The little I know

“Boys will be boys” might sometimes be true, but often it is not. If there were a small chance that someone’s food is poisoned, it would not be dismissed as quickly. If there is a remote chance that the occurrences observed are not “Boys will be boys”, there would need to be some increased observation, investigation, assessment, consultation, something to verify that there is nothing dangerous happening here. It is irresponsible and unprofessional for the school to be alerted to this multiple times, and to dismiss it with the wave of a hand. One cannot cry wolf for everything, but the ease of dismissing it is the opposite extreme, and intolerable.

As for begging for mechila, it is not quite so simple. The interpersonal asking and granting of mechila is a more complex subject than just a ritual of asking mechila. If it is not asked with sincerity, it is a sham. If the victim is not ready to forgive, because of the intensity of his pain, he cannot be forced to grant mechila. These are areas of halacha that are seldom studied, and may well be outside the scope of the kollel learning that somehow was allowed to become the prerequisite for employment in the chinuch field.

Forgiveness is an entire subject, both in halacha and in the professional world. It ain’t simple. It is truly a shame that such subjects are not taught in yeshivos, as they are pertinent to daily life, and should be a prerequisite for marriage.

Joseph:

You wrote: “children with televisions in their home affects the child and carries a very strong possibility of that child negatively affecting classmates. No question about it. And there are other influences that a child can have that will negatively affect his or her classmates that must be accounted for. Sometimes the damage that can be done to multiple classmates is more than the damage of requiring that one child to change yeshivas.”

My previous comment was that the statement about negative effect from television sounds really holy. However, it does not pan out in terms of the consequence. Many of my generation grew up with televisions in the home, and turned out to be successful klai kodesh. Their TV’s had no impact on them, and certainly not on me. I am not defending TV, and feel that no home should have one. I oppose using yeshivos as the enforcers of that, or children as the victims. The labeling of a child by the yeshivos based on some of these “standards” is arbitrary. It sounds noble, not different from Korach pronouncing כל העדה כלם קדושים ובתוכם ה. But it has no factual basis, and has yet to be proven. Rather, the role of the yeshiva is to bring the child to the level of Yir’as Hashem in which the choice of that over the TV will be made. That’s what yeshivos did for a few generations. Are we holier now? Where are the current Gedolim that are being produced from this noble arrangement?

You are correct that there are instances in which a child needs to leave a particular yeshiva. There are “rodfim”. But the burden of proof that a given child is among those is on the yeshiva, and outside of the holy sounding words of “standards”, there is nothing to support the expulsion or rejection. There are situations of a mismatch between a yeshiva and an applicant. If the yeshiva was ever in a position of being responsible for the child, it is incumbent on that yeshiva to participate in the effort to find alternative placement. If the parents fooled the yeshiva with inaccurate information, they bear the responsibility.

You referred to “changing yeshivos”. I would agree. However, my experience with many cases is that the expelling yeshiva does not contribute to the alternative placement. It is fact that they sometimes sabotage efforts for the talmid to go elsewhere. This is not an empty or vicious accusation, but facts on the ground. In such cases, the talmid is being sent to the street. The balance of the two sides is not the same as your statement about “changing yeshivos”.

RebYidd23:

1. Opening new yeshivos is not efficient. Ask anyone who attempted to do that.
2. Specialized yeshivos for OTD kids carries a Pandora’s Box of other issues. It is difficult to create the proper environment, and the matching of a child to a particular setting is infinitely tougher. Again, ask anyone who runs such a yeshiva.
3. I suspect that you missed the entire matter here. To create a system that catches the throw-outs might have some redeeming value, but it circumvents the true problem. The real issue is that yeshivos have become exclusive instead of inclusive. That is inherently problematic. It was achdus that merited Klal Yisroel to receive the Torah. The continuity of Torah demands that achdus be maintained. If we mess that one up, we have a serious problem. Chinuch is extending the chain of Torah to yet another generation. Exclusivity challenges one of the foundation criteria. The problem is not just a single individual or a particular yeshiva. It is a system where this becomes the modus operandi. You are correct in noting that efforts to change the “system” are so difficult that doing other inefficient things gotta be easier.

ZD:

That is a bold statement. Can you support that? How do you know who does or does not believe in Daas Torah? And, for that matter, what is your working definition of Daas Torah?

