Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Joseph:
Your comments are increasingly bizarre. I feel badly for you, to have so little supporting your position while you are unwilling to let go and admit you’re seriously wrong.
You persist in contorting the posuk in Mishlei to meet your needs to make parenting and chinuch into a career of violence and subjugation. Nothing can be farther from the truth. If you want to trash דרכיה דרכי נועם, go right ahead. But don’t expect anyone else to believe you and accept your derech. It is antithetical to Torah, and would make Shlomo Hamelech quite angry to see his words distorted to the opposite of his intent.
You make a valid point, wondering just what sorts of infractions by a 21 year old would warrant corporal punishment. I ask the same question regarding the young child. And when I find the answer to what behaviors warrant the potch for the child, I must then consider the other variables to determine whether I may administer it.
You also wrote: Avram , the posek in Mishlei that I quoted falls pretty much in line with imploring. Otherwise the parent must hate his child according to Mishlei. You can nitpick the verbiage but that is a fair way to put it.”
If the implication wasn’t so tragic, I might have laughed. I will try to explain it while hoping bor brevity. I must say that I suspect you will accept none of it because it disagrees with your compulsion to hit children.
Nowhere does the posuk say to hit a child. It says חושך שבטו, which refers to the complete withholding, and the exclusion of it as a tool. The expression is clearly NOT about pushing the agenda to hit. There is not a single posek or chochom known that extolled the virtues of hitting and recommended it to be used as a main tool in chinuch. References you shared earlier say nothing of the sort that you wish to blame on them. The second half of the posuk refers to the loving of the child that uses “guidance”. Do you dispense with that half because it doesn’t support your agenda? No one is nitpicking the verbiage, just translating it as it states, and with the full support and backing of many, many generations of Gedolei Yisroel.
Lastly, you might decide that love of one’s children is nowhere in the Torah lexicon. Here, I send you to Chumash Bereishis, where Avrohom was identified as loving Yitzchok, Yitzchok as loving Eisav, Rivka as loving Yaakov, and countless times throughout תורה שבכתב ותורה שבעל פה.
Next time, begin with an open mind on a subject, look up references, and do not pasken or draw conclusions before consulting what Gedolei Yisroel said. You failed miserably at that here.
Joseph:
Your error here, among others, is that you are pumping the hitting thing as the preferred method of intervention. Your primary source, which I believe you are abusing, is that חושך שבטו שונא בנו a recommendation. That is clearly inaccurate. Rather, it is that the total withholding is problematic. The second half of the posuk, unknown to many but still present in all present publications of Sefer Mishlei, is ואוהבו שיחרו מוסר. You may consult again with Rav Wolbe ZT”L to see the simple explanation. Discipline is NOT the primary approach, and several of us here in the CR have presented our simple explanations. It is sad that your approach is to begin by proclaiming that this spanking thing is the primary tool, and that you now need to find a way to justify it.
Many of us reviewed your citations. NONE of them push the hitting agenda as the preferred tool in chinuch. You confuse the עיקר and the טפל. It is not right to attribute this to any of the resources you cited. Try some that I have cited multiple times, and approach the question with an open mind. Let the Gedolei Yisroel answer the question.
klugeryid:
You wrote: So it comes out that there is always a line,past which smacking is justified.”
Translating this into the vocabulary I chose, there are times when compliance is so critical that teaching is secondary to compliance. This doesn’t teach the child safety, which still needs to be done.
Bottom line is that discipline rarely teaches. It controls. And in instances of safety risks, that is appropriate.
There are so many myths, some of which are pushed here in the CR, about the obligations of chinuch. So many abuse the posuk חושך שבטו שונא בנו, and I am quoting this directly from Rav Wolbe ZT”L. Hitting is not chinuch, and never was. It is untrue to attribute this to שלמה המלך. He never said that.
Chinuch is the raising of child to be a true Oveid Hashem. That has nothing whatsoever to do with discipline. It has to do with teaching. And the greatest amount of true teaching and learning occurs by modeling. We have a fundamental obligation to teach our children to WANT to fulfill mitzvos. Anything that scares them straight is NOT chinuch.
Yelling, spanking, and all other punishing interventions do not produce better Ovdei Hashem. They do promote compliance, and make the lives of the caregivers (parents and mechanchim) easier. But these methods do not teach and do not constitute chinuch.
As usual, i will read followup comments that are vehement and toxic, how dare anyone say this. I will only refer to the many seforim on chinuch from Gedolei Yisroel. After someone has reviewed those, and still wishes to disagree, we might have a debate. Meanwhile, one who wishes to use discipline must be fully aware of the true chiyuv of chinuch, and exactly what is accomplished with the use of these disciplinary tools.
DY:
You wrote: “That’s wonderful, but a very small minority. In general, the learning of one immersed in it יומם ולילה is of a higher quality than one who isn’t, and the gemara clearly places a priority on higher quality learning, your politically correct stance notwithstanding.”
You gotta know that this is pure baloney. I don’t know numbers for the מחברי ספרים that I mentioned, but that is not the point either. It’s about people using the abilities they were Divinely gifted. The יומם ולילה issue is the mitzvah (not in Chumash but in the beginning of ספר יהושע), and this includes implementation as well as the actual limud. I refer you back to the quote from the gemora in ברכות דף לו where it notes that הרבה עשו כרשב”י ולא עלתה בידם, as they were outside of their true mission. review that with the meforshim, and we can discuss this further. You cannot address the “quality” of one’s learning by talking quantity. They are not the same.
