this is an interesting letter to the editor and an interesting perspective worth pointing out, especially with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy comlpaining a lot about Israel not supporting Ukraine enough publicly...

this was in the Yated Neeman (USA), and posted online in a closed group (so I can't share the original link where I saw it), but hattip to RH

I am just going to leave this here without comment...

this "Letter to the Editor" is awesome..

This LTTE appeared in the HaPelles newspaper

Translation:
We wanted to inform the bnei torah community regarding the issue of renting apartments that we almost failed in without realizing. As a rental landlord we were pressured to find a renter for our apartment, specifically because it had sat empty for a period of time. One day a mother comes with the sister of a bride to see the apartment, and we were under the impression that this was a "beis yaakov" family. They said they wanted it and wanted to come to agreement as to the price of the rent, but were waiting for the final ok of the bride, when she would come later to see it.
The next day the bride comes and was favorably impressed with the apartment, but in ad hoc conversation it was mentioned that the chosson wanting to rent the apartment is in the army.
We were literally a step away from coming to an agreement and only by a miracle were we saved at the last moment from bringing into our house a person dressed in army uniform who would be walking around our haredi neighborhood in the uniform and adding some cooling down during the acclimatization period of the army draft law.
Landlords, pay attention and do not give in to the pressure of time and money! and by that we will fulfill the mitzva of [serving God" with all your being"

I was planning on writing about a letter to the editor I had seen in the Mishpacha magazine, but my magazine disappeared, so I did not have the original letter to quote. Thankfully The Jewish Worker quoted and wrote about the same letter, so now I have it..

The letter and its translation:

מיהו אברך

רבקה ח ירושלים

אני לא קוראת קבועה של העיתון, אבל קניתי אותו בגלל הכתבה על אנשים שתורתם אומנותם במובן שגם הם לומדים שעות וגם עובדים

אני נשואה לאברך חשוב - אנחנו חיים, שורדים, ומתחתנים ילדים, והכתבה הזה השאיר אצלי טעם חמוץ. אינני יודעת למה, אבל אולי כי הרגשתי שיש בה משום זלזול בתלמידי חכמים אמיתיים כמו בעלי שמוסרים את הנפש לתורה,שלומדים כל החיים, שנשארים בכולל והם אברכים אמיתיים

אני לא יודעת להסביר בדיוק, כי מובן שזה תופעה מבורכת אבל לא על חשבון אנשים כמו בעלי וחביריו

אני כותבת לכם בסערת נפש. אני מורה בסימנר מספר שעות בשבוע, ואני תוהה מה לומר לתלמידות בעקבות כתבה כזו אם השאלה תעלה 

אשמח לשמוע דעות בעניין הזה ומה אומרת דעת תורה על זה

I am not a regular reader of the magazine but I bought it because of the article about the people who "their profession is torah", in the sense that they learn hours a day while also working.

I am married to an important Avreich - we live, we survive, we are marrying off children, and this article left a bitter taste in my mouth. I don't know why, but maybe because I felt that there was disrespect for real Talmidei Chachamim like my husband who gives his soul to Torah, learns his whole life, and stays in kollel and these are the real Avreichim. I don't know how to explain this exactly, because it is clear that this a good phenomenon but not on the backs of people like my husband and his friends.
I am writing to you with a lot of trepidation. I am a teacher in a high school a few hours a week and I don't know what to tell the girls about this article if the subject comes up. 
I would be happy to hear other opinions on this subject as well as what "Daas Torah" has to say about this.

I do not know why she thinks that if they write respectfully about one type of person it means nobody else is deserving of respect. They write non-stop about the yeshivot, the kollels, the avreichim, and how important they are. They constantly write against the attempts to change the system.

Is it so bad that they write once about people who work and make time to learn regularly? Does it mean this is the only way? Does it mean these people deserve respect and nobody else does?

Regarding her problem with what to tell her students - maybe she should tell the students that men who go to work to support their families should make time to learn Torah, and that is just fine, if not better than "fine", at least for people who are not going to be learning full time..

She says she thinks it is good, but "not on the backs of people like my husband". Who is doing anything on the backs of her husband and his friends? Because the people working and learning deserve some respect means it is coming on the back of her husband? Is there a limited amount of respect in the world that if one shows respect to one person it takes away respect earned by and showed to another?

Earners-Learners deserve respect to, and granting it takes away nothing from anybody else.

