The charedi claim of being as entitled to exemptions as US clergy is a double fraud that needs to be exposed.

 

The Charedim Go to Trump

And invoke a uniquely American argument to be exempt from army service

Natan Slifkin Sep 5

READ IN APP

Credit: Molly Riley/Official White House Photo

This past Thursday, several leading Chassidic Rebbes, along with R. Malkiel Kotler of BMG Lakewood, met with President Trump. The chassidic rebbes included the Satmar Rebbes of both Kiryas Yoel, Aaron Teitelbaum, and that of Williamsburg, his brother Zalman Teitelbaum. They have been estranged and have fought bitterly for decades, but they put their differences aside for this occasion. Achdus!

The meeting opened with the Kiryas Yoel Rebbe reciting the Hanosein Teshuah prayer for Trump. This of course the traditional weekly Jewish prayer for the ruling powers of whatever country the Jews happen to be in. However, note that charedi rabbis, including these chassidic rabbis, generally do not recite it anymore on Shabbos, neither for the USA nor for Israel.

What was so important about this meeting with Trump that it brought these Chassidic rebbes for their first face-to-face meeting in two decades, along with the Rosh Yeshiva of Lakewood? Well, they discussed several things, including increasing welfare assistance for the undereducated and impoverished US charedi communities that they seek to keep undereducated and impoverished, and improving conditions for charedim in US prisons (consistent with the prevalent charedi approach of treating criminals as martyrs and heroes).

But the main topic of discussion was apparently something else, which does not quite tie in to the achdus theme (unless you define Klal Yisrael as referring strictly to charedim, which of course they effectively do). Here is a letter that was delivered to Trump:

“September 3, 2026

“The Honorable Donald J. Trump
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

“Dear Mr. President,

“On behalf of tens of thousands of Jews currently living in Israel, we are writing to you to request your assistance regarding a matter of the utmost importance to us.

“Long before you first ran for public office, you demonstrated great kindness toward the Jews whom you encountered. After you assumed the presidency, you extended that kindness to the Jewish people throughout the world. We will be forever grateful.

“In light of this longstanding relationship, we implore your intervention on behalf of the 100,000 students studying in Haredi yeshivas and seminaries in Israel. There is no need for us to explain to you the unique way of life of Haredi Judaism, generally known here in the United States as the ultra-Orthodox community.

“For nearly two hundred years, students attending recognized religious schools and training themselves to become ordained clergy have been exempt from conscription into the United States military. For more than seventy-five years, a similar exemption existed in Israel. Recently, it was abolished, a step that has had a devastating impact on the Haredi community.

“For many reasons, it is not practical for the IDF to accommodate the religious and cultural needs of the Haredi community. It would be almost impossible for Haredim to serve in a secular Israeli army without sacrificing their unique identity and relinquishing essential religious freedoms. Here in the United States, we enjoy the protections afforded by the First Amendment to the Constitution, protections that do not exist in Israel.

“It seems inconceivable that in the Land of Israel Jews are being deprived of their religious freedoms. Yet, tragically, this is the situation. Tens of thousands of God-fearing students, whose only desire is to continue living according to the tradition of their forefathers—a tradition reaching all the way back to the patriarchs of the nation—are living in genuine fear.

“As we write these words, dozens of students are imprisoned in military prisons because of their refusal to enlist. Every Haredi Jew of draft age walks the streets in fear and goes to sleep at night knowing that he may be arrested at any time, solely because of his religious faith.

“They are unable to leave the country for any reason, including in order to seek refuge elsewhere. As we understand it, thousands of American citizens who hold dual citizenship are unable to return to their homes.

“Mr. President: Since the days of the Founding Fathers, the world has not seen a leader so determined to defend religious freedom. You will be recorded in history alongside Thomas Jefferson and George Washington because of your courageous efforts to assist Jews throughout the world in practicing their faith in peace.

“We respectfully ask you to instruct your administration to raise this matter at the highest levels of the Israeli government, and to urge its leaders to follow your example by protecting the religious freedoms of ultra-Orthodox Jews instead of persecuting them.”

So finishes the letter.

