Quote of the Day: Priorities

Princess D'Tiara:

Don't make people in your life a priority when they only make you an option.

Pain & Inches

As I sit here barely able to move (or breathe) with a very painful left ribcage, I can't help but think back to Moshe's postgame comments about our devastating loss about how we were a few inches from winning the game - which we lost 31-6. When we were in Los Angeles recently, Serach and I watched the movie The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (not as bad as people say it is), and there was a particularly good scene where Brad Pitt is describing a sequence of events. He shows how if not for numerous individual incidents occurring in perfect sequence, then the penultimate car accident could not have happened as it did.

Though there are times in life, or in football, where one can point to a particular event and call it a turning point, there are often so many other small differences that truly led to that event happening in the first place. (I touched on this in regards to football a number of years ago.) One of the interceptions we threw today in the endzone was caused by a sequence of events including me chipping their defensive lineman, stumbling slightly in the mud before taking one step too many forward before turning to look for the ball, not hearing the QB calling me, seeing the ball a half-second or so too late, slipping again slightly as I tried to pull it out of the air, that slight beat off from my extra step before messing me up, causing me to bobble the ball rather than catch it smoothly, resulting ultimately in it tipping off my hands, off a teammate's diving attempt in the endzone, and being snatched by an opposing safety at the goal line before I could recover. In short: "My bad", and instinctively to those who play the game, understood as to exactly what went wrong; but to a passive observer, impossible to understand unless it were slowed down enough for them to grasp all the details. If one were to call that play a turning point, it would be true in the broader sense; it would be true as well, however, to point to that extra step as the real turning point.

What football players do in practice each week, and what we did for a few minutes before today's game, is brilliance: Working on those little aspects of a game, of a play, of a block, of a route, of a coverage. By understanding the nuances and perfecting those as well as one can, it automatically results in better performance in real situations. It is not that there is anything new necessarily in practice (though sometimes there is), or that they are learning something new or doing something better (though sometimes they are). It is about turning learned reactions into instinctive ones; turning concepts into reality by repetition. "Knowing something" is not the same as doing something, and even doing something many times does not mean you can't do it better the next time.

Those who know me know that I like to say that it is the little things in life that matter. This is not to minimize the big things in life, which are called so with good reason, but because it is the little things that are what eventually push those big things. The difference between a touchdown and an interception may be just a single extra step; the difference between someone viewing you positively or negatively may be as simple as whether you were smiling brightly the first time you met one another. Focusing on the details of life (without getting caught up in the details, as balance is always key) can assist a person as much as it creates a difference in a football team. We may have lost 31-6 this week, but we were all aware of how few inches we were from winning this football game - and more importantly, we know what aspects we need to work on to be better next time, and we're confident we can succeed. Understanding those little things in life - just as in football - can make all the difference.

Time

I think that one of the most difficult parts of life to relate to others in is time.

Throughout life, we go through countless different stages. Each stage of life brings with it its own set of limitations, chief among those often being time. One of the reasons people suddenly find it easier or harder to relate to others in general is when they've gone through the same situation; this is as true when it comes to time as it does to so many other aspects of life.

What is often difficult for a person is when they switch stages of life and the amount of time they have suddenly changes dramatically. A person who had plenty of busy time and suddenly find him or herself with a lot of free time can be overwhelmed, and start to feel down as they can't seem to fill the time. Another person might be thrilled to have all the free time. On the flip side, a person who had a nice amount of free time may find it hard to adjust to having so little - whether because they have so much to do in that free time as they're accustomed to, or because they simply aren't used to having so much busy time in general.

Beyond the person whose time has suddenly changed are those who know this person: Friends, family, other workers... When a person is used to their friend being in a certain stage of life with a certain amount of time available, they can take for granted their ability to call their friend up and talk, invite him or her out, or the like. When that changes, it can be as hard if not harder on a person's friends and family as it is on the person her or himself.

It's interesting to see this phenomenon repeat itself at so many stages of life: As people move from elementary school to high school, high school to college, college to the working world, single to dating to being engaged to getting married to having kids, from being employed to being unemployed to being employed again... You'll often find that people who have already gone through or are simultaneously going through those same changes understand that change in time on top of the other changes so much more easily. Those who have yet to really face those often have a much more difficult time adjusting.

How often does a person hear someone complain about a friend who suddenly seems to "disappear" when they get engaged? (I've done this complaining recently.) For the person who got engaged, they're simply unaccustomed to the sudden reduction in available time. For their friends, it's weird that their friend is suddenly unavailable. Neither side is "wrong" - it just is.