I have zero regard for the PC approach. I am practical. Someone gifted with drawing skills should utilize them for Kiddush Hashem. How? Perhaps safrus, perhaps art work that advances Kiddush Shem Shomayim, maybe something else. No one is minimizing learning. All I am saying is that the universal full-time learning is a myth. It is great for some, and an exercise of failure for others. And quantity doesn’t equal quality.
DY:
Nice try. You are ignoring a reality, and looking to attribute that to the gemora. Here’s the news (not good, not bad, just reality.) Not everyone is cut out for full time learning. Some are not granted the means to do that. Many more are simply not able to learn at that pace. It thus becomes a recipe for failure. What right does someone who is not able to learn full time have to demand that kind of support from others? It’s actually dishonest.
Next – there is a Torah obligation to provide for one’s family. No, it is not the Torah way to be dependent on others. The kollel lifestyle was declared by Rav Aharon Kotler as a הוראת שעה, not a deviation from countless divrei Chazal and psukim that guide a Yid to work and provide for his family. Here’s a knee jerk list of such citations:
בזיעת אפך תאכל לחם
יגיע כפיך כי תאכל
הרבה עשו ברשב”י ולא עלתה בידם, הרבה עשו כר’ ישמעאל ועלתה בידם
גדולה מלאכה שמכבדת את בעליה
מר להן כך מקובלני מבית אבי אבא לעולם ישכיר אדם עצמו לע”ז ואל יצטרך לבריות והוא סבר לע”ז ממש ולא היא אלא ע”ז עבודה שזרה לו כדאמר ליה רב לרב כהנא נטוש נבילתא בשוקא ושקול אגרא ולא תימא גברא רבא אנא וזילא בי מילתאThere are many, many more. Chazal frowned significantly on dependency, and on the hiding behind the gemora. It is not a bizayon to work and earn an honest day’s pay. And giving the message to our bochurim and girls that only full time kollel learning is the true Torah derech is virtually lying. We do need our kollelim and full time learners, and they represent us in that מלאכת הקודש. The rest of us, need to be קובע עתים in a serious way, and to implement the many halachos that we and they learn. After 120, no one will arrive at בית דין של מעלה to face a multiple choice exam on Shas and Shulchan Aruch. We will be asked about honesty, קביעת עתים, etc.
I am familiar with quite a few people who are working full time (some already retired) who are מחברי ספרים, whose learning is on par with quite a number of recognized Roshei Yeshivos.
Does anybody actually know their “life’s mission”? Aside from those with Ruach Hakodesh, knowing anyone’s mission is a virtual impossibility. Since we are not supplied with that knowledge, we are stuck with the need to assess our liabilities and assets, and make sound, educated decisions based on this. It is tragic that the universal message given to our young people is that they need to remain in full time learning. There are certainly those who should, and they form an important backbone for Klal Yisroel. There are many others who cannot handle this, and should not. Our chinuch system should be educating our youth to know their strengths and to build on them. The notion of כל תורה שאין עמה מלאכה סופה בטילה is a critical rule in our ability to live a Torah life.
The truly crucial piece to educate our youth honestly and properly is that לימוד התורה is one of the greatest things we can do. It needs to become a mainstay in our lives, whether we choose other careers or not. And the learning that is done that way by the working man is a s precious to HKB”H as the full time learning of the kollel yungerman. I predict some backlash for this statement, and I will respond only to those who provide references and citations that differ from what I stated.
knaidlach:
Nice idea. However, the goniff that wants to steal but doesn’t actually take anything (because nothing was there to take) was not in violation of the issur to steal. By providing something, the generosity of the few dollars might be the issur of לפני עור לא תתן מכשול. I suspect a better option would be to have some means of surveillance, and to catch the thief. That way he/she could get the help they need, which is not the money (they might need that, too). but the therapy to learn to live a normal life.
ZD:
You wrote: “A mamzer is also punished for the sins of his parents too”
No he is not. Can you cite a source for this? I want the guilty to pay.
The posuk says (לא יומתו בנים על אבות (דברים כד טז
There are ways of HKB”H exacting consequences from children, as we read in last week’s parsha in the Aseres Hadibros, but that is G-d’s business, not ours.
T2T:
You wrote: “So you sgree we should take them to court if we believe they were psrt of the abuse?
Well how do u propose a victim take them to court without suing them first?”I am declaring that yeshivos, rarely if ever, have responsibility for the crimes committed. If you can prove they do, with policies that are the structure of the yeshiva, you have a case. Meanwhile, you have individuals who are committing crimes that are outside of their job description, whether the abuse or the protection. Your second sentence is hardly coherent. There are criminal matters, and there are compensation lawsuits. If a crime is proven, throw the book at ’em. If liability is proven, award them. The question is whether old cases can be proven with anything beyond a verbal claim. The “metoo” movement states that anyone that claims anything should get millions. I say that true victims might deserve something, but that this “window” just invites false claims. I also question whether monetary awards accomplish anything but damaging the alleged perpetrators and the yeshivos.
Syag:
Why insult yourself? Have you any clue what scientific research is? Any study requires a research design that is crafted, modified and improved, and passes review by several experts. Conducting the study, providing everything needed to replicate it, analyzing the results, and drawing conclusions are all complex processes that bear no resemblance to the impulsive comments that appear in the CR. The questions you ask have been asked before, and the studies bear out that there is no meaningful clinical benefit from the negative consequences to the abusers. No one conducts studies with the conclusion predetermined, and you may be saddened that they do not support your belief. Do you really think the researchers did not study the victims?