Now, the most obvious horror with this letter is charedi Jews trying to recruit the US administration’s help to harm Israel. We saw this previously with Rabbi Dovid Hofstedter of Toronto (Dirshu), and now we’re seeing it with American charedi rabbis. Historically, it’s reminiscent of when Jews asked Rome to intervene in Jerusalem.

But it’s not just the effort that is a terrible thing. The lies in this letter are numerous. There was no seventy-five year exemption from the IDF for students in religious schools. Rather, there was an initial exemption for 400 students, to rebuild the losses of the Holocaust, which was gradually increased until Begin removed the cap, and successive charedi religious and political leaders then extended it to include even charedim who are not in yeshiva.

Likewise, it is a sheker on numerous levels to state that the only desire of charedim is to continue living according to a tradition, reaching all the way back to the patriarchs. First of all, there was no ancient tradition not to help with a defensive war! Second, there was not even a recent tradition to refuse to be economically self-sufficient. Charedim do not only desire an army exemption, they also demand a multitude of tax exemptions, welfare benefits, and additional funding.

But I also want to point out an additional distortion in this letter - the appeal to there being a similar exemption from the military in US history. This is something often voiced by charedim arguing for a draft exemption. But it is an utterly fraudulent comparison, for two reasons.

First is that the primary (and single most frequently cited legal) reason for the US exemption is that removing ministers from communities would damage civilian morale during a time of crisis. In a 1944 ruling against Isaac Trainin, an Orthodox Jew who was denied an exemption as being a rabbi, a U.S. Federal Appeals Court explained that ministers are exempt “not so much for their personal religious training and beliefs, but for the disruption of public worship and religious solace to the people at large which would be caused by their induction,” which accordingly did not apply to Trainin since he was only a part-time rabbi. Congress believed that keeping the home front spiritually stable was vital to national well-being. If the government drafted practicing clergy and stopped the training of future religious leaders (divinity students), entire communities would be left without spiritual guidance, funeral officiants, or counseling when they needed it most.

The exact opposite is the case with the vast majority of the 100,000 charedim seeking exemptions today. They are neither clergy nor divinity students training to be clergy - indeed, the goals of charedi yeshivos today are not at all for their students to enter the rabbinate, and are often specifically for them not to enter it. And unlike the situation with Christian clergy in the 1940s, it is their refusal to enlist which harms national morale and disrupts religious solace! (Dati-leumi rabbis and yeshiva students who enlist, in contrast, help national morale and inspire people with religious solace.)

The second critical difference between the US military exemption and the Israeli charedi desire for exemption is that the United States is a gigantic powerful country that has never suffered an existential threat. It is surrounded by oceans, Mexicans and Canadians. It has always had far more manpower available than it requires, and has accordingly historically been extremely generous with its exemptions. And, of course, it’s also important to keep the economy strong and society healthy during a war, as much as possible. Thus, the US historically gave broad exemptions to people merely on the basis of such things as their being in higher education and/or being married breadwinners.

Again, the exact opposite is the case with Israel. It is a tiny country facing constant immense threats. It needs to have a strict mandatory universal draft policy in order to survive. It cannot repeatedly deploy all its older reservists in a long conflict without suffering enormous domestic damage in all kinds of ways - which is what has been happening. Careers have crashed, emotional health problems have exploded, family lives have collapsed, marriages have broken, suicides have soared. The very broad exemptions that are possible and helpful for the US are devastating for Israel. And charedi isolation neither helps with the economy or society healthy - in fact it dramatically harms both.

The charedi claim of being as entitled to exemptions as US clergy is a double fraud that needs to be exposed. Please share this post with others.

סליחות ראשונות עם יצחק מאיר | אלול תשפ"ו | שידור חי מבנייני-האומה ירושלים

 

Hakdoma -"THE GREAT SELICHOT MUSIC CRISIS, GUITAR OR KEYBOARD" ---- Selichot at Slabodka -12 Harav Sher St., Bnei Brak, Israel : Contact: 972-3-5703358 - Limited Tickets Available

SLABODKA SELICHOT - KIPA SRUGOTS & BTs WILL BE EJECTED

 

SOME GEDOLIM AVAILABLE FOR YESHIVESHE SELICHOT IN THE USA - TZITZIS WEARING CHECKERS WILL BE AT THE DOOR  BEFORE ALLOWED ENTRY - YOUNG ISRAEL JEWS  "fuggetaboutit"

A few days later, in response to several days of reporters trying to get a straight story from the coroner, Diamantoni acknowledged that measles was documented as a contributing factor in the death.