Positive Reinforcement

R' Doron Beckerman has a very good piece on Cross-Currents regarding education that I'd like to throw out a couple excerpts from:

There is an educational approach known as “The Nurtured Heart Initiative,” or “The Inner Wealth Initiative,” developed by Dr. Howard Glasser, that takes the above to the next level, inverting the equation altogether. The concept is that “difficult children seek intense relationships, and they quickly learn that they can readily engage and control others through negative behavior. These children can become almost addicted to the rush of this kind of relationship” (The Inner Wealth Initiative, pg. 165).

What this approach does is intentionally pour on huge amounts of positive energy when the student is doing something positive... [...]

On the negative side of things, problems and poor choices should not be given much attention and energy, and they thus become unnecessary as a way to gain relationships. To be sure, rules are strictly enforced, but not with high intensity interactions, long-winded lectures and the like. These reactions are perceived by the relationship-seeking child as an energetic reward, and encourage more of the same. The “action” happens when good things take place, and that is where the student naturally wants to be.

I don't think this is limited to difficult students, either; I think it's as applicable to little kids, young adults, and grown men and women. One of the most difficult parts of parenting or teaching is striking the balance of not taking good actions for granted, which allows kids to think that only negative actions will get them attention, and making clear that those actions are to some extent expected to encourage kids to strive to improve even further.

May we all be blessed with the wisdom to approach such situations with the proper balance.

Finding a Center: The Role of Yeshiva University

Reprinted with permission from Adventures in Chinuch
by YD

I just read that DRS (the boys high school in Woodmere) is opening up a post-high school yeshiva program. I am extremely happy with this news, although I am sure (based on speaking to someone there), that Yeshiva University is not. Obviously this presents a potential cheaper option for those who want to attend Queens College or a comparable place. But it is not only the potential savings that excites me.

I am not going to go through my entire story, but suffice it to say that I was not happy for the year I spent at YU. I subsequently switched to Lander College, from where I graduated. I know, if I switched to Lander you are probably thinking that I must have...

a) Thought of myself as being yeshivish
b) Considered poetry to be the source of all evil in the world
c) Labeled Rabbi Lamm as a kofer
d) Been really weird
e) All of the above

Actually none is true, except maybe d. I switched because I wasn't happy. I wasn't happy because I felt that the environment in the Yeshiva Program was (and probably still is) a bit too Torah-Centric. Here's what I mean:

As we have discussed numerous times, there is a lot more to meaning in a Jewish life than how much a person engages in "holy" activities. There is a lot to be said for accomplishing things outside the realm of what people call "spirituality." People, including myself, are often sensitive to this, and need other things for their spirituality. In fact, engaging in pursuits other than "holiness" may be fulfilling part of the purpose of creation. If you don't trust me, read the first chapter of By His Light, which is based on R' Aharon Lichtenstein's speeches. (Thanks to fellow blogger Erachet for suggesting I read it; it's a must-read for anyone who believes in "being normal.")

This idea, is one of the biggest casualties of the "flipping out" phenomenon. When many teenagers flip out they change their entire focus to the areas of Talmud Torah and holiness. What many don't realize is that to drastically alter your focus is not an obligation incumbent on every person, and that for many, it is unhealthy. Additionally, they may become ignorant of the fact that other who don't follow their approach, may actually be doing the right thing.

As we have discussed, the Rebbeim is Israel have the ability to set these kid straight, and often don't, either because they don't believe they should, or because they think it will hurt the effectiveness of their Yeshiva, or some other reason. However, as fellow blogger Chaim pointed in the comments, the post-high school Rebbeim have just as much responsibility and ability to attend to this problem.

Which brings me to YU. I found there to be very little guidance from the Rebbeim in Yeshiva University. Many of them only come in for a few hours, just to give shiur, and leave. Very little is heard from the Rebbeim besides the Torah they teach, and for some, even the Parsha shiur is just another Gemara sugya on a topic related to the Parsha. Every once in a while there was a speech about a meaningful topic like dating or something, but this was never followed by a "meet with the rebbe and discuss your issues personally" session. In short, one could easily get the impression there that Talmud Torah is the only important value.

My impression was that this attitude was very prevalent among the students there as well. People spent hours on end learning, (which is good) but cut a lot of their classes (which is bad), brought seforim to class (which is disrespectful), were constantly deriding the Madda portion of the school (also bad), and gave off the general impression that value to yourself and the Jewish people is based on how much Torah you learn. These guys were the ones who were "well-known" in the Beis Medrash (aka the role models), and were overall just way too intense.

I wouldn't have a problem with this if YU were strictly a Yeshiva for the most serious boys. But it's not. Just based on the sheer numbers, there is no way that the Yeshiva Program can expect everyone to be Torah-only students. Additionally, YU itself stands for the type of well-rounded philosophy that is not most common among it's students. Most care too much about Torah, or not enough Torah, to even come near the ideal YU product. So either the Rebbeim are not on boat with YU philosophy (which is dysfunctional) or they are, but don't have time to care (which is equally as dysfunctional).