You are correct that encountering the molester would be painful to the victim. Incarceration, as wonderful as it might be, is not the only answer to that. How about if the alleged abuser moved away and they would never meet again? I’m not looking to protect anyone, just to ficus on the question. No, I’m not insulting victims/survivors, and I have made my observations from having spent many, many hours with them. Difference is that I am making logical and intellectual observations, and you are speaking from passion. That’s why I won’t make the “breath of air” the punishment of the abuser. Both have merit, but are not connected. The scientists studying the matter also believed, in their hypothesis, that you were correct, but the results indicate otherwise.
places:
The studies I saw focused on children who were abused. I do not recall, without reviewing them, what the top age was. It may have included adolescents, but I do not remember. That relates to the subjects of the abuse. As far as the ones studied, they were adults at the time of collection of data, and there was plenty of time passed during which there were observations of those whose abusers received consequences versus those who did not.
What is important is that we are all entitled to our feelings and passions. When we are addressing how to act on them, we must always allow facts to be the guide. I hate molesters as much as anyone here, and I have nary a good word to defend them or their protectors. There is an obsession by many to punish, punish, sue, incarcerate, and punish some more. That focus comes from passion, not logic. If we focus on what truly helps, there is a very different picture. I do not support any statute of limitations. But I also cannot support the “metoo” delusion that allowed for women to fabricate lies to block Kavanaugh, that brought experienced politicians into the delusion. Victimization happens, and our community is not exempt. Now, what will help? We disagree on whether this legislation helps or hurts. I recognize the need for something. I believe this is not it.
places:
The literature refers to the healing process as clinical benefit. And your suggestion is not supported by the research. Perhaps you would like to believe that the healing is quicker and better, but science says it ain’t so. There are good reasons to lock up a perpetrator. But it is not for the victims, as much as they may relish in the perpetrator’s misery. It is to protect the public. This matter was the focus of the studies, and your hypothesis was not supported. Your logic is okay, but the facts are not that way.
ZD:
You wrote: “It definatly is a greater danger that people are more concerned about Yeshivas who committed offenses should be more worried about being sued than the crime they committed”
You are not thinking straight about this. I believe that everyone is concerned about the commission of an offense. You seem to suggest that the yeshivos are evil houses of abuse. Now, I am one who has a record of throwing the book at chinuch for a lot. And I am directly familiar with some who turned away from abuse, covered it up, and allowed faculty with problems to continue at their jobs. These yeshivos disgust me. I have yet to meet a yeshiva that has a destructive policy. Their policies are generally good, and some are better. There may be individuals who do not follow them, and they expose kids to danger. And we can talk of menahalim, rebbeiim, teachers, and other employees who misbehave, crossing lines of abuse of various kinds. These individuals are personally liable. Go sue them. The yeshiva does not officially condone abuse, and if one alleges they do, prove that in court.
I suggest that the liability, if it is true and exists, is on the individuals. The bloodthirsty and greedy attitude here will not heal anyone, nor will it deter anyone. Show me support for such attitudes anywhere in the Torah.
NOYB:
I do not disagree about lawsuits. They must be targeted at those actually responsible. The trouble with the new legislation is that it allows old cases to be basis for suit. As noted earlier, there is no corroborating evidence or witnesses that are likely to exist on old cases, and the tendency to believe anything that claims victimization today is beyond the morally acceptable. There are true cases of abuse. But this window allows for fake ones, even invites them. And no amount of denial will stand in front of someone that claims victimization – which is inconsistent with halacha and secular law. There needs to be proof before conviction. Today’s world says otherwise.
If I am struggling to pay my mortgage and credit card bills, all I need to do is hire a lawyer to sue all my past yeshivos, and viola, debts paid. That’s the predicted result of the present legislation.
Syag:
I have researched this subject quite thoroughly, via literature and victims/survivors. I reach my conclusions after study, not looking for support for my contentions.
AnonJ:
Sorry, but your comment smells more of greed than helping trauma victims. “There’s got to be money somewhere. Find it, and I’ll look for a way to demand it.”
You and others have still failed to prove that the ones targeted in a lawsuit are actually responsible for anything. I noted earlier, let the guilty pay. But those not guilty cannot be subjected to lawsuits, regardless of how the victim feels.
RebYidd:
The protecting of the offender by a yeshiva and community might well be a factor in the OTD. But those victims I spoke to identified the main issue was the role of the perpetrator as someone who should have represented kedusha, and had no problem exploiting someone for their moment of gratification. The confusion began long before anyone reported that there was an offense.
All that differentiates between the OTD factor and the other negative consequences of the abuse is that this one is clearly not measurable in dollars. At least one can place dollar figures on the years of therapy that the victim needs. And I still say that this should be compensated. But this has nothing to do with bankrupting anyone.
ZD:
You wrote: “Sometimes suing the pants off someone will prevent someone else from doing the same. Its a deterant”
I disagree. If you know anything about the perpetrators of these crimes, they act impulsively, and do not make calculations about the consequences. They operate under the delusion that they will not get caught, and will get away from everything. It’s not about a calculation that the “system” will somehow protect them. Secondly, your statement “suing the pants off someone” implies that this is based on creating damage, not repairing a situation. As much as I detest molesters and wish them no good, “suing the pants off” is the wrong solution to a real problem.
Next, you wrote: “In general money is used to pay for all sorts of damages to someone. If someone is killed, Will $5 million bring them back ? Of course not, but that doesnt mean the person doesnt deserve the money
And sometimes they might need it, Someone sufferent from PTSD from being a victims has medical bills that need to be paid for, the money from the offending yeshiva can help pay for that”
I cannot imagine why you feel that the victim deserves the money. For what? I agree that the therapy and related expenses should be compensated. Money serves no other role. If you are looking to salivate at the announcement of huge dollar figures, get a life.