 

Coroner Says Measles Wasn't the Cause of Infant's Death. Is He Right?

— Pennsylvania's health department and Lancaster County coroner have offered contradictory info

by Paul Offit, MD

August 31, 2026 • 4 min read

13

Stephen Diamantoni, MD

Paul Offit, MD, is director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and author of the Beyond the Noise Substack.

On Aug. 25, the Pennsylvania Department of Health reported 393 measles cases and two associated deaths from an outbreak that centered on Lancaster County. One death was in a newborn infant. Within a couple of days, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said the deaths may have been fabricated. This wasn't surprising. Just a year ago, when two little girls in West Texas died from measles, anti-vaccine activists -- who don't want us to believe that their anti-vaccine advocacy is killing children -- also claimed that poor medical care, not measles, had caused the deaths.

This time it's different. Anti-vaccine activists' claims were supported by a Lancaster County coroner named Stephen Diamantoni, MD, a board-certified family medicine practitioner, who said that measles was not the cause of the newborn's death. Diamantoni said that he had detected "measles virus in the infant's lung tissue," and that the baby had died from an internal hemorrhage and "traumatic rupture" of the spleen. Because measles virus can cause enlargement of the spleen and thinning of the splenic capsule, it is plausible that the child's splenic rupture occurred during the birth process, which can be traumatic. Nonetheless, the coroner stated that because "there was no swelling or enlargement [of the spleen] whatsoever," that he does not consider measles to be the cause of death.

Diamantoni is in a tough spot. Splenic ruptures are extremely rare in neonates. He is dealing with an unusual case. So, it's easy to understand his caution in assigning a cause. However, it's hard to make sense of what he is saying.

First, Diamantoni put a lot of emphasis on his finding of a normal-sized spleen, emphasizing it with the word "whatsoever." To him, this meant that measles virus didn't affect the spleen so it couldn't be the cause of death. However, once a spleen is ruptured, it's difficult to tell whether it was enlarged. For example, if you find a balloon on the ground that has burst, it's hard to know how big it was before it burst.

Second, Diamantoni might have found that the spleen was vulnerable because the child had suffered from something other than measles that had caused splenic fragility before birth; specifically, infections like congenital cytomegalovirus and rubella, hemolytic disorders, or certain inborn errors of metabolism. If Diamantoni had found any of these other problems, then he could confidently say that measles wasn't the cause. But if he hasn't, the only obvious cause left would be measles.

Third, Diamantoni is wrong to believe that a spleen must be quite enlarged to be fragile and at risk for rupture. Even mild or moderate enlargement of the spleen due to measles can still make the organ vulnerable to rupture. Also, a fragile splenic capsule can be difficult to determine post-mortem. It would have been of value here to look at the remaining splenic tissue to determine the presence of cells typically found during measles infection, such as multi-nucleated lymphocytes. This would have further solidified the case for measles virus as the cause of the splenic fragility. Perhaps this was done; if so, it should be reported to the public.

A few days later, in response to several days of reporters trying to get a straight story from the coroner, Diamantoni acknowledged that measles was documented as a contributing factor in the death. Diamantoni further explained that measles was listed under Part II of the infant's death certificate, which reports "other contributing conditions contributing to death but not resulting in the underlying cause." He said that this was listed on the death certificate to offer "a broader view of the general health of the child."

Diamantoni's clarification only caused more confusion. The critical question is clear: Would this infant have died if he hadn't been infected with measles? Although the press and public have grown increasingly frustrated with Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) and the state's department of health for failing to make the cause of this child's death clear, the confusion lies with Diamantoni.

What do we know? We know that this infant was infected with measles while in the womb; we know that the infant died of splenic rupture; we know that measles infections can increase splenic fragility leading to rupture; and we know that splenic rupture is extraordinarily rare in newborns. It's understandable that Diamantoni is cautious about determining why this child died of splenic rupture given its rarity. Nonetheless, if Diamantoni is going to claim that measles wasn't the precipitating cause of this child's death, he is going to have to do a much better job of explaining why it wasn't.

