Municipal chief rabbis: Excommunicate rabbis who back religious reforms
A group of municipal chief rabbis have called for other municipal chief rabbis to be excommunicated should they establish kashrut authorities or their own conversion courts.
I hate that I believe the sentence I’m about to write. It undermines much of what I spend my life trying to do. But there is nothing more overrated in politics — and perhaps in life — than the power of persuasion.
It is nearly impossible to convince people of what they don’t want to believe. Decades of work in psychology attest to this truth, as does most everything in our politics and most of our everyday experience. Think of your own conversations with your family or your colleagues. How often have you really persuaded someone to abandon a strongly held belief or preference? Persuasion is by no means impossible or unimportant, but on electric topics, it is a marginal phenomenon.
Which brings me to the difficult choice we face on coronavirus vaccinations. The conventional wisdom is that there is some argument, yet unmade and perhaps undiscovered, that will change the minds of the roughly 30 percent of American adults who haven’t gotten at least one dose. There probably isn’t. The unvaccinated often hold their views strongly, and many are making considered, cost-benefit calculations given how they weigh the risks of the virus, and the information sources they trust to inform them of those risks. For all the exhortations to respect their concerns, there is a deep condescension in believing that we’re smart enough to discover or invent some appeal they haven’t yet heard......
READ MORE:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/29/opinion/covid-vaccine-hesitancy.html
|
Yona Metzger, former chief rabbi of Israel, was arrested on the suspicion of bribery, fraud, breach of trust, money laundering, obstruction of justice and witness tampering. |
Under the current kashrut system of the Chief Rabbinate in Israel, the possibilities range from food actually being kosher at best, to deception in many cases. The system functions somewhere between disorganization, to say the least, and outright chaos. There is also a jungle of private “Badatzim” (rabbinical courts) which results in a “double kosher tax” that all Israelis pay.
So, the kosher reform promoted by Minister of Religious Affairs Matan Kahana is a revolution on a historic scale in the kashrut system, and, if implemented wisely, it will offer kosher food consumers reliable kashrut certification and lower prices.
Kashrut certification in Israel today is granted, by law, by the Chief Rabbinate. In practice, those who confer kosher status are the local rabbis who oversee the local kashrut system and set the halachic standards for its operation. Alongside them are many Haredi private courts (Badatzim) that provide additional kashrut certification beyond that of the Rabbinate, usually according to stricter standards.
The kosher market in Israel generates about NIS 3.5 billion a year. Most Jews in Israel (about 70 percent) consume kosher food exclusively and about 80% of food businesses hold a kosher certificate. Today, the Chief Rabbinate has a monopoly on kashrut under the law. There are also 20 Badatzim, which sometimes employ the Rabbinate’s kashrut supervisors, at tax-payer expense, as well as the “Tzohar” organization, which provides independent kosher status. Kashrut departments in the religious councils and local rabbis set the standards of kashrut, appoint the inspectors, and manage their operation.
The result of this decentralized structure is low-level kashrut and operational chaos, as reflected in state comptroller reports, High Court rulings, harsh investigative articles, and several criminal investigations. The standards for kashrut certification vary from city to city, the providers hire their own inspectors, and the supervision of inspectors is poor. The existing kashrut system hardly provides what is most important to almost all Israelis – kosher food at affordable prices.
The reform promoted by Minister Kahana is historic and embodies a promise of better, more reliable kashrut. Its cornerstones are the creation of a uniform set of kashrut standards, and the transfer of kosher certification to private entities to be supervised by the Chief Rabbinate.
Under the proposal, the Chief Rabbinate, or a panel of three municipal chief rabbis, will set the halachic standards of kashrut. Private bodies licensed by the Rabbinate will grant the actual kosher certification. The proposed structure would remedy most of the ills of the kashrut system: first, it would create an order — the menu of criteria for all links in the food chain would be uniform and not subject to the whims of local rabbis; second, each body’s certification standards would be transparent to consumers; third, the supervision of inspectors will be more significant and will increase the level of kashrut; fourth, competition between bodies would lead to lower certification prices; fifth, providers would not hire their own inspectors (as the High Court has long demanded), and their employment conditions would improve; and finally — the bizarre situation of three or even four kashrut hechshers on certain products, and the resulting high cost to consumers, would disappear.
