EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!

EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!
CLICK - GOAL - 100,000 NEW SIGNATURES! 75,000 SIGNATURES HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED TO GOVERNOR CUOMO!

EFF Urges Court to Block Dragnet Subpoenas Targeting Online Commenters

EFF Urges Court to Block Dragnet Subpoenas Targeting Online Commenters
CLICK! For the full motion to quash: http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/hersh_v_cohen/UOJ-motiontoquashmemo.pdf

Tuesday, September 29, 2026

The Sukkah: Judaism’s Most Radical Argument With Permanence


Everything you are building will eventually disappear. Your house will belong to someone else. Your money will be spent, transferred, taxed, inherited, or forgotten. Your business will eventually change hands. Your political influence will evaporate. Your reputation will be revised by people who never met you. Your body, which you spend a lifetime protecting from disease, aging, and decay, will eventually return to the earth. Even your name, no matter how loudly you announce it to the world, will eventually become a memory. This is not pessimism. It is the most obvious fact of human existence. What is astonishing is how much of civilization is constructed around avoiding it. We build bigger houses, larger institutions, greater fortunes, more elaborate monuments, and increasingly sophisticated technologies, all while pretending that permanence is somehow within reach. Then Sukkot arrives, and Judaism has the audacity to tell us to leave the house.

Not metaphorically, literally. Leave the house. Walk away from the permanent dwelling and sit in a hut. The Torah commands us to dwell in sukkot for seven days, and the Talmud in Sukkah 2a gives the command its extraordinary conceptual vocabulary, dirat keva and dirat arai, the permanent dwelling and the temporary dwelling. Rava teaches that during Sukkot, the Jew leaves the dirat keva and enters the dirat arai. For seven days, Judaism deliberately reverses the hierarchy by which we normally organize our lives. The house we trust becomes secondary. The fragile structure becomes primary. The solid walls become less important than the flimsy walls. The permanent dwelling becomes temporary, while the temporary dwelling becomes the place in which we are commanded to live.

That is not a quaint agricultural ritual. It is an assault on one of humanity’s oldest illusions. We are obsessed with permanence because we are terrified of impermanence. We accumulate because we fear loss. We build because we fear disappearance. We surround ourselves with objects because objects create the comforting illusion that something about us will remain. We attach ourselves to wealth, status, institutions, titles, reputations, political power, and even religious structures because we desperately want something solid to stand on while everything else is moving beneath us. The sukkah comes along once a year and says: You are standing on nothing permanent.

That is the Jewish message modern man does not particularly enjoy hearing. The sukkah is deliberately vulnerable. Its walls do not pretend to be a fortress. Its roof, the schach, provides shade but does not seal us off from the heavens. We can look upward and see the sky. Rain can enter. Wind can shake the structure. The very architecture tells us that absolute security is an illusion. We are sheltered, but not invulnerable. Protected, but not permanently protected. We have a roof over our heads, but the roof itself reminds us that there is a greater roof above it.

Judaism could have created a holiday celebrating the permanence of Jewish civilization. Instead, it created a holiday in which Jews are commanded to live in temporary shelters. That is an extraordinary statement. The Jew is being taught that permanence is not the highest religious value. The highest value is meaning. This distinction is essential. Judaism does not tell us to stop building. The Torah does not command poverty, passivity, or withdrawal from civilization. Jews are supposed to build homes, businesses, families, schools, communities, and institutions. We are supposed to create. We are supposed to improve the world. We are supposed to leave something behind. But Judaism draws a line that modern culture constantly crosses: build everything you want, but do not confuse what you build with what you are.

That is the great danger. The house becomes the identity. The money becomes the identity. The institution becomes the identity. The political movement becomes the identity. The rabbinic title becomes the identity. The community becomes the identity. The human being disappears beneath the structure he has constructed. Then the sukkah arrives and tears the curtain down.

Kohelet understood this centuries ago. “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.” The Hebrew hevel is breath, vapor, something that appears and disappears. Kohelet was not preaching that life is worthless. He was exposing the absurdity of believing that temporary things can provide permanent meaning. Wealth does not defeat mortality. Power does not defeat mortality. Wisdom does not defeat mortality. Fame certainly does not defeat mortality. The great king and the forgotten beggar eventually encounter the same biological fact. Death does not negotiate. The sukkah does not either.