Here is an awesome Letter to the editor that was in this past week's Mishpacha magazine (Hebrew):

The letter is referencing some articles recently in the magazine. Specifically, a couple of weeks ago they described a situation of married children going to their parents houses and "stealing" things from the house, cleaning out the pantry, etc. The second article referenced is one that described the need to properly prepare spiritually before joining the workforce.

The letter reads (my translation):
I want with my letter to connect between two articles you published in the previous edition of the magazine. The interview with the lawyer Gottlieb and the article with the solutions for the sorry phenomenon of children taking and taking from their parents without them putting an end to it. The breaking point of the solution for the problem of the children can be found in the second article, in which Gottlieb testifies to the spiritual danger awaiting people who are about to go out and on the workforce without being properly prepared. Meaning, the poverty would be perpetuated, as well as the becoming a burden on the parents.
This paradox has raised many thoughts, and we even raised it in a thought group I participated in, and I want to share with the readers the conclusions we arrived at.
In my opinion, in the reality of life today each individual and every family must make a decision about their personal identity. I will explain: it is very clear that the desires of the world and of life according to the norms are not options for one who chooses a Haredi lifestyle. If previously we lived a life of "also this and also that", there was also parnassa (due to payments and subsidies of sorts) and it was also possible to safeguard the strict definition of "harediyut", those days are long gone. Today someone who wants to be completely Haredi, like it once was, cannot want to also integrate into the general world, cannot be integrated into the discussion that sees parents and children living from one account as a negative thing.
Yes! The Haredi children take form their parents! yes, it is difficult for the parents! But if it is done by choice because they want that "harediyut" life, as it once was, that is the price they have to pay today!
What can you do: the price that needs to be paid today for the product that is called "to be Haredi" is much higher today. Somebody who that doesn't work for him, somebody who has a different definition of harediyut, somebody who is willing to buy a different "product" - can talk about integration. But, that is not the same harediyut as that of those who by choice prefer a world in which the parents are crashing economically because their children are completely dedicated to Torah.
It should be noted that this analysis is not a statement of what is good or bad, it is just a statement of the facts.

Wow! In order to be haredi today, one must embrace the lifestyle of children forever living off their parents.If you think any differently, you cannot be Haredi. This is definitely a new definition of Haredi.

This is one of the wackiest "Letters to the Editor" I have seen in a while...

Rabbi Shalom Gold penned the following letter and sent it to the Hamodia newspaper for publication. Being that they did not print it, Rabbi Gold has given permission for it to be published and passed around.

The following Letter to the Editor in this past week's Hamodia struck my fancy..

On Mehadrin Buses

To the Editor:
I would like to recall a historical fact that can be checked out by anyone.: If you remember, a few years ago it was frightening to ride on buses in Eretz Yisrael. Suicide bombers would get onto buses packed with innocent people and blow themselves up, killing and maiming hundreds. Nothing could be done about them; the army was helpless.
Then it was decided to launch mehadrin buses. As soon as these chariots of kedusha started running, the suicide bombers stopped.
unfortunately, the Supreme Court came out against mehadrin buses. Whereas before, women could enter through the back doors of the bus, now they have to enter through the front door, making it necessary for them to pass through the men. At one point, I read in Hamodia that Rav Kav "readers" (like they have on trains) would be installed on buses so women could enter through the back, but this never came about. Why don't we insist on this?
Also, there are signs on every bus saying that one traveler cannot tell another one where to sit. I have been told that one can end up in jail even for politely asking people to move. But why should anyone have to be told to move in order for the bus to be modestly segregated? The mehadrin buses pass through "our" neighborhoods, and each individual should be looking out for the kedusha of Am Yisrael, concerned about protecting his family and neighbors.
How long does a bus ride take? Must couples sit together when it is compromising the security of everyone, including themselves? (You can always talk when you get home.)
Please, I beg you, men sit in your part of the bus and women sit in yours. The safety of our nation depends on this.
May we be zocheh - in the zechus of showing Hashem that we care about His Torah and His having asked us be kadosh - that the redeemer should come to Tzion in mercy, very quickly.
With Torah blessings,
Rav Shmuel Littmann

This Letter to the Editor published in the Hamodia newspaper irked me when I first read it. After that a few people pointed it out to me. As it seemed to be "not just me", I decided that it deserved to be pointed out and made famous (if only I had that ability..).

Ahavas Yisrael for Everyone?

To the Editor:

I would like to raise a point regardubg a letter in Hamodia June 13th, where Mrs. Risha Deitscg says the mitzva of ahavas yisrael applies also to the non-religious. 