Either way, YU has the potential to produce normal, but G-d fearing graduates who are knowledgeable in both their professional field and in Torah. But unfortunately, the opportunity is not being taken advantage of for whatever reason or reasons that may be. I know YU has been trying lately to reverse this trend, but until they do more to change the culture there, I will be excited about any new possible program that may (or may not) steer their students, and by extension the rest of us, in the right direction.

Romantic Sparks

(Hat tip: RK) There is a very interesting piece in The Jewish Star this week titled Romantic Sparks, and it is written by Michael J. Salamon, Ph.D.*

Some excerpts:

...Some have suggested that, in the Orthodox world, we simply do not believe in romance, as real love supposedly happens only after marriage. While in many ways this is true, we are often left without defining just what that means. [...] Unfortunately, there have been some changes to the system in recent years that have led to rising stress in a process that should contain both fun and excitement despite the seriousness of the goal.

Increasingly, in virtually all shades of orthodoxy, both men and women are segregated from one another even when it is unwarranted. This separation has led to a fear of socializing, a form of stage fright or anticipatory anxiety that causes young daters to not know how to act in a socially acceptable fashion with one another. I hear them talking about the “magic” of the opposite sex as if it were a truism, a fact that in order to understand how to even talk with one another they must unravel a secret magical code. While there should be magic, it is not of this type.

Even after marriage there is often a dearth of appropriate communication between the spouses. [...] more and more young marrieds are divorcing with the primary complaint that they simply did not know each other at the time of marriage and do not understand one another once married. [...]

When we add to this mix the volatility that comes from being overindulged and overprotected well into the late teens and early twenties, we are left with young men and women who feel no need to even try to get to know anyone else. Many of our young men and women have placed themselves on a pedestal and want to marry someone who can keep them there, even in financially troubling times. The goal then is not a warm, affectionate, supportive relationship but a selfish, egocentric one. Who needs a romantic relationship with a spouse or even friendship with a spouse, as long as you get what you want?

There actually is somewhat of a scientific formula for the magic that causes the spark of romance. [...]

He then goes on to talk about just how it all works, and emphasizes that The natural process of romance develops in stages beginning with learning how to socialize and proceeding from there. Let us allow young adults to find one another so they might develop the friendship so necessary to a successful marriage.

When I was in WITS, during one of our STAMPs (Senior Torah And Mussar Perspectives) where we discuss issues that can come up in life, I recall the primary drawback of a non-coeducational school system being almost exactly this. The Rosh Yeshiva who was giving the STAMP emphasized strongly that this is not something to be underestimated: A complete lack of interaction with the opposite sex can lead to serious problems down the road.

What seemed especially interesting was that near the end of the piece, Dr. Salamon specifically states that "young adults" should be the ones finding one another to develop the friendships necessary to a successful marriage. While I've yet to see much that shows a significant academic advantage to a co-educational school growing up (in fact some public schools are switching to a separate education), and I question why frum people would send their teenagers to coed sleepaway camps, somehow this extreme "separate" mindset continues on even into adulthood.

I don't understand the extreme measures young adults sometimes take to avoid talking to the opposite sex, from not wishing to have meals with them (ever) or similar practices simply because they view it as improper in some way. One would think that by the time people are looking to get married, they would be mature enough to have meals with and converse with the opposite sex and gain from those experiences, which will only help them later on (if not offering them the chance to meet someone who may be good for them), rather than view them as unapproachable, incomprehensible, and "wrong" to talk to.

At the same time, I don't understand why people take this to the opposite extreme either, constantly trying to force people into coed situations. Yes, sometimes people could use a little encouragement, but there is no need for every meal to have numerous members of each sex, nor for someone to spend every available moment of free time with a crowd of each.

What's so hard about balance, anyway?

* According to the Star, Dr. Salamon, a Fellow of the American Psychological Association, is the founder and director of the Adult Developmental Center in Hewlett, NY. He is the author of numerous articles and several psychological tests. His most recent book, “The Shidduch Crisis: Causes and Cures,” is published by Urim Publications.

Balancing Act

A great post on my favorite subject, balance, at Hirhurim. (Bonus R' Salanter quote, too!)

Parshas Kedoshim: The Burden and Freedom of "Kedoshim T'hiyu"

I absolutely loved this D'var Torah at Adventures in Chinuch by YD, and am reposting in full (with permission).

Parshas Kedoshim: The Burden and Freedom of "Kedoshim T'hiyu"

Being holy, that's what it's all about. So why does G-d feel the need to command us specifically to be holy?