This is why the sukkah can be more intellectually honest than much of contemporary religious discourse. We often speak about eternity while behaving as though the preservation of our institutions is the central purpose of Judaism. We speak about faith while obsessing over buildings, budgets, titles, social status, and communal prestige. We speak about humility while competing over who is more important. We speak about the temporary nature of this world while behaving as though our particular version of it must survive forever. The sukkah exposes the contradiction.

The Talmud calls it dirat arai, a temporary dwelling. That phrase should disturb us. We have spent thousands of years attempting to turn the arai into keva. We want temporary things to become permanent. We want youth to last. We want health to last. We want our children to remain children. We want marriages never to change. We want businesses never to fail. We want political power never to disappear. We want our communities to remain exactly as they were when we were young. We want the Judaism we inherited to remain frozen in place. But history does not work that way. Nothing remains frozen.

The First Temple was permanent until it was destroyed. The Second Temple was permanent until it was destroyed. Jewish communities that believed themselves securely established disappeared. Political powers that believed themselves invincible collapsed. Empires that imagined themselves eternal became archaeological sites. Jewish history should have cured us of the fantasy of permanence. It has not. The sukkah tries again.

Perhaps this is why the sukkah is such a profound antidote to religious arrogance. No generation owns Judaism. No rabbi owns Judaism. No institution owns Judaism. No community owns Judaism. Every generation receives something it did not create and is responsible for transmitting it to a generation it will never fully control. The sukkah reminds us that even the people sitting inside it are temporary custodians. That realization ought to produce humility.

Instead, human beings frequently respond to impermanence by becoming more possessive. The more insecure we feel, the harder we cling to our possessions. The more uncertain the future becomes, the more aggressively we defend our institutions. The more fragile our identity becomes, the more loudly we insist that our particular interpretation is the only legitimate one. The sukkah answers all of this with an almost insulting simplicity: sit down. You are temporary too.

Pirkei Avot tells us, “Know from where you came, where you are going, and before Whom you will ultimately give an accounting.” The sukkah is that teaching made physical. You came from somewhere. You are going somewhere. Your time between those two points is limited. The question is not whether you will eventually leave the sukkah of life. You will. The question is what you will do while you are sitting inside it.

That is where Sukkot becomes radically different from nihilism. Nihilism says nothing lasts, therefore nothing matters. Judaism says nothing lasts, therefore what you do matters enormously. A kind word disappears in seconds, but it can change another person’s life. A charitable act may take minutes, but its consequences may continue for generations. A parent can spend years teaching a child values that the child eventually transmits to another generation. A Jew can live for a limited number of years and become part of a covenant that stretches backward into antiquity and forward into a future he will never see. Temporary does not mean meaningless. Temporary is precisely what creates urgency.

This is why it is so significant that Sukkot follows Yom Kippur. On Yom Kippur, the Jew confronts the moral fragility of the self. On Sukkot, the Jew confronts the physical fragility of existence. Yom Kippur strips away excuses. Sukkot strips away walls. Yom Kippur asks, “Who have you become?” Sukkot asks, “What have you built around yourself?” The two questions belong together.

A person can spend decades building an impressive exterior while never confronting the condition of the interior. He can accumulate money while remaining spiritually bankrupt. He can build an institution while destroying relationships. He can acquire religious authority while losing moral authority. He can become publicly successful while privately terrified of the one fact that success cannot change. The sukkah has no patience for that deception. Sit down. Look up. The roof is open. You cannot hide from the sky.

Perhaps that is why the sukkah is a house of joy. Sukkot is Zman Simchateinu, the season of our rejoicing. That seems almost outrageous until we understand what Judaism is actually saying. Once we accept that everything is temporary, we can stop demanding that everything remain permanent before we allow ourselves to enjoy it. The person who knows that his children will grow up learns to appreciate them now. The person who knows that friendships can end learns to cherish friendship now. The person who knows that health is fragile becomes grateful for an ordinary morning. The person who understands that life is finite becomes less willing to waste it. The knowledge of death can therefore become a school for living.

