Category: Hashkafa

  • Houdini & his Rabbi

    Houdini & his Rabbi

    A exploration of magic in Halacha, and how Houdini and Arthur Conan Doyle played a significant role.

    Written by Rabbi Moshe Taub for Ami Magazine December, 2021

       Having recently constructed new book shelves, my sefarim, yarchonim (Torah journals), notes etc. were scattered for some time around my house and various offices.

        Recently I took the time to gather them together to place them on my new shelves. In that process, I came across sefarim I thought were long lost. I also rediscovered English books I had forgotten that I owned.

        One of these was a book published in 1948. It was purchased from the Cornell University Library by an unknown person.

          The title of this tome is ‘The Unfailing Light’. That it is an autobiography is not what makes it unique, rather what does is that it one written by a rav about his life in rabbanus.      

          Rabbi Bernard (Dov Ber) Drachman was one of the first American Orthodox rabbis to both be born a in America. Born in 1861, he was raised in Jersey City. It was a disappointment to many of his reform teachers and their leaders when this smart and energetic young man returned from studying in Europe with a semicha and declaring himself Orthodox.

        He would later go on to become the president of the Orthodox Union – which he actually assisted in forming, with the direct purpose of slowing the tide of Reform -he was a supporter of Rav Yaakov Yosef, and even translated some of Rav Hirsch’s works, specificly parts of ‘The Nineteen Letters’ (this was stunning, as some of Rabbi Drachman’s own ‘Orthodox’ teachers were named by Rav Hirsch as dangerous to our mesorah). He would even become a finalist to serve as the Chief Rabbi of Great Britain, losing in 1913 to Rav Yosef Tzvi Hertz (d. 1946; today best known for his translated-to-English ‘Hertz Chumash’).

           Over Sukkos, I wrote a feature on the history of mechitzah in America -where the first synagogue without one first occurred. There we recounted, briefly, Rav Eliezer Silver’s famous testimony in the case of the Cleveland Jewish Center.  He asserted the central role of halacha in general and mechitzah in particular. But he was not the lone voice.

        The JTA reported at the time (November 4th, 1927) “…So far the testimony of Dr. B. Drachman, Rabbi Leo Jung, Rabbi M. S. Margolies, Rabbi Eliezar Silver of Springfield, Rabbi J. L. Selzer of the Union of Orthodox Rabbis, Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein of the Union of Orthodox Congregations and Mr. Gedaliah Bublick, editor of the Orthodox “Jewish Daily News” has been taken.  The witnesses are asked to answer to 33 questions which pertain to the charges brought by the Orthodox committee against Rabbi Goldman. Among the charges are that Rabbi Goldman had denied the Sinaitic origin of the Torah and the Decalogue, that he had permitted men and women to sit together in the synagogue…”

         What I did not know at the time of that writing is that this was not the first time Rabbi Drachman fought such a Torah battle. After serving Oheb Shalom of Newark for two years, in the spring of 1887 Rabbi Drachman was hired by Congregation Beth Israel Bikkur Cholim to serve as their rav. Rabbi Drachman was engaged to be married, and very much needed this parnasah. But soon the winds of change swayed the fragile among his flock, and those susceptible to cultural swings soon demanded that their shul too shall demean the mechitzah to a religious artifact. Although he fought against it, ultimately it was up for a vote which mechitzah did not win (p 200).

        Now married, and with a family he would need to support, what was he to do? The first Shabbos after the vote he arrived in shul as if nothing happened. Likely the congregants believed that, like them, he too quickly adapted to change thereby compromising his morals.

        After leining, when the Torah was put away, it was time for the rav to speak. Many articles recount what happened next with simplicity, but his autobiography demonstrates how he had to still defeat the yetzer hara in his ear. He wondered to himself not if he should acquiesce but rather if he should choose a less dramatic venue and method to be mocheh (protest).  

         “Perhaps I should switch to an innocuous sermon” he thought to himself (p. 202). In the end, he gave his planned remarks. He was also helped by the fact his father-in-law, Mr. Weil, stopped by his home before davening to express his pride in what his new son-in-law was about to do.

       And so, to the shock of the audience this typically soft spoken man saw his voice steadily rise in passion as he discussed halacha, mesorah and the future of the children in the attendance. “I spoke with a fire and force quite unusual for me…but my feelings on the subject were so deeply stirred that once I began to speak I put my whole sould into my words”.

        He concluded his drasha with the following words, “Since they had acted in direct opposition to Biblical passages and Talmudic dicta…I no longer consider[ed] the rabbinical post at this congregation worthy one, and that, with the conclusion of the present service, I would cease to be their spiritual leader”.

            Perhaps the greatest surprise in reading him tell the story of his life is that he almost became an essential part to my background and that of both of my parents. In 1925 Rabbi Drachman was invited to become the rav of Toronto. Although tempted by the offer, he did not accept this position because his wife had just died (p.393). Toronto already had a great gaon -Rav Graubart-but perhaps the need for a new rav came when the Rav Graubart announced his departure for St. Loise (he would soon after return to his position in Toronto). Rav Graubart’s life and geonis will have to wait for another article (see HaPardes, November 1937 p.5ff for an article about his life).

         There is so much more discuss about Rabbi Drachman’s life – including working with Rav Hillel Klein to found the Vaad L’mishmeres Shabbos (Rabbi Klein was married to the granddaughter of Rav Hirsh) and his being the rabbi of one of the most famous Americans of his day…Houdini!

         Indeed, it is this last point that I want to focus on, as it relates to a serious shailah I just received. We will iy’H discuss what that current issue in the next chapter.

        II.

    Above, we introduced the reader to the fascinating life and career of Rabbi Bernard (Dov Ber) Brachman.

         Rabbi Drachman dedicates a chapter of this book describing the sad state of affairs when it came to the observance of Shabbos, along with his efforts to repair it. He opens this chapter by expressing his surprise that here in America when we were finally granted a constitutional right that protects religious liberty in galus is also when so many turned away from yiddeshkeit. Of course, this is an old conundrum.

        While he writes with great passion in defense of Shabbos, he also describes with delicate sensitivity the non-observant and the challenges they faced that may have led to this unholy breach.

         Together with his brother, Gustave, Rabbi Drachman worked with politicians to change New York’s laws so that the shomrei Shabbos would be better fiscally protected. He also helped found an organization helping to educate Jewish Americans about the vitality of shemiras Shabbos. He was very successful in both of these endeavors.

        Humbly, he does not mention in his book that he was elected the president of this early American vaad l’shmiras Shabbos organization, and it was left to the editors to add this fact in a footnote (p. 229). When I saw this, I was reminded of the great quote often attributed to Sir Winston Churchill that should inspire all those involved in tzarchei tzibbur b’emunah –“It is amazing what can be accomplished if one does not care who gets the credit”.

         A more humorous portion of his story is his recounting of his and other early rabbanim’s relationship with chazanim. One of the chazanim tenured at Ohab Zedek was none other than the famed Yoselle Rosenblatt. The senior rav at the time was Rabbi Phillip Klein, grandson in-law of Rav Hirsch. Rabbi Klein and Rabbi Drachman worked well together, so when the shul requested an English speaking rav to work together with Rabbi Klein, Rabbi Drachman was the obvios choice (p.278). Rabbi Drachman would switch off each Shabbos between his main shuk -Zichron Ephraim -and Ohab Zedek each week. In any event, the latter had a rotation of chazanim, no one of which impressed Rabbi Drachman. Although an appreciator of music, he would describe some chazanim by their “sometimes joyous, sometimes pathetic rendition of the prayers”. Yet, because many of these members did not have a sophisticated understating of yiddishkeit, often chazanus was their only way to feel close to Hashem. IN fact, Rabbi Drachman reports that when Rabbi Klein would give his Shabbos Hagadol derasha -which was chock-full of lomdus and erudition – “…to the ordinary layman [in attendance] they were absolutely unintelligible”. He goes on to explain that therefore “To have a chazzan for Shabbos was the highest delight of the old-time Jew…Listening to those melodious outpourings, he forgot all about the hard realities of the unkind present and felt himself transplanted to a holy realm, in the company of the saints and sages of Israel’s past”.

        As for Rosenblatt, Rabbi Drachman records that the annual income to the shul that this one chazan would bring in annually was $25,000, which corrected for inflation would equal about a quarter of a million dollars each year for the shul!

        However, as anyone familiar with rabbanus is aware, rabbis and chazanim were often like oil and water. After recounting the large funds that just Yoselle Rosenblatt brought in to the shul, he immediately then writes, “In the matter of chazanus I did not see eye to eye with my congregants”. Before explaining his reasoning, he first wants the reader to be aware that he too loves music. He spends significant space recounting yiddeshkeit’s important connection to music. He then goes on to explain how too often the chazan’s role in the shul becomes exaggerated. Davening loses its religious function and becomes more of a concert. While he admits, “Even in the case of Joseph Rosenblatt, who was a sincerely devout Jew and strictly observant in the Law -which not all chazzanim are -his repute was not due to his [very real] conscientious piety and religious loyalty, but purely his musical ability.

        Rabbi Drachman’s concern was specific for his time, when people would only come to shul for the concert, rarely daven themselves, and most certainly did not stay for the derasha.

        He goes on to express his frustration in the constant repeating of words that some chazanim utilize. He recounts, “On a certain Shabbos, a chazzan –not Joseph Rosenblatt -was conducting the service.” It was rosh chodesh, and they were saying a piyyut that referenced the idea that we can’t bring the day’s korbonos because Titus destroyed the beis hamikdosh. When the chazan got to the words of that rasha “…he repeated them no less than eight times, each time in a different tone of lamentation and threnody”.

       When after a davening a member asked the rav how he enjoyed the chazan, he replied, “He is worse than Titus!” “How can you say that” asked the befuddled congregant?” “Very simple” replied Rabbi Drachman, “Titus harasha destroyed Jerusalem but he did it only once, but this chazan destroyed the Holy City and the Temple eight times!”

          Perhaps the most fascinating element of this autobiography is his description of his deep relationship with arguably the most person on earth at that time -Harry Houdini. It is hard today to understand just how celebrated this man was across the globe.

        Ironically, or perhaps by design, there is a lot of mystery surrounding Houdini’s background. While we know his real last name was Weiss, there is some debate if his father was trully a rav. In addition, many say his first name was just simply Eric/Erich. According to Rabbi Drachman, his father was a rav, and his Houdini’s real Jewish first name was Yaakov (p. 337). Rabbi Drachman even shares how Houdini and his tw siblings went to Rabbi Drachman’s shul’s cheder,which was held inside Congregation Zichron Ephraim!

         The Jewish life of Houdini, his relationship with his rav, as well as some more on Rabbi Drachman will all be discussed in the next chapter, when we conclude the story of his life and rabbanus.

    III.

        Why would Sir Arthur Conan Doyle -famed creator of Sherlock Holmes– quote a hesped from a rav, and do so with the express purpose  of the world reading it?

         The above question is intriguing, based on real history, and one of the oddest sentences I’ve ever put to paper.

        We ended the last section with a selection from his published (1948) autobiography, where he makes mention of his close relationship with Harry Houdini, who was, arguably, at one time the most famous man on earth. We discovered that Houdini’s first name was Yaakov -and not simply Eric(h), as all historians believe, and how as a young child, he and his brother and sister attended the Hebrew School housed in Rabbi Drachman’s shul. We will now pick up from there.

         Houdini’s father is described by Rabbi Drachman as a rabbi, although refers to him as ‘Dr.’. I have indeed heard this fact before, and often repeated, “Did you know that Houdini was not just Jewish, but that his father was a rav?!” ‘Rav’ may be a strong term. Meir Samuel Weiss was a part of a lesser-known movement in Budapest called ‘Neolog’, a close cousin to modern-day conservative Judaism, although even this is a broad-brush description. An older woman in my shul who grew up in pre-war Hungary remembered her father not allowing her to step foot in those shuls. The full story of the Neolog’s, and how even Hungary’s Ksav Sofer once tried to approach them, will have to wait for another time, perhaps. Regardless, Rabbi M. S. Weiss was certainly learned.

           Houdini’s greatest escape may have been at the age of three, when his father fled the poverty suffered in Hungary. R. Weiss would soon become the first rabbi in Appleton, Wisconsin. Sadly, he was let go after a just a few years.

         Penniless and without skills, the Weiss’s would find themselves in New York where both father and son Eric(h) would support the family through working at the R. Richter and Sons tie factory.

       It was at around this time when Rabbi Drachman began to study with and oversee a young Yaakov/Eric(h)’s, initially preparing him for his bar mitzvah.

        Although Houdini would soon, R’l, leave yiddeshkeit, he retained his relationship with Rabbi Drachman, even during the peak of his fame. Rabbi Drachman would have Houdini to his home for seudos and sought to keep Houdini connected to the shul of his youth as much as possible.      