T2T:
You wrote: “What it accomplishes is as follows:life isnt always and therefore desparate measures sometimes have to take place to teach the masses a lesson.
למען ישמעו ויראו,ולא יזידון עוד”Criminals get their due by going to prison. The past several years delivered several extremely harsh sentences for offenders. If that doesn’t serve as a deterrent, million dollar court awards won’t either.
Syag:
I wish to acquaint you with something found in the professional literature. The consequences imposed on the offenders (including monetary awards and jail sentences) have no clinical effect on the victims. That does not say that offenders should not get locked up. That serves to protect potential victims. And I agree that we can throw away the key. But this provides the moment of sweet revenge, not real benefit. That’s the scientific literature.
ZD:
You have missed the point completely. These lawsuits benefit absolutely no one. The victims, as long as we are discussing the real ones, have suffered whatever they did. The projected compensation will not remove or relieve any of the PTSD symptoms, nor will it provide a miracle to those who went OTD. Money doesn’t fix any of that. Punishing those who erred long ago – that’s nothing beyond revenge, and the issur of taking nekomoh. It will not benefit the lawyers on either end, as noted earlier. It will not create the prevention programs that are needed. In essence, it feeds the lowest of one’s passions.
I am not defending perpetrators. If they are guilty of the crimes, let them do their time in prison. No mercy. But precisely how will huge lawsuits help anyone here? If this makes you believe you are accomplishing something, I am happy for you. But reality is that there is nothing here but potential for harm to many and benefit to no one.
I applaud your advocacy. But you must provide solutions, not something like “Sue their pants off – what else is there to do?”
ZD:
Let’s play out the following scenario. Someone now in their 40’s claims to have been victimized while in yeshiva Ploni Almoni. This alleged crime occurred more than 30 years ago. The perpetrator is no longer alive, nor are any of the administrators or principals of that yeshiva. The yeshiva has none of the faculty from that era, and is no longer located in the same part of town. In essence, it is vastly different from what existed back then. This yeshiva has also embarked on a serious mission to insure safety, with placing cameras everywhere, doing background checks on all of their hires, and providing advanced and continuous training for all adults who are employed there.
The case goes to court, where there is nothing besides the word of the alleged victim. The matter is not being denied, as there is virtually no one who was present then who could remember anything at all. Now, do we hold this yeshiva responsible or not? Shall we bankrupt the yeshiva because it bears the same name as the one allegedly involved? Do we have reason to believe there was responsibility or cover up, while it is just as likely that no one was aware of anything?
I have zero problem with the Rosh Hayeshiva who drove to eat McDonald’s on Friday night getting the Divinely determined consequences for his chilul Shabbos. And someone who committed the crime of victimization or protected it being liable. But how does that relate to the above scenario? I suspect that much what could emerge in this 12 month window will be almost precisely this.
Another variable here is that there is a very, very minimal amount of proof that one can offer regarding old cases, perhaps with witnesses not even being alive to provide testimony. There are inaccurate memories, and all the “metoos” cannot make fabrication become strong evidence. That’s a sort of natural “statute of limitations” that is built in to the passage of time.
Another consideration is that there is a strong argument to make for those institutions that have a policy that protects perpetrators, which could be a target of liability. I doubt most yeshivos have any such policy. In the absence of that, there could be a potential for personal liability for the faculty or staff involved, and there is limited projected gain. How many of these are still alive, and how many of the yeshivos are still under the control of these alleged protectors.
While I am all in favor of “let the guilty pay”, I agree with several of the commenters here that minimize the risk.
There is a phenomenon of newlyweds jumping into the shadchanus business. I have actually seen it work a few times. But mostly it fails. There are skills involved, and until one gets to learn the ropes, it is just a friendly gesture that conveys that the newlyweds care for others. As a midoh, it’s a nice thing. But hardly effective.
It does portray that this couple feels happy enough in their newly married status that they would like to share that joy with others. And it is seldom hurtful. On a long shot, not a bad risk.
GH:
Great comment!
6:
You are correct in noting the brochah on pineapple and banana id Hoadomoh. They are brought to the table for their ascetic feature. They beautify the platter. And if the rebbe (or anyone else for that matter) eat from them, they get to make another brochah. Nothing wrong with adding another opportunity to fulfill the daily requirement of making 100 brochos.
P.S. Quite some time ago, the frum communities in Europe hardly had exposure to tropical fruit. On occasion, someone managed to bring in a shipment of bananas, and were informed that they grew on a tree. It was a common mistake to recite a boreh pri ho’eitz on bananas. Eventually, someone investigated further and discovered that this does not qualify as a tree and that one should recote boreh pri hoadomoh.
AJ:
You wrote: “Unfortunately, too many families have let mental issues go untreated and unacknowledged because they were worried it would ruin the shidduch opportunities of their other children”
You are certainly correct about that. What these families forget is that a psychiatric illness can be better covered up and kept secret if it is treated and there is absence of symptoms. Otherwise, one can safely say that there is no history of psychiatric illness, but the candidate is nuts. That actually reduces chance for a successful shidduch.
Having noted this, withholding such information to facilitate a shidduch is, in my opinion, criminal behavior. I believe the Chofetz Chaim spoke about this, and that withholding such information is wrong. I leave it for others to quote the citation from the CC.
Joseph:
Chassidishe and Litvishe also tend to daven different nuschaos, have different levush and values of that levush, and follow minhagim and piskei halacha that also differ. So what? The variability in expectations of marriage may well have nothing at all to do with these artificial groupings, and more to do with the role models experienced by these young people prior to marriage. And these role models certainly involve one’s parents and family of origin, but likely others to whom one has been exposed. I am familiar with marital discord among all types of families, and I do not detect mechanisms that distinguish these groupings, nor any meaningful statistics.