Cries of foul by Haredi MKs and the Chief Rabbinate should not mislead. The Rabbinate is alarmed by the loss of control over its rabbis and functionaries, and Haredi MKs are alarmed by the anticipated economic loss facing the Haredi Badatzim under their wings.
The truth is, apart from the economic benefit and the reliability of kashrut, the reform will only strengthen the Chief Rabbinate and save it from itself. Instead of local rabbis engaging in managing kashrut, they will be freed up to spiritually lead their communities. On the national level, the Rabbinate will be significantly strengthened as it will supervise the certification process.
The reform is important in another aspect: after years of stagnation — and Haredi control in order to gain power, money, and jobs — religious services in Israel are now led by a minister who has the public’s best interests at heart. Kahana is ready to fight against a religious establishment that sanctified the status quo, – and it did so not out of pure motives. We should hope that this is only the first harbinger of many necessary improvements.
Imagine if there were only ONE kashruth agency in the USA!
THE KASHRUTH INDUSTRY IN ISRAEL AS IT EXISTS IS PAYING FOR "PROTECTION" - NOT ON RELIABILITY! I'VE SEEN THIS DISGRACED AGENCY AT WORK - UP FRONT AND PERSONAL! | |
Ever since the Romans put an end to the council of elders known as the Sanhedrin in the fifth century, religious Jewish communal life has been placed in the hands of local rabbinical authorities, primarily the mara de-atra (Aramaic for master of the house). As the major Rishonim, the formative rabbis who codified Jewish law, the Rambam and the Rif state “asu gedolim eilu kerabam” they have made these great ones their teachers.
This mandate to follow the local rabbinic leaders makes sense. Such figures understood the local realities and sensitivities and felt a closeness to the community and the individuals who formed it. These rabbis were easily accessible and prominent in their locales.
This did mean that Jewish law or custom could differ from place to place, but this was something to be embraced rather than feared. This is one of the reasons why the reforms being enacted by the new government in Israel to decentralize issues like kashrut, conversion, marriage and divorce should likewise not be feared, but rather welcomed.
While the media like to describe this government as “the government of change,” which it certainly is, it is more than that. We are looking at issues and situations that have sadly become stagnant at best and corrupt at worst and seeking to create new realities, or in the case of reform in the arena of religion and state, to return to a former reality that serves the interests of society as a whole.
More than this is a breaking of the Rabbinate’s monopoly on issues like kashrut, there is a dismantling of the equation created in recent times in which kashrut has been equated with corruption.
Unfortunately, average Israelis see what has become of kashrut with their own eyes, and when they associate a central part of Judaism as dishonest, it moves them further away from it.
This is why, from my first days in the Knesset, I dealt with issues relating to religion and state, including the issue of kashrut. I saw that the relationship Jews in Israel had with the issue of kashrut certification in the State of Israel – the lack of clarity, the double payments for the same kosher supervisor for different certifications – threatened not only the status of the rabbinate, but also and especially the status of Judaism in the state.
For a nation that prides itself on being both Jewish and democratic, this is a sharp blow to our central ethos. It harms our Zionist spirit.
Furthermore, dissolving the rabbinate’s monopoly on kashrut has significant economic implications estimated at many millions of shekels every year – shekels that will end up in the consumer’s pockets in substantial savings.
Most of all, however, the reforms led by Minister of Religious Affairs Matan Kahane are a step toward rebuilding the credibility of kashrut. From now on, those who keep kosher in this country can rest assured knowing that the kosher certification that a business owner chooses will be free of outside considerations, and will be a certificate attesting to kosher supervisors who fulfilled their role more faithfully than before. Certification will be provided by local rabbis who are cognizant of the reality on the ground and are known and accessible to the patrons.