        Rabbi Drachman shares an amazing story of how his shul wished to raise funds so as to pay off their mortgage. He called Houdini when he had already “become a world-renowned and wealthy man”. After meeting with Houdini, he agreed to donate five-hundred dollars -which would be the equivalent of about fifteen-thousand dollars today. But Houdini had one condition (the following quote is taken directly from the book):

        “I will gladly assist your synagogue. I will give five-hundred dollars toward your fund. But I want you to do me a favor too”. Rabbi Drachman wondered what the request may be for. Houdini continued, “You remember that set of Maimonides [the Rambam’s Yad Hachazaka] you bought of [from] my father? I would like to keep it in his memory”.

       Within twenty-four hours of return the set of Rambam, the shul had the check from Houdini. Rabbi Drachman then records, “I considered it an extraordinary act of filial devotion on the part of Harry Houdini that, although his Hebrew attainments were extremely weak, and could not [himself] read the code of Maimonides, he desired to keep it out of respect for his father” (p, 338-339).

         Later in his book, Rabbi Drachman discusses the death of Houdini and he being the rabbi who ran the levaya (p. 417). This recounting brings us back to how we opened this column, as it is here that Rabbi Drachman mentions how Doyle used his hesped in one of his books.

        To get the basic background, Houdini spent his life disputing the occult, and explaining that all magic is but trickery and sleight-of-hand. In this, his view, lahavdil, matched the words of the Rambam who states that such matters are “emptiness and vanity which attracted the feebleminded” (yad, avodah zara 11:16; cf. Biur Hagra to siman 179 s.v. af al pi)).

        In this point in history, the world was obsessed with the accult and black magic, ad it was Houdini who almost single handedly taught the world that these were all fakers, actors and charlatans. He thereby changed how the world approached magic shows, and while many poskim still forbid them, some poskim were far more lenient, now that world became aware that this is simply a human skill that can be practiced and learned by anyone (Rav Moshe, Chazon Ish, Klausenberger rebbe, etc.; next week many sources will be shared).

         But not everyone was ready to let go of their ‘beliefs’. Many even believed that Houdini himself -although trying to disprove sorcery -was himself a sorcerer, and his outward cynicism was but a red-herring, a ruse, so that no one would catch on.

        One of these true believers was Sir Arthur Conan Doyle who, while writing about great detectives was a horrible one himself. After the death of Houdini, he published a bestselling book, a collection of essays, titled ‘The Edge of the Unknown’.

         There he writes, “At that burial [of Houdini] some curious and suggestive words were used by the presiding rabbi, Barnard Drachman. He said: ‘Houdini possessed a wondrous power that he never understood, and which he never revealed to anyone in life.’ Such an expression coming at so solemn a moment from one who may have been in a special position to know must show that my speculations are not extravagant or fantastic when I deal with the real source of those powers. The rabbi’s speech is to be taken with Houdini’s own remark, when he said: ‘There are some of my feats which my own wife does not know the secret of.’…”

       Rabbi Drachman was aghast that his hesped was used by some as proof that their unsophisticated worldview was correct. He explains that he meant those words in “their narrowest and simplest sense”. Simply, that Houdini was talented, and had the ability to capture attention, etc.

         But the story doesn’t end there. As we will see in the next chapter, Houdini, his relationship with Rabbi Drachman, and the returned Rambam has an impact on psak halacha till today.

     

    INSERT -ONE ARTCILE OF HIS ARRIVAL, AND ANOTHER OF HIS DEPARTURE:

    Friday, March 23, 1883, edition of The Courier-Journal. Aside for describing his upcoming class on Eishes Chayil, note how it also inconceivably asserts Dr. Weiss as being “one of the most learned Rabbis in the United States”

        The Appleton Post from Thursday, August 10

    IV.

    One of Houdini’s life missions was to prove that magicians have no special powers. He travelled the word seeking to disprove the acts of psychics, shamans and other artists of the ‘occult’. The reader should note that until this undertaking, most audiences earnestly believed that magicians had special powers. The magicians themselves not only did nothing to dispel this thinking but would advertise as being the real deal! (See the book ‘Learned Pigs’ by R. Jay where he describes how these acts were presented and were viewed by audiences throughout history).

    Therefore, not wishing to admit being bamboozled, many attacked Houdini’s mission. We even made mention how Sir Author Conan Doyle sought to use Rav Drachman’s hesped for Houdini to prove that even Houdini’s rav was aware of his ‘secret powers’.

    But there was one story that is steeped in irony, that will then lead us to our shailah -Houdini’s Rambam.

    After Houdini agreed to donate five-hundred dollars to Rabbi Drachman’s shul -a huge sum in those days – he had laid-down one condition (what follows is verbatim from his autobiography).

    “You remember that set of Maimonides [the Rambam’s Yad Hachazaka] you bought of [from] my father? I would like to keep it in his memory”.

    Rabbi Drachman then records, “I considered it an extraordinary act of filial devotion on the part of Harry Houdini that, although his Hebrew attainments were extremely weak, and could not [himself] read the code of Maimonides, he desired to keep it out of respect for his father” (‘The Unfailing Light’, p. 338-339).

    Little did Houdini know that the Rambam may have held the strictest view when it came to the practice of magic. In line with this new 20th century movement, after describing all matters of the occult -from witchcraft, incantations, talking to the dead, magic, etc. -the Rambam concludes with the following words (Yad, avodah zara, 11:16):

    “All the above matters are falsehood and lies…. It is not fitting for the Jews who are wise sages to be drawn into such emptiness…Whoever believes in [occult arts] of this nature and, in his heart, thinks that they are true and words of wisdom yet are forbidden by the Torah, is foolish and feebleminded…The masters of wisdom and those of perfect knowledge know with clear proof that all these crafts which the Torah forbade are not reflections of wisdom, but rather, emptiness and vanity which attracted the feebleminded and caused them to abandon all the paths of truth. For these reasons, when the Torah warned against all these empty matters, it advised (Devarim 18:13) ‘Be of perfect faith with God, your Lord.’”

    After speaking to magicians -both frum and non-Jewish -in preparation for this article, it is clear that today any magician who even hints at having any ‘special powers’ is mamash excommunicated from their community. In other words – Houdini had great success in his mission.

    In fact, any magician today who claims to have true powers will be ostracized from his peers. James Randi, a legend in the magic world, spent the better part of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries debunking such claims, and spreading the mission of magicians as being “Honest Liers”.

    Does this in any way effect halacha today? Does the fact that the audience is keenly aware, that it is fake, change its halachic status? Can we assume that they all have such an awareness?

    Many camps, Bais Yaakovs, Shuls, etc. hire (frum) magicians from time-to-time. Should their rabbanim put an end to it?

    Some may opine that, it would appear, according to the Rambam who mentions specifically the prohibition of ‘achizas aneyim’- which seemingly means stam illusions -Houdini’s influence on the world is then of no matter. For, Rambam appears to hold that magic has always been fake, and therefore that is precisely what the Torah prohibited! (For explanations as to how Rambam could hold a view that seems counter to many chazals, see Vilna Gaon in his Hagoas HaGra to Shulchan Aruch, yoreh deah, siman 179; shu’t Rashba 413; shu’t Radvaz 5:63; see below shu’t Igros Moshe for a novel reading of Rambam; see also the yarchan ‘Talpiot’, Tammuz 5709)

    However, many others – such as the Ramban to Devarim ibid., Nemukei Yosef to Sanhedrin 16b, Rav Yehudah HaLevi in Kuzari 1:79, Maharal in Gur Aryeh to Bereishis 25 and Shemos 8, Ramchal in Derech Hashem 3:3, et al. – differ from Rambam and discuss the concept and the force behind real magic (still forbidden to practice!), as well as why it was created, and if this tradition is still known today.

    The famed R’ Menashe ben Yisroel – about whom we spent much time discussing in our summer history series – writes that while the real forbidden magic about which the Torah speaks is no longer fully extant, it may still be found in pockets of India (Nishmas Chaim, p.186 in Hebrewbooks edition). Rav Shach is famously quoted as relaying a mesorah from the Chofetz Chaim that remnants of this forbidden tradition are found today mostly in Africa, somewhat in India, and a little among Native Americans.

    Some would assume that this debate among rishonim -and lahavdil the mission of Houdini – is at the heart of how to view sleight of hand today, where the magicians wants the audience to know it is not real.

    Before sharing the views of the major chadisheh and litvehshe poskim, it is fascinating to point out how some linguists trace the word ‘magic’ to a gemara in Sota 22a. There the gemara speaks of someone who issues halachic rulings without understanding the background. One view there states that such a person is like a ‘magush’; meaning a magician who says incantations without knowing their meaning (see ‘A Jewish Guide To The Mysterious’-with haskomos from gedolim -p. 291 note 3).

    A more known connection to yiddeshkeit may have as its first source Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan’s hakadama to Sefer Yetzira (p. xvi). The gemara famously shares how Rava created a golem. The expression used is rava bara gavra (Sanhedrin 65b). He goes on to suggest that the term ‘Abracadabra’ comes from the Aramaic term ‘abrey k’adabrei -I will create as I speak’.

    A few years ago, a sefer was published with haskamos from many leading poskim – like Rav Shlomo Miller – and written by Rav Rephoel Szmeria of Lakewood. In it, the author explicates the views of the rishonim regarding any alternative medical therapy and if violates any number of halachos. He wonderfully elucidates the above Rambam and how it applies to many things around us that science may have a hard time explaining. I highly recommend this sefer, titled ‘Alternative Medicine in Halacha’, Feldheim, especially the latter (Hebrew) section of this sefer. Indeed, I often call the mechaber when issues that relate to his focus come up in my shul or work.

    So, how do we rule? Can one’s shul hire a magician for Avos U’Banim?

    Of course, the rav of each shul will have to decide.

    For instance, the Radvaz, (Metzudas Dovid, #61, first column) states “It is difficult for me to comprehend that the Torah prohibits mere trickery and sleight-of-hand”. Rav Moshe Feinstein, who after an innovative approach to the Rambam, demonstrates from the speed of Naftali, the strength of Shimshon and other natural-but-rare skills found in tanach that natural talent- no matter how baffling- would always be allowed. He says, however, that he would seek to avoid answering a direct shailah relating to magic (Igros Moshe, y’d 4:13). The previous Klausenberger rebbe was similarly inclined to be lenient, but wished to keep it theoretical (Divrei Yatziv 1:57; see also Sefer Hachinuch 250) and lhbch’lch Rav Moshe Shternbuch felt that so long as the magician makes it clear that it is all illusion and sleight-of-hand it is allowed, although regarding certain illusions stringency may be warrented (Teshuvos V’Hanhagos 1:455).

    However, many other poskim follow the words of Rav Avraham Danzig (d. 1820) who disallowed even a badchan who performs tricks for a chosson and kalla (Chochmas Adam 89:6). Although, even regarding this strict view, some differentiate depending on what type of magic is being performed (Btzel HaChochma, 4:13 end of os vav)

    Everyone should of course follow the psak of their own rav.

    Let us end with the words of the Nefesh Hachaim (3:12; see A Jewish Guide, ibid. p. 313), that we should approach our lives with temimus, and put our faith only in Hashem.

    I wish to thank Shlomo Levinger-a wonderful young magician -who helped in answering some technical questions about his profession as I prepared this monograph.

  • Rabbanus, Family & My First Grade Rebbe

    Rav Dovid Moseson, z”l

    October, 2021

         I am allergic to peanuts. Indeed, when I was growing up my allergy was so unheard of that many teachers thought I was making it up. I share this bit of personal information so that the reader does not find what I will write next to be coming from a place of insensitivity.

        In the late 1990’s, congress had the idea of developing nationalized testing for school-age children. A committee of veteran educators and a prominent publishing house were brought together to create such workbooks.  The goal was to make any material interesting, to use vital information to tell a story. But the censors always seemed to find a reason to disallow material.

        One example: for younger grades, they chose to teach about the clash of civilizations in the New World through the story of peanuts. Peanuts were first cultivated by Natives of South America and were then brought to Europe. The booklet taught how this legume would soon become vital in the Slave Trade, and, in a twist of irony, would give the black inventor of many additional uses for peanuts much acclaim, etc.

        The reader can guess why this was rejected: “…A fourth grade student who was allergic to peanuts might get distracted if he or she encountered a test question that did not acknowledge the dangers of peanuts”.

       Even if true, who, pray tell, will teach kids the skill of avoiding the temptation of distraction?!

         What started twenty years ago has spread and increased. In 1998 the government funded a book titled Quit It! geared to teachers. There it was suggested that through the third grade the following exercise should be considered before a game of ‘tag’ by recess:

    “Before going outside to play, talk about how students feel when playing a game of Tag. Do they like being chased? Do they like doing the chasing? How does it feel to get tagged out?”

       Today, in many school districts across the country, the game of Dodgeball has been banned (Boston Globe, march 29, 2001). One director of Phys-Ed in his district said that we should “fire immediately” any coach who allows Dodgeball (it’s a good thing they never heard of machanaim!).

        Of course, I am not dismissing the need for sensitivity and originality in our chinuch. Rav Yaakov Weinberg, the late rosh yeshiva of Ner Yisroel once spoke at an Agudah Convention about his distaste for Color War, as it divides a whole camp, or yeshiva, for an extended period of time, risking turning them against each other.

        There are reasons to take a fresh look at everything, but there also must be limits.