DY:

Actually not. But the opening question can mean many different things, and until these are clarified, no one can answer anything.

First, there needs to be a defining of the terminology. What are public issues? What is dirty laundry? What is considered airing? Are these halacha questions, or are we seeking wisdom to guide us?

Second, Talmidei Chachomim are exactly that. They might be poskim, but might not have smichas chachomim to pasken shailos. They have their specialties. Some have many, others have few. Some are knowledgeable about many non-Torah issues, many are not. Can a Rosh Yeshiva guide a talmid in choosing a career? I wish he could. But the odds are that without having had a vast amount of exposure, which is unlikely because he was probably in the beis hamedrash learning, he cannot.

My experience is that the well recognized Gedolim do not tread into unknown waters. I have engaged with many of them. I have also experienced quite a few rabbonim that feel free to advise on anything, and make tragic mistakes when they leave the confines of their professional (Torah) domain. Their noble intentions are not supported by their knowledge gaps.

The Steipler ZT”L was hesitant to offer specific advice on many subjects. He consulted with experts. Sometimes, he would make a suggestion such as, “Ask your doctor about such-and-such.” Not direct advice because, as he stated to me personally, “I am not a doctor, and not qualified to give such advice”. Reb Moshe ZT”L was also one who consulted with experts regularly. Reb Shlomo Zalman Auerbach ZT”L spent many hundreds of hours studying about electricity, with electrical engineers and electricians before feeling himself knowledgeable enough to pasken shailos in hilchos Shabbos and electricity.

The past many years of a mistaken and dangerous approach to molestation by prominent rabbonim seems to be on the mend. They simply did not know or understand. So we had some great rabbonim making statements that are known to the professional world to be completely inaccurate, as there was a knowledge gap. This appears to be mending today. But gaps still exist. Thanks to the intervention of askanim who engaged with the Moetzes and provided badly needed information.

As for the שופט אשר יהיה בימים ההם, there is a simple comment that should put this in perspective. Yisro directed Moshe to create a hierarchical system of dayanim, with only the toughest being posed directly to Moshe. But the pattern was that anyone with a shailoh approached his שרי עשרות and asked. If this was too difficult, it was passed upward, until it reached Moshe. Recognize that all the way up the line, there were dayanim who had no problem saying that they lacked the ability to pasken. Their true power lay in their ability to say, “I don’t know.” The שופט that the posuk refers to here is not the lower level dayan, but the recognized leader of Klal Yisroel. It does not mean the average Rov, however scholarly he might be, unless he has that broad range of experience and world knowledge.

DY:

I reread that comment. I do NOT trash Gedolei Yisroel. A real gadol does NOT give advice regarding subjects he does not know. It is the ignorant public that pushes the Rav to advise on medical subjects. But their advice there is actually lay knowledge, not Daas Torah. And it is unfortunate that this is a sizable portion of the “Daas Torah” that gets flaunted today. Have you heard the “Daas Torah” that gets attention in cases of marital discord, mental illness, addiction, even chinuch? Anyone can have opinions, but it does not become worthy of being “expertise” or “Daas Torah” until it is based on a body of learned information and experience. This is why I wish rabbonim were consulted on many areas, but that they should reject the questions in areas where they lack the information and experience. This is why the Agudah created a mechanism that offers such education opportunities for rabbonim of various subjects so that they are not “talking though their rabbinical hats”.

As for the Daas Torah regarding chinuch, I suggest you examine the many seforim now available from experts and gedolim. I dare you to question whether there was any lack of expertise among the following: Rav Gamliel Rabinovich, Rav Ovadia Yosef, Chazon Ish, Rav Pam, Slonimer Rebbe, Rav Shach, and Rav Wolbe. None of them intruded into areas in which they had not been informed and experienced. Look at what they said about yeshivos, chinuch, and parenting.

It is not about a world view. I do not fix cars because I really know very little about that. The Rabbonim whose “Daas Torah” is being flaunted in the other thread are not the caliber of recognized Gedolei Yisroel like the list in the previous paragraph. I bet those rabbonim know a lot more than I do, but not enough to be the expert in absolutely everything. As long as they are within their domain of expertise, I listen and follow. When they are pushed to creep outside that, they are no better than the next bloke who knows much less Torah than them.