Modern civilization has developed an extraordinary industry devoted to avoiding mortality. We consume entertainment whenever silence threatens to make us think. We accumulate possessions because possessions create the illusion of control. We chase status because recognition temporarily reassures us that we matter. We obsess over political power because power creates the intoxicating feeling that we can shape history. We build technological systems that promise to eliminate every inconvenience, every uncertainty, and perhaps eventually the biological limits of human existence itself. The sukkah looks at all of this and quietly says: You still die.

It is not an insult. It is a fact. And facts can be liberating. Once I know that my life is temporary, I can stop wasting it trying to convince myself that it is not. Once I know that my possessions will eventually belong to somebody else, I can decide whether they will become instruments of generosity or monuments to my ego. Once I know that institutions will change, I can ask whether they are actually serving the principles for which they were created. Once I know that my reputation will eventually disappear, I can become more concerned with character than applause.

This is where the sukkah becomes a profound challenge not only to secular materialism but also to religious materialism. It is entirely possible to become attached to religious buildings, religious titles, religious institutions, and religious power in precisely the same way that secular people become attached to money and status. The vocabulary changes. The psychology does not. A person can worship a golden calf without ever calling it a god. Sometimes the golden calf is an institution. Sometimes it is a title. Sometimes it is communal prestige. Sometimes it is the belief that preserving one’s authority is identical to preserving Torah.

The sukkah asks a dangerous question: What happens when the structure disappears? What remains? If the answer is Torah, conscience, faith, kindness, courage, responsibility, and covenant, then perhaps the structure served its purpose. If nothing remains except the structure itself, then perhaps we were worshipping the wrong thing.

The Jewish people have lived through enough destruction to understand this better than most civilizations. Temples were destroyed. Cities were burned. Communities disappeared. Books were confiscated. Businesses were destroyed. Families were murdered. Governments collapsed. Jewish life repeatedly had to begin again. And yet the Jewish story continued. Why? Because Judaism ultimately understood that the building is not the covenant. The sukkah embodies that lesson with almost brutal elegance. It can be dismantled in an afternoon. The covenant cannot.

That is the paradox. The temporary structure teaches the permanent truth. The fragile house teaches the durable faith. The open roof teaches dependence. The temporary walls teach humility. The limited number of days teaches urgency. The joy teaches gratitude. Perhaps that is why the sukkah remains one of the most radical ideas in Judaism. It refuses to let us hide behind our possessions, our achievements, our institutions, or our illusions. For seven days, it makes the Jew vulnerable enough to remember what being human actually means.

We are passing through. That is not a tragedy. It is the condition under which meaning becomes possible. We do not need to make our lives eternal. We need to make them worthy. We do not need to own the future. We need to use the present responsibly. We do not need to defeat mortality. We need to refuse to let mortality make us morally insignificant.

The sukkah will eventually come down. So will the house. So will the institution. So will the generation. So will each of us. The question Judaism leaves us with is not how long our walls will stand. It is what happened inside them while they stood. That is the uncomfortable beauty of Sukkot. Judaism takes the human obsession with permanence and turns it upside down. It tells us to leave the building we think will protect us forever and sit beneath a roof that openly admits that it cannot. Then it tells us to rejoice.

Perhaps the greatest Jewish wisdom is this: life does not have to be permanent to be sacred. It has to be lived with courage, gratitude, responsibility, and purpose. The sukkah is temporary. The human being is temporary. The world we build is temporary. But for the brief period in which we occupy this fragile dwelling called life, we have the extraordinary privilege of deciding what kind of people we will be.

 

REPUBLISHED

 

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-sukkah-judaisms-most-radical-argument-with-permanence/

Wednesday, September 23, 2026

The Demon-Haunted World: When Ultra-Orthodoxy Surrenders Reason

 

 וְלֹא־יִזְבְּח֥וּ עוֹד֙ אֶת־זִבְחֵיהֶ֔ם לַשְּׂעִירִ֕ם אֲשֶׁ֛ר הֵ֥ם זֹנִ֖ים אַחֲרֵיהֶ֑ם חֻקַּ֥ת עוֹלָ֛ם תִּֽהְיֶה־זֹּ֥את לָהֶ֖ם לְדֹרֹתָֽם׃
ויקרא י״ז:ז׳

There is a haunting question at the heart of modern Jewish life: What happens to a people that survived centuries of persecution, intellectual challenge, and religious catastrophe, only to become increasingly afraid of the very tools of reason that could help preserve its future? Carl Sagan, in The Demon-Haunted World, warned against a society that abandons critical thinking and becomes vulnerable to superstition, fear, and claims of authority without adequate evidence. Applied to certain aspects of contemporary ultra-Orthodox Judaism, his critique raises an uncomfortable question: Can a religious community devoted to Torah become so protective of its institutional authority that it begins to distrust the intellectual freedom upon which Jewish civilization was built?