A version of this post originally appeared in the Beyond the Noise Substack.

Dr. Zink said she could not remember a time when the C.D.C. publicly questioned a state’s determination of cause of death. State officials are increasingly “choosing not to share data with the C.D.C. because of mistrust how it might be used,” she said.

 

C.D.C. Director Challenges Pennsylvania’s Report of Two Measles Deaths

 

Questioning a state’s investigation is highly unusual for the public health agency, but reflects tensions between the Trump administration and many states over health issues.

Dr. Erica Schwartz, who has expressed strong support of childhood vaccines, was confirmed as C.D.C. director this month, despite persistent questions during her confirmation hearing about her willingness and ability to push back against Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s actions.

 

The new director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ordered agency officials to challenge two measles deaths reported by Pennsylvania, shunning the agency’s normal procedure of accepting data shared by states and amplifying comments made by her boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The incident draws the C.D.C. into a highly political disagreement about whether the deaths were a result of measles or merely coincided with the infection, echoing similar disputes over causes of death during the coronavirus pandemic.

It also pits the agency against a state health department, an extraordinary move for the C.D.C. But the episode is emblematic of the Trump administration’s continuing tussle with states, particularly those led by Democrats, over health policies and priorities.

“This week’s measles outbreaks update will not include the two measles-associated deaths reported by the Pennsylvania Department of Health on Aug. 25,” the C.D.C. posted on its website, after Mr. Kennedy, in a social media post, accused the state’s Democratic governor of “manipulating” the truth.

One of the two deaths involved a newborn with a ruptured spleen. Details of the second case have not been disclosed, but both people were unvaccinated and both tested positive for the measles virus, according to the Pennsylvania Health Department.

Dr. Erica Schwartz, who has expressed strong, public support of childhood vaccines, was confirmed as C.D.C. director this month, despite persistent questions during her confirmation hearing about her willingness and ability to push back against Mr. Kennedy’s actions. She has repeatedly promised to “follow the science” and promised the agency’s staff that she was prepared to disagree with her superiors when needed, and that she would work to build trust with state partners.

But the current incident threatens to do the opposite, some public health experts cautioned.

“Having the C.D.C. question what the state is sharing will only lead to a further erosion of what is a really critical partnership between states and the federal government,” said Dr. Anne Zink, a public health expert at Yale University and a former chief medical officer for Alaska.

Dr. Schwartz did not respond to a request for comment.

The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the C.D.C., said the agency “has a responsibility to ensure its reporting accurately and transparently reflects what is known and what remains unconfirmed.”

“The two measles-associated deaths announced by Pennsylvania have not been confirmed based on the information currently available to C.D.C.,” the department said in a statement. “The information currently posted reflects the best available information and our commitment to transparency and telling the American people the truth — a foundational principle of the Trump administration.”

Pennsylvania is in the midst of a rapidly expanding measles outbreak that had sickened 497 people and hospitalized 87 as of Monday. Following the standard process for reporting cases of notifiable diseases like measles, the state’s Health Department reported two deaths to the C.D.C. last week, saying two people had tested positive for measles.

At a news conference last Tuesday, Gov. Josh Shapiro said the federal government was partly to blame for the hesitancy surrounding measles vaccinations.

“When the information we see coming from the federal government in some cases isn’t driven by facts and by science,” he said, “it makes it even more confusing for parents, and that has a serious impact.”

In a social media post on Wednesday, Mr. Kennedy accused the governor of taking “giddy delight in announcing two measles deaths” and suggested the deaths may have been “fabricated by one of the Governor’s hopeful staffers.” He added, “The Lancaster County Coroner says that it has no record of any measles deaths.” Contrary to Mr. Kennedy’s assertion, however, the state is not required to inform the county coroner of all deaths.

The state’s Health Department characterized the deaths as “measles-associated.” It uses that term “when laboratory or epidemiologic evidence of measles is present, but the disease may not be assessed by the medical certifier or coroner to be the immediate cause of death,” the department clarified in a social media post.

The disagreement involves in part the report of a newborn, whose mother was sick with measles, and who died shortly after birth. Although the newborn tested positive for the virus as well, the immediate cause of death was a ruptured spleen, Dr. Stephen Diamantoni, the Lancaster County coroner, said in an interview. Measles is more typically associated with complications such as pneumonia and encephalitis, but infection can lead to an enlarged spleen, which may make the organ more vulnerable to rupture.

