Baruch Dayan Haemes

 wishes of nechama are extended to Reb Harry and family on their loss. May they be comforted among Israel's mourners

Higayon Iguli?

I am not sure if that's how you say circular logic in modern Hebrew but since our middling mentor is in his Hebraic haunts I thought I'd do him that courtesy. His latest missive is a classic example of the risks of veering too far from classic Talmudic training.

http://haemtza.blogspot.com/2016/04/when-fellow-jews-are-hurt-because-of-my.html#disqus_thread

Let's examine it piece by piece

"Why am I so opposed to giving women Semicha? ... rabbinic authorities across the Orthodox Hashkafic spectrum are opposed. Including the Roshei Yeshiva at YU, the flagship institution of Modern Orthodoxy"

- this is classic circular reasoning. You define Orthodox as only those who oppose women's semicha, then point to the fact that orthodox across the board are against it. I am not sure how Reb Harry, who was Talmud educated, can even articulate the vehrter. It doesn't even start

"It is not like the issue of Metzizah B’Peh. Where there is a variety of views by rabbinic leaders – depending on what their Hashkafa is"

- I am trying to decipher poshuteh pshat in this. Which hashkafa can RHM possibly be referring to that would have an impact on the technical halachos of milah?? As Yerachmiel Begun once had his boys sing, "it's not a matter of hashkafa ..." (who can name the song??)

"At the end of the day, I have to respect rabbinic leadership when its agreement on an issue is across the board"

- how far across? Well, you know, not too far

Bottom line is that Harry is employing the exact same reasoning as the Haredim he routinely eschews. Just that he considers Rabbis Schachter and Lichtenstein within bounds, whereas for the overwhelming majority of the Torah world, they are not on the radar. 

This has been articulated multiple times in many ways by his commenters but, RHM, I truly believe, is sincere in not getting it.

Being Different

Not exactly sure what R Harry's point was in this post

http://haemtza.blogspot.com/2016/04/being-different.html

But it felt like he was looking for something to pick on. I will provide my feedback point by point:

" I am sure that Governor Kasich is not an antisemite"

- not sure how a Jew with a sense of history can make this kind of statement about anyone, surely not about someone he doesn't know very well, personally. And even then .... Just think about our history 

"Please do not misunderstand. I would be the first one to defend the the right of any group or individual to dress in any manner they please"

- would, but don't. In reality, you never cease to harangue those whom you deem to be 'extreme" beyond "mainstream"

"They do not want to look like the rest of a society whose culture they perceive as decadent and reject"

- not sure what Harry's source is on reasoning for traditional garb, but it sounds like he's projecting his own interpretation. My sense is that they are holding dearly to their tradition of dressing like their parents who, in turn, did the same. I've never heard any Hasidic acquaintance give Harry's reason

"Another more mainstream interpretation of this Halacha is that it applies only to the immoralities of their culture"

- yes, if you define "more mainstream" as "more like Harry". In reality this is such an insulting and ethnocentric statement. who's to say what interpretation is more "mainstream". What is 'mainstream' anyway, bigger numbers? Well, I have news for our middle of the road friend - the chasidim are winning. Just look at their numbers! I challenge our Midwestern maven to defend his statement!

"for Chasidim anything a non Jew does, should be avoided by a Jew"

- and if a Chasid were to make a statement that modern orthodox people are trying to water down the religion, would that be accurate? Not sure what prompts Harry to say this stuff

" I don’t think the Chasidic Jews succeeded in making a favorable impression on him either"

- why not? Just because you cringe from them doesn't meant he wasn't able to pick up on the beauty. I think you, as a centrist, davka should feel Jewish pride in all our segments, not the least of which those who observe our religion most passionately!

"I doubt for example that Governor Kasich or any non Jew that has this kind of encounter would ever say that their way of life is one that should be emulated."

If I'm reading this correctly our centrist chum is suggesting there is no place for chasidus in America because goyim's don't get it. Why is Harry so obsessed with what the goyim think ?? Is that in America centrism says a god should lead his life?

No Way to Win

Over at Haemtza RHM provides his daily dose of haredi bashing, though today's installment has a twist.

http://haemtza.blogspot.com/2016/04/when-being-honest-is-newsworthy.html

Normally Reb Harry Ha Mercazi picks on a news item, or a thought in his head, that he uses to provethe ills of haredism and the virtues of Centrism. Apparently there was nothing in the press today that, when taken in its straightforward sense, could possibly be interpreted as putting Haredim in a bad light. Enter Reb Hershel min HaMizrach who, through centrist creativity, found a way to take a nice story and flip it such that it sheds bad light onto Haredim. The reasoning is - if it is newsworthy when they do something good, it must be a rare exception. The problem for our איש התווך is, though, that applying this reasoning to the negative stories would imply that the rest of the Haredim are good.

Bottom line - if you are passionate about seeing the bad, you can always find a way

The Harry Watch 4/13/16

"I just care that Jews might be killed because some people got their jollies getting married on Har Habayis"

- "get their jollies"?? You, the broad minded centrist, are making choizek of other people's religious practices? And to assume that you, residing in Midwestern US, care more about Jewish  lives than right wing Israelis. How convenient indeed to sit back in Chicago and graciously give up our rights to Har Habayit. What about Beit Shemesh? Was 1948 worth the price? We could have saved lives there by giving up and not establishing a state. 