         I bring up this subject due to an ‘experience’ I recently had.

            In the midst of a busy yom tov season, a rav can forget that he has a family. My wife sometimes even has a friend text me her own shailos just so I don’t push it off and will indeed get back to her right away (see Yevamus 65b)!

          One morning, as I was leaving a shiva house, my wife called and said, “Where are you? He is waiting for you at the door. He looks so cute in his new knapsack!”

         It was my son’s first day of first grade, and in the hubbub of yom tov preparation it had completely slipped my mind. I rushed home, picked him up, and before we knew it, we were on our way to his first day where he will be sitting behind a desk.

        We have kn’h four girls, and our youngest is our only son, so as I looked at him through the rearview mirror, I could not help but to flash-back to my time in first grade (or ‘Grade One’, as we called it in Canada).

        Suddenly, I was right back in the classroom, I could even smell my tuna sandwich leaking through the paper bag, and the aroma of the stained copies off the old ‘ditto’ (mimeograph) machine.

         One can learn a lot about a person by discovering their earliest memories. Childhood Amnesia is a real concept, finding that most adults have no memories before the age of about three, and many more retain little before the age of ten. This is an area of increasing study.

         I went to Eitz Chaim of Toronto. It was an amazing chinuch, filled with talented rebbeim and michanchim. The reader is very familiar with the staff of my youth -even if they do not realize it. The popular Marvelous Middos Machine series was a creation – together with R’ Abie Rottenberg – of the rebbeim, their friends, and many of my classmates (alas, I couldn’t carry a tune, so one won’t find me in the liner notes).

        My first grade rebbe was Rabbi Dovid Moseson. He was gentle, kind and most importantly, sincere.

         He had already taught first grade in Toronto for many decades at the point. He was an old-time Williamsberg-er, having leant in Torah V’Daas in its early days.

         But that morning, just weeks ago, only one memory came forth. I do not know why this is the one my brain had collected for its hard drive. Indeed, when calling old classmates this week to hear their memories, each shared something different (I did not remember that he was a talented artist who would draw for frum publications, and, compose an artist’s rendering of each week’s parsha for the class).

        That one and only memory I had was the following:

         We were sitting in the classroom with the lights off. Rebbe had put on a record (remember those?!). It was a story, acted out. There was the chosid, the town rav and the nearby rebbe. I can still hear the sound effects of the baal agalah galloping-away in my ear.

         Rebbe’s head was down, but he was clearly listening to every word of that story/album. One of the characters said, “…but he passed away many years ago…”.

       Suddenly, we all heard the scratch of the needle being pulled away, and rebbe quickly turned on the lights.

        “Kinderlach”, he began ever so gently, “We will get back to the story in a minute”. Long pause. “Did you all hear the words he just said? Does anyone hear know what that means, to ‘pass away’?

        I remember still thinking then that I did not know what that term meant.

          Ever so gently, tenderly, he explained to us the concept of death, olam habah and techias hameisim. As first graders, we were certainly all aware of the concept, but now we were getting an ‘official’ explanation to this scary mystery. I still recall a wave of relief falling over me and the shedding of fear from deep within me.

         I do not know if schools would allow rebbeim to talk about such topics today, but that would be a shame, if placed in the right hands. Children are far more resilient than we often give them credit for, and indeed sometimes desire frank explanations (again, if done by a proper mechanech).

         There is also another lesson in chinuch we should take from this. We often put on tapes or music to quiet our children. How often has Schwekey or Mordechai Shapiro babysat our children? We may use these tools to shut off the noise around the house, but we did not shut down our children’s’ minds. They are processing everything they hear and see.      

        Sometimes we have to stop the record -of the MP3 -and explain what they just heard, especially when it’s a difficult topic. 

          We just may create a hashkafa and a memory that will last forever.

  • Hoshanos: Understanding the Hoshana Chart & Daily Order Found in the Siddur

    Hoshanos: Understanding the Hoshana Chart & Daily Order Found in the Siddur

    And Some Calendar Anomalies

       October, 2021

    The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, or SIGAR, was formalized under the Bush administration. Its mission is self-explanatory.

          Leading into our current yom tov season, when the blunder in Afghanistan began to unfold, SIGAR published a one-hundred-and-forty page document titled ‘What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction’.

       It is an intense and eye-opening read, and opens with these introductory remarks:

    “‘What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction’ is the 11th lessons learned report issued by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction…”

    What an amazing quote, their 11th ‘Lessons Learned’ Report?!

       I told my kehilla that this is the perfect introduction to the yom tov season, as depending on our age, this will be our own ‘Xth Lessons Learned Report’.

       I was not referring only to the yimei hadin and our need to always assess our standing, but the yimei simcha of sukkos as well.

        Things change, causing many changes and reevaluations, be it in theatre of battle, or even. lahavdil, our actual calendar.

        In this column I will demonstrate the many unique qualities of this coming year.

         A member commented to me that we ‘never’ have Sukkos in September. This is a misconception. Sukkos occurring at all in September happens about fifty percent of years. To have it fall like this completely in this month actually happens about thirty percent of years (34.4% to be exact).

         Many have suggested that this year is unique in that it is both a Shemitta year and a leap year. This is an understamble concern, as we would be extending a difficult year for farmers. Indeed Rashi makes this same point when the gemara teaches us that we may not create a shemitta during a leap year (Sanhedrin 12).

       So how come we see this phenomenon somewhat regularly? We last saw this type of leap/shemitta year in 2008, and we will iyH see it again in 2043. Rav Heber of Baltimore, in his sefer Shaarei Zemanim (siman 9) explains (see also shu’t Seridei Eish 1:39) that rule of not extended a shemitta year by adding an extra adar is when the desire to do so is due to communal concerns – such as giving time to fix roads before the annual Pesach pilgrimage. However, for the other reason leap years are mandated, we can and must do so, even during shemitta. The Torah teaches us that Pesach must be in the spring. One of the goals of a leap year is to keep each yom tov in its proper season. This concern trumps the Shemitta concern.

       We see this concern this year beginning to creep up now –as elul zman began mid-August. In order to fix this  

    Growing time-gap, a leap year is now critical.

          But this year has been a unique calendar yom tov season too, especially for a rav.

        Whenever there is a year when erev Pesach will be falling out on Shabbos, that year’s Rosh Hashana will be falling out on a Tuesday, and Sukkos Monday night. This happened only twelve times in the 20th century, and will happen twelve times in the 21’st (2199 being its last). So don’t fret just because this year’s chol hamoed schedule is not made for long trips; it happens rarely.

        Leading into this yom tov season, this came to mind as I read the pizmon ‘im avoneinu’ and all ofthe ‘seventh day’ selichos – as they to are only recited about twelve times a century!

        It being an earlier yom tov season also allowed for Shabbos shuva to fall on September 11th, the 20th anniversary of that fateful day, thereby creating an opening to give over a derasha that seaks directly to our vulnerability and the fleeting nature of hai almah.

       A member approached me after the derasha with an amazing thought. I had mentioned the question regarding the term ‘ashamnu m’kol am-we are more guilty than any nation’. How could this be? I asked. Not ‘than some nations’, but ‘all’?!

         Many answers have been proposed. Rav Levi Yitzchok suggested that perhaps our translation of this phrase is askew. Instead of translating it ‘worse than all nations’, this phrase can also be read as follows: “ashamnu? M’kol am! –are we guilty? If so this is due to the influence of and pressures from the other nations’.

         Rav Sorotzkin suggests this phrase should be perhaps rendered as a question, “Are we worse, more guilty, than the other nations?’

        This balabuss however had a different approach. Klal yisroel is given this gift of elul, selichos, teffilos Rosh Hashana, aseres yimei teshuva, the ninth of tishrei, Yom Kippur, Sukkos, Hoshanah Rabbah and Shemini Atzeres. All of these days are designed to allow us space to revaluate our relationship with Hashem and with each other. But with this gift comes responsibility. If we waste these days, if we retreat and disregard the influence of these days than we become culpable; maybe even more so than all other nations.

       Perhaps this is why we chose the pizmon ‘im avoneinu’ to be said only during this type of year. Precisely because we have an extra day of selichos, an extra day to become close to Hashem, our responsibility is that much greater, and so we beseech Him over-and-over again in this pizmon, “Do not rebuke us in Your anger…’

     Interestingly, this is not the earliest that Sukkos could fall out. In 1994 the yom tov season began two days earlier (September 5th). This will happen again in 2089 and 2146. After that, the next time this will happen again for another….seventy-five thousand years!

         Because of the early nature this year –and the days on which the yom tovim fall –rabbanim had but a day-and-a- half to prepare Shabbos shuva, and shuls such as ours that sell daled minnim had to begin this work early in the summer.

          As it relates to Sukkos, this year is anomalous for a different reason –its anomaly is that its normal! What do I mean?

       Each day of Sukkos we have hoshanos. Every reader is familiar with the chart in each siddur explaining how each day’s hoshanos may change depending on which days Sukkos falls out.

        The Machatitz Hashekel states (siman 662:4) “The reason for this order I have not found, save for in the words of the Levush…”.

    He goes on to give us the reasons for some of this ordering:

       The day before Hoshana Rabbah should always be Adon Hamoshia. This is because it references rain, and rain on Sukkos is a siman kelela, so we save it to the end.

    The first day of chol hamoed should always be E’Erach Shuey. This is because it references our prayer and fasting, i.e. Yom Kippur. While we should really begin yom tov with its recital –as the Rokeach and others indeed argue – however due its acting as a formal prayer and because the first day of chol hamoed is the same day of the week Yom Kippur falls, we save it for then. And, of curse, the first day of Sukkos is always to be Lmaan Amituch.

        However, there is a hiccup. On the Shabbos of Sukkos the hoshanah is always to be Oim Netzorah.

        This means that if Shabbos is on the first day –when Lmaan Amituch should be said – or on the first day of chol hamoed –when E’Erach Shuey should be said – Oim Netzorah would push them to another day.

       Because of this, each year the standard order needs to be modified every year….accet this year!

        This is the one calendar year Sukkos (out of four options) where all the hashonos stay in place! This can only happen when Shabbos does not take place on the day Yom Kippur fell (thereby moving E’Erach Shuey) or if Shabbos falls out the day before erev Hoshana Rabbah (thereby totally removing the hoshana for rain), or if Shabbos is the first day of Sukkos (thereby pushing aside the typical first hoshanos of L’maan Amituch).

        In the midst of this anomalous year, and after all the strangeness, horror, and tragedy of the past twenty months, it is nce to have something stay unchanged.

        May the only change to come next be the arrival of moshiach tzikainu!

       Good yom tov!

  • The ‘Second Day’ of Yom Tov Explained

    Why Do we have a Yom Tov Sheni?

    Do we still need this Halacha today?

    Why do some festivals not have one?

    October, 2021

    For a discussion regarding a visiter to Israel for Yom Tov, see linked post here.

    Space, Time and the Second Day of Yom Tov

    I.

       Every year at this time I receive two common, albeit conflicting, questions. The first goes something like this:

       “Rabbi, this particular yom tov season is so exhausting. Of course we thankful for all the amazing mitzvos with which Hashem gifted us, but are two days of yom tov still necessary?”

    The second, usually asked by younger members, is as follows:

    “Rabbi, should not Yom Kippur have two days our of doubt, like any other biblical day?”

         So many mitzvos come down to the two factors of space and time.

     Zman itself may share its root with zimun, order. Without time there is no order, and without order there is no halacha.

          For this reason did the Syrian-Greeks wish to ban the keeping of Rosh Chodesh. Without our calendar our system collapses.

           Kedusha can also exist inside a vacuum of space. Sometimes we create it (a shul, a beis midrash) and sometimes it is imbued so from above (the macheneh shechina, the beis hamikdosh, not to mention the heady topic of tzimtzum). Indeed the word for space –makom – is often used as a term of endearment for Hashem, as it is He, and His Torah that imbues a space with its holiness (See Meshech Chochma to Moshe’s smashing of the luchos for a fundamental discussion of this point).

         Sometimes these two values of space/time can merge, such as by a shemitah year, like we just entered into. On the one hand it comes about but once every seven years; and on the other hand it exits only within very specific boundaries.

         However where the time-space dichotomy is most mystifying, most vexing to common halachik practice is Yom Tov Sheni Shel Golyos.

         There is no greater example of a seemingly purely zman-based mitzvah than our yomim tovim – zman simchaseinu, zman cheiruseinu, etc. -and yet, which days are kept hinges upon the makom, the space, of the individual.

       Let us start at the beginning…

    II.

    Yom Tov, the Calendar, and Chazal

           The gemara (Shabbos 75a) teaches us that when the Torah exclaims that our nation’s wisdom will be apparent to the nations of the world (Devarim 4:6) it was referring to the art of calendaring, which in its classic and most basic form is a system of witnesses testifying to beis din regarding a new moon.

        Rav Yitzchak Hutner (Sefer Zichronos, pp. 164-165) wonders what is so special about the calendar that it demonstrates our wisdom; are we not simply following a simple system of witnesses? Furthermore, Rav Hutner wonders, why this was also  our first mitzvah (Bo, 12:2 the mitzvah of sanctifying the month i.e. our calendar system)? Certainly we must have always had some form of time-keeping method before this! Would it not therefore have been more symbolic to introduce us to the Torah with something more novel?