On Friday, the C.D.C. did not update its weekly tally for measles cases and deaths as it was expected to, saying only that the update had been “delayed.” Staff members then updated the site on Sunday, appending an asterisked explanation about the Pennsylvania deaths that the “available information does not establish whether measles caused or contributed to the deaths or whether the individuals died from other causes while infected with measles.”

Dr. Schwartz ordered that highly unusual statement be added to the website, according to officials with knowledge of the events, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about the matter.

“C.D.C. has historically relied on expertise of state and local health departments,” said Dr. Debra Houry, who served as the agency’s chief medical officer until she resigned a year ago.

“This is a moment for the C.D.C. director to speak publicly about the outbreak,” Dr. Houry said. “Delays in reporting of data further erode trust and create confusion.”

Neil Ruhland, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of Health, said the state had meticulously investigated the deaths. “Every reported measles case is thoroughly reviewed to confirm it meets the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (C.D.C.) case definition for a measles case. To date, D.O.H. has provided all required epidemiological data to the C.D.C.”

Dr. Zink said she could not remember a time when the C.D.C. publicly questioned a state’s determination of cause of death. State officials are increasingly “choosing not to share data with the C.D.C. because of mistrust how it might be used,” she said.

“It’s definitely unusual, tragic and frustrating to see publicly this sort of back-and-forth disagreement with counties, states and the federal government over the cause of death,” she added.

Having a lacerated spleen may not be a well-known complication in part because experts know little about how measles affects a fetus, said Dr. William Moss, a measles expert at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Congenital measles has been exceptionally rare since the virus was declared eliminated in 2000, and measles infection in pregnancy significantly increases the risk of miscarriage or stillbirth.

It is possible that the C.D.C. is hesitating to document the deaths in order to further investigate the exact cause, Dr. Moss said. But that does not explain why the agency failed to log the second death reported by Pennsylvania health officials as related to measles, he said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/31/health/measles-deaths-pennsylvania-schwartz-kennedy-shapiro.html

California lawmakers vote to change childhood sex abuse law

 

SACRAMENTO — The California state Legislature voted Sunday to amend a 2019 law that extended the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims but was blamed for draining the coffers of municipalities and school districts.

Senate Bill 577 by John Laird (D-Santa Cruz) follows years of heated debate over the state law, which resulted in scores of lawsuits against cities, counties and schools.

Since the law was enacted, L.A. County has agreed to pay nearly $5 billion to settle more than 12,000 claims stemming from alleged sexual abuse committed by government employees in foster homes and juvenile halls.

Advertisement

Paid Content

Is your car always in the repair shop?

By Quill & Arrow

The bill passed by the Legislature on Sunday requires victims older than 40 to provide evidence that the public entity was aware of the misconduct that resulted in the assault and failed to take reasonable steps to avoid it.

It also states that attorneys who file fraudulent sex abuse lawsuits can be fined $25,000 per violation. The Times reported last year on nine plaintiffs who said they were paid to sue the county over sex abuse, some of whom said they were told to fabricate their claims.

Consumer attorneys, counties and victims rights groups jostled over the elements of the proposed bill over the last few months.

Advertisement

Paid Content

Free Case Review for Defective Vehicles

By Quill & Arrow

Lawmakers stopped short of capping payouts in the bill, a change sought by some local governments and school districts.

The legislation follows multiple attempts to change the law in recent years. Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica) tried last year to increase the burden of proof for sex abuse cases, but pulled the bill after outrage from victims rights groups.

Some of the groups blasted the bill this week, arguing it would shield rapists and deny justice to survivors.

Speaking on the floor of the state Senate on Sunday, Laird said that he tried to balance the needs of all parties.

The bill now goes to Gov. Gavin Newsom for his consideration.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-08-30/california-lawmakers-vote-to-change-childhood-sex-abuse-law

When Rabbis Abandon Truth

 

Judaism’s Epistemic Virtue and the Crisis of Rabbinic Authority

There is an uncomfortable question that the Orthodox Jewish world desperately needs to ask: What happens when rabbis stop pursuing truth? Not when a rabbi makes an honest mistake, which is inevitable for any human being, but when rabbinic authority becomes so invested in protecting its own conclusions that facts, evidence, history, science, and even reason itself become subordinate to institutional loyalty. Judaism has an ancient answer, and it is not particularly flattering to those who demand obedience at the expense of truth. The Torah does not tell us to worship authority. It commands us to pursue truth.