Disagreeing with the right wingers is one thing, mocking them, quite another

All or Nothing

Over at HaEmtza Reb Harry, once again, displays his 'all or nothing' thinking, with no ability to perceive nuance. His zeal to condemn misbehaving haredim blinds him to some correct observations that Ezra Froedlander makes. There is no question that Ezra is correct in his contrasting the level of political correctness observed by the press toward racial minorities with the 'no gloves' attitude tolerated with regard to yiden those rule. Now, I get that Harry probably doesn't like that Ezra focuses on that inequity to the apparent exclusion of facing up to the core issue. But Harry does his cause a disservice by denying that there is anything to the clam Ezra makes

Where's the reasoning

Over at HaEmtza Reb Harry has a long exposition building quite a case against viewing pornography (he uses a crude colloquial abbreviation of that word). No where in his essay does he indicate that he disagrees with that strong case, in fact he comes across as strongly supporting it. Okay. And then he takes a sharp left turn, with the following:

"Does that mean we should stop using the internet? Of course not. It is way too valuable..."

Of course not?? Why of course not? I certainly understand the instinct of not wanting to stop using the Internet. It is too valuable, etc.  but, based on the strong arguments he himself just made how does he know that it's an "of course"? Especially when there is an overwhelming number of rabbonim and Jewish communal leaders who in fact say "of course" to not using it!

Where is the judgment, where is the שיקול הדעת? Where is the intelligent discussion? Where is the Talmudic training? Why, without a reasoned cost / benefit analysis is it so obvious, and why does this not seem to bother the readership?

Could it be this is nothing but dogma of the centrist variety? My fantastical theory goes like this -  according to RHM's view of the world, Thou shall be a centrist comes along with its own Big 3 averos, one of which apparently is that thou shalt not block exposure to the secular world. At any cost. That being an incontrovertible tenet, leaves no choice but to say "of course". Can this sort of narrow (non?) thinking dogma actually be what centrism is about?

Reader Contest: what are RHM's other big 2 big centrist averos?

The Harry Watch

Over at Haemtza, Reb Harry is proud that his blog being is a place of civility where insults are not acceptable and contributions are judged by the merits of their substance in a convivial spirit, free of sarcasm and snark. It is in this context that I track these excerpts:

April 9, 2016
In disagreeing with a commenter who questioned Ryan's conservative bona fides (incidentally, without a trace of rancor or antagonism) RHM responds as follows

 "Please. Ryan is a mainsstream conservative. Your characterization of him is nonsense"

There are two interesting things to note about this response

1. His way of refuting the commenter is by placing the (sarcastic) 'Please' in front of a restatement of his point of view. No sevara, no refutation, no conterargument. Just the word 'please', as if to say - don't be an idiot
2. He resorts to the juvenile tactic of insulting the commenter by name calling

This tone does not seem to align with the spirt of Rav Soloveitchik. 

.

Mainstream Orthodoxy

Over at HaEmtza, Rav Maryles, when forced to defend why he deems something religiously unacceptable, will invariably respondthat mainstream orthodoxy is against it. Well, that is tantamount to using a word to define itself, a well known no-no. Reb Harry defines mainstream Orthodoxy as - the type of Yiddishkeit that he, RHM, holds from. So using something's nonconformance to his Yiddishkeit as a "reason" it's wrong, is obviously circular logic. What I'm saying is so elementary to someone who passed (even with a C) Logic 101 or Talmud 101, that  it's almost embarrassing to have to articulate. And yet, here we are ...

When I first saw the HaeEmtza title "Driving the Wedge Further" I have to say that I couldn't imagine what the topic was. Turns out it is Rav Maryles trying his hand at assessing the woman rabbi situation.

RHM, who we can assume never met the new Ortho woman rabbi (else he surely would have mentioned it) feels he knows enough about this woman, based on reports in the press, to definitively assess her sincerity:

"There is nothing fake or misleading about her desires. Her sincerity and commitment are palpable"

He goes further, exhorting the rest of us to be as committed as she:

 "Would that all of us would be as committed to serving Klal Yisroel as she is"

For context, the self described "Centrist" uses his space on an almost daily basis to criticize charedim (check yesterday's post, for example), the thrust of which adds up to, "if they would only cease being Charedim and be more like me, all would be solved'

Other oddities in the post:

- he paints her as uninformed by her associating teaching with rabbanus

"she has taken the wrong path in trying to express that commitment. Especially since she says that her primary focus will be on teaching. You do not need to be a rabbi to teach Torah"

I am sure she knows very what that you do not need to be a rabbi to teach. What RHM may not know is that in most haredi yeshivot all the rebbis are titled rabbi. Furthermore, EVERY baal habayis listed in the Lakewood community directory is titled rabbi. Apparently the need to be thought of as "rabbi" is alive and well in the most mainstream of orthodox circles.

- here's another one

"The Chafetz Chaim famously did not get Semicha until near the end of his life... There are not too many teachers greater than he was"

I am wondering what RHM's source was that the CC was even a teacher at all, much less the greatest of all time. It may very well be true that he taught but I never came across any hint of to that in my readings.

If I am right, must RHM then be schooled on the concept that you needn't have been a great teacher to be considered a great rabbi?

Over at Haemtza, Rav Maryles takes another shot at yiden in his never ending barrage, this time  pouncing on reportage of alleged misbehavior by sources none other than Forward and the New York Post. I would use these papers to wrap fish were I not afraid that the fish would pick up a smell.
Interestingly, our centrist friend goes even further than these publications do, assuming their guilt exactly as charged by the aforementioned tabloids. Much of the rest of his article is consumed with worries about the image of yiden in goym's eyes. My anecdotal experience traveling the US and beyond is that the Jew's integrity is held in the highest esteem. Where Reb Harry and I can agree, though, is that if your lone source of information is Haemtza, you would, in fact, have valid basis to disparage the Jew.