This is not an indictment of Torah, religious observance, or the millions of sincere Orthodox Jews who live with faith, moral conviction, and intellectual seriousness. It is a challenge to a culture when its leaders treat questioning as rebellion, scientific inquiry as spiritual danger, and human pronouncements as though they possess the certainty of divine revelation. The problem is not faith itself. The problem begins when faith is used as a shield against the obligation to distinguish truth from error.

The Jewish Tradition Was Never Afraid of Questions

The irony is almost unbearable. Judaism is one of the world's great traditions of argument. The Talmud preserves disputes rather than erasing them. The rabbis record minority opinions even when the practical law follows another view. Abraham challenges God. Moses challenges the Almighty's decree. Job demands an explanation. The prophets confront kings, priests, and the powerful. Yet in sections of contemporary ultra-Orthodox society, the culture of questioning has sometimes been replaced by a culture of submission, where the authority of a rabbi is treated as the final answer to questions that may require empirical investigation, moral judgment, or independent intellectual inquiry.

The Talmud's famous declaration, elu v'elu divrei Elohim chayim, these and those are the words of the living God, reflects a tradition in which disagreement can exist within the pursuit of truth. But disagreement becomes dangerous when a community begins to confuse reverence for Torah with unquestioning loyalty to every pronouncement issued in its name. A rabbi may possess extraordinary Torah knowledge without possessing expertise in epidemiology, military strategy, economics, psychology, or every other field in which his opinion is sought. Acknowledging that limitation does not diminish Torah. It recognizes the difference between religious scholarship and specialized knowledge.

The demon-haunted world emerges when those distinctions disappear.

When Fear Becomes a Substitute for Knowledge

Sagan's central concern was not merely the existence of superstition. It was the failure of institutions and individuals to develop methods for testing claims, challenging assumptions, and correcting mistakes. In that sense, superstition can take sophisticated forms. It does not always arrive as a fortune teller, an amulet, or a mystical prediction. Sometimes it arrives dressed in the language of religious authority, surrounded by reverence, communal pressure, and the implicit warning that asking too many questions may endanger one's faith.

Within certain ultra-Orthodox communities, fear of spiritual contamination can be extended to secular education, scientific inquiry, the internet, modern media, or unfamiliar intellectual perspectives. Some restrictions may arise from legitimate concerns about harmful content, religious identity, or communal cohesion. Those concerns deserve serious consideration. But there is a profound difference between educating people to navigate intellectual and moral challenges and teaching them that the outside world is inherently threatening.

A Judaism that must prevent its adherents from encountering questions cannot demonstrate the strength of its answers.

The Jewish people did not survive because every generation lived in an intellectual enclosure. Jewish civilization produced philosophers, legal scholars, physicians, astronomers, linguists, and thinkers who engaged the intellectual currents of their times. Maimonides, perhaps the most famous example, did not regard reason and religious commitment as inherently incompatible. His work demonstrates the possibility of rigorous intellectual inquiry within a life of Torah.

The challenge facing contemporary religious education is not whether young Jews should be exposed to every cultural influence without guidance. It is whether they will be taught to evaluate ideas honestly, recognize evidence, and confront uncertainty without panic.

The Cult of Infallibility

One of the most troubling developments in any religious culture is the elevation of human authority beyond the reach of meaningful criticism.

Judaism has no doctrine that every rabbi is infallible. The Torah itself presents the failures of its leaders with extraordinary candor. Moses loses his temper. Aaron participates in the episode of the Golden Calf. King David commits grave wrongdoing. The prophets rebuke the nation's rulers. The Talmud records disputes, errors, reversals, and competing interpretations.