        Before sharing his stunning answer, let’s propose the following. What if we never sanctified the months one year during the time of the beis hamkidosh; would yom tov happen with-or-without us? The Raaved (Toras Kohanim, Emor) is of the opinion that the moadim will spontaneously exist on their respective dates even if we do not sanctify and/or declare the months. The opinion of the Ritvah however is that the chachamim were actually given full power, in that if they do not declare it, even the moados cannot take place (Chulin 101b, s.v. eleh)!

         In fact the shu’t Avnei Nezer (301:6) suggests that when chazal teach (Sanhedrin 10b) that should no witnesses come then shomayim sanctifies the month, it only means that Hashem, as it were, gives His stamp of approval on beis din’s own declaration.

          Rav Hutner, based on this profound power given to us, explains that it is that very novelty that Hashem chose with which to introduce us to His Torah. As if to say, look at the power with which I am entrusting My nation!

          The Gemara (Chulin ibid.) tells us how during a time of persecution the sages of eretz yisroel sent word that Yom Kippur would be postponed until Shabbos –not its true Torah date –thereby fooling the Romans as to why we were in shul. Based on this, the Gemara teaches that whereas the day of the week Shabbos falls Shabbos has been already set in motion since creation, Yom Kippur (and all the yomim tovim, presumably) is dictated by beis din. (See also Klei Chemda, Bo)

            The Pnei Yehoshua (Beitza 5a) shows how chazal’s ability to control the calendar was even used to support even a minhag (such as aravos).

        In Rosh Hashana 30 we are taught how Rav Yochanan changed the calendar system to preserve the daily shir. There, the Pnei Yehoshua comments just how much power the chachamim had when it came to the calendar.

        Concepts such as lo a’d’u rosh, etc. are tools uniquely in man’s domain so as to create zman as chazal and mesorah see fit.

        The present Second Day of yom tov is not, then, merely a necessary annoyance, rather it is a beautiful affirmation of the power Hashem gave over to His nation.

        More, the present yom tov sheni is not even the first of its kind. We already find in the days of the beis hamikdosh that many would keep two days of Rosh Hashanah, and even those in Yerushalaim would, at the very least, keep the first night out of doubt (as to how they acted that night, see Meiri to Beitza 5a; Rashi and Ritva to Rosh Hashana; Rav Zevin, Moadim B’Halacha p. 26 s.v. b’rishonah; Chazon Ish, oh’c 141:6).

         In fact, we already in tanachwe find a two-day Rosh Hashanah! (Nechemia 8:13. See also Beitza 6a)

         Nor was this was not limited just to Rosh Hashanah. Already in the early days of our settlement in eretz yisroel it was difficult to get the word out to all Jews if the last month was 29 or 30 days, and those living far from the declaration would have no choice but to keep two days.

          Some even suggest that the concept of Jews who lived far from beis din’s declaration observing two days on each yom tov is a halacha Moshe m’sinai! (Rav Hain Gaon; See Chasam Sofer, Beitza 4b)

          We continue to see the power chazal had over the calendar some time later when Rav Yochanan ben Zakei created a system just for Rosh Hashanah (Rosh Hashana 30) whereby, under cetain conditions, two days of Rosh Hashana would be kept even in Yerushalaim.

         We see from all the above that irrespective of why chazal instituted yom tov sheni (see below), our second day is by no means unique when one looks through the prism of our long history.

    III.

    New Calendar System

         The Rambam and Rambam have a fundamental debate. (See Sefer Hamitzvos, aseh, 153; Yad, Kiddush hachodesh, chapters 5 and 6; Peirush Hamishnayos, Rosh Hashanah 2:6).

          According to Rambam the standard way to establish the month is through eyewitness accounts of the new moon. Nevertheless, there is a halacha Moshe m’sinai that if the sanhedrin is no longer active, and hence no witnesses are testifying, then a beis din may establish the months based on calculation alone. (See Kisvei Rav Chaim, 46; Brisker Rav in Chidushei Hagriz, kuntros Kiddush hachodesh, p. 10)

         Ramban disagrees with Rambam, and argues that our present system is not an ongoing sanctification; rather it was a system ordained and sanctified from the days of Hillel, which took place in the year 4119/359 (year based on shu’t Rav Hai Gaon). Hillel, seeing the end of the era of true semuchim, had the semuchim in his day empower each of our past, present and future months with the needed kedusha.

          Moreover, we even find many rishonim (Rav Sadia Gaon; shu’t Ri Migash siman 146; Rabbeinu Channel) who suggest that sanctification through calculation was a tool that was always in use. Rabeinu B’chayay (Shmos 12:2) even wonders how the yidden would even have been able to sanctify the months through eyewitness accounts in the midbar, as the anneinei hakavod were blocking their sight! (See Chazon Ish, oh’c, siman 140:3; Netziv to Sifrei, Bahaloschah; Chazon Yechezkal, et al. who all question and seek to explain this view. See also Otzar Iyunim to Mesivta Rosh Hashanah pp. 50-56)

    IV.

    Two Days…Still?

          As seen thus far, a two-day yom tov was not a novelty. However, once Hillel established his calendar it would seem that its need vanished. For now we know when rosh chodesh falls.

         The Gemara (Beitza 4b) explains that because this has been the minhag in chutz l’aratz (see above) and because the calendar is so complex that havoc or decrees can cause us to forget even the system we have now (the Syrian/Greeks tried!), we must continue in what we had been doing –keeping two days of yom tov outside of eretz yisroel. Some rishonim apply it in eretz yisroel too, in the cities where the sheluchei beis din would not historically reach. See Mikroei Kodesh, pesach vol. 2, siman 57.)

     Halacha has to survive long trials of galus. How many people does the reader know who can figure out even Hillel’s calendar should all communications suddenly cease?

    V.

    Yom Kippur

         As for Yom Kippur, historically some would fast for two days, and the sefarim, including the Mishnah Berrura, discuss these halachos. This does not mean that the Chofetz Chaim condoned such behavior, rather that he was recording more ancient discussions on the subject. Indeed he writes (siman 624:17) that since even in the days of the beis hamikdosh they did not fast two days out of doubt there is no minhag to emulate here! This is based on a chazal where those fasting two days yom kippur were reprimanded (Yerushalmi, Challa, 1:1). Already in the days of the Bach we find him and others saying that they have never heard of anyone taking on this stringency.

        Others suggest that fasting two days would mitigate the mitzvah to dafka eat the day before yom kippur!

         May we soon merit the words of the Chasam Sofer (to Beitza 4), that when moshiach comes there will still be a second day of yom tov, but instead of being called yom tov sheni shel golyos (second day of exile) it will be called yom tov sheni shel geuloseinu (the second day of our redemption)!

  • The Life and Works of Rav Aaron Levine, tz”l

    He Was the Source for Many of the Modern Pesakim on Aveilus and Beyond

    January, 2020

    “Rabbi, you still did not get back to me regarding my shailah”.

    It was true, I hadn’t.

    Weeks earlier this member asked an off-the-beaten-path question. After the milchama, her grandparents discovered that their own parents as well as their siblings and their families were wiped out, hy’d.

    There are no kevarim or known yartziets, yet her surviving grandparents chose a certain date on the calendar to mark their passing as a zikaron. On this date someone in the family will light a ner neshama, say kaddish and even daven for the amud if available.

    This has been kept in the family for several decades now, and through many new generations.

    Nowadays, its her son-in-law in eretz yisroel who commemorates the date with kaddish. He is four generations removed from the niftarim.

    “Rabbi, I am just curious…While it is by no means a burden, how long should our family continue to do this? Should my daughters’ children continue, and their children, ad bias goel? Perhaps it more b’kovidik to end it officially, rather than have it un-purposefully wither and over time become forgotten”

    Now of course this is not a pressing matter, rather an interesting curiosity.

    Her question opens up many imponderables.

    The importance of choosing some date for a yartziet in such cases is mentioned in early sources (see, e.g. Magen Avraham 568:20).

    However, just how to go about choosing such a date is more complicated, and the poskim discuss various fascinating methods. 

    Some write that if the year of their passing is known, then one should choose the last day of the year (due to one’s chezaka of being alive, see Igeress Hakodesh to the Lubavtzher rebbe, Rav Yosef Yitzchak Schneirson, chelek 9).

    Others suggest the fifth of teves to be chosen as, should one have the custom to fast on a yartziet, it will be short taanis (M’orei Ohr quoted in Moed Kol Chai 2:21).

    Rav Felder z’l, the av beis din of Toronto (Pri Yeshurin p. 246) says that since chazal already stated (Sanhedrin 47b) that Hashem completes the years of the righteous, and we know that those killed by the Nazi’s y’s are considered kedoshim, then we should simply choose their birthday(s) as a likelihood of their day of death!

    [On this idea that all Jews killed at the hands of the Nazis’ have the status of ‘kedoshim’, there are a myriad of teshuvos and kesavim, see Hidden in Thunder, volume 2, pages 439-475]

    Rav Shterrbuch (shu’t Teshuvos V’Hanhagos, 2:588) suggests selecting Yom Kippur; still others suggest using the date of one’s discovery of their death as the yartziet (see, e.g. Pachad Yitzchak, erech ‘taanis’), and Rav Yechezkal Abramsky suggests that, whichever month one chooses, it is best to pick the fifteenth day of the month of the day of the molad (Sefer Zikaron Rav Abramsky, p. 238, and shu’t Be’er Moshe 8:112).

    But what about her question –for how long, or how many doros –should such a date be a remembrance?

    I told her that I just do not have an answer.

    You see, for all my years in rabbanus, whenever any interesting issue came up relating to death, aveilus, bikkur cholim and all other interrelated topics, there was a recognized expert whom I could call:

     Rav Aaron Levine.

    Sadly, he was niftar last week after a long battle.

    So the reader understands how important he was to rabbanim, every single wonderful source brought above is taken from his sefer on yartziet –a two-volume magnum opus titled Kol Bo LaYartzeit (volume 1, p. 153160).

    Whenever I wrote in these pages on topics relating to his expertise I would first confirm sources and receive guidance from him.

    His sefarim and research in these matters were recognized throughout the Torah world.

    When his son Rav Yitzchok Levine –the current CFO of Lakewood yeshiva, BMG –was a bachur he went to Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach for a beracha.

    When asked about his family, he spoke about his maternal grandfather, Rav Moshe Nussbaum, an important askan and Torah builder.

    “But what is your last name”

    “Levine”

    “Rav Aaron Levine is your father?”

    “Yes”

    “Well where is chelek beis of sefer Zichron Meir?!” the great posek asked.

    Zichron Meir is a much admired sefer on the laws of aveilus. It was published many years ago as ‘chelek aleph’, but due to his many sefarim being written in the interim, the second part was never completed.

    Rabbanim have gained so much from his life’s work, even if they do not know his sefarim, virtually every modern likut –English or Hebrew –culls from his material. Aside for American gedolim, his sefarim received glowing haskamos from Rav Shach and other eretz yisroel gedolim.

    But he also wrote books for the public.

    Many years ago he was asked to speak about ‘Jewish Grief and Counseling’ before a Jewish but not frum group. Before his turn to speak to the audience, a man got up and said something about grief and faith that I will not even quote here.

    Rav Levine was shocked and disgusted by this, and realized the need for another work geared also toward the more secular Jew setting down the proper hashkafos for suffering and mourning, ‘To Comfort the Bereaved: A Guide for Mourners and Those Who Visit Them’ was thus born. I recommend it often to anyone going through a crises of faith after a tragic loss, l’a.

    He could reach such people not only because he had the proper hadracha, but because he and his Rebbitzen Chani Levine suffered from their own grief, as I shall soon explain.

    At the age of 12, he arrived to Toronto from England, and by the late 1950’s would find his way to Telshe, Cleveland.

    American bochurim in those days were not like today. Entry fahers were not as intense, to say the least. One boy arriving in yeshiva at that time was asked by Rav Mottel Katz one question to gain entry: Was Noach a tzadik or a rasha?

    The boy responded honesty: “I don’t know”.

    “Exactly right!” cried out Rav Mottel. “We don’t know, and Rashi gives both views. Welcome to Telshe!”

    After spending time in Ner Yisroel, Baltimore, Rav Levine would go into chinuch, soon serving as the menahal in Ner Yisroel, Toronto, and then Eitz Chaim.

    Before those posts, he began in Savanah, Georgia, in the late 1960’s early 1970’s, where he served as a principal.

    My parents were living there at that same time, also to spread Torah, and our families remained close ever since.

    The Levine’s would then move to Deal, N.J. where he continued in chinuch.

    It was there when horrible tragedy struck. Their second son, Efraim, was niftar on his second birthday.

    Years later, growing up in Toronto, their son Chaim was a close friend. His full name is Chaim Efraim, named for his brother he never met.

    In the hakdama (introduction) to his first sefer on these topics he explains that while sitting shiva he realized the need for sefarim and books on these topics, to guide people in the proper halachos and outlook.