With all the respect due to Daas Torah, we are suffering in the present generation from a lack of leadership. Our “Daas Torah” are learned scholars, and each has their areas of great expertise. Yet, many are limited and handicapped when advice is needed about a great many subjects. We tend to seek their advice regarding medical matters, when the greatest proportion of them have zero knowledge in the subject. Many are sought for guidance on business matters. Yet, their knowledge of the subject can range from the common place common sense, or often less than that. These gaps in knowledge do not diminish their chashivus or their value to the Klal. But much as one would not likely consult a Rav about an issue with a malfunctioning washing machine, or a stalled car, one gotta wonder why we are expected to bring these questions to a Rav. Seeking the brocho of a Rav or other talmid chochom is praiseworthy. But advice?

One can, perhaps should ask shailos regarding the permissibility of discussing certain things in public. There can easily be questions about lashon horah, defamation, etc., which can be matters of halacha. Outside of that, one needs to know a bit more about the breadth of knowledge, outside of Torah erudition, that qualifies the Rav to respond to requests for guidance and advice.

There is another take on this subject. Airing in public. What today is not already public? We can consider the far reaching spying of NSA, turning on webcams remotely, scanning and screening email, etc. I doubt the NSA would find anything of interest on my computer, but the delusion that it is private is B”H not one of my symptoms.

Does discussion about some of the hot subjects that appear in articles on YWN, or some of the discussions and debates here in the CR constitute airing dirty laundry? Is it considered public? Were these positions ever secret or private?

So I’m not sure that Daas Torah has the ability to be the ultimate guide here. And I am not sure that the CR is considered airing dirty laundry in public. That’s my two cents.

Joseph:

I am not the only one who has commented on YWN about smoking. But you might consider searching the archives. I wrote a long comment some time ago in which I documented the overwhelming majority of poskim who ruled that smoking was assur min haTorah. Repetition should not be necessary. Look it up.

tb:

There is no school named, so no one is bashing the school. Reality is that similar stories occur all the time, and there is something really stinky at the core of all this. That is the message, and that is why people are responding as they are. You may decide that this letter is a hoax, or that the missing information renders it trivial. But the real problem continues to exist, for boys and for girls. If you wish to deny the existence of the many hundreds of kids who are yeshivaless today, I wish for you teshuvah and kaporoh. I know nothing specific about Lakewood, but the problem is rampant throughout all the concentrated frum communities. Now, would you rather bury your head in the sand and pretend the problem doesn’t exist, or would you choose to recognize it and address it?

This article speaks volumes about what our schools have become. It is always disturbing to hear these stories, and they are unfortunately not rare. However, as long as yeshivos consider themselves competitors in a market, and not a public service, the arrangement for such tragedies is guaranteed.

Just few years ago, Reb Shlomo Yehuda Rechnitz addressed this in public. It caused a furor. How could anyone dare to challenge the status quo of how yeshivos maintain quality? But he got a pass, because he has money. You or I would be expelled from every beis hamedrash and shul, and our kids from their respective yeshivos. But truth hurts. The problem is not a fabrication, and there are live victims all the time.

Denying fact is plainly foolish, and I would assume that most people who are proud of their intellect will not do that. I do suggest that many are the victims of “spin”, quite similar to the pattern of the secular mainstream media. Words that sound good are used to obfuscate truth. The child that is no longer here cannot be restored to life and a school. Or to quote Hillary, “What difference, at this point, does it make?” Perhaps, if we examined the issues that enable this to happen, we can learn something about prevention. But it is not about an individual or a particular school. It is about a system.

So I ask the following pointed questions:

Does any yeshiva feel any sense of responsibility to insure that every Jewish child receive a Jewish education?

How was the calculation of the child’s emotional reaction to expulsion or rejection made? Was any outside professional (mental health professional or Rav) consulted?

Since when do other parents become baalei batim over a school?

Why is anyone playing the game of choosing one child over another?

Does anyone really know who is the better child, or is there a game of Ruach Hakodesh being played by amateurs?

Is the role of our yeshivos academic excellence or is it raising a Jewish child to live a Torah life? If the latter, what is the point of competition?

We know what the real answers should be, but we also know what they are. These questions go to the core issues. Sadly, the answers speak to the kavod and reputation of the institution without prioritizing the talmid. Such has evolved into today’s yeshivos. And the tragedy preceded the suicide by many years. Or maybe we should refer to this loss as a murder?