Yet a culture of daas Torah, when interpreted as requiring unconditional acceptance of rabbinic judgments across every area of human life, can create an environment in which the authority of the individual is treated as more important than the quality of the reasoning. The term itself has different meanings across Orthodox communities, and not every proponent of rabbinic guidance advocates the same degree of deference. The concern arises when the concept is used to discourage legitimate scrutiny, particularly when a rabbinic directive affects public health, education, military service, or the protection of vulnerable people.

A community that teaches its children to question scientific claims but forbids them from questioning a rabbinic pronouncement has not eliminated authority. It has merely made one category of authority less accountable.

The question is not whether rabbis should be respected. They should be respected for their knowledge, integrity, and service. The question is whether respect requires surrendering one's moral and intellectual responsibility.

It does not.

The Pandemic and the Test of Humility

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the consequences of institutional uncertainty across societies, including religious communities. Public-health recommendations changed as evidence developed. Experts disagreed. Governments made errors. Scientific institutions sometimes communicated poorly. These realities created legitimate reasons for scrutiny and criticism.

But the fallibility of scientific institutions does not establish the superiority of unsupported claims. Nor does the existence of scientific disagreement mean that all opinions carry equal evidentiary weight.

The proper response to uncertainty is better investigation, transparent reasoning, and willingness to revise conclusions. It is not the rejection of expertise as a category.

Religious leadership faced a parallel responsibility. When questions involved infectious disease, public gatherings, vaccination, or the safety of congregants, the responsible approach required consultation with qualified medical professionals, attention to available evidence, and a willingness to acknowledge what remained unknown. Rabbinic guidance could play an important role in applying religious values to these circumstances. It could not replace medical expertise.

The lesson extends beyond the pandemic. When rabbis speak on matters of science, economics, education, or public policy, their opinions should be evaluated with the same intellectual honesty expected of anyone else. Religious commitment does not transform an assertion into verified fact.

The Superstition of Institutional Power

There is another form of demon-haunted thinking that deserves attention: the belief that institutional authority can protect a community from consequences that it refuses to confront.

A community may insist that its leaders are uniquely qualified to make every important decision, while simultaneously avoiding meaningful accountability when those decisions produce harm. It may defend a system of educational isolation while struggling to provide its young people with the tools necessary to navigate employment, technology, citizenship, and modern economic life. It may invoke divine protection while neglecting practical preparations for emergencies.

These contradictions should not be dismissed as evidence of religious insincerity. People can hold sincere beliefs while participating in institutions that produce damaging outcomes. The task of Jewish criticism is to examine those outcomes honestly.

Faith cannot become an excuse for abandoning responsibility.

If a community's educational system leaves young people unprepared to earn a living, the solution cannot be a demand that everyone simply trust the system. If a community's leadership fails to protect children from abuse, the response cannot be to prioritize institutional reputation over the safety of victims. If a public emergency requires timely communication, religious restrictions on technology must be assessed against the actual risks they create.

The Torah commands us to protect life. It does not command us to protect institutional pride.

The IDF, Jewish Sovereignty, and the Refusal to Confront Reality

The question of ultra-Orthodox participation in Israel's military and civic responsibilities brings these tensions into sharp focus.

For generations, Jewish communities lived without sovereignty and relied on the protection of others, often at terrible cost. The modern State of Israel created a fundamentally different political and security reality. Its citizens face military threats, terrorism, and the practical obligations of maintaining a functioning state.

The ultra-Orthodox community contains a wide range of positions concerning military service, Torah study, national identity, and the relationship between religious institutions and the state. Those positions should not be reduced to a single motive or attributed uniformly to every Haredi Jew. Nonetheless, the public debate over exemptions and participation raises a fundamental question: Can a Jewish society sustain collective security while permanently assigning unequal civic obligations along communal lines?

This is not a question that can be resolved by slogans alone, whether religious or secular. Torah study has immense value within Jewish tradition. Military service carries real risks and demands. The state must consider security needs, religious commitments, legal principles, and the practical integration of diverse populations.

But any position that claims divine protection eliminates the need for soldiers, intelligence, emergency services, or national preparedness abandons the historical Jewish principle of acting within the world rather than waiting passively for miracles.