    Thereby, Rav Levine turned his son’s short life into Torah that will live on forever.

    There is much more to say about Rav Levine, his Rebbitzen and his family. But in addition to the bounty of Torah and psak he left behind (much still to be published iy’h), let me conclude with a story about who he was as a person and a michanech.

    While serving as menahel in Ner Yisroel, there was a series of thefts in the dorm. It got so bad that the hanhala was considering bringing in the police to put an end to it.

     Rav Levine interceded and asked if he can try to discover who the ganaf was before such drastic measured need to be taken.

    He decided he will meet with each and every boy of the large yeshiva, starting from the ninth grade through the beis midrash, a time consuming task.

    One by one, he would sit down each boy in his office. “This is very serious. If you tell me know it was you it will never leave this room. But if not, well, its about to get very serious, with police, etc. And then I will have no control…”.

    The idea worked, and the bachur who was doing the geneiva admitted his guilt to Rav Levine.

    Yet, amazingly, Rav Levine didn’t stop the one-on-one integration. Rav Levine continued to meet with every boy from each and every grade, giving them the same third-degree. He did this so that no one would ever figure out who the guilty boy was. And indeed, no one ever did find out, baruch Hashem.

    May Rav Levine’s middos, emes, and Torah be a meilitz yashor for his Rebbitzen, children and all of klal yisroel.

    (Following this article’s publication, Rav Aaron’s son, Rav Shneur Levine of Waterbury, shared with me a private correspondence that Rav Avraham Ausband sent him during shiva. I can share that as a younger bochur in Telshe, Rav Ausband looked up to Rav Aaron Levine)

  • Tu Bishvat & The Baal Shem Tov’s Tree

    Tu Bishvat & The Baal Shem Tov’s Tree

    January, 2021

    See separate post regarding the sources for a Tu B’shvat ‘seder‘, new fruits, and more.

    Rav Yaakov Teitelbaum (d. 1968), the beloved mara d’asra of Kahal Adas Yereim for twenty years, held his shul’s grand annual seudah on, of all days, Tu BiShvat.

    Rabbi Paysach Krohn, who grew up in this shul and under the tutelage of Rav Teitelbum, recently shared with me:

    “This [seudah] was his ‘State of the Union. Even the counselors at Camp Agudah -where Rav Teitelbaum served as the rav in the summers-shlepped all the way to Queens on Tu BiShvat to hear this important drashah.”

    The date chosen for this “State of the Union” address might have seemed odd to some, but I have a theory about why he chose it.
    Allow me to give some quick background first.

    Rav Teitelbaum was a tremendous talmid chacham.

    Rav Heschel Greenberg, who has served as a rav and shaliach in Buffalo for the past 45 years, shared his has fond memories of Rav Yaakov coming often to Crown Heights from Queens to farher the Lubavitch bachurim. This was a major event, and a stressful one, for the bachurim.

    In fact, when I recently spoke to Rav Yosef Teitelbaum, one of Rav Yaakov’s sons, he shared how the Lubavitcher Rebbe chose his father to test the boys because he wanted an outsider – an unbiased participant- to best, and honestly, gauge how the bachurim were doing in learning.

    Many readers may be more familiar with Rav Yaakov Teitelbaum’s other son, Rav Eli Teitelbaum (d. 2008), an early developer of technology l’maan haTorah (among his many projects was Dial-A-Daf; today his organization is still active as ‘Torah Communications’).

    Their father, Rav Yaakov, was born in 1897 in Husyatin, Galicia. When World War I broke out, he was only seventeen. His family, along with many others, fled to Vienna, where he became a student of the illustrious posek Rav Meir Arik (d. 1925), from whom he received semichah.

    Rav Yaakov published a sefer titled Kol Yaakov. It was in this sefer where I discovered a story that may explain his enchantment with Tu BiShvat.

    He shares a story that he heard from his rebbe, Rav Arik.

    We are aware that communal custom was sacrosanct throughout Europe. For example, the great tzaddik and gaon Rav Nosson Adler was famously put in cherem when, whilst in Frankfurt, he adopted a nusach sephard siddur, sephardi pronunciation, and other sundry anomalous practices.

    Rav Arik shared how something similar occurred to the Baal Shem Tov.

    When the Baal Shem Tov was about twenty years old, he moved to the city of Brody, where he became a melamed.

    One year in Brody, he longed to have new fruit for Tu BiShvat (see Magen Avraham 131:16, or the post where I discuss the sources behind this minhag in detail).

    Before refrigeration, as well as our ease of shipping, fresh fruit on which to make a shehecheyanu during the winter was rare.

    The Baal Shem Tov was unable to attain any such ‘new’ fruit.

    At that time, the kloiz of Brody, headed by the gaon Rav Chaim Rappaport, heard rumors about this new melamed, how he was teaching unique concepts and, generally, who had his own way of doing things.

    Rav Rappaport demanded that the melamed come to the beis din of Brody to explain his actions.

    The day the Baal Shem Tov was supposed to meet with the beis din was…Tu BiShvat.

    Rav Rappaport’s brother-in-law, the esteemed Rav Zev Volf Kitzem, came upon the Baal Shem Tov on his way to the beis din and watched as he took a circuitous route through a snowy forest.

    He decided to follow him.

    He watched as the young Baal Shem Tov stopped by a barren tree and cried out words from the Yom Kippur davening:

    “V’yeida kal pa’ul ki Atah pe’alto, v’yavin kal yatzur ki Atah yetzarto—All of Your offshoots know that You are their Maker, and all of Your creations know that You are their Creator.”

    Suddenly, and to Rav Kitzem’s astonishment, dates appeared on the tree, as if out of nowhere!

    The Baal Shem Tov, he observed, was giddy with joy. He watched as he made a shehecheyanu with great intent.

    • (The question of whether birchas ha’eitz or shehecheyanu should be recited first is a serous debate in halachah, and one must speak to his rav about what to do – See Be’er Heitev 225:6; Pri Megadim, #7; Magen Avraham, 225:9;shu”t Kesav Sofer, ohch, siman 25;shu”t Avnei Nezer, 250:6.)
    • (The question of if ‘miracle’ items have the same status as the item they are intending to imitate is deep, yet it is a subject well beyond our brief sharing of this story. This question touches upon issues such as the beracha on mann, or un-kosher intent on it, as well as the view that klal yisroel had ‘miracle’ grain in the desert, etc. See Shalal Rav, Chanukah in the name of the Brisker Rav [regarding if miracle oil would even satisfy the menorah’s mitzvah requirement], and see as well as Rav Yosef Engle’s notes, as collected recently in Asifas Yosef, sefer shemos)

    As soon as the Baal Shem Tov was out of sight, Rav Kitzem gathered some of these ‘miracle’ dates in his basket and ran to the beis din so that he could offer clear proof that the young melamed was a person of remarkable holiness and should be left alone.

    As he breathlessly entered the beis din, they were already in the midst of interviewing the melamed, the Baal Shem Tov. Rav Volf Kitzem interjected, “You won’t believe this! This man should be left alone as he is a real baal mofes—a miracle worker!”

    He opened his basket to show the members of the beis din the miraculous fruits that had appeared on the tree; but alas, all that he found inside was snow!

    The Baal Shem Tov turned to him and said, “One should not try to gain victory in a beis din through miracles. Even in shomayim they do not desire such an outcome. There are other ways to triumph.”1

    I shared with Rav Yosef Teitelbaum, Rav Yaakov’s son, my hypothesis for why his father had chosen Tu BiShvat for the shul’s main dinner each year—that he wanted to celebrate his rebbe’s story about how the Baal Shem Tov was matzliach on this day.

    Rav Yosef considered it but was not entirely convinced.

    “Perhaps,” he responded. “But there is another explanation. In my father’s sefer, in his drashah for the 1951 Tu BiShvat shul event, he spoke about the significance of this date. He mentioned that twenty years earlier, on February 2, 1931 (15 Shevat 5691), the very first Siyum HaShas for the Daf Yomi took place. My father may have felt that Tu BiShvat was special due to this more recent event.”

    That Tu BiShvat, some 89 years ago, was indeed special. The major venue for the Siyum HaShas was the newly opened Yeshiva Chachmei Lublin, and Rav Meir Shapiro opened the siyum by having his yeshivah choir sing his newly composed (and now famous) song “Kad Yasvin Yisrael.” (There is still some debate who composed this niggun and its lyrics, and if it predated this event)

    In America, there were smaller celebrations that took place in Philadelphia and Baltimore.

    Either explanation for Rav Yaakov Teitelbaum’s minhag is fascinating!

    Let us hope that this Tu Bishvat we can see the realization of both of these theories: a growth in the klal’s learning, and, our own vindication in the beis din shel maaleh.

    1. The story is told how the Baal HaTanya was on a boat and, in his desire to recite kiddush levanah, requested the captain to row toward its visibility.
      The captain refused this request, however the ship, as if becoming animated, began to head on its own in the needed direction, only stopping when in perfect view of the moon. The captain and his shipmates were in awe of the miracle they had just witnessed.
      They were therefore shocked when the Baal HaTanya requested they row/sail just a bit more.
      “Why? Hasn’t Gd already brought you to a most pristine area at which to witness the moon!”
      The Baal HaTanya explained that Gd desires human effort, rather than mitzvos fulfilled through nissim (miracles).
      [Heard in the drasha from the shliach at Chabad of Diana Beach, near Hollywood, Florida, parshas Bo, 5786] ↩︎
    A Tu BiShvat ‘Seder’ & Other Secrets of the Day
  • Why Do We Light the Menorah In Shul?

    Why Do We Light the Menorah In Shul?

    Secember, 2020

    I.

    The Question

    Over the years, we have, b’chasdei Hashem, dedicated this space during Chanukah to share and uncover secrets, mysteries and enigmas relating to these days.

    These have varied from the complex – e.g. why there is no mention of Chanukah in al hamichya; the historical –e.g. sourcing the story of Yehudis; and even the mystical –e.g. is there really an issur of blowing out candles?

    This year, I wish to share the background to another puzzling element of Chanukah, one that speaks directly to the purpose, and name, of this column.

    Every yom tov has a ‘Shul’, or communal, element peculiar to it alone. For example, the first days’ nightly hallel’s recital –reserved for the hagada – is said by many in Shul as well as a part of, or following, maariv; only on Sukkos do we find a yom tov’s special mitzvah (the daled minim) carry an element that can only be done in a shul (the hakafos; on Shavous our batei midrashim are filled with the sound of, and the morning’s re-acceptance in, Hashem’s Torah.

    Chanukah is no exception to this pattern.

    Imagine if on Pesach night, after davening, the rav announces that the shul will say the hagada together first, before we all go home and perform it as a family.

    How odd this would be! The mitzvah on Pesach night is hagadita l’bincha –to say over the story at home, with one’s children – not in shul to ourselves!

    Why then on Chanukah –whose lighting requirement is ner ish u’beiso, davka on the home – do we light the menorah in shul?

    There is an important corollary to our question. Chazal state (Sukkah 44b) that although we can make a beracha on a mitzvah/chiyuv derabanan (Shabbos 23a) we do not –and can not –make a beracha on a minhag.

    This minhag of lighting in shul in not even found in the gemara. While the rishonim make clear that lighting in shul is a “minhag vasikin –a devout/precious custom” (shu’t Rivash 111, see below) – would not its beracha be a beracha l’vatala?!

    Let us explore the background to this unusual minhag, and the numerous explanations for it that have been given through the centuries.

    II.

    The History

    While I do not know precisely when this minhag began, I can surmise that it first became universal at some point after the mid 1300’s. In the late 14th century, the rav of Granada, Spain, Rav Amram, wrote to Rav Yitzchak ben Sheshes (d.1408) with eighteen questions. These shalios ran the gamut from queries relating to serious matters of marriage, money and death (shu’t Rivah 102-119).

    His tenth question was this rav’s concern over the minhag of lighting the menorah in shul, and with a beracha. We will quote the Rivash’s response below.

    It is then likely that this minhag, although peformed by some some time before this, was just then becoming popular.

    III.

    The Reasons and their Complications

    Rav Yosef Karo, in his Beis Yosef (siman 671), bring several ways to explain this minhag of lighting the menorah in shul –and with a beracha – including the answer the Rivash provided to Rav Amram.

    We will list each of his reasons –as well as further suggestions brought by other poskim –below, along with some of the difficulties in each:

    1. – Two years before Rav Yosef Karo was born in 1488, a likut of halacha, titled Kol Bo was published, whose author is today unknown. Rav Karo brings from here (siman 44) that there is nothing so novel about this minhag. Similar to how chazal instruct us to make kiddush Friday night in shul (Pesachim 100b) for the orchim (guests) and the aniyim (poor), we do the same for them in shul on Chanukah. The Levush (ibid.), Tanya Rabasi (35) and the Shiblei Haleket (185) also give this reason.

    There are many difficulties with this approach. First, when it comes to the comparison to kiddush in shul Friday night, Rav Karo himself rules (siman 407:2) that on Pesach night we do not make kiddush in shul because the community is required to provide every poor person with wine to perform this mitzvah at home. The same would apply to Chanukah whose mitzvah is at home! In fact, Rav Amram and the Rivash –although living before the Shulchan Aruch – both make this argument so as to dismiss this first approach!