The is a highly popularized explanation of the Ramban which basically goes like this:

Yeah, mitzvos are to make us holy, but not all of life is so clear-cut. There are many details in life that are not covered by specific "do this, do that" guidelines (how much to eat, how much to spend on a car etc...) and our job is to sanctify ourselves in those areas using our own boundaries. And on the other hand, it's possible that a person can earn the dubious title naval b'rshus haTorah: someone who follows all the specific guidelines mentioned in the Torah, but is a completely unrestrained in the non-controlled areas.

Maybe you are thinking: well, maybe Ramban only meant this as a drash. However, I have seen (albeit in only one context) that R' Moshe Feinstein uses this Ramban as one of the reasons that smoking marijuana (or hashish, as he refers to it) is assur; it is an indulgent activity which flies in the face of Jewish values.

To me most interesting part of this concept is that it allows for subjective areas in halacha. So many of us were taught that "the beauty of halacha is that it touches all aspects of our lives: how we eat, get dressed, talk etc... and it tells us the proper way to serve G-d in every way possible," or something to that effect. But apparently, this isn't completely true; although the mitzvah of kedoshim t'hiyu does tell us that we should be aware of Jewish values in everything that we do, it does not always tell us what is right and wrong.

How can the Torah leave it up to us? Why should we have to ask ourselves what G-d would want us to do? What is gained?

I have two approaches, and I think both are correct:

1) G-d, better than anyone, understands the fact that we need to feel like individuals and we need to enjoy life. He also knows that every person finds meaning differently. So, in order to strike a balance between the control of the Torah and necessity of individuality, G-d allowed certain aspects of our lives to be regulated by us.

2) There are the commandments of Torah and there are Torah values. In order to impress upon us the significance of Torah values, certain areas omitted from the list of "do's and dont's." By leaving thing out the Torah forces us to to make our own decisions, decisions that are meaningful to us and based on Torah values.

There's the d'var Torah. Now, let's get political, liberally and conservatively:

Liberally:

Unfortunately, the significance of subjectivity and the beauty of individuality has been lost on much of our generation. How many people out there think that there is a specific way for a "Ben Torah" to dress and spend his free time? Lots. How many people out there think that a "Bas Yisroel"(I purposely replaced the 'a' of yisrael with an 'o') has to stay away from certain professions and has to to look for specific characteristics in a shidduch? And unfortunately, this close-mindedness has reached the point of masquerading as Halacha Moshe MiSinai.

This doesn't mean that people shouldn't strive for growth. However, every person is on a different level, and to impose your way of life on others is, I believe, contrary to the message of Kedoshim T'hiyu.

Conservatively:

The other side of this message is that we must govern our lives within the confines of the Torah, even in areas not discussed by halacha. It is often difficult to decide what is right and wrong in these areas and even harder to follows those decisions, but that doesn't remove our responsibility. However, for many Jews, this concept isn't even on the radar. Torah values include modesty and humility, two values that many in our generation ignore. Affluence and immodesty are pretty common in many of our communities, perhaps, due to the absence of the message of kedoshim t'hiyu.

As always, we must be honest with ourselves and find our own balance...

Choice Angst

My mother forwarded me one of the more interesting pieces I've read in a long time, and I think that a lot of the readership here will appreciate this one. It's titled So Many Choices in Life, So Much Angst, and it essentially argues, based on a study published in Scientific American, that people are better off just making choices rather than spending all their time debating them or trying to find "better" ones. A choice quote:

...when it comes to making decisions, people fall somewhere on the spectrum between two extremes: " 'maximizers' (those who always aim to make the best possible choice) and 'satisficers' (those who aim for 'good enough,' whether or not better selections might be out there)." In the end, the article said, maximizers are usually less content than satisficers with their final decisions -- they have regrets about what they might have had with one of the other options. The more options there are, the more opportunity cost there is and the more chance for regrets.

We've discussed this before on this blog, but it's interesting to see it spelled out in a study like this. Read the whole piece, it's interesting.

Quotes of the Day

They say the center is hard to hold. People crave the extremes because it is easier to identify, but most people lighten up as they grow older and learn to compromise. ~ Adapted from a comment by PsychoToddler

A mature person is one who is does not think only in absolutes, who is able to be objective even when deeply stirred emotionally, who has learned that there is both good and bad in all people and all things, and who walks humbly and deals charitably. ~ Eleanor Roosevelt

R' Feitman on Yoatzot Halacha: Second Letter

In this past week's Five Towns Jewish Times, there was a piece published by R' Yaakov Feitman (formerly the Rav of my parents' shul in Cleveland, currently the Rav of "The Red Shul" in the Five Towns) about the issue of Yoatzot Halachah - female halachic advisors. Upon reading the article, I will readily state that I was less than impressed by the arguments cited. Certainly, the examples of a shtender or the tzuras haDaf as examples of not altering our mesorah came off poorly; as commenters on the piece noted, it is difficult to imagine that Moshe Rabbeinu learned at a shtender or that a form created by a non-Jew to allow for easier printing is somehow such an important part of our tradition. Furthermore, only after a later closer reading was it clearer just how R' Feitman intended the role of the rebbetzin and how that was quite dissimilar to that of the proposed yoetzet. Prior to that, my reaction had been to wonder how what he described was different than what was expected of a yoetzet.