I believe that having inadequate preparation for marriage leaves one with unrealistic expectations, and this is unrelated to whether one wears a shtreimel or a bend down hat. It would be curious to hear the assessment of the toanim that represent couples in beis din, who get to hear a good bit about the factors responsible for the problems. Do they second the motion on the hypothesis that the approach to marriage is any different, and does that matter?
I disagree with the premise.
Does the anonymity of a screen name in the CR qualify for the “hidden” status?
apushatayid:
You wrote: “I thought in a leap year, the freezer opens on rosh chodesh adar…”
Wouldn’t that be jumping to a conclusion?
Joseph:
To respond to your comment “Perhaps I overlooked your suggestion, but what, in detail, solution do you propose for the problem you describe?”
There are 3 obvious changes we need to have, and some are actually feasible, not fantasy.
1) We must be conscious of our responsibilities to children, to provide them with a home environment that extols the virtues we wish they absorb. That means our own shalom bayis, models for how we handle conflict, and availability to be an active part of our children’s lives. The participation in everyone else’s simchos, countless fundraisers, and massive amounts of volunteer activity, while virtuous, often replace what we should be giving to our children. If we give our parental responsibilities priority over the other things, whether work, Klal, or social, we will reap huge profits. Seems to be asking much, but really placing importance on what really matters.
2) Our chinuch in yeshivos, schools, and seminaries must include a hefty dose of guidance about proper midos. There is zero bitul Torah involved in teaching about problem solving, conflict resolution, communication skills, and a host of midos of bein odom lachaveiro. The Mussar Movement that was pushed by Reb Yisroel Salanter was not about academic mussar, but about the practical mussar. The mashgichim who followed his derech, mostly from that first generation of his talmidim, were focused on the dedication of their talmidim to menchlichkeit, not what color shirts they wore. Coming on time to tefilos was not a disciplinary issue, with negative consequences, but a matter of one’s connection to tefilah and avodas Hashem. If we revisit what is priority in chinuch, we will encounter much to change, again with huge profits.
3) I am not the one who seeks regulation (I guess that allies me with Republicans not Democrats). We must get a handle on the chosson and kallah teachers, and make that step of preparation for marriage into a useful process for much more than the basic halachos. This needs to compensate for whatever is missing from #1 and #2. Do these madrichim try to inform their chassanim or kallahs about the expected thinking differences between genders? How about expectations of relationships with in-laws? Should newlywed wives be mashgichim to insure their husbands wake u on time? Who guides them to avoid power struggles? The kollel couple has added measures of challenges. How do they cope with them? Is their dependency temporary, and how do they manage it? What about the possibilities of crisis? To whom do they turn? While some of these issues might be addressed in some form by #1 or #2, most are relevant almost completely to the marital context, and belong in the guidance prior to marriage.
There are growing trends for communities to begin filling in the serious gaps. While welcome and effective, we are observing a drop in the ocean, with so much more needed.
It is no longer revolutionary to make the observation that today’s marriages face greater challenges and risk. It is also no chiddush that preparation for marriage is a factor in this. Reflecting back on the past few decades, I can notice distinct efforts to make things better. Yet, that improvement might not be keeping pace with the population growth together with cultural factors that impinge on the life of a young couple.
Many homes today lack the parental role models for marriage. This includes shalom bayis issues, single parents, problems involving extended families, having siblings with health conditions that drain parents’ time and energy, or even parents whose time and energies are swallowed by work (and klal work is included).
Behaviors common to yeshiva environments and girls schools/seminaries are, in many cases, not adaptable to marriage. Even the chinuch and guidance offered with regards to interpersonal midos is often incompatible with what is needed for a marital relationship. It is easy to understand why some material is not appropriate fr the academic settings. As the Steipler Gaon ZT”L once noted, it is a huge change for a yungerman to relate appropriately to a wife after spending many years relating to a shtender.
The actual phase of chosson and kallah instructions and guidance is frought with handicap. To date, there is no credential that indicates that one is qualified to serve as a chosson or kallah teacher. The position in a yeshiva or shul is not a relevant qualification. Many of these teachers are great, others teach only halachos, and others fare even more poorly. Learning the nuances of how to count vestos is a critical aspect that needs to be taught. How to communicate, respect, earn respect, and value the marriage are equally critical. Omitting these is a gigantic risk. Some of these were taught by society, and the community was on a greater spiritual level. we lack the safety of the shtetl.
There are other forms of progress (or regression) with the influences of technology, other worldly values, etc. that make our lives different. And we need other measures to protect ourselves from becoming victims of these developments. There are “norms” and “standards” that one can see all around us that are the products of our times. Of course, we can label these and ban them. But that seems to be relatively ineffective.
We also should seriously question the myth of the “learning boy” and the girls that look for them. The placing of Torah as the priority element of a lifestyle does not require kollel, and does not contradict earning an honest living. Pushing that agenda in our yeshivos and seminaries is misguided and unhealthy for marriages.
I am not addressing the Freezer, nor Lakewood. I am addressing the many couples that emerge from their Sheva Brachos with shell shock, and no one to approach to seek help. Sometimes a Rosh Kollel is useful for this, but often not. Seldom is a chosson or kallah teacher the right person for the already married couple. And family is almost always a horrible choice for this.
jdb:
Careful. Don’t get in over your head with the capabilities of the Rebbe and Mashgiach from an anonymous yeshiva. We may have no clue who that individual is, and even less knowledge of how much they grasp outside of the gemora. Not every Rebbe or Rosh Yeshiva is able to advise on these matters, as long as they are aware of their limits. This is not a put down at all, just a statement how careful we must be when seeking or offering advice. I have been asked for advice on the stock market. I reject the request, as my understanding of it is extremely poor, while I do have advanced knowledge and training in other areas.