    However, if one looks at some of the sources who offer this approach to the minhag the they add the fact that these poor people are sleeping in the shul, making it their guest-house for the nights of Chanukah. This explains not just why we light, but why a beracha is would be required.

    But this begs the question: today, when there are no guests in shul, why do we still light?

    This same question is asked by many regarding kiddush in shul Friday night: since there are no longer poor people or guests staying in the shul, how is this Kiddush -with no seudah to follow –still being performed?

    However, the poskim (see, e.g. Mishna Berrura 269:5, inter alia) offer a number of rationales for this practice. Amazingly, the 13th century shu’t Min Hashamoyim (siman 25) compares our ability to still make kiddush in shul with our ability to also light Chanukah lights with a beracha even though, in both cases there are no guests who need it!

    2- Next, Rav Yosef Karo brings another answer from the Kol Bo. We light in shul, and with berachos, to lay before the congregation the way to light and the order of the berachos.

    The fact that we would be allowed to recite a Beracha for such a need would make sense, similar to teaching a child to make a Beracha where Hashem’s name may be used (see, e.g. Shulchan Aruch 196:19).

    3-Finally, he brings the answer that the Rivash gave to Rav Amram: the reader may recall that last year we dedicated this space to discuss the minhag to still light indoors even though the danger seems to have passed. The Rivash suggests, that whatever the reason we no longer light outside, we still need a public display, a true pirsum haness, and shul provides this.

    This explanation brings with it many questions that are beyond the scope of this column (see, e.g. Igros Moshe oh’c 1:107 and Minchas Shlomo 2:51), but the most salient issue with this response is why make a Beracha? It is still but a minhag –even if to be mefarsem haness! To make matters even more confounding, the Shulchan Aruch itself rules (siman 422:2) –as is the minhag sefardim – that on Rosh Chodesh one does not make a Beracha on hallel as it is but a minhag!

    Rav Yaakov Emdin (Mor U’Ketzia siman 672) answers that on Chanukah the berachos themselves are a part of the mitzvah of pirsum haness!

    The rosh yeshiva of Lakewood, Rav Yerushum Olshin (Yerach l’Moadim, p. 194-195) gives an additional explanation how according to the view that we light in shuls simply because of the extra minhag of pirssum haness we can then also make a beracha. Based on the words of the Brisker Rav, he demonstrates that only a stand-alone minhag (like aravah) do we not a beracha on; however, a minhag that is represented by the action of a pre-existing mitzvah (such as lighting the menorah), we can!

    This explanation would seem to fit with the words of the Vilna Gaon. He explains our lighting with a beracha in shul on Chanukah as being similar to ur making a Beracha on hallel on Pesach night in shul. We may explain this connection as both hallel and hadlakos neros chanukah as being a cheftza shel mitzvah –a pre-existing commandment, even if now we are doing that same action/recital as a minhag.

    • –Finally -but by no means exhaustive! – Rav Moshe Shternbuch (Moadim U’Zmanim 8:89) suggests a novel understanding of this minhag of lighting in shul. Originally, the gezeira for Chanukah was just to hodos u’l’hallel. Indeed, in maoz tzur there is no mention of our lighting. Only later, when the beis hamikdosh was destroyed did chazal then institute a public lighting outside our homes. However, due to danger, we had to move that lighting inside. And so, as to retain a semblance of a public lighting –as chazal first established after the churban –did we then also choose to light in shul so as to retain a veneer of the original, public, mitzvah.

    There is much more to say on this topic –many more explanations to the minhag, and many more ramifications to each approach.

    But for now, let us end as we always end the Chanukah column –there are so many secrets in even the minhagim of klal yisreol!

    Wishing everyone a frelichin Chanukah!

  • The Rambam & The Mayflower

    The Rambam & The Mayflower

    November, 2020

    Americas First Thanksgiving Drasha

    Over the past decade, we have often singled out the week after Thanksgiving to discuss many of the questions that surround this secular day – such as the halachic issues involved in its celebration, the kashrus of turkey, and the etymology/shoresh for the name of this fowl in many laguages –e.g. turkey/indik/ hodu.

    This year, I wish to share something both lighter and fascinating.

    Sarah Halen (d. 1879) is most famous today for composing Mary Had a Little Lamb. But she is also responsible for making Thanksgiving an accepted national holiday in all states when she convinced Lincoln of its virtue (he also saw it as a way to unify the country after the Civil War).

    In one of her many editorials arguing for its permanence in our calendar, she writes, “The noble annual feast day of our Thanksgiving resembles, in some respects, the Feast of Pentecost, which was, in fact, the yearly season of Thanksgiving with the Jews”

    While some wish to argue that Thanksgiving is not a religious day –and therefore issues of bchukoseohem lo seileichu do not enter the equation – historically this is grossly inaccurate (I refer only to its religious nature, if this also then makes it assur is up to each reader’s posek).

    Indeed, when Washington issued the first such proclamation in 1789, he stated:

    “Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of A-mighty Gd, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor…

    “…Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be…”

    Later presidents would issue similar proclamations, only varying in formalities and dates. In fact, Jefferson was the first president to not issue any such Thanksgiving proclamation…precisely because he did not believe in Divine intervention, R’l!

    In fact, the religious connotation to this ‘secular’ holiday goes all the way back to the ‘thanksgiving story’. William Bradford –who arrived on the Mayflower and would serve as the Governor of Plymouth Colony – came with a bible and had the passengers read psalm 107 upon their arrival.

    Amazingly, the following Rambam (!) is written in this bible in English:

    “And from this Psalme, and this verse of it, the Hebrues have this

        Canon; Foure must confess (unto God) The sick, when he is healed;

        the prisoner when he is released out of bonds; they that goe down to

        sea, when they are come up (to land); and wayfaring men, when they

        are come to the inhabited land. And they must make confession before

        ten men, and two of them wise men, Psal. 107. 32. And the manner of

        confessing and blessing is thus; He standeth among them and blesseth

        the Lord, the King eternal, that bounteously rewardeth good things

        unto sinners, etc. Maimony in Misn. Treat. Of Blessings, chap. 10,

        sect. 8.”!

    Mary Hale and William Bradford’s connection to Yiddeshkeit’sthemes were not lost on the public. For many years after Washington passed away, one Orthodox Rabbi’s Thanksgiving sermon was often found re-published in local papers.

    Rabbi Gershom Seixes served as the preacher and guide (semicha did not yet fully exist on these shores) to the famed Spanish-Portuguese Synagogue in New York City (a shul still extant today).

    We discussed his amazing life and dedication to Torah, as well as to his new country, at great length this past summer.

    Leaving aside for now the halachic issues invloved, the very first Thanksgiving after Washington’s Thanksgiving Declaration, Seixes delivered remarks in his shul that were published that year and years after in the local (non-Jewish) papers.

    Amazingly, some contemporaneous accounts report that they even omitted tachanun in his shul on that day!

    Here is an excerpt from the first famous Thanksgiving Day Sermon, that just happened to be given by a frum leader:

    “In considering the duties we owe to ourselves and the community to which we belong, it is necessary that we, each of us in our respective stations, behave in such a manner as to give strength and stability to the laws entered into by our representatives; to consider the burden imposed on those who are appointed to act in the Executive Department; and to contribute, as much as lays within our power, to the support of that government which is founded upon the strict principles of equal liberty and justice…  
     
    “If, to seek the peace and prosperity of the city wherein we dwell, be a duty even under bad governments, what must it be when we are situated under the best of Constitutions? It behooves us to unite, with cheerfulness and uprightness, upon all occasions that may occur in the political as well as the moral world, to promote that which has a tendency to the public good. As Jews, we are even more than others, called upon to return thanks to God for placing us in such a country – where we are free to act according to the dictates of conscience, and where no exception is taken from following the principles of our religion.  
     
    “…And lastly to conclude, my dear brethren and companions, it is incumbent on us as Jews, in a more special manner, seeing that we are the chosen and special treasure of God, to be more circumspect in our conduct – inasmuch as we are this day, living examples of His Divine Power and Unity. So may we be striking examples to the nations of the earth, as it is mentioned in Sacred Scripture: ‘Ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation!” For this purpose, let me then recommend to you a serious consideration of the several duties set forth this Day: to enter into a self-examination; to relinquish your prejudices against each other; to subdue your passions; to live as Jews ought to do – in brotherhood and amity with all our neighbors, ‘to seek peace and pursue it.’ So shall it be well with us, both here and hereafter, which God in His infinite mercy, will grant to us all!”  

    Whatever our halachic views toward Thanksgiving may be, the closing sentiment of this drasha is still critical for all of us today.

    We must show thanks to Hashem for placing us here, have daily hakaras hatov to our government, and all the while remember that we are still in galus so as to only seek to make a Kiddush Hashem.

  • Smart Cars and the Trolly Dilemma

    The Trolly Dilemma & Jewish Law

    December, 2017

    On July 26, 2013, The Wall Street Journal published a story about the ethical dilemmas facing Google and other companies working on “driverless cars.” It is only a matter of time before these cars, which are already being tested, are on the road. The cars have computers with built-in algorithms that are designed to respond to any scenario—a speeding car, oncoming traffic, yellow lights, bikers.

    But how should they be programmed to respond when faced with a choice that has no clear moral authority? What if a driverless car needs to choose between swerving so as to avoid a crowd and plowing into a smaller group of people?

    Several years ago I came across a book by Harvard professor Michael J. Sandel, who has invested a great deal of time and effort exploring the subject of justice as it pertains to these intriguing, often disturbing, ethical dilemmas. His bestselling book Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do? is a fascinating study of our moral compass and how we might handle the many situations he paints on the canvas of “What if?” His thinking has inspired many, which is evident from the fact that a video of one of his lectures pulled in over five million viewers.

    As I read parts of his book, I thought not so much about how I would deal with these situations but about what halachah would say.

    One of his dilemmas mirrors the problem Google is now facing. Let us briefly review it, consider his students’ response, and discover an inherent contradiction that it presents. We will then review the halachic key to both the dilemma and the contradiction.

    A writer for The Atlantic Monthly discusses a lecture given by Sandel, who presented this scenario: “Suppose you’re the driver of a trolley car, and your trolley car is hurtling down the track at 60 miles an hour. You notice five workers working on the track. You try to stop but you can’t because your brakes don’t work. You know that if you crash into these five workers, they will all die. You feel helpless until you notice that off to the side, there’s a side track. And there’s one worker on the side track.

    “The question: Do you send the trolley onto the side track, thus killing the one worker but sparing the five, or do you let events unfold as they will and allow the deaths of all five?”

    Then Sandel asked about a popular variation of the problem. “The same trolley is careening toward unsuspecting innocents, but this time you’re an onlooker on a footbridge, and you notice that standing next to you, leaning over the bridge, is a very heavy man.

    “You could give him a shove. He would fall over onto the track, right in the way of the trolley car. He would die, but he would spare the five. How many would push the [heavy] man over the bridge?”

    A few hands went up.

    “And that’s exactly why,” Sandel concluded, “some scientists argue that this well-known ‘trolley dilemma’ shouldn’t be used for psychology experiments as much as it is.”

    How could it be, many scientists wonder, that while most people would cause the trolley to veer, only 11 percent would push the man to save the many? Don’t they both involve the very same moral dilemma?

    Many explanations have been offered, none of which satisfied me. However, halachic history may hold the key to this inconsistency.

    Shmuel II (20) tells us that Serach bas Asher, who was 684 years old, made a deal with Dovid Hamelech’s general that instead of killing many of the inhabitants of her town, they would kill the one man who was guilty of rebelling against the king—Sheva ben Bichri—and deliver his head. From here it is derived that one may hand over one (guilty) person to the authorities to be killed in order to save many (innocents). The Gemara2 debates whether this principle would apply in a case where handing over an innocent person would save the lives of many.3

    The Rambam rules famously4 that one may hand over only a guilty person in order to save the many. Many disagree with Rambam, and indeed, Rama5 mentions both views.

    The Tzitz Eliezer cites a discussion found in the writings of the Chazon Ish,6 who wonders about a case strikingly similar to the trolley scenario. If an arrow is heading toward a group of people and will certainly kill them, and one has the opportunity to divert it so that it will kill only one person, what should he do?

    Much of the halachic discussion hinges upon how action is defined. As we know from hilchos Shabbos, not all actions are equal. There are gramas, koach sheni, psik reisha, and others—various forms of indirect or noncommittal action, not all of which are actually deemed actions by Torah law.

    The Chazon Ish suggests that one who diverts the arrow can consider this not as the killing of one but as the saving of many. In other words, it is not comparable to handing a person over to be killed because the diversion of the trolley/arrow can be viewed as a unique manipulation of the laws of physics in order to save people. The ultimate result of this act of salvation may not be our concern.

    Yet the Chazon Ish was hesitant; after all, the case of the trolley/arrow may be worse in that we are causing death by our action, as opposed to simply handing someone over to death. There is no precedent to allow actually killing someone!7

    The Tzitz Eliezer is more certain. He proves that inaction, the principle of “Shev v’al taaseh (sit and do nothing),” is better, implying that in such a case, an “error” of omission is always safer than one of commission.