Between my own confusion as to his article and after reading other (disrespectful) criticisms elsewhere, I decided to contact R' Feitman asking for a clarification: [e-mail was sent to Rebbetzin Feitman; only relevant parts included]

I'm writing because I feel like your husband is going to get harshly criticized for the Yoetzet piece in the 5TJT. [...] the substance of the piece comes off rather weakly, I have to say. A careful reading suggests that a few points come off a little differently than he may have intended, so perhaps a clarification would help, though certain points simply don't work well.

Not sure why I'm writing this, just felt somewhat frustrated reading it originally. Perhaps R' Feitman could rewrite it in a way that comes off more clearly? I don't know. But it felt important enough to comment to you/him about.

R' Feitman wrote a letter in response to me, beginning with a simple statement noting that he has no further intention in responding in any way, feeling that he has said what he needs to say and is moving on to other things. He then shared a few thoughts for my own sake, but allowed me to quote him if I felt it would be productive. As I had a much greater understanding of his position after reading the points he made, I have decided that the same may be true for others and have decided to do so. [again, only relevant portions included]

Dear Ezzie:

Sholom Aleichem.

[...]

Regarding your e-mail and my article, [...] I actually have no intention of further responding in any way. I said what I needed to say and am moving on to other things.

However, for your sake only, I will share a few thoughts. Feel free to quote me if you feel it will be productive:

1. I purposely did not cite sources.

Much of Torah decision-making and Hashkafah positions are more related to the essence of the Torah and elemental issues than to a particular footnote. It is famous that Poskim treated the "Yirah Li" ("I believe") of the Rosh as a stronger statement than when he sourced his P'sak. There is a famous story to this effect as well with Rav Chaim Soloveitchik and Rav Chaim Ozer Grodjenski. As a matter of fact, Rav Soloveitchik ZTL used this method in responding to Ben Gurion's famous "Who is a Jew?" query. He chose to answer succinctly and with almost no sources jointly with Rav Chaim Heller. The point he was making was

• a. There is no need for us both to respond since this is basic and there is only one Torah;
• b. This does not require lengthy analysis or pilpul. It is self-evident-poshut.

2. The points about women being more comfortable with a woman than with a man are of course all valid. My only contention was that this has certainly not gotten worse in recent times. If anything, I believe the opposite is true and there IS a time-honored approach to this matter. I am well aware that Nishmat advocates that the Yoatzot turn to a Posek for complicated or novel issues. However, this is not enough. The sense from the Nishmat web site and literature is that they believe their training is sufficient for the overwhelming majority of Shaalos. This is simply not true. They provide a great deal of INFORMATION. However, even basic P'sak often involves methodology and training far beyond the purvey of those with a thousand or even two thousand hours of study. It is, of course, true that not every Rov is a Posek or the expert we all ought to be. But that does not justify ejecting millenia of tradition.

3. I never, obviously, would claim that a shtender, Tzuras Hadaf or particular type of shiur was the sine qua non of Torah study but the point I was making was that Tzurah or form is part of the tradition of Torah. Clearly, there are numerous legitimate forms -- Chassidim, Sepahardim, Hungarians, Litvaks each maintain authentic but different Tzuros. However, each of those groups would be guilty of a lapse in their own Mesorah if one of their leaders unilaterally cancelled his own tradition even in favor of one of the others. Rav Hershel Schechter, who speaks often in my Shul, has written eloquently in his Nefesh Harav (in the name of the Rov) and especially in his lengthy essay "Tz'ei Lach B'ikvei Hatzon" of the requirement in Torah of emulating earlier generations in both format and substance. This applies most urgently to this subject because we are speaking about the Mesoras Hatorah. We have nothing more sacred than this.

4. Another source which I did not quote (but of course could have) is the famous Yam Shel Shlomo No.9 on the Gemara in Bava Kamma 38a which seems to indicate Jewish bias toward gentiles concerning monetary matters. The Maharshal in this sefer asks, why couldn’t the rabbis have simply withheld the one Mishnah in all of Shas which caused difficulty? The answer, he writes, is that when it comes to presenting the Torah accurately even a sin of omission is as bad as a sin of commission, and may not be utilized even if it means putting all of k'lal yisroel into danger. Analogies are always imperfect and dangerous but it is clear from this Gemara and Maharshal that one must be extraordinarily careful when tampering with any Mesorah.