Before anyone wishes to bash me for daring to utter such things, please review the growing number of seforim on chinuch habonim, where Gedolei Yisroel made these points. I could relate countless stories of situations in which Gedolei Yisroel prohibited this practice of selectivity, and were moseir nefesh to prevent rejection. The viral video clip of Rav Shteinman shlit”a referring to this selectivity as גאוה, is just one example.

The Gemora (Nedarim 81a) tells us הזהרו בבני עניים שמהם תצא תורה. Be careful with the children of the poor because Torah will come from them. Simple pshat would be a warning to us to resist our tendency to predict where Torah will be found. Do we really believe the A student will fare better than the poorer performer with motivation?

This awful story with a tragic ending is not about Lakewood. Nor is it about a girls school. It is about every yeshiva, girls or boys, in E”Y and America. And the horrible endings vary as well. But there is blood, and the responsible parties all consider themselves innocent, even tzaddikim.

It is rare that a child is a true rodeif. Rather, the menahel that throws the kid to the streets is. Our world is upside down, and the beneficiary is the chevra kadisha. How many more levayos will occur before someone wakes up?

PBA:

While many of your comments are tongue in cheek, they are usually not offensive or simply untrue. Well, you finally fell into that. I happen to know quite a few frum doctors, and their shmiras Shabbos is as good as anyone else’s. I also know many other people whose shmiras Shabbos leaves much to be desired, and they are counted among Klai Kodesh, and the gamut of professional and non-professional careers. They span the spectrum of Chassidishe and Litvishe groups. Any effort to malign doctors is not just inaccurate, but a blatant attack on some people who are moseir nefesh for Klal Yisroel without compromising on Torah values or halacha. Your comment undeniably crossed into the boundaries of hilchos lashon horah.

As with any other career, there are challenges to overcome. HKB”H created each of to live a shuman being and face these challenges, not as mal’achim who never encounter such nisyonos. As for percentages how many withstand the nisyonos, there is no data on how they group as different careers. My quite varied experience finds no predominance of any career regarding the nisyonos of Hilchos Shabbos.

Sitting shiva is for someone that died, not someone that is sick. The children we are addressing today are suffering. There have been many labels used for these kids, OTD, at-risk, KIPs. KIP stands for Kids In Pain. They are suffering, usually far more than their parents are. How they got there may make for an interesting study, and there are rarely cases that are identical, just as everyone has their own, unique fingerprints. I have commented in other threads that the single universal ingredient for all of these kids is REJECTION. Different flavors perhaps.

We are far more capable than ever in our history, though perhaps more resistant to the idea, of loving these kids, accepting them without necessarily approving of their behavior, and including them in Klal Yisroel. Ultimately, we do not know why this happened to our family. Gedolei Yisroel have made comments on this. The Steipler ZT”L suggested that these are nisyonos for us, and we will never be capable of grasping why. Do we understand gilgulim, often jumping over many generations? Are we being given the nisayon of Sinas Chinom – Ahavas Chinom? Maybe. Should we not try to pass it? I would give my maximum. I bet it sometimes gets really hard. I may need to lean on others, get chizuk, even therapy. As long as I do not see the child as dead, I will love him/her, include them in the family, and see them as a precious neshomoh who is struggling and suffering. I would want HKB”H to do that for me when I struggle.

I know a parent whose kid was acting out in all sorts of ways. He or his wife regularly prepared his negel vasser, even though he was sleeping late (having watched movies for many hours of the night), and might not be putting on tefillin. He is gainfully employed, keeping Shabbos today. he was never lost, just in pain.

Gedolei Yisroel have been making statements about OTD kids for several generations. What is universal to all statements is that kiruv, not richuk, is the only approach. Many emphasized the role of tefiloh. Never, ever, stop davening for your children. The ways of Hashem are so far beyond our ability to grasp. The Steipler ZT”L was quoted as responding to the question about how there is a current influx of baalei teshuvah. He attributed this to tefilos recited by zaides and babbes even many generations ago.

If someone’s child is rejecting their obligations bein odom laMakom, that does not justify the parent abandoning their obligations bein odom lachaveiro.