The Jewish tradition begins with an extraordinary proposition: “The seal of the Holy One, blessed be He, is truth,” chotamo shel HaKadosh Baruch Hu emet (Shabbat 55a). Truth is therefore not simply a desirable character trait. It is associated with the very nature of God. The Psalmist declares, “Your Torah is truth” (Psalms 119:142). If Torah is truth, then a Torah culture that becomes frightened of facts, hostile to questions, or dependent upon intellectual conformity has created a contradiction at the heart of its own religious mission.

The Talmud should be enough to cure us of the fantasy that Judaism was ever founded upon unquestioning obedience to rabbis. Open almost any page of the Gemara and one finds disagreement: Rabbi Akiva against Rabbi Ishmael, Beit Hillel against Beit Shammai, Abaye against Rava, one sage challenging another, one interpretation being dismantled and reconstructed by the next. The Talmud did not erase disagreement. It preserved it. It did not conceal the arguments of those who ultimately lost the halakhic debate. It recorded them for posterity because the process of thinking was itself part of Torah.

This is one of Judaism's great intellectual achievements, and one of the great ironies of contemporary Jewish life is that some rabbis appear increasingly uncomfortable with it. They want the authority of the sages without the intellectual culture of the sages. They want the reverence without the argument. They want the obedience without the questions. But the rabbinic tradition was not built on the assumption that a rabbi is incapable of being wrong. It was built on the assumption that human beings must struggle with truth.

There is a profound difference between rabbinic authority and rabbinic infallibility. Judaism recognizes the former. It has never granted the latter to every rabbi who acquires a title, a reputation, a yeshiva position, or a large following. A rabbi may be an extraordinary talmudist and know very little about economics. He may be a brilliant halakhist and know very little about medicine, psychology, military affairs, history, or science. There is no humiliation in admitting that limitation. Quite the opposite: the admission is an act of intellectual honesty.

Yet in parts of the Orthodox world, a disturbing doctrine has emerged in practice, even when it is not articulated explicitly: if a rabbi says something, questioning it is somehow questioning Torah itself. This is a dangerous confusion. The rabbi is not the Torah. The rabbi is a student of Torah. He may interpret it brilliantly. He may teach it magnificently. He may possess extraordinary wisdom. But he remains a human being. To transform the fallibility of the human teacher into infallibility is not an act of religious devotion. It is an abdication of responsibility.

Maimonides understood this better than many of his modern admirers. His intellectual world was one in which philosophy, science, logic, medicine, and reason mattered. His famous formulation, “Accept the truth from whoever says it,” captures an epistemological principle that ought to be engraved above every rabbinic study hall. Truth does not become true because a great rabbi says it, and falsehood does not become true because a revered authority repeats it. The identity of the speaker is irrelevant to the truth of the proposition.

That principle is particularly relevant today because modern Jewish communities confront questions that earlier generations could scarcely have imagined. Medicine has transformed. Science has transformed. Psychology has transformed. Technology has transformed. The geopolitical realities of Israel and the Jewish Diaspora have transformed. The Jewish community cannot afford a religious leadership that treats knowledge outside its own narrow expertise as a threat to rabbinic authority.

A rabbi who says, “I do not know,” may be demonstrating wisdom. A rabbi who says, “The evidence is unclear,” may be demonstrating intellectual maturity. A rabbi who says, “There are legitimate disagreements among the sources,” may be teaching authentic Judaism. But a rabbi who cannot acknowledge uncertainty because uncertainty might weaken his authority has a much deeper problem. He has confused leadership with certainty.

There is an even more troubling phenomenon: the deliberate conversion of opinion into doctrine. A rabbi may have a legitimate political preference, historical interpretation, educational philosophy, or sociological judgment. But once that opinion is presented as the unquestionable position of Torah, the discussion changes. The followers are no longer being invited to think. They are being instructed to submit.

