion.

Can we commit to true unity for Purim?

Can we focus on the successes, and financially and emotionally support all our local institutions who are truly there to serve us?

Can we convince ourselves that it’s not really a big mitzvah to air every piece of dirty laundry Ad infinitum?

Can we support those dedicated to spreading Torah to our fellow Jews, without undermining them by questioning their effectiveness?

Can we commit to true achdus?

Any suggestions on small steps we can take on that path?

Suggestions for a Study Program for a Well Educated Baalat Teshuva

Posted on by — 9 Comments ↓

Dear Beyond BT Readers,

I am a 33 year old baalat teshuva. I am considering attending a study program in Israel next year, and am looking for advice about which are best suited for a women with a postgraduate education.

I’d like a seminary that is Orthodox and were I’ll be exposed to different hashkafot. I’ve met some people who have attended Midreshet Rachel (part of Shappell’s/Darche Noam) and this seemed like it would be a good fit. I wanted to consider other options though.

Any advice I could get would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Rebecca.

Are BTs Treated as Second Class Citizens?

Posted on by — 141 Comments ↓

A few weeks ago an article about BTs came to our attention. For a number of reasons we decided not to run it, but some of our favorite BT advocates such as Rabbi Adlerstein, Rabbi Maryles and Rabbi Horowitz decided to run with the article.

Instead of us discussing what we didn’t like about the article, despite the good intentions of the author, we decided to ask our audience about the article’s main premise:

In your experience, are BTs generally treated as second class citizens in the communities you’ve lived in?

First Published on July 22, 2008

How Can We Get Beyond the Failure Narrative?

Posted on by — 13 Comments ↓

As Jews we want to improve ourselves, our communities and the world. That’s our calling. Perhaps that’s why some very fine people, including many articles and comments on Beyond BT, scrutinize our people and institutions in search of improvement.

It’s a noble cause, but the downside is that we get caught in a failure narrative. Kiruv is failing. Our communities are failing. Our spiritual connection is failing. Our educational institutions are failing. Our resource allocation is failing. We do acknowledge the successes, but it seems the overriding narrative is one of failing people and failing institutions.

Can we improve without the failure narrative?

Is finding failure the Torah viewpoint?

Can giving the benefit of the doubt and judging favorable apply to communities and institutions?

Should we emphasize the successes or is that just a rose-colored-glasses view?