As with all competitive markets, the business owners and the consumers will have the freedom to choose. If they see that a particular kosher supervisor is not living up to their commitment, they can take their business elsewhere. When there is no choice and a monopoly in any particular market, it invariably leads to corruption and the constant raising of cost which has an impact on the price the consumer has to pay.
Cronyism and extreme centralization are never good things for any modern industry, and become the enemy of ethical and moral behavior. That is why the enactment of desperately needed reforms is central to the ethos of this government. Of course, like any monopoly on the verge of shattering, there will be voices who will cry and threaten.
Reforms by this government are taking place across the spectrum. Excessive bureaucracy is being limited, regulatory burdens are being eased, competition is being increased in many industries and the cost of living is being reduced.
These are principles that unite this government, and we dare not leave issues relating to religion and state behind.
Whether religious, traditional or secular, being Jewish should be a source of pride for all. Every time a Jew in Israel meets an aspect of Judaism they see as petty or corrupt, it erodes this pride and weakens a central aspect of the Jewish solidarity and peoplehood that are the foundations of this country.
There is a reason our great rabbis, in their infinite wisdom, saw the need to create a more personal and accountable Judaism, which survived for thousands of years.
It is time for the State of Israel to return to that Judaism.
Late last week President Biden achieved something I’d thought impossible: He got me to feel bad for Mark Zuckerberg.
Sure, it was only a little bad, but that’s no small feat. As I spent the weekend brushing up on funereal dirges to play on my tiny violin, I couldn’t help but marvel at the president’s rhetorical shoddiness regarding Facebook’s role in Americans’ refusal to get vaccinated, the most important obstacle to the nation’s full recovery from the pandemic.
By accusing Facebook and other social media companies of “killing people” through what Biden said was their lax policing of vaccine misinformation, the president reduced the complex scourge of runaway vaccine hesitancy into a cartoonishly simple matter of product design: If only Facebook would hit its Quit Killing People button, America would be healed again.
Worse, Biden fed into the bogus right-wing notion that Facebook and other social media giants now operate as media arms of the Democratic Party, a belief that will only undermine whatever greater action against vaccine nonsense that the companies might take. If Facebook decides, tomorrow, to ban all criticism of the Covid-19 vaccines, its actions will be instantly undermined as Big Tech censoring “the truth” to satisfy the radical left or some other such reflexive dismissal. On cue, The Wall Street Journal editorial board declared on Monday that Biden was only criticizing Facebook because “Facebook has bent to politicians far too much, inviting this latest assault.”
Finally, in the blundering way he took on the tech giants, Biden illustrated the profound challenges that bedevil calls for stricter regulation of social media. Facebook and Twitter, like The New York Times and Fox News, enjoy a right protected by the First Amendment to post or to amplify — or to not post or not amplify — just about any legal content they care to.
In a free society, a president accusing a media company — even one whose chief executive insists it’s not a media company — of mass death simply for disseminating legal content should make us all a little uncomfortable. Sure, Facebook has a right to kick you off its site for lying about vaccines — but if the president fiercely exhorts Facebook to do so, the argument that you’re being censored by the government becomes a lot more plausible.
You might defend Biden’s passion here on the grounds of public health. But it’s probably past the point of utility. Researchers who study vaccine hesitancy say that social networks play a huge role in the spread of dangerous lies about vaccines. Perhaps there was a time, months or years ago, when Facebook and other social media companies had the power to stop the anti-vaccine movement from swallowing up so many Americans.
But if that was ever the case, there is little evidence it still is. Polls show that about a fifth of Americans refuse to get a Covid vaccine, and the divide is highly partisan. As The Washington Post’s Philip Bump has noted, states that voted for Donald Trump in the last election are suffering vaccination rates far lower than states that went for Biden. This suggests the anti-vaccine movement has achieved a kind of cultural escape velocity.