Haimy:

You wrote: “Relieving an incompetent Rebbi of his job is a very rare occurrence in the chareidi world we live in. It’s not just the financial distress, it’s his self-esteem as a member of a kehillah. ”

Good midos are a mainstay of living as a Torah Jew. No one can legitimately argue against that. But business is business. It is unconscionable to allow a poor rebbi to wreck my child, possibly for life, because of our concern for his self-esteem. I certainly advocate for preserving his self-worth, and I would never take someone whose problem is underperformance as someone to punish. But my obligation here is to prevent the severe damage that can happen to a child who loses a year of education, and possibly gets harmed by unnecessary and damaging discipline by someone who is in the wrong job.

It is not likely that we will witness much perfection, not in ourselves, and certainly not in the chinuch system. But we are never absolved of the responsibility to seek improvement. There are punches that will happen. We might find milder ways to deliver the termination notice, perhaps with warnings earlier, and the idea of helping to find other employment sounds nice (despite being unlikely).

In past years, there were multiple situations that achieved public exposure of rebbeim who were found to have been severely inappropriate with talmidim. They fought against dismissal, citing their families, needs for parnosoh, shidduchim for their children, etc. I found these forms of resistance intolerable, to the point of nausea. Should a pedophile be kept in a position of risk to countless others because he needs to marry off his children? Anyone with positive number IQ believe that? This thread is not about a criminal rebbi, but someone who just ain’t got what it takes to do the job. The primary responsibility is to provide a good rebbi to the class, not a salary to pay for his child’s wedding.

akuperma:

You talk of the cup being half empty or full. Your handicap is that you are addressing the issue from a statistical point. I happen to be quite involved in chinuch, and I believe the statistics are the opposite direction, but I won’t get into that debate here. The problem, which is certainly not uncommon, is that we have rebbeim in our yeshivos whose performance warrants termination. We can conjure up a list of excuses, the challenges in finding other employment, the poor salaries, the supply-demand issue, etc. We are still left with a classroom with a rebbi that cannot do the job, and this will impact negatively on all.

One problem, rather off the track here, is that our entering rebbeim are inexperienced, untrained, and lack knowledge how to manage a classroom. Truly, a good curriculum with a well planned lesson will result in a rather well managed class. But unless someone knows how to do that, the alternative method is some version of discipline. There certainly is a role for that, but it has become the majority classroom tool, which it is not intended to be. This neophyte rebbi will likely resort to that approach. While it may contribute to decorum in the classroom, it is actually detrimental to the education. The average talmid who gets punished is more likely to associate learning with negativity. The mission of instilling אהבת התורה in such a talmid is doomed.

I don’t want to get into that subject more deeply, as it probably deserves its own forum. But the underperforming rebbi is more apt to use other methods to “make his job easier”. And considering that this will not be done by giving a better and more interesting lesson, it will be in the direction of behavioral control and management. The result is not just poor education, but poor preparation for future learning, and perhaps a negative association. Yes, the talmid can be harmed by the poorly performing rebbi.

Putting the numbers to the side, we have Reb Ploni here who is underperforming in Yeshiva Enkas Mesaldecho. The dilemma is this person, not the broader issue of how many such rebbeim there are. How would you guide this puzzled menahel to handle the situation?

There is a real question that lies at the core of this issue. The yeshiva and its administration are here to serve whom?

If the mission is to provide jobs to those seeking careers in chinuch, then the rebbi must be kept in his position at all costs.

If the mission is to provide the best chinuch possible to the children, then this rebbi must be replaced.

What makes this problematic is that we have a situation here of אחד בפה ואחד בלב. No yeshiva would openly say that they are here for any other other purpose than to do the best for the talmidim. But that becomes an obvious decoy for the mission to keep themselves in business, with the “best” talmidim, the “best” image and reputation, and the record of doing such great jobs of hiring faculty.

In reality, there are rotten apples in every bushel, and chinuch is no different than any other employer. If a grocery store hired a worker that was ineffective, that employee would be replaced. There is no acceptable excuse to not replace a rebbi who cannot do the job.

There was a book published in 1969 called The Peter Principle. He studied the subject of incompetence at great length and depth. The result was the formulation, “In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence”. It is a good, healthy read, and highly recommended. One of the tenets is that when the incompetent reaches that level, he/she is maintained there and not let go. I bet this has been witnessed by many. I have observed it in chinuch, but similarly in many other places, businesses, government, etc. Sadly, our yeshivos can boast a good measure of this.