Those who make the point about changes brought about by individuals such as Sarah Schnierer etc. are correct. However, she did go to the Chofetz Chaim, Gerrer Rebbe and others, the Gedolei and Ziknei HaDor, who with the the most profound of gravity, decided that these innovations were acceptable and necessary for the survival of K’lal Yisroel. This process has certainly not happened with the Yoatzot.

There is much more but it is Erev Shabbos [...]

B'ahava,

Rabbi Yaakov Feitman

At this point it is important to remember what R' Feitman's original intent was in publishing the article in the 5TJT:

...Since this was reported without critical comment or dissent, I feel that an alternative view must be presented to your readers. So please consider this article a macha’ah—one man’s protest and disagreement with the “rave reviews” this project has reportedly received.

His intent was not and does not seem to be to pasken or say with finality that the idea of a yoetzet is anathema to and must be rejected as an attack on Jewish tradition. Rather, he seems to be simply noting an alternative way of looking at the issue by making a few succint points about how it seems to have come about and what the purpose of it is, by questioning why it is necessary and what it really adds. This does not mean that there is no merit to the other side of the discussion, but merely questions whether those merits outweigh or countermand the tradition that is already in place and properly address the other points that have been raised. Certainly, it is worthwhile to think about these issues from both sides before rushing to judgment either way.

On Thinking Institutionally

Via cousin Ally, this article in the New York Times is fantastic, and worth a quick read:

A few years ago, a faculty committee at Harvard produced a report on the purpose of education. “The aim of a liberal education” the report declared, “is to unsettle presumptions, to defamiliarize the familiar, to reveal what is going on beneath and behind appearances, to disorient young people and to help them to find ways to reorient themselves.”

The report implied an entire way of living. Individuals should learn to think for themselves. They should be skeptical of pre-existing arrangements. They should break free from the way they were raised, examine life from the outside and discover their own values.

This approach is deeply consistent with the individualism of modern culture, with its emphasis on personal inquiry, personal self-discovery and personal happiness. But there is another, older way of living [...]

In this way of living, to borrow an old phrase, we are not defined by what we ask of life. We are defined by what life asks of us. As we go through life, we travel through institutions — first family and school, then the institutions of a profession or a craft.

Read the whole thing.

Sheltered

Erachet had a good post recently about balancing what you read and what you don't.

One summer, I interviewed at a Literary Agency for a summer internship. They told me at the interview that, if I got in, I'd have to read all different kinds of manuscripts, from adventure to historical fiction to, yes, pornography. Believe it or not, they told me, there is such a thing as good pornography. I wanted to throw up. So when they asked me if I'd be interested working in their children's books department instead, I very readily said yes.

She discusses the balance necessary and how people should think about approaching reading, TV, and the like while trying to maintain that balance. On the flip side, here's R' Horowitz discussing what happens when people take the other extreme:

A close friend of mine owns a business in an area with a large charedi population and is always looking to provide avrechim with jobs. His ‘entrance exam’ is rather simple. He gives prospective applicants a pad and paper and asks them to write two paragraphs in English expressing the reasons they would like to land a job in his company, and then to turn on a computer and type those lines. His thinking is that if an applicant cannot perform those two tasks, they are useless to him in his business. Suffice it to say that this would probably be my last column in Mishpacha if I shared with you the percentage of applicants he turns away because they cannot do that.

In more than twenty-five years of dealing with at-risk teens I have not noticed a lower drop-out rate among kids who are raised in more sheltered environments. In fact, my experience leads me to support the observation made by my colleague Reb Yonasan Rosenblum, in a number of columns in these pages over the past few years, that out-of-town children have a lower drop-out rate than those who are raised in very sheltered communities.

The first part of that is more sad than anything else - we're talking about men who are willing and able to work, but due to their (lack of) education thanks to the frum community they grew up in, they simply will not be able to get a decent job. The latter part is more interesting, noting that sheltering does not seem to have the advantages it should, and that if anything, having more exposure would help them not only in terms of careers and the like but even in terms of staying healthy and religious. R' Horowitz even concludes with a message about poverty and how it undoubtedly a colossal risk factor in many areas, and that this sheltering causes poverty.

As with anything, a proper balance is necessary. Parents and educators should work on exposing kids and students in the proper way, and should take more confidence in their own ability to expose kids to subjects that include many shades of gray and explain how to approach them, rather than avoid them or whitewash them. It is far better to educate and allow people to decide for themselves what to pursue and what to avoid, and realize that with that education and self-awareness they'll more often than not make the right choice, than to hope that they never come across whatever issues may exist.