The Rambam's approach to human responsibility, practical action, and the pursuit of knowledge offers a powerful counterpoint to fatalism. Jewish faith has never required the abandonment of ordinary means of protection.

The Jewish people pray for divine assistance. They also build hospitals, train soldiers, study medicine, develop technology, and establish institutions. These are not signs of deficient faith. They are expressions of responsibility.

When Rabbis Fear the Question More Than the Falsehood

Perhaps the most revealing feature of an intellectually unhealthy culture is not that it contains false ideas. Every society contains false ideas. It is that the culture develops mechanisms for protecting those ideas from correction.

A young person who asks why a particular policy exists should receive an answer. A student who challenges an interpretation should be encouraged to examine the sources. A parent who raises a question about medical safety should be directed toward reliable information. A congregant who challenges a leader's conduct should not automatically be treated as a threat to the community.

There are, of course, legitimate boundaries in every educational and religious institution. Not every argument is productive, and not every source is reliable. But a mature intellectual culture teaches people how to distinguish strong arguments from weak ones, rather than demanding that they accept conclusions based solely on the identity of the person delivering them.

The fear of questions often reveals a deeper institutional insecurity. Leaders who trust their reasoning can explain it, defend it, and revise it when necessary. Leaders who depend primarily on unquestioned obedience may see scrutiny as a threat to authority itself.

Judaism deserves better than that.

The Jewish Obligation to Pursue Truth

The phrase midvar sheker tirchak, distance yourself from falsehood, is not merely a command to avoid lying in personal interactions. It expresses a broader moral commitment to truthfulness. Jewish law, philosophy, and ethical literature repeatedly emphasize the importance of intellectual honesty, though they also recognize the complexity of human judgment and the limits of knowledge.

Truth-seeking requires humility. It requires recognizing that a person can be sincere and still be wrong. It requires the willingness to acknowledge evidence that challenges one's preferred conclusions. It requires the courage to say, "I do not know."

These principles should apply to religious leadership with particular force. The greater the authority of a leader, the greater the responsibility to exercise that authority carefully. A rabbi who influences thousands of families carries obligations that extend beyond personal piety. His guidance can affect education, public health, financial stability, family relationships, and the welfare of children.

A culture that rewards certainty while discouraging correction creates conditions in which mistakes become difficult to identify and even harder to repair.

The solution is not the abandonment of rabbinic authority. It is the restoration of accountability, intellectual modesty, and clear distinctions between religious expertise and other forms of knowledge.

A Judaism Worth Defending

The future of ultra-Orthodox Judaism should not be framed as a choice between religious loyalty and intellectual freedom. That is a false choice. The Jewish tradition contains resources for both.

A Judaism worth defending can maintain rigorous observance while recognizing scientific reality. It can honor Torah scholars without treating them as universally infallible. It can preserve communal identity without teaching contempt for the outside world. It can value Torah study while addressing the economic and civic responsibilities of its members. It can insist upon modesty and religious standards without confusing every modern innovation with spiritual catastrophe.

Above all, it can raise children who are not afraid to think.

The Jewish people have endured persecution, exile, forced conversion, ideological assault, and the destruction of communities. Their survival has depended on faith, communal solidarity, adaptability, learning, and practical courage. The response to contemporary challenges cannot be a retreat into an intellectual fortress where every external question is dismissed as a danger.

The walls of a fortress may protect a community from some threats. They can also prevent the community from seeing dangers approaching from within.

The Final Reckoning

Carl Sagan's warning about a demon-haunted world is ultimately a warning about human vulnerability. People are drawn to certainty. Institutions are tempted by power. Communities sometimes prefer comforting explanations to difficult truths. Religious societies are not exempt from these tendencies.

The answer is not to mock faith or dismiss the sincere devotion of religious Jews. It is to insist that faith be accompanied by moral seriousness and intellectual integrity.

A rabbi should not be diminished by the admission that he needs a physician's expertise. A Torah scholar should not be humiliated by acknowledging a scientific error. A religious community should not fear the education that enables its children to understand the world. And no institution should be permitted to claim that its authority is so sacred that it becomes immune to moral scrutiny.

The greatest danger to Judaism is not the question asked by an honest Jew. It is the falsehood that an honest Jew is forbidden to question.