A more general comment – Oh the labeling. We fall into the trap of these labels about someone’s hashkafos, as if they have any bearing at all on fact. Personally, I have found these broad generalizations highly misleading, aside from being poorly understood in the first place.
While it is really nice to wish for someone with various limitations to live a normal, married life, it is not always a benefit. There are many with mental illness that cannot manage a home, lacking the management, organizational skills, and maturity to survive. To create a couple that will be permanently dependent on parents and the community is not necessarily a favor to them or anyone else. Obviously, these are individual decisions,, and the general proclamations accomplish little. But it is necessary to spell out the issues so that they can be applied as needed, and rational decisions are made.
The application of these generalities to shidduchim, where we need to consider a single individual is bizarre. I would hope that if one were to seek the advice of a Chochom on this, there would be no such pronouncements. It is tragic that nonsense like this is used to pass judgment on someone who has not been considered for who he or she is.
In our generation, we are privy to the myth of the “learning boy”, or the girl who wants to marry a “learning boy”. This entire concept is a simple lie, and has zero bearing on the individual’s true dedication to Torah or learning, nor the hashkafos of either candidate. Labels are completely artificial, and those with smarts should realize that a shidduch is being proposed for this girl with this boy, which needs to be considered on its own merits.
Can the title be modified to reflect that the target is a store that sells “baby furniture”? It sounds like someone is looking for a store that sells babies. Really?
Jo: You believe that reporting to 311 is mesira? Do you know anything at all about the halacha?
Multiple choice question:
How do I get Lehovin to stop delivering their trashy paper to me?
A. Collect a pile, and dump it on the doorstep of the publisher.
B. Use it for cat litter, etc.
C. Place a sign about no unsolicited literature on your door, and then report to 311.
D. Make a video of A, B, or C, and upload on the internet.
E. All of the above.1:
You wrote: “Today’s kids are different because they have to be worshipped by parents and teachers. It’s 1960s values that aren’t based on reality.”
Either you’re being sarcastic, or you have some serious disorder. Your comment is bizarre. No one is worshiping kids. But you gotta understand something about chinuch that is often missed. The classroom and the school are about the kids, not the teachers or rebbeiim. That’s not 1960’s. That’s Torah. Perhaps you need to review the countless quotes in Chazal about the immense value of our children. How about אין העולם מתקיים אלא מחמת הבל פיהם של תינוקות של בית רבן? Maybe you will be more fond of בנינו ערבים אותנו as a prerequisite to מתן תורה. The main character in the yeshiva or achool is the student. The teachers and rebbeiim are there to serve them. No, the kids are not boss, and they cannot do just anything they want. It is the עיקר of the school day to provide the education to talmidim who should enjoy the experience and want more. NOT to make the teachers and rebbeiim happy. The good rebbe runs a class that the talmidim enjoy, and has the value system to have the internal and external smiles seeing the chinuch working. The good rebbe rarely turns to discipline. And the strict rebbeiim are either untrained, in the wrong career, or have class that is poorly matched for that rebbe.
It’s not about the 1960’s. It’s about the common situation of a rebbe entering a classroom to teach to a large class without the skills to manage that crowd. When he resorts to the equivalent of riot gear and tear gas, we have lost the dynamic of teaching, and have sunk into crowd control. Success would then be measured by the degree to which that rebbe has managed to cram the kids into his cookie cutter, and created enough fear to beat them into shape. This is an utter disgrace, and has zero connection to real chinuch or a derech of Torah.
No, I am not grouping all mechanchim into this category. But I am saying that there was a phase in the development of our communities where this approach was more prevalent, and it had horrible outcomes. Things have reversed a lot, and there are many who deserve credit for that. We are not out of the woods.
It’s not at all about worshiping kids. It’s about following Divrei Chazal without picking and choosing. They never advocated corporal punishment. Quite the opposite. They were quite advanced in their understanding of the human psyche. They knew that the use of fear and coercion will not produce אהבת התורה and all that follows from this.
Perhaps we are aware that Hashem created us to walk upon the earth with our feet. being enclosed in a metal tube miles above the surface of the earth, especially moving at these incredible speeds, is simply abnormal. Of course, we get to learn to accept it, but that is acquired knowledge, not innate experience.
1:
They also used to crank up their cars to turn them on. Today’s world is a different world. Today’s kids are not those of earlier generations. And today’s teachers are not those of earlier generations.
There are many mitzvos that are completely dependent on the outcome. You might check out Mesilas Yeshorim Perek 20, where he addresses the mitzvah of rebuke. Clearly, any form of tochacha that produces an opposite result is prohibited. In fact, he even states that it would be a mitzvah to not offer that rebuke!
I am not sure of the technicality of the rebbe’s potch. But if it produces the outcome that the kid straightens out, behaves, and does not lose cheishek for learning, it should fall within the “potch that contributes to chinuch”. If not, it is not permitted. The rebbe who harms a talmid is a problem, and should really be employed in another field. That’s why it is academically sound to be aware of what was done in the past, but that we must be cognizant of the facts on the ground when we want to apply old methods to a new phenomenon. Considering the risks involved, I would approach this cautiously.
1:
If your intent was the good slap, i disagree.