    Returning to Dr. Sandel’s trolley paradox presented in The Atlantic Monthly, perhaps inherent in our moral compass is the sense that flicking a switch—similar to handing someone over—is much less of a concern than actually murdering someone with our own hands in order to save others.  One is an act of murder, while the other is closer to an indirect result.

    It would seem that the Chazon Ish would agree that pushing the man over the bridge to stop the trolley would be forbidden, and that it is certainly different from the original scenario, in which the choice would be to divert the path of the trolley.8

    Based on halachic compartmentalization, then, it appears that there is really no inconsistency in this moral dilemma and that the students at Harvard were on to something when they differentiated between hitting a switch and pushing a man.

    (According to some,9 non-Jews must look to halachah as their guide in determining how to observe the sheva mitzvos bnei Noach. Perhaps, then, Hashem implanted in their psyches a moral sense that enables them to inherently feel what may take us years of study.)

    Sadly, in Dr. Sandel’s brilliant book on ethical dilemmas, I saw not one mention of the Talmud. It is my hope that Dr. Sandel, who is a Jew, will someday discover the beauty and realism that is halachah—and the heritage that no doubt imbued him with the exquisite sensitivity with which he has been marveling at the world.

    As for driverless cars, perhaps, like many modern ovens, they will one day come with a “halachah mode”!

    NOTES

    1. Shu”t Tzitz Eliezer 15:70.
    2. Yerushalmi, Temurah, ch. 8; see also Tosefta there, 7:23.
    3. The Gemara only discusses handing over the one to save the many but not killing him with one’s own hands. Perhaps, as the Chazon Ish posits, this is due to Sheva’s rebellion against the king, which was a unique case and for which crime the townspeople could even have killed him themselves.
    4. Yesodei HaTorah 5:5.
    5. Yoreh Deah, siman 157.
    6. Choshen Mishpat, Sanhedrin 25.
    7. Unless that someone is the very person trying to save the many himself. See Taanis 18b with Rashi regarding the story of Paypus and Lolnus.
    8. See also Shu”t Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:358. See Ramban
    9. Ramban to Parshas Vayeishlach and Shu”t Rama 10. When Yaakov’s sons go out to return Dina they kill every male in the city (ibid. verse 20). Ramban wonders how such righteous men like Shimon and Levi could kill what would appear as innocents. He first quotes Rambam (hilchos melachaim 4:9) who states that non-Jews who transgress or fail to fulfill any of their seven mitzvos deserve the death penalty (sayeph). Ramban disagrees, challenging Rambam that if he is correct wouldn’t Yaakov –not only not later reprimand Shimon and Levi (ibid. 30) –but would have, indeed, been the first one there to kill members of the city?! Ramban then posits a different reading of the Rambam’s source for his view (Sanhadrin 57a) and says: “…They (non-Jews) are commanded in the laws of geneiva, v’ona’ah, v’oshek, v’shcar sechir, v’dinei hashomirim, v’oness, umephateh, v’avos nezikin, v’chovel b’chaveiro, v’dinei malveh v’loveh, v’dinei mekech u’memchar, and similar matters, ‘k’inyan’ the laws of the Jewish people.”

    Now, many of the laws that Ramban brought as examples would seem to be unique to Jews, and are certainly not mentioned as any of the Seven Mitzvos. Therefore many understand that Ramban is asserting that the mitzvah demanded upon non-Jews of, say, not stealing, is not a generic term up to them to categorize, rather it must confer with our laws. Meaning, just as Jews have clear definitions of these categories based on the Chazal and the Shulchan Aruch non-Jews too must search these very sources for their definitions, categories, and fines. I would suggest, lulei d’sitapineh, that Ramban may not be saying that at all; rather he is simply stating that their mitzvah of not stealing should not be seen by them as Pollyannaish or pro-forma, instead they must, like us, take these seriously and apply them to the real world, real cases and possibilities. They too need laws of shomrim, workers’ rights, loans and securities, etc. So that he is not suggesting that they must use are categories, per se, and certainly not our very rules, rather they simply need to model themselves after a system of jurisprudence based in the real world.

  • The Mission of Passaic’s Rav Shlomo Singer 

    “Every Shul Can Be A Yeshiva!” 

    October, 2020

    This is an Elul story.  

    This is a Rosh Hashanah story.  

    This is a story of Jewish survival. 

    It is a story of a beracha from the Frideker Rebbe of Chabad; 

     The words of Torah from Rav Moshe Feinstein; 

     And, a promise made a century ago to Rav Aaron Kotler. 

    It is now 5780-1, and these Berachos and promises are now being fulfilled; 

     And they can grow still ever more… 

    1. Personal Preamble 

    Elul always reminds me of  Rav Shlomo Singer.  

    It is no secret that one of the best and sharpest yeshiva shiurim given today is Rav Meir Stern’s brilliant shiur in Yeshiva Gedolah of Passaic. 

    Aside from the bnei hayeshiva and the yungeleit that attended his daily shiur was one Rav Singer, a retired individual living in Passaic.  

    For two years –some 20 years ago –I sat mere feet from him, but we never spoke until this summer. 

    Like the nephews of Rabbi Yochanan Ben Gudgada (see Chagiga 3) who would make sure to sit in front of Rebbe Yehudah Hanassi, Rav Shlomo Singer would sit almost directly in front of the rosh yeshiva with a tape recorder and intently focus on the words being taught.  

    I was told he was a local retired chazzan, who went by ‘Cantor’ Singer. 

    I assumed he was a baal teshuva, or someone without a classic yeshiva background who upon retirement asked Rav Stern to attend his shiurim. 

    Looking back, that (self) explanation made little sense. Young men begged and clawed to get in to this shiur, and even then they had trouble fully understanding it until after a number of reviews. 

    But Rav Singer did understand the shiur. 

    How do I know that? 

    You see, as the zman went on I witnessed this ‘Cantor Singer 

     do something so different, so revolutionary, that I can honestly say that it has inspired how I act today as a person and as a rav.  

    When I first saw him do this it blew-my-mind. 

    Rav Singer was involved in kiruv rechokim, and he has had the privilege of bringing back many to the fold.  

    But here is what was inimitable: while other kiruv workers give lectures on light topics, or subjects that they think will draw people inside a shul, regardless whether it’s misleading/misinformed or not (‘Kabbala in the 21st Century’, is always popular), he would invite these unaffiliated men inside one of the most prestigious yeshivos in the world and give a class on…Rav Meir Stern’s shiur! 

    That’s right! He would stand before men who never saw the inside of a chumash – let alone a gemara – and first slowly and carefully explain the gemara under discussion, go-over the points of Rashi or Tosfos or any other rishon that will be needed to understand what was to come.  

    Then, slowly and painstakingly he would pierce it, drawing their attention to the apparent inconsistencies or chakiros, and finally penetrate the sugya and tie it all together in a bow with the rosh yeshiva’s analysis and explanation of the pertinent achronim.  

    Rav Chaims; Reb Elchanans; The Ketzos vs. the Nesivos; Rav Barush Ber, etc., nothing real-and-true was off the table. 

    And, he was successful – he made people frum this way!!! 

    It was a lesson that while the not-yet-frum may not know a lot of Torah, we err when we treat them as a remedial group.  

    Years ago, I received a letter from a chashuveh rosh kollel. “I was passing through Buffalo and stopped into your shul for Mincha and Maariv. When you spoke in-between, you talked about deep halachik topics that, while interesting, were likely above the heads of your audience, and not what they needed to hear” he wrote. 

    Respectfully, and while I understood where he was coming from, he could not have been more wrong. He never saw Rav Singer in action. 

    Aside for the fact that every member there that night was already frum, even if this rosh kollel assumed they did not have a yeshiva education, they too can understand a ‘Rav Chaim’, they too can see the intellectual marvel of chochmas haTorah. Why should we deprive them of the very thing that gives us the most simchas hachaim – Simchas Torah?! 

    Why not explain the reason behind the psak? Why not challenge them? 

    This brings me to Elul. Throughout the year we convince ourselves that we are not at ‘that’ level. We see others, or read about others whose ways are inspiring and the kinas soferim, a healthy jealousy and pining, begins to stir within us.  

    Elul is when we all attend -metaphorically speaking – Rav Singer’s class. When we all walk into Passaic Yeshiva, don one of those silk-like yarmulkas found in a basket and sit and bask at who we can, one day, become. 

    1. ‘Taylor’ed Beginnings 

    R’ Shlomo Singer comes from Torah royalty. 

    His father, Rav Dovid Yehudah Singer, was a rav in Taylor, Pennsylvania where he sought for many years to spread yiddeshkiet in the early part of the 20th century. 

    He would soon move his family to Scranton and open a sefarim printing company. 

    He was a known talmud chacham raising frum children in America (not so common in those days, sadly), and so one day he received a plea from Rav Meir Greenberg. 

    Rav Meir Greenberg was an emissary of the friedeker rebbe of Chabad. Rav Meir was a massive talmud chacham, and had spent years learning under Rav Shlomo Heiman, and received semicha from Rav Moshe Feinstein. 

    Rav Meir would later become the rosh yeshiva of the central Chabad yeshiva of Paterson, now in Morristown. 

    I had the zechus to have met Rav Meir Greenberg on many occasions before his passing. He was a chavrusah with both Rav Shustel and Rav Shisgal zecher tzadikim l’breacha (their nickname in yeshiva was ‘the three musketeers’). 

    Rav Meir’s son, Rav Heshel Greenberg, a gaon in his own right, has been a rav in Buffalo for many decades, and his father Rav Meir lived with him until his passing. I had the zechus to talk to Rav Meir in learning, and even see his notes on the Chidushei Rav Akiva Eiger, and ask his about the time he received a psak from Rav Menachem Zembah hy’d (alas, I will have to share more about him in another article, iy’H) 

    In any event, Rav Meir called Rav Singer to plead with him to bring his family and children to New York. Spreading Torah is vital, but now he must make sure his children themselves would become bnei Torah. Before we re-build Torah, we first need bnei Torah! 

    And so, Rav Singer senior sprung into action, and with no money brought his family to the Lower East Side. 

    Young Shlomo Zalman was sent to Crown Heights to learn –after all it was the rebbe who had reached out to save them and have them raised as bnei Torah. 

    Rav Singer recently related to me, “I can still remember bringing the rebbe milk in his study. When I walked in their it was like walking into gan eden! Not just because of the kedusha in the air, but in the rebbe’s smile” 

    Little Shlomo Zalman’s brother had one of the first Bar Mitzvah’s to ever take place in 770. 

    “I can still remember being brought with my brother to the rebbe for a beracha. ‘Be a yorei shomyaim and grow in gadlus b’Torah!’ the rebbe said” 

    It was only a matter of time that young Shlomo Zalman would take advantage of his living location. After spending some time in RJJ, he went to Mesivta Tifferes Yerushalaim, led by Rav Moshe Feinstein, mere blocks from his house. 

    And so, together with a young Jackie Mason (“Jackie’s father was one of gedolim of the last generation” Rav Singer shared with me) enrolled to learn under Rav Moshe. 

    “Rav Moshe would always ask Yaakov Moshe (Jackie) to emceeMC events. Rav Moshe loved to see the talmidim happy and laughing”, he shared. 

    During his time by Rav Moshe Fenstein, he learnt the power of middos tovos and hasmada. When Rav Singer contracted pneumonia, Rav Moshe traveled aline to his house to visit in person! And as for Rav Moshe’s legendary hasmada, Rav Singer –being close friends with Rav Reuvein, would from time-to-time sleep over in the Feinstein’s apartment. To get to the bathroom in the middle of the night, one had to pass by Rav Moshe’s room where he learnt. Once, in the middle of the night he looked in and saw Rav Moshe learning, in a chair without a back, and with his feet in a bucket of ice so he would be able to stay up! 

    While continually growing in his own learning, and becoming close to (and even sleeping from time-to-time at the home of) Rav Moshe Feinstein, he also kept hearing about this ‘Ari Shel Torah –Lion of Torah’, by the name of Rav Aaron Kotler. 

    Rav Aaron was a legend of Torah even while still in Europe, and his arrival to America was a watershed moment in Jewish history. 

    “I wanted to meet him, to see him”. 

    And one day he got his chance.  

    Rav Moshe and the entire yeshiva were heading to Boro Park to celebrate in the siyum of another yeshiva. 

    As Rav Shlomo Zalman was leaving, his friend tugged at his sleeve. “Shlomo! You wanted to meet the Ari Shel Torah? Well, he is right over there waiting for a taxi!” 

    They ran toward Rav Aaron, grabbed his suitcase, hailed a cab for him, and escorted him into the taxi. 

    The destination of Rav Aaron mattered little to these two yeshiva bachurim; Wherever Rav Aaron was heading, they would follow. 