As I Walk The Balance Beam

As I Walk The Balance Beam

"I know," I say, but do I know?
"I see," I say, and put on your shoes.
I understand, but yet I'm me,
And so I know from my own mind.

I feel, I think, all that you say.
I'm wise - compared to myself.
I pen my wisdom as a gift
But keep it on my own shelf.

This line I draw exists just here;
I try not to let it run or blur.
It casts a shadow, builds a wall,
Yet through it all I'm with you there.

Unsure, I guess, but sure at once:
I'm scared - I listen, guide, pray.
The haze, the rain, it interrupts -
I don't think you see what I say.

I keep you far, but bring you near,
With trust - I open the seam.
Yet all these things I do with care
As I walk the balance beam.

(Note: This poem on advice was partially inspired by the unpublished ruminations of a friend who then helped edit it slightly.)

What's Right

Reb Abe sends me a couple of e-mails every week; one from R' Eisenmann, one from R' Aviner. They're always interesting and full of excellent thoughts and information, but a couple points really struck me this weekend. The first is a mildly amusing point from R' Aviner, in his Q&A section about Pesach:

Husband's help

Question: Does a husband have to help his wife?

Answer: A husband does not have to help his wife nor does a wife have to help her husband. Rather, the two of them have to clean together since this is a shared home, and it is a shared life as well.

Heh. Meanwhile, on a more thoughtful note, there was this excerpt from R' Eisenmann, discussing a comment by NJ Governor Jon Corzine at an event.

“Even though I am not a moral leader, nevertheless, I must tell you guys, always wear your seat belts, believe me I know.”

As a person who has been studying the Talmud for thirty seven years, I am usually attuned to extra or seemingly unnecessary words. Immediately it hit me. Why did the Governor have to add on the caveat, “Even though I am not a moral leader”? Why couldn’t he have simply said to my boys, “Listen, I did wrong, I was in a speeding car without and a seat belt and I almost paid for that mistake with my life”? Why did he feel the need to add the disclaimer, “I am not a moral leader”?

I then realized an important lesson. He views himself and indeed all political leaders as just that: political leaders. Things that have to do with laws and legislation are in his arena; if they touch on morality, well that is just coincidental. Morality, that is a specific realm relegated to religious/moral leaders. However, he, as a political leader, is not only not a moral leader, he needed to apologize and preface his words with a disclaimer before commenting on that which in his mind is a moral issue.

I don't think Corzine is at personal fault for thinking this way, as I think most political leaders think this way, and have for a long time. Clinton's escapades in the '90s just made that belief public and turned it into a debate over whether a leader's private failings matter so long as it doesn't affect their job; Guiliani and others likely reinforced this. This isn't just an American phenomenon either; Israel is not only no better, but in many ways, worse.

It would be nice, though, if this idea started to reverse itself, and political leaders were held to a somewhat higher standard as examples for the country. Do they need to be perfect? No. Do they need to be held to the same standard as clergy? No. But they are the examples we all see every day; they are the leaders of cities, states, and our country. In a way, Corzine is not a step down, but a step up. He may not hold himself to be a moral leader, but at least he is willing to speak up on matters of responsibility. Other leaders should do the same, and then take that next step and think of themselves as responsible to be moral examples for this country as well.

In fact, so should we all. In a short aside about a week ago, I mentioned the quote that has been on the header of this blog for a long time. G noted that while it is a good quote, it can be taken too far as well, which I agreed with. While we should not worry about what others think and do what we feel is correct, we still should strive to set a positive example with our actions.

Perspective Is Everything...

...one's view on just about anything is influenced, if not flat out dictated, by their point of reference.

Posted originally on Life In Israel
Guest-Posted again on The Dove Bar

My response, as it were, can be found in the comments of both postings.

I was chatting with my chavrusa the other day. We were talking about Kollel life and the topic of mesirus nefesh to learn Torah came up (my chavrusa is a Rosh Kollel. He is very organized, very serious and runs his kollel in a very organized way).

Kollel guys are moser nefesh - they give up everything, to learn in kollel. To learn Torah. And that is wonderful.

Typically when we hear the phrase "moser nefesh to learn Torah" we think of money. These avreichim are giving up a life of (possible) comfort, earning a decent living, all to learn Torah while living on, often, nothing more than the basics and the minimum.

Aside from the money aspect of their mesirus nefesh, there is an aspect even greater. And this is what I had never heard described before. The whole lifestyle is mesirus nefesh on a psychological level.