Yes, it is a menahel’s dilemma. But the primary responsibility is not to the rebbi, but to the flock that is losing out on his continued employment. I would insist the stated mission for the yeshiva should dictate the direction of the decision. And upon the notice of termination, the rebbi should be advised to make a change in his career direction.

Meno:

You crept into another hole. It is not for you or me or anyone else for that matter to determine whether someone has given enough tzedokoh, nor are we authorized to allocate it for them. I know many fundraisers for yeshivos. They always want more than they get. But, for that matter, so does every single fundraiser for any other tzedokoh. There is nothing that will be done that can accomplish the redirection to yeshivos and kollelim. It remains my choice completely whether to give to a yeshiva, a keren for chassanim and kallos, a soup kitchen, or countless other causes. In fact, the Purim scene is flooded with kids collecting for yeshivos, when hachzokas Torah is not a tad different on Purim than any other day of the year (the collectors consider it so, as do the yeshivos). In reality, all of these causes are worthy, and this goes without debate. Donors are free to allocate as they see fit.

But again, you changed the subject. Is it permissible (halacha, yashrus, common sense) to enter long term learning on yenem’s expense? Doesn’t it create voluntary poverty and dependence? Or should the yungerman who wishes to learn begin some degree of the process of getting prepared for a career? How should one approach the financial crisis of the emerging kollel yungerman who no longer has the youth or the time to engage in career training? And there are two questions here. One – should this situation be avoided? Two – once in this matzav, what should one do?

Meno:

Sorry, but you are in la-la land.

Firstly, Klal Yisroel gives fortunes in tzedokoh. While there is likely a small number of people who are miserly and give less tzedokoh than they can, it is mostly the other way around. Our community can boast of countless tzedokos for hachnosas kallah, infertility, medical costs and needs, feeding poor families, and others. There is also a staggering variety of gemachs. Add to that, there are massive amounts of tzedokoh that go on between people that do not involve organizations or publicity. No one takes being machazik Torah lightly. With all that is already going on, in very handsome numbers, all yeshivos are hurting. Before making an accusation like you did, just ask. There is a lot being given to support Torah. The needs are far greater.

Second, you are talking party line, and completely ignoring the real issue. You are once again allowing anyone who wants the label as Kollel Yungerman to take it, without demonstrated merit, and at the expense of everyone else (community support and government). That is foolish, futile, and dangerous. That is what led to the current matzav. The culture of dependency is found nowhere in Torah. In fact, we specify in ברכת המזון, that we do not want to be dependent on others.

ונא אל תצריכנו ה’ אלקינו לא לידי מתנת בשר ודם ולא לידי הלואתם.

We baalei batim have all the education we need about supporting Torah. That does not include supporting someone who should not sit in kollel for years of unproductive time. It does not mean assisting someone to achieve the status entry level – low pay jobs when he has already a sizable family. This is an aveiroh for the yungerman, and all the helpers carry the responsibility as מסייע לדבר עבירה. If you are looking to re-educate me, spare yourself the wasted time and effort.

Lastly, as ZD said, there are wealthy people who give generously to so many causes. The rest of us are making ends meet (hopefully), and our tzedokoh dollars are limited. If you had your way, most all the baalei batim would be barely eking out a living so that there would be hardly any tzedokoh available from them for supporting Torah. Rethink your comment please.

Several commenters used some version of the phrase “losing government benefits”. This is objectionable. These are entitlements for which one needs to qualify. If someone gains employment, they do not really lose benefits, and it was not theirs to lose. All that really happened was that they progressed in life to where they no longer qualified. I don’t fault those who express themselves this way. we are conditioned to feel entitled, that these benefits are ours. Well, no, they are not. They might be given to us if we are eligible. Just look at how we have been trained to think. We have a huge problem in attitude that underlies the myth of “kollel for everybody” and the propensity to calculate these benefits as part of the family budget. It is this attitude that leads way too many to be מורה היתר with regards to compromised honesty and the circus that affected Lakewood these past 2 weeks.

Huju:

You have missed the point. I got the “innocent until proven guilty” message. And every media report that discusses any of the arrestees must include the word alleged. Got it. You are obsessed with the technicalities. You have missed the elephant in the room.