This is particularly dangerous when rabbis enter areas in which their authority is assumed rather than earned. Knowing Shas does not make someone an epidemiologist. Knowing Rambam does not make someone a military strategist. Knowing Choshen Mishpat does not automatically make someone an economist. Knowing thousands of pages of Talmud does not make someone an expert on modern psychology. Jewish scholarship is magnificent precisely because it recognizes specialization. The physician consults the physician. The engineer consults the engineer. The historian studies history. The posek rules within his halakhic competence. Wisdom begins with knowing the limits of one's knowledge.

The great Jewish intellectuals understood this. They did not confuse Torah scholarship with omniscience. They understood that humility before reality is itself a religious virtue. The Torah commands, “Distance yourself from a false matter” (Exodus 23:7). The command is not qualified: distance yourself from falsehood when it is politically convenient, when it protects your institution, or when it makes your followers uncomfortable. Falsehood is falsehood.

This is where the modern crisis of rabbinic leadership becomes particularly serious. There is a difference between being mistaken and refusing to correct a mistake. There is a difference between ignorance and willful ignorance. There is a difference between sincerely defending an interpretation and manipulating facts to preserve authority. The first category belongs to the human condition. The latter is a moral failure.

A rabbi should therefore be judged not by whether he has ever been wrong, but by what he does when reality proves him wrong. Does he correct himself? Does he acknowledge the evidence? Does he teach his students that intellectual honesty is more important than personal prestige? Or does he move the goalposts, redefine the facts, attack the questioner, and invoke “Daas Torah” as a shield against criticism?

If the latter becomes normal, the Jewish community has a serious problem. Because once followers are trained to believe that questioning a rabbi is itself sinful, the rabbi acquires something no human being should possess: immunity from accountability.

That is not Judaism. It is clericalism.

And clericalism is particularly alien to the intellectual spirit of the Talmud. The Talmudic sage does not win an argument by shouting louder. He wins by bringing a source, examining an assumption, identifying a contradiction, and answering the objection. The entire architecture of the Gemara is based upon the proposition that claims must be tested.

What a remarkable lesson for contemporary Jewish life: the question is not the enemy of faith. The dishonest answer is.

A Jewish child who asks, “How do we know?” should not be frightened into silence. He should be encouraged. A teenager who challenges an assumption should not automatically be branded rebellious. He should be taught how to argue intelligently. An adult who discovers that a revered rabbi was mistaken should not be forced to choose between intellectual honesty and religious loyalty.

The Jewish people have survived for thousands of years because Judaism gave us an extraordinary intellectual survival mechanism: argument. We survived because our ancestors were willing to ask questions, challenge assumptions, reinterpret texts, debate authorities, and confront uncomfortable realities. The danger today is not that Jews are asking too many questions. It is that some Jewish institutions are producing Jews who are afraid to ask them.

There is a final irony. Rabbis who insist upon unquestioning obedience may believe they are strengthening Torah. They may actually be weakening it. When a young Jew discovers that an authority figure has presented an opinion as absolute truth and later discovers that the evidence contradicts it, the resulting crisis may not be limited to that particular opinion. The young Jew may begin questioning the entire institution that taught him not to question.

Intellectual honesty therefore is not merely an academic virtue. It is a strategy for Jewish survival.

The rabbi who admits uncertainty strengthens his credibility. The rabbi who admits error strengthens his students. The rabbi who welcomes disagreement strengthens Torah. The rabbi who teaches his followers to investigate strengthens Judaism. The rabbi who demands unquestioning obedience may temporarily strengthen his own authority, but he risks weakening the very intellectual tradition he claims to defend.

Judaism does not need rabbis who pretend to know everything. It needs rabbis who know what they know, know what they do not know, and possess the courage to distinguish between the two.

The Jewish people deserve leaders who understand that truth outranks prestige. Torah outranks personality. Reality outranks ideology. Evidence outranks convenience. And emet outranks the ego of the man delivering the sermon.

The ultimate test of a rabbi is therefore not whether thousands of people stand when he enters the room. It is whether he will remain standing when the truth requires him to admit that he was wrong.

That is the rabbi Judaism needs. And that is the rabbi Judaism deserves.

 

REPUBLISHED

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/when-rabbis-abandon-truth/