The Torah's enduring power does not depend on the silence of its students. It depends on the seriousness with which they study, debate, interpret, and live its teachings.

A Judaism that welcomes truth, even when truth is uncomfortable, does not need to fear the modern world. It can engage that world with confidence, discipline, and faith.

But a Judaism that teaches its followers to fear knowledge, surrender judgment, and confuse human authority with divine certainty risks turning the sacred pursuit of wisdom into the very demon-haunted world that Sagan warned us against.

And that is a danger no amount of religious rhetoric should allow us to ignore.

 

 

REPUBLISHED

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-demon-haunted-world-when-ultra-orthodoxy-surrenders-reason/

Thursday, September 17, 2026

Yom Kippur for Victims of Sexual Abuse - Yom Kippur 5787 - Rabbi YY Jacobson

 

 

WATCH:

https://youtu.be/cGDtD9dwLNY?si=YQ_WmVXziX8HheC-

https://www.theyeshiva.net/jewish/item/9997/yom-kippur-for-sexual-abuse-victims-nobody-asked-me-for-forgiveness

 

Growing I.M.P.A.C.T. Publications



Young children often get to enjoy more time around extended family and friends on Yom Tov. This may happen in close quarters and with less direct parental supervision. That's why it's a great time to share and review a few simple personal safety messages with our children.

As Dr. Shani Verschleiser, co-author of My Special Body, reminds us, "Research shows that 95% of abuse is preventable with education.”

Here are a few simple things you can remind your children:

• Your body is a gift from Hashem and deserves to be treated with respect and care.

• The parts of your body covered by your swimsuit are private.

• You are allowed to say “No.” If someone asks to see or touch your private parts, you can say no, move away if you can, and tell Mommy, Daddy, or another trusted adult.

• If something makes you feel uncomfortable, tell us.  We want to listen and help.

And before Yom Tov, set clear guidelines such as having children play in common areas rather than behind closed doors.

These reminders give our children important tools to help keep them safe—while preserving the innocence and joy of childhood.

Looking for a gentle way to start the conversation?

Bracha Goetz has written three child-friendly books that teach about personal safety:

My Special Body: A First Book About Personal Safety - ages 2–5

A gentle first board book about personal safety and respecting our bodies.

Talking About Personal Privacy - ages 6+

A child-friendly introduction to personal privacy and appropriate boundaries.

Let's Stay Safe - ages 6+

A picture book about many normative safety guidelines, including personal safety.

Reading an age-appropriate picture book together is a natural and comfortable way to open the door to these important conversations.

May we all experience a beautiful, safe, and uplifting Yom Tov, surrounded by family and friends.

Chag Sameach from all of us at Growing IMPACT Publications!

WATCH: A short clip of co-author Dr. Shani Verschleiser in action on our book tour at a stop in Boro Park! 🎥

🌎 We have some exciting news to share! 🌎

Our books made their way to Israel this year — and now they’ve just arrived in Australia too!

They’re now available at Shanky’s Judaica in Israel and Gold’s World of Judaica in Australia — and we’re excited to see where they’ll go next!




✨ Our New Article on Between Carpools

We’re excited to share a new article by Bracha Goetz, recently published on Between Carpools, about an important topic close to our hearts:

Protecting Our Children While Preserving Their Innocence

In this thoughtful article, Bracha shares insights on how to approach these important conversations in a way that feels natural, gentle, and age-appropriate.

Read the article on Between Carpools →

P.S. In case you missed it, here's our newest book!

Get My Special Body Here


I.M.P.A.C.T. TODAY PODCAST IS AVAILABLE ON SPOTIFY, 24SIX, AMAZON MUSIC, APPLE PODCASTS & YOUTUBE!

EPISODE 12
New Book! My Special Body: A First Book About Personal Safety
Bracha Goetz & Shani Verschleiser

Listen on Our Website





Don't Know Which Book to Get?
E-Gift Cards Make Awesome Gifts Too!



Click Here to find the books that turn homes into Happiness Boxes

OUR MOTHER'S MESSAGES, OUR FAMILY'S MISSION TO SHARE

facebook
instagram
youtube
Growing I.M.P.A.C.T. Publications/The Goetz Bookshop & Publishing House