What I hope you meant was that proper chinuch involves the setting of boundaries. There are times when we need to say no. The permissiveness of the Dr. Spock generation was not good for anyone. The OTD kid was not disciplined appropriately, and was more likely to have experienced too much of the negative than the positive. Why else would the positives and love help?
CS was correct. Corporal punishment was never an effective educational tool. For that matter, shaming a child is also not an educational tool. And most of the time, kids react poorly to this infringement on their person.
But before the self-righteous wolves start attacking me about the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch, I must qualify. There is a limited place for discipline in schools. Once the greatest concentration is about the rules and the consequences, we have stopped teaching and the students have stopped learning. The true message of the beauty of Torah and Mitzvos cannot be learned in such an environment.
I have quoted before that there are treasures of seforim from the gedolim of the past many generations about chinuch (some authored seforim, others collected an anthology). Most of them address the subject, and I would turn to them for guidance on this subject. There are zero seforim who approach hitting as a good thing. At the most, they acknowledge that it can be a last resort. They also list prerequisite conditions. The rebbe/teacher cannot be angry, the “punishment” must teach not punish, all other forms of intervention have been exhausted, etc. If these criteria are not met, the pronouncement of these gedolim is, “רשע למה תכה רעך”, as this an aveiro, not a mitzvah. The Brisker Rov stated that under very specific and limited conditions, the first potch can be excused, but the second one is an aveiro – Min Hatorah! This is not a contemporary, secular, liberal mind.
What is most sad here is that a good rebbe/teacher makes lessons interesting enough that there is hardly a role for discipline. It is not an easy job, and definitely not handled by someone whose experience is just kollel study. Planning lessons is no quick task, and having learned the material is not enough to teach it.
How many readers here can cite the second half of the posuk without looking it up? חושך שבטו שונא בנו. Most would expect it to tell us that the one who truly loves the child should beat the daylights out of him. Rav Wolbe ZT”L points this out. I won’t kill the punchline. Go look it up. משלי י”ג כ”ד.
Tongue in cheek. Wouldn’t death prevent future illness?
GH:
I find your comment repulsive and dishonest. While I was a Trump voter, I am not without valid complaints about him. I am quite upset with how he is handling many things in his presidency,, and will not whitewash his performance because of those areas in which I am displeased.
Your observation that he lacks much of the refinement that one would expect from someone occupying the highest office in the land is valid. He lacked it as a candidate, and after taking office, it improved only a little. You levy accusations at him that are repeated by the press, and there is no more truth when they try to inject it into peoples thoughts and mouths than when you repeat it.
Trump is not a racist, and he has zero to do with the hate crimes or terror acts around the world. It is a dirty lie to blame him. His mouth, as noted above, is not refined, and he chooses his expressions poorly. His impulsivity in tweeting is frankly abhorrent, but not racist. You are doing the liberal thing of playing the race card. Well, it is simply untrue.
Immigration is a huge problem, and the Dems refuse to deal with it. His stubborness about the wall is a problem, but not all his fault. Can the Dems accept something about border security? So far, they reject everything. That does not make Trump a racist. Nor does it explain hate crimes. Dems just want to slash law enforcement and open the borders. I choose Trump on these issues any day.
Trump is a CEO, and a bullyish one. Working with him has its challenges, and it is affecting the administration badly. I am bothered that the Republicans have a history of connecting with the greatest minds for advice and guidance, and basing hirings and appointments on that. Dems do not do that as a rule, and hand out jobs like candy to their donors, regardless of their expertises. Just review the past 50 years of presidents. Trump took mostly good people, but was murder to work with. Such a shame. It is not his policies that pushed him to this point.
Please check facts before writing. The racist claims are nonsense and baseless. MSM believes that if you repeat it often enough, lame brains will believe it, and they succeeded at it. Be a bit smarter than that. There are enough valid complaints with Trump. Stick to those.
Leah:
There are literally hundreds of parking spaces in BP that are blocked for completely meaningless reasons.
We have 2-3 times the number of hydrants needed. Firefighters typically use much more hose than they did in the past. The 15 feet in either direction from the pump is an obsolete requirement to assist access.
There are many shuls that have extended no parking regs. Can anyone share a reason for this?
The length of bus stops is absurd, often an entire block.
Businesses that do not use their driveways at night still prohibit parking there with “24-hour” signs. This is clearly dishonest.
Parking in BP is a mess. We have witnessed candidates campaign for local office promising to fix this. To date, no one did. reason, I presume, is the revenue from citations is wanted. Sorry, but that is greed and immoral.
Sketch:
Don’t be foolish. OU is not Johnny come lately. They are waiting to be fully informed before jumping into the arena of public comment/action, they are looking to work with the other players instead of public opinion. I commend them for this. There is a serious issue here, and playing the cards correctly is critical. You gotta know when to hold ’em, know when to fold ’em.
In response to the opening question:
The matter of לשיטתם is reference to an intellectual process. I suggest that the anti-vax movement is firmly rooted in emotion, not intellect. The decisions are made before examining empirical data, and then all research in used to provide circular reasoning, with correlational data used to infer causality, etc. This is not rational thinking. While I could not suggest that the anti-vaxxers lack intellect, it is plainly clear to me that they are not engaged at that level. Therefore, I conclude that they are doing so as an emotional reaction, which often ignores frank logic, fact, and truth.
I am not sure that the cholov stam matter is similarly emotional. So I do not think there is any logical connection.
Who are the best moderators for correcting spelling goofs in thread titles?
DY:
You wrote: “They teach their kids how to make a parnassah. They don’t have college degrees perhaps, but they do very well in business.”