Consider, after all, how widely anti-vaccine lies are now echoed on the right — vaccine misinformation has become a staple of Fox News, conservative talk radio, prominent Republican members of Congress and many organs of conservatism. (THEY ALL GOT VACCINATED)
Biden, thankfully, seems to have quickly realized his comments were unhelpful. After Facebook pointed out that a survey it sponsored found that 85 percent of its American users are vaccinated against Covid or plan to be, the president conceded that “Facebook isn’t killing people” but said that a handful of Facebook members are doing so by spreading lies about the vaccines.
I’m glad he did so. But I worry that by dragging the vaccines further into the partisan mire, Biden’s slip-up will cause long-term damage in the effort to get Americans to trust these miraculous shots.
Renée DiResta, the technical research manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory and an expert on how the anti-vaccine movement has spread online, has said that one of the main reasons the movement has taken off is the savvy way it has navigated new currents in media.
While the American public health community repeatedly bungled its messages on Covid, online influencers understood “how to gain the confidence of people they will never meet, make content that captures attention, and persuade audiences to take action,” DiResta wrote in April. A worthy countercampaign, she suggested, would embrace the same distributed model — it will require an army of family doctors, religious leaders and other trusted local officials to slowly and deliberately undo the lies about vaccines that have seeped into the culture.
In a lengthy document published last week, Vivek Murthy, the surgeon general, issued a similar call for a distributed effort against vaccine hesitancy. Of course, inspiring such a countermovement will not be easy.
Much simpler to just blame Facebook.
A senior haredi rabbi excoriated the national unity government over the weekend, calling for its elimination.
Rabbi Meir Mazuz, the dean of the Kisse Rahamim yeshiva and a leading halachic decisor for the Tunisian haredi community, called Sunday for the Bennett government to be “erased from the world”, and accused it of depriving the haredi sector of funding in order to benefit the Arab sector.
During the traditional lamentations recited during the Tisha B’Av fast Sunday, Rabbi Mazuz blasted planned government cuts to daycare and preschool subsidies for children of full-time yeshiva students, saying the move was meant to take food “from the mouths of religious school children in order to benefit the Arabs.”
Finance Minister Avidgor Liberman, who has proposed an end to the inclusion of yeshiva students in the list of occupations eligible for daycare and preschool subsidies, has argued that the cuts are part of a larger program to trim Israel’s massive deficit.
The coalition members, Rabbi Mazuz continued, “are the enemies of the Torah, the enemies of Torah scholars, the enemies of the Jewish people. They funnel money to the Arabs without end, while taking food away from religious children who are learning in Torah schools.”
The government’s “time will come, for all of them. They will be erased from the world.”
In her July 9 blog post, Shulamit Magnus pronounced that the staunch secularist, Avigdor Liberman, is “doing God’s work.” The finance minister has decreed that Israel will no longer give child care subsidies to families in which one parent does not hold paid employment of at least 24 hours a week. The measure targets the Haredi sector — specifically married men who claim to study Torah all day. If Liberman’s plan holds, the families of such kollelniks will be denied these subsidies.
Magnus’ formulation accomplishes a quiet, but highly significant, linguistic and conceptual shift. Note that she did not argue on nationalist grounds that extending state subsidies to kollel families is unfair and wrong, she did so on religious grounds. God may be present in the study halls of Bnei Brak, but God is also present in the Knesset and government offices that make policy for the Jewish state. God is at work in these “secular” ministries because of the Torah’s commitment to justice, fairness and the welfare of the entire Jewish people. Tsedek, tsedek tirdof! (“Justice, justice you shall pursue”) commands the God of Israel.
In other words, Haredim and their politicians should not define Judaism for us. There is a widespread dangerous illusion, particularly among secular Israelis, that even if you do not agree with Haredim, they ”keep Israel Jewish,” and so the Jewish state should accede to some of their demands. This is a bit like Golda’s myopic statement, “I don’t go to shul, but the shul I don’t go to is Orthodox.”