The culture of Lakewood and other kollel communities is based on avoiding parnosoh, assigning oneself to full time learning, at yenem’s expense. Whether this should be permitted altogether is not a clear issue. The Gemora specifies not to do that at all. There are reasons to make exceptions and permit עשרה בטלנים. And these can continue their learning at the expense of the public. But these are the exceptions, and is NOT the rule.

We need our kollelim, to have where the growth from bochur to klai kodesh takes place. These are our future roshei yeshivos, magidei shiur, poskim, dayanim, rabbonim, etc. They are important assets to the community. But not everyone should go that way. Those equipped with the resources to become business owners, mechanics, doctors, etc. should utilize their potential and become assets to the Klal in their own way. Of course, they should continue to live as Torah true Yidden, with regular learning. One can be quite holy as an owner of a hardware store, a car service driver, or insurance agent. Perhaps the kollel yungerman has more data of Torah knowledge. Hopefully that yungerman is working towards his own potential.

Another angle – the poverty (at least the spirit of the law) that renders one eligible for entitlements is not the kind that is self imposed. The latter might be someone’s privilege, but that cannot be at the expense of others. That is not exactly what I would call a Kiddush Hashem. If I throw my wallet into the ocean, do you have an obligation to compensate me for my loss?

So I am ignoring the issue of the couples arrested here. I am only addressing the kollel lifestyle and the kollel community. I question whether it is permitted altogether to make oneself a “case” for public assistance because one followed the trend to sit in kollel. And upon whose direction has this yungerman rejected going to work or training for work?

There is nothing to this subject that is pleasant discussion. Rebbeim are often not earning a decent income. This is coupled with the financial woes that yeshivos often carry, resulting in few raises that can offset the deficit that the average rebbe experiences.

The trend of yungerleit staying in kollel, then hunting for employment in the chinuch system keeps the supply far greater than the demand, thus the low cost of a rebbe.

But there are other angles, all equally as uncomfortable as topics for discussion. The first question is, how many rebbeim are expert enough in what they do to deserve extra pay? Plenty, who are otherwise wonderful people, and mediocre in the classroom. Being minimally adequate, they are often kept on the job, but without reason to raise their pay. They are easily replaceable if one looks for the same level of skill. It is becoming more common that a rebbe has undergone training of some sort before applying for a job. But this blink of optimism is minimized by the fact that the percentage of applicants for chinuch jobs who have such training is still quite low. And there are opportunities to get the training.

Second question is, the time in kollel is often considered a preparation for chinuch. I disagree with that. It might be a useful part of training for rabbonus, or for teaching in a yeshiva gedola. But elementary and even high school demands a different set of skills (way beyond the knowledge of Torah material). Kollel rarely, if ever, has such a focus.

Third question is, the motive for going into chinuch is a critical issue. It is often that it is not the love of bringing children to launch their lives in an environment of Ahavas Hatorah. More often, it is the belief that entry into the work environment that is not “klei kodesh” is somehow a treif thing to do, and that by default, one must turn to chinuch.

A fourth question concerns the understanding of what comprises the job. Most enter the system believing that they need to prepare a lesson, enter the classroom, and deliver it. It is only after having taken the plunge that one recognizes that the task is many times greater than that. Preparation demands quite a bit, but the need for attention to each talmid is completely overwhelming. The good rebbe, worth every dime, has learned to master this. The mediocre ones look for all kinds of ways to avoid this huge investment of time and effort. Among these, we have the disciplinarians, who are obsessed with the talmidim’s compliance, at the severe expense of generating the passion for Torah and Mitzvos. I know there is a whole lot of generalization here, but these are the kinds of questions we need to entertain when we wish to discuss the rebbe’s pay.

We need to identify chinuch as a profession, meaning that it requires training and a proper match of someone’s nature and skills to the type of employment. As such, it should be reimbursed at an appropriate level. This at least provides a challenging dent to the trend of sitting in kollel, and then, with the strokes of a pen on an application, walking into a classroom of children.

In direct response to the question of the OP, most Rebbeim are underpaid. But way too few have the qualifications to deserve the better pay. This is pessimistic, and things have improved over the past years. But there is a long way to go.