Avreichim, living in an area where there are plenty of kollels and plenty of avreichim, live a life of obscurity. many of these guys (the more serious ones), could easily have been successful in the business world; as professionals such as doctors, lawyers, accountants, financial pros, etc., computers, whatever. They would have been noticed, their work would be appreciated, and they would feel good about what they do because they are noticed (to a certain extent).

However, as an avreich in a neighborhood where kollels and avreichim are "a dime a dozen" so to speak, these guys are all bundled into one package. They are not noticed because there are so many. An exception is one who is unusually exceptional - he gets noticed as a real star, but he will often take a job fairly quickly in the Rabbinate, or in a yeshiva, etc. But just for good serious guys who are learning, successfully, there is tremendous mesirus nefesh in living such a lifestyle. These are, often, guys who could be doing other things, yet they chose to learn because of its importance to them.

He went on to explain that this is why, he thinks, he sees many frustrated avreichim at about age 29-32, who start looking for things to do - starting local shiurim in shuls even for just 2 or 3 people, for example. They do that because they have begun to get frustrated that they have learned, and learned well, for a number of years, but they are not noticed at all.

Yes, it is nice to be altruistic and say that people should do what they love and not be concerned whether they are being noticed or not. Especially when learning Torah. But everybody likes, and wants, to be appreciated, and recognized, for their accomplishments and for their success. So even if for a number of years they go by and learn quietly, eventually it catches up with them, with most of them, and they start to feel it at a certain point.

That is a tremendous mesirus nefesh. To learn in kollel, seriously, knowing that nobody is recognizing you for your accomplishments, for your achievements, for your contributions. And add to that, when you could have been doing something else that would have gotten you noticed, even if only on a small scale. And it is harder for a kollel guy who is in an area where kollel is more accepted, and even the standard perhaps, than it is for a guy who goes to learn in an "out of town" kollel" where it is not the norm and they are appreciated by the local baalebatim, and they get involved, etc.

If you are working at a job and you accomplish something successfully, likely you will have your peers commend you, your boss will notice, etc. Your efforts will get noticed and you will get complimented. You will be appreciated.

If you are in kollel, and you are learning seriously, your efforts will almost never get noticed. You figured out pshat in a difficult tosafos or Ritva! Wow! You are so excited. You tell the guys learning at the other table, and they could care less. They were not bothered by your question and just want you to leave them alone so they can work out their own difficult piece.

That weighs down on a person, even somebody who is supposed to be learning L'shma will often be affected by this eventually. These guys are human and want to be noticed for their accomplishments just like the rest of us.

That is mesirus nefesh in a way that you probably have not considered.

Not April Fools...

...this is an actual comment from a post on YWN, that's right -- Yeshiva World News.

Perhaps all is not as lost as it seems:
(the associated post was about a certain ad in the Jewish Press, but that is beside the point. The greater message is the important part)

Oy. Is this what we have come to? We spend years in Yeshiva and Beis Medresh educating ourselves as to what is appropriate for us and what is not and yet we have to run to seek the guidance of Daas Torah on what newspaper advertisments we look at? Yidden!! It is time to look at what Hashpo’oh you can have on the world instead of constantly obsessing over what influence it has on you! Do you have so little confidence in your upbringing and your Jewish education, in your community and your conscience that you fear the influence a half-noticed ad will have on you? How are you going to be mekarev a woman who doesn’t happen to be dressed to your impossibly high standards of modesty? How are you going to fulfill your responsibility to your fellow Jew, who might benefit from your knowledge, your committment, your connection with thousands of years of Torah tradition?

One of the previous posters mentioned burkas. The problem is not that Frimme Yidden want to be dressed modestly. That’s their positive choice. No. The problem is frimme yidden want the entire world outside their community to disappear. Jews, Non Jews, Good, Bad, it doesn’t matter. if its not in my arba amos, I’M NOT INTERESTED.

Do you think that the gift of Torah and Mitzvos is a treasure for you to hoard like Gold in a safe bechedrei chadorim? DO you think that you are fulfilling your responsibility as a Jew by cloistering yourself and patting yourself on the back for keeping out the wig ads from your home? That kind of self righteousness is just another form of koichi v’otzem yodi.

For myself, I don’t read the Jewish Press because it is in general poorly written and sensationalistic. I can’t live in the real world, paying for my children’s Jewish education and our frum lifestlye, interacting with other Jews and other good people, without encountering, unfortunately, everything in that ad and more. The challenge is not to look away - that goes without saying, and is the easy part. The challenge is to have some emunah, have respect for what your parents spent their lives and their hard earned dollars teaching you about yiddishkeit, with the expectation, I hope,
that you wouldn’t treat it all like buried treasure.

Comment by
yichusdik — March 18, 2008 @ 1:16 pm