    “As soon as I closed the door, and the taxi drove off, I thought to myself, ‘What have I done?! What have I gotten myself into?! He will talk to me in learning! He will see I am nobody in Torah! But he never did, You know why? Because he didn’t want to embarrass or hurt me. Instead, Rav Aaron only asked me personal and sweet questions about my life. And, when he arrived at his destination, he gave a tip to the can driver like you would not believe!” 

    “So when did you go learn by him?” I asked. 

    “The next day”! 

    1. The Lion Roars 

    Rav Singer was trying to explain to me who Rav Aaron was. 

    “Rav Aaron would clean your house, he would polish your shoes, if it meant you would come learn in yeshiva. He was fighting for the very survival of Torah!” 

    I’ve spoken to Rav Singer many times in preparation for this article, and each time he shares a different event to capture Rav Aaron’s milchama for Torah in America. 

    “Once, I was in his home when a cousin was mentioned. ‘Where does he go to yeshiva?’ asked Rav Aaron. ‘He doesn’t. He is going to law school in the fall’, I answered. Rav Aaron then asked me to dial his number, and as soon as he came on the phone Rav Aaron quickly grabbed the phone from me. ‘You are coming to yeshiva!’ Rav Aaron ordered into the phone!”! 

    Each time, another story to illustrate Rav Ahron’s passion for American Torah growth. 

    In fact, just last month, the OU’s Jewish Action published an interview with Rabbi Berel Wein. He quoted Rav Soloveitchick who told Rabbi Wein that the students he had in the later years were much more proficient in learning than the early days of YU. Rav Soloveitchick said this was all due to Rav Aaron Kotler’s long fight for classic limud Torah in America! (Jewish Action, Fall 5781, p. 58) 

    Rabbi Singer continued: 

    “I saw with my own eyes the assimilation at that time. When I first came to Passaic there were ten frum families I saw growing up men with longa burds (long beards) whose kids intermarried, Rachamana l’tzlan! 

    “Rav Aaron had to ‘kidnap’ people to come to his yeshiva. But he was fighting for our survival. He killed himself! And for what? Look around! Find me a major city without a kollel today!” 

    1. Mishnas Rav Singer 

    While learning in BMG –which at the times had about one-hunded students, everyone would struggle to understand the breadth and depth of Rav Aaron’s shiurim. 

    Together with Rav Shneur Kotler, Rav Shlomo Singer got a hold of a reel-to-reel recorder, created a surreptitious hole in the ceiling and lowered a microphone.  

    For some time he recorded the rosh yeshiva’s shiurim, allowing bachurim and yungeleit the amazing opportunity to hear it again and again, until they ‘got it’. 

    There was one problem. How will they break this news to the rosh yeshiva? Perhaps he didn’t want these shiurim recorded. 

    So, a plan was set. When Purim came around, one of the bachurim went up to a shtender during the yeshiva’s seudah. With Rav Aaron in attendance, this bochur was to give over a drasha or shiur imitating the style and speech patterns of Rav Aaron, all in good humor. What Rav Aaron –and most others- didn’t know, however, is that instead of speaking, they would simply play a recording of one of the secretly taped shiurim with this bachur simply mimicking the gestures of Rav Aaron. 

    The bachor stood by the shtender and began to ‘speak’. Rav Aaron sat and listened and… was enjoying the Torah! This was not Purim Torah, this was deep stuff! Keep in mind, such recordings were not common in those days, and coming from Kletzk, this technology was not on Rav Aaron’s mind.  

    Rav Aaron was nodding in agreement and enjoying the Torah, when suddenly it dawned on him that he was listening to himself deliver a shiur!  

    Rav Aaron put everything together, and did not get upset that his most precious Torah was being recordered. Rather, he made them promise to keep these tapes safe. Today, it is these reel-to-reel tapes that are still utilized by BMG in their production of Rav Aaron’s writings in Mishnas Rav Aaron! 

    • A Promise To Rav Aaron 

    When Rav Singer was preparing to leave Lakewood, Rav Aaron asked him, “Will you open a yeshiva?” 

    “No” said Rav Singer. 

    “Maybe you will enter the rabbinate” 

    “That too is not for me”, he honestly responded 

    “Well, what will you do?” 

    “I will be a chazzan” 

    “A Chazzan! You can sing! And you never sang for me and the yeshiva!?” 

    Then Rav Aaron commanded the following: “Wherever you go, whatever shul you work for, you must work to turn that shul into a yeshiva! No balla buss is below learning deeply, with chaburos, in depth b’iyun rabba. It is not enough to make them shomer Shabbos. They must know how to delve into the amkus shel Torah (the truest de;th and brilliance of Torah)!” 

    “I promised my rebbe” said Rav Singer, now crying. “I promised me rebbe! And forty years ago is when the yeshiva I have today began.” 

    Rav Singer continued sharing, “I want you to know, this was not my rebbe’s message unique just to me. Rather he told this to everyone who went into rabbanus: ‘A Shul must be a yeshiva! A rav must be a a rosh yeshiva!’” 

    Rav Singer accomplished a lot in Adas Israel as cantor. This includes serving as the menahel and opening of a Hebrew Day School, under the guidance of Rav Moshe. There he taught many. 

    “I didn’t care to teach them ‘Bar Mitzvah’ laining and a speech –and I am a chazzan and could have taught them this! Rather I focused on amkus shel torah!Now, so many of these studnetsstudents are in eretz yisoel. Many of these boys came from deeply conservative homes.” 

    It was over forty years ago is when Rav Singer invited a balla buss Bruce Goldberg to his house on Shabbos for some kugel, cholent and in-depth Gemara. 

    Soon, the entire dining table was filled with men learning the depth of the yam hatalmud. Then it stretched into the kitchen. 

    Soon, there were so many attendees; they had to move to his garage. 

    Eventually, Rav Meir Stern urged Rav Singer to use the yeshiva. 

    This was close to 25 years ago, when I first saw Rav Singer. 

    Soon, he realized that he needed his own building. 

    He told his late wife, “We need a place where people from all backgrounds could attend shiurim and give real chaburos, say chiddushim in Torah, experience the beauty of real learning, each on their own level. In-depth learning for balla battim”. 

    She got nervous. “How will we pay for the mortgage?” 

    “But we both understood they that Hashem had a lot of money” 

    Rebbetzin Ita Singer, was niftar just a few years ago. She was the emotional and financial support for tis yeshiva throughout its early and challenging phases. She also urged a focus on women who need classes and shiurim in depth. 

    “The address of our new, and first home, was street number 441 Passaic Avenue”, exclaimed Rav Singer. 

    I started to quickly think what the significance of this number was. 

    Rav Singer explained, “441 is gematria emes! How amazing is that!” 

    • He Just Needs a Gemara 

    Rav Singer has the secret to kiruv: He truly loves every Jew. It drips off of him. 

    One of his children shared an amazing story. Growing up, their Shabbos table was always graced by Jews of all paths. “A yid is always special” Rav Singer would say. 

    Once, the Sukkos after 9/11, a young man, maybe twenty years old, arrived for the seudah in their sukkah. 

    The world was still on edge, and this young man was a committed Leftist. He blamed democracy, Israel, America, etc. for these horrific events, focusing on their ‘treatment’ of Arabs as the cause for their own chosen actions. 

    “I had enough” one daughter told me. “There has to be limits to can come to our home. It was so soon after 9/11, I simply could not bare taking any more of this man’s childlike view of the world”. 

    “My father told me, ‘You are wrong. His values may be corrupt but they come from good middos. It is his pinteleh yid for rachmanus that is behind his Leftism. 

    “You see”, explained Rav Singer, “All he needs is a gemara, to be trained in learning, and he will be an amazing Jew!” 

    That young man is now married and living in Bnei Brak!! 

    This love for all Jews, and for their potential, is seen in the shul/yeshiva still today.  

    VII. Ner Boaruuch/PTI (Passaic Torah Institute) 

    Today, Rav Singer has a new beautiful building on the way (still at ‘441’), with over 200 balla battim from all backgrounds attending shiurim and learning b’chavrusah per week. 

    Sure, there is davening, and shalosh seudos on Shabbos, but this shul is the fulfillment of a dream – it is also a yeshiva! 

    In-depth shiurim Shiurim in-depth are given for different all levels of backgrounds. The attendees prepare chaburos, give over their own chiddushim. 

    The only difference between their learning style and a yeshiva is that of age. 

    Rav Baruch Bodenheim –one of Rav Singer’s son-in-laws –is the accsosiate rosh yeshiva at PTI, along with a group of talented maggidei shiurim. 

    “I want you to know” says Rav Singer, “This is not created just for those new to Torah. What will be of the kollel yungerman who leaves the walls of the beis midrash to go to work? What? He will learn the daf? That’s great, but what of the amkus of Torah, its true depth and simcha?!” 

    He continued, “When I would speak to Rav Yaakov Kamanetzky about my idea, he too would scream ‘Lomdus! Its all about lomdus!’” 

    As his rebbetzin urged, Rav Singer also has a slew of classes and shiurim for of all backgrounds, housed in a separate place. This women’s learning program is called Ateres Beracha/Nvei TTI. 

    I could spend the rest of the article speaking about Ner Baruch/PTI, but this is not what Rav Singer wants. 

    “I am 86 years old. I have to spread the message that every shul can be a yeshiva! We have to share with the world the sweetness of amkus haTorah! This is what I promised my rebbe, Rav Aaron.” 

    On this last point, a video spread around after this past year’s Tisha B’Av. 

    It was the renowned rav Rav Zev Leff speaking to his shul by kinnos. 

    “A rav in Pasaaic, Rav Shlomo Singer, he has a shul where the balla battim learn, but not just stam learning daf yomi, or learning something peripheral, but learning mammash b’omek. Ad kdei kach, that these balla battim write chaburos! And, they are mechedesh chiddushim! 

    “And he feels that this is something that is crucial. Torah b’amkus is not just for bnei hayeshiva, but every shul should be like a yeshiva.  

    “I heard this not just from him, but from Rav Mordechai Schapiro zt’l, that Rav Aaron said every shul should be a yeshiva. 

    “A shul should be a yeshiva!” 

    I should here make the obvious point, that all of the above is not, chalilla, to disparage daf hayomi (which I myself do), rather to challenge ourselves if in addition to that general crucial knowledge, if we need to go deeper. 

    •  The Dream 

    Rav Singer shared with me, “Many years ago, when Torah Umesroah was successful in placing Day Schools all across the country, they held a special event in Lakewood. 

    “Principals from North Carolina, Tennessee, and all over the country came. While the goal was to give a mazal tov and mach ah shehechiyanu, the principles arriving looked despondent. 

    “I mean, put yourself in their shoes! They were dealing largely with families not interested in Torah-true Judaism. It was an uphill battle. They would teach the essentials and then see these children go off to public schools or college and forget their yiddeshkiet. It was a painful job to have back then. 

    [What follows is Rav Singer’s recounting of the speech] 

    “But Rav Moshe Moshe spoke last, and he stole the show. I still have this recording. 

    “Rav Moshe asked, why do we bless our children to be like Efraim and Menashe? 

    “Perhaps you will say that its because they were raised in Torah in the depth of tumas mitzriam…and that is true, but its also a lie! Our children cant reach that level. We can try they becomes a Rebbe Akiva, an Abayay, but Efraim and Menashe? 

    “Rabbossei, we bless our children this way, even though its impossible, even though it is but a guzmah (an exaggerated desire). Because to succeed in chinuch we have to compare them to the best there ever was. If you wish to succeed in chinuch you can just teach them the essentials, but rather to teach them as if they could become the next Menasheh and Efraim! 

    “And if you wonder, how indeed was Yosef so successful? It is because he taught them from Yaakov, the personification of pure, unbridled, unfiltered, unwashed-down Torah. This is how we succeed in chinuch! Hold them to the highest potential!” 

    Rav Singer said that every menahel walked out of that speech with a new mission: they will not shy-away from teaching youngsters amkus haTorah. 

    “Look at Passaic today. So many mosdos. How did this happen? I remember when it was a midbar! I came for parnasa, and to fulffil the promise to my rebbe. I would never have dreamed Passaic would be what it is today.” 

    Rav Singer, paused, and then again began to cry. 

    “Yes, there have a lot of chashuveh and hard working rabbanim, but it all could not have happened if Rav Meir Stern didn’t walk into to town so many years ago with ten talmidim! 

    “Amkus haTorah is the only future cities have for growth. And now we have baruch Hashem reached the point in American Jewry where it need not be reserved just for yeshivaleit!” 

    In other words, and as Rav Moshe expressed in that speech, for a school, city, kehilla to thrive they must have the highest, even impossible to reach, goals. They must be able to witness Torah at its deepest levels. Without that ingredient –without a kollel or a yeshiva, and without a rosh yeshiva or a rosh kollel for their children to look up to –it is hard to grow a town. 

    This brought to mind growing up in Toronto, and the influence of Rav Shlomo Miller and Rav Hirschman’s Kollel Avrechim –founded by Lakewood –and its mark on the city of my youth, as well. 

    Rav Singer concluded our conversation. “I am just a talmud trying to fulfill the promise to his rosh yeshiva. Help me spread the word, help me share how successful this can be.  

    “Every shul can become a yeshiva!” 

    The Ari Shel Torah lives on!