Let’s not allow the Haredi community to kidnap the Judaism, which belongs to the entire Jewish people. That would be a tragic theft. The idea that haredi’ut defines Judaism is historically false and religiously wrong — and it does violence to our Jewish identity. The truth is that many of the central practices of the Haredi community run squarely against what God, the Torah, and the talmudic rabbis demand of Jews, and what will sustain Israel going forward.
The Mishna (Avot 2:2) cites R. Gamliel, who counsels Jews to combine Torah study with a worldly occupation, warning us that not having an occupation brings about sin. Elsewhere, the Talmud (Kiddushin 29a) quotes Rabbi Yehuda: A father who does not teach his son a trade in effect teaches him thievery because when a person has no profession he is likely to turn to stealing. Maimonides concurs, adding that one who studies Torah exclusively and lives on handouts “profanes God’s Name” (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Talmud Torah 3:1).
It is important to recognize that the talmudic rabbis and those thereafter worked for a living. For example, Shimon ben Shetach was in the flax trade, R. Yehoshua was a tailor, Rashi was a vintner, Rambam and Ramban were physicians, and the Chofetz Chaim ran a store. So working Israelis who contribute to Israel’s social and financial structure are the ones following Jewish tradition and doing a religious deed, while Jews who refuse to work are bringing sin to Israel. The Talmud (Yoma 86a) condemns the Torah scholar who buys merchandise and pays later, because it appears to others that he is taking without paying. That scholar, says the Talmud, cannot repent for his sins because, through his behavior, he has caused people to despise the Torah. If so, what are we to say of the current practice of some Jews who benefit from government defense and subsidies, but pay no taxes and do not contribute to larger Israeli society? Judaism demands that those who take also give, that those who benefit also contribute.
Last week’s Torah reading provides another essential criterion of correct Judaism: “Will your brothers go out to war while you remain here?” asks Moses rhetorically (Bamidbar 32:6). He was stunned by such an irresponsible request by the two tribes that asked to settle on the other side of the Jordan River, and would not countenance some Jews risking their lives, while others remained comfortably ensconced in their safe homes, far from the battlefield.
Judaism demands that all of us defend our people. It is more than a civic duty; it is a religious obligation. Jewish religious law is clear: when the people of Israel fight an existential defensive war (“milkehemet mitsvah”) everyone—without exception—must fight. Even a bride is required to leave her chuppah to contribute to the national defense. So when Israelis serve in the IDF, they should understand their service not only in nationalist terms, but also as a truly Jewish religious act, a mitzvah.
The Mishna also demands that Jews not separate themselves from society (Avot 2:4). Being a responsible and integral part of the Jewish collective is a religious and moral imperative. Maimonides even rules that someone who separates himself from the community has no share in the world to come. Ultimately, the Talmud and the traditional rabbis categorically rejected Shimon bar Yochai’s model of leaving the community to live a solitary life in a cave and learning Torah to the exclusion of any practical knowledge. They knew that such monastic isolation serves only yourself, not God. Separatism is a selfish sin.
This is not a new insight. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook understood it 100 years ago when he claimed that the early secular halutzim were doing holy work by returning to the land God promised them, and that religious quietists who stayed in the study halls of the diaspora were actually contravening God’s plan for His people.
Similarly, all Israelis today — religious and non-religious alike — should appreciate the dedication and toil of those who serve in the IDF and those in government who demand fairness and justice in Israeli society. They are “doing God’s work,” whether or not they wear kippot. And as the prophet Micha tells us, following God’s demands does not mean growing payot, wearing long coats, or voting for religious parties. God’s work means doing justice, being compassionate, and acting humbly before God.
Dr. Leana Wen is an emergency physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at the George Washington University’s Milken School of Public Health, where she is also a distinguished fellow at the Fitzhugh Mullan Institute for Health Workforce Equity. She is an expert in public health preparedness and previously served as Baltimore's Health Commissioner. A contributing columnist for The Washington Post and author of the book When Doctors Don't Listen, Dr. Wen is a frequent guest commentator on the covid-19 crisis.