There is a huge mistake in this statement. Some of their kids go on to make decent parnasah, and among these are several who enter various kinds of business. But there are many that don’t. They are those lacking the skills and motivation to be klai kodesh, but are coerced by the trend to remain in kollel until they get thrown out by the kollel, the family, or circumstances. Meanwhile, we have a family that is impoverished because there was no valid reason to “kvetch a bonk” while dependent on others, family, entitlements, etc. This is not a small segment of the population that comoes out of our yeshivos that do NOT prepare their talmidim for parnasah.
Yeshivos have abdicated their responsibilities here. They should have hanhalah that establishes individual relationships with each and every talmid, and fulfills the mandate of חנוך לנער על פי דרכו, where a rebbe understasnds the liabilities and assets of each talmid, and knows how to guide that talmid towards a career that affords success while maintaining a life of kedusha in avodas Hashem. Do you know any Rosh Yeshiva, Rebbe, Mashgiach, etc. that does this? Of course a parent should participate in teaching the child אומנות, as the גמרא tells us. But that does not mean the specific career, as the father might not possess the skills to teach. But the average rebbe gives the message to NOT pursue a career, and instead teaching the talmid that anything but learning is either bitul Torah, kefira, or other lies. Can we straighten this injustice out before resolving the others?
Neville:
I am far more interested in the across the board reporting to authorities and the expansion of programs to protect our children. However, I have a strong issue with the Markey bill, and it is based on the focus. The way it was proposed several times was designed to punish, not protect, not deter. That doesn’t sit well. I have no reason to protect a perpetrator,, and I sincerely believe there is no better place for one than in prison. I am not an advocate of less than life sentences for molesters. But the open season on yeshivos misses the point completely.
Firstly, the bad apples, whether faculty, menahalim, administrators, are probably long gone and replaced. We don’t know if past misdeeds and neglect (cover ups) were part of the reason for their no longer being in the employ of the yeshiva. But there should be personal liability for them, not the collective punishment of the yeshiva.
Secondly, the system believes anyone that claims victimization. The burden of proof is far less in this realm of crime, and this is also an issue. I grant that these crimes are generally committed away from spectators, and actual witness of the event is close to never. But the usual proof is the diagnosis of trauma symptoms, and this doesn’t implicate the perpetrator. Only the word of the victim. I actually know a case where someone was chased out of a career in chinuch, who was an excellent rebbe. The basis was the report of a child with trauma symptoms. A parent nailed this rebbe. The parent later recanted, with irreparable damage done. It turned out that the child had been victimized the year prior by someone else.
I support increasing the statute of limitations. Trauma often does not surface within the time allotted for court action. But the reality is that the longer time that passes shrinks the available testimony or evidence. And that needs to be tightened so that we are not just shooting at anyone. Until Markey does that, I vote with my feet to the ballot box to trash the bill.
I continue to gaze at this subject with amazement. What troubles me is that there is a battle to fight, but that no one seems to be doing it. The public announcements, the video clips, the media hype are just smokescreens to make the oilem goilem believe the battle is being fought. But nothing meaningful happens here on this stage.
There are two venues where this will be resolved. One is the backrooms with politicians, away from media, no cameras or microphones. The other may be the courtrooms.
Meanwhile, it is childish to believe that parading in sackcloth matters here (Mordechai Hatzaddik knew when to do that), nor do video clips help. And the large groups (blocs) need to rethink how they choose to endorse and support candidates. By definition, politicians running for office are notorious liars, and they don’t change their stripes once elected.
Until proven otherwise, anything done by Lev Tahor has nothing to do with Yiddishkeit. The cult is a missionary group based on avodah zoroh. Their kashrus is not acceptable, and kal vachomer geirus. Their leaders are busy with the deification of themselves, and this is anti-Torah. They negate Torah Sheb’al Peh, proof that they are NOT a link in the chainof mesorah from Har Sinai. Meanwhile, their tactics are those of Eisav, and they are in desperate need of being eliminated. The leaders need either to be exterminated or at least jailed. Their victims need to be rescued, deprogrammed, and placed in years of reparative therapy. Klal Yisroel needs to be more vigilant to stop groups like this from forming, and to enforce the kedusha and safety of real Yidden.
Chabadshluchah:
I am not one to disagree with the Rebbe ZT”L. His statement is not much different from what was proclaimed many times by Gedolei Yisroel. Many years ago, there was a statement from the Moetzes Gedolei Yisroel of the Agudah that expelling a student required a beis din that is independent of the yeshiva/school to rule on each case. That statement was DOA. Firstly, there has yet to be known beis din that will accept a case involving a yeshiva. Secondly, it was never implemented. Not only do the many askanim working with OTD and at-risk kids know of no such case among the many of their clientele who have all been ousted from yeshivos, but have never encountered a case where a talmid’s expulsion was brought before a Rov/Posek for approval. Here’s the problem. It is correct that some expulsions are indicated. The trouble is that the yeshiva is one of the baalei din in the matter, and cannot be considered objective. For that reason, an independent outsider who is capable of objectivity should be consulted. So far, no such consultation is known about. I suggest that there may actually be such situations that involved an objective third party, but this should be a 100% rule, not a rare exception.
The statement from the Moetzes stated that a child who was a “rodeif” can be ousted, with beis din approval. Aside from the phantom beis din, the determination of “rodeif” is far from simple. A kid that is spreading schmutz among his peers may well be a rodeif. One that sells drugs might be one, too. The drug user and the one that has unfiltered internet at home might not be one. Again, there still needs to be a process to determine risk. And yeshivos overestimate risk quite often. I have consulted to some situations that were dramatic, and speak volumes of the failure of the system.
The Rebbe ZT”L shared brilliance. But how do we know when to apply it appropriately?