Avram in MD:

Whoa. Not just any rabbi is a good assistant or wise counsel for a beis din, and not just every beis din is good for any rabbi. There is a matter of experience in the subject, and the knowledge about how specific rabbonim and batei din work. The rabbi that “knows you well” might possess many great talents and skills, but that does not guarantee that he has what it takes to give the best guidance when involved in a beis din. I am personally talented in several areas, but I cannot perform surgery or play violin. You are certainly correct in drawing attention to the “knowing you well”, but there is a particular skill set and other variables that are equally relevant.

These artificial groupings of people are commonly used when describing people, and all too often in the shidduch world. Personally, I find these labels offensive, and truly meaningless.

The boy/girl entering shidduch eligibility can be labeled as virtually anything, and this has no real bearing on how he/she will be living life after marriage. How many “learning boys” are truly so? Many try, but cannot sustain the life of dependency, and lack the resources to remain outside the working world. Even more do not really belong there, and should be addressing their parnosoh needs in a Torah and honest way, and taking steps to pursue gainful employment. Yet, such boys are labeled “learning boys” or “yeshivish”, with zero correlation to their actual futures. We would be far more productive if we assessed our shidduch age boys and girls by their midos (I refer specifically to the real midos, not the standard “information” that flows freely when inquiries are made about a shidduch prospect).

The same problem is when we label “hashkafa” as Chareidi, Modern, Machmir, and similar concoctions. These words do not really carry any standard definition, and tell us virtually nothing about the compatibility for a shidduch.

If all this was funny, we might be laughing a lot. But it is a tragic misuse of our intellect.

I would rather hear others’ opinions on this. There are two separate issues here, and they should be discussed individually. One thing is about how victims of bullying should handle the bully. There is a completely different issue how a school should deal with the bully. It needs to be borne in mind that bullies tend to be those with various forms of “pull”, either parents who are substantial supporters, good students themselves, or related/connected to senior faculty/administration. This usually leads to bullies being able to get away with their behavior for quite some time. It also explains why the victims, who are generally afraid to speak up, tend to be disbelieved, while the bullies are somehow trusted in their denial of responsibility. From my observation, it takes major interventions (expulsion or arrest) for a bully to stop and to change.

I reviewed the sugya of gebrokts many times. There are strong reasons to not see it as issur involved. The poskim who weigh in on this almost unanimously conclude that it is completely muttar. The matter at hand is Pesach chumros, which are considered symbolic of the Avodas Hashem vs. Milchemes Hayetzer issue, and the deciding factor is Mesoras Avos. In consistency with the greatest dynamic of Pesach being למען תספר באזני בנך ובן בנך, the handing down of tradition in terms of minhag is to be recognized for how great it is. I have a dear friend who is chassidish in every way, but comes from a choshuv family that have connections to the Chasam Sofer. He eats gebrokts at the seder. It was difficult for his wife to accept that, coming from a family that did not eat gebrokts, but she got used to it. Gebrokts was not associated with any other “kulos”, and is a minhag that deserves the same respect as those considered “chumros”.

“Not to say the word bread or bagel (what on earth is the reason for this one)?

There are many groups of chassidim who refused to use the word bread all through Pesach. They also would not say the word “rain” during Sukkos. Perhaps this draws focus to the power of speech, that the spoken word takes on greater value than a passing sound. Maybe, just maybe, we should think of that message when we feel the desire to share lashon horah.

There are many more very interesting minhagim on Pesach. In Skver, they have a far more restricted diet that anyone else, refusing to eat carrots and several other vegetables that are staples in most other homes. While I have seen some of their published writings about their minhagim, and seen them with a trace of humor, I needed to step back and recognize that their minhagim are mesora based, which is one of the most important pieces of Pesach. Some break the middle matzoh for afikoman, place it on their shoulder, and parade around the table or room, reciting the posuk, “משארותם צרורות בשמלתם על שכמם”. Not having experienced this minhag, I can find it amusing. But there were tzaddikim who practiced this minhag, and others who lauded it even if they themselves did not do it. Choices of vegetable for karpas are also interesting. It is said that the Gerrer Rebbe (בית ישראל) used banana. In the chassidic groups of Ropschitz and Tzanz, they made a brocho of Shehakol on potatoes all year, but בורא פרי האדמה on Pesach. I don’t get that one at all.