I would like to refer her to Q and A with Rabbi Avigddor Miller, z"l. He clearly states at the beginning of a chapter entitled Loving the Jewish Nation, that loving a Jew only applies those who share the commitment fo the Torah, ve'ahavta l'reiacha kemocha means those who are like you, in that you both serve Hashem. He further makes a harsh comment that people who say they like to also have ahavas yisrael for members of other Jewish movements, it's enough of a job loving our real brothers and sisters. He also notes that people who are not loyal to Hashemare not loved by Hashem even if they are a tinok shenishba. Says Rabbi Chaim Brisker, zt"l, "Nebech an apikores, is fort an apikores."

I am also not sure about your assumption of tinok shenishba, since these people know about yiddishkeit and choose to look into other things. I don't, however, want to stretch the letter and will rather just refer you to the sefer which we have talked about.

The message is clear that there is no mitzva to love these possible reshaim, and as it is mentioned in many gemaras, we may not make up our own mitzvos

With warmest regards,

DY, 

Golders Green

The following "Letter to the Editor" (translated by me) was published in the local Bet Shemesh haredi paper "Chadash", and made me laugh. So, here goes...

Last week  a letter was written from the parents of a certain school about a major failure regarding their needs, and amongst what was said it was also said there a very jarring sentence: "We will not elect you again...".
It seems to me that without intention the words were emitted from their pen, since every intelligent person knows and it is clear to him that we don't vote for a specific party or for a specific representative, but only according to the decisions and instructions of the rabbonim shlit"a and the expectations we have of our representatives is not connected and will not be connected to any system of elections (I am not getting into the issue and of the serious distress of the parents, but I think that even in the most frustrating situations there is no place for these types of sentences).
I think that even the Chadash needs to do some introspection on this issue, as from so much describing of the parents distress and the problems of the various neighborhoods every week causes a feeling that the elections are connected to some sort of independent decisions by haredi residents, we get dragged unknowingly into a spirit of representation, factionalism, interests, etc.
The community should be reminded that we are led by the rabbonim shlit"a, and fortunate we are that we have merited so.
M.M. 

That was my entertainment for this past Friday afternoon.


------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------

I saw this interesting Letter to the Editor yesterday in the weekly free edition of Mishpacha newspaper..

The Jewish Nation is now entering the beginning of the month of mercy and selichot. In the sefardi shuls the tunes of selichot can already be heard and by the ashkenazi shuls they are trembling from the sound of the shofar.

There is no doubt that this last year has been one of the stormier ones that haredi Judaism has known visa vie the State and the general public in Eretz Yisrael.

It is known what the gedolim said about the passuk "The eyes of Hashem are on Eretz Yisrael from the beginning of the year until the end", that the conclusion of the year has special divine assistance in Eretz Yisrael.

In normal days, the words "national responsibility" and "mutual responsibility/gaurantorship (ערבות)" arent always appropriate for us, but in these days when the eyes of the general public are fixed on our backs, when every movement of ours is analyzed, registered and filed, it is our obligation to pay attention and be careful to remember that in the public domain we are the messengers of the community, and we are the shofar, the megaphone, of Hashem in this world.

Shaul Weissman, Bnei Braq

I thought his approach was interesting, if not a bit haughty and demeaning..

------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------

This past week's Mishpacha (Hebrew) Magazine had a Letter To The Editor that I'd like to point out. I have seen many similar letters over the years, and it bothers me.

The week before, Mishpacha ran an article about a Jew in England who has reached the pinnacle of the justice system and is a justice on the Supreme Court of England. I no longer have the original article, but it was interesting, dealing with his relationship with many rabbonim and gedolim and the jewish community and issues in general.

Last week someone wrote a Letter to the Editor about that article:
To translate:
[The interview with the judge of the Supreme Court was very interesting but raised a number of questions: Who allowed the judge to wear a wig? What about "Lo Tilbash"? And even if there is no issue of "Lo Tilbash", there might be an issue of "chukas ha'goyim".
I did not come to complain about the judge, who seems to be God fearing and careful about light and serious commandments equally, and has even merited to pour water on the hands of the gedolim, but it is important to point out in the article that his actions were done in coordination with the gedolei yisroel.. and not take things for granted....]

To be honest, when I first started reading this letter, and I got to the point of  "Who allowed the judge to wear a wig?", I said to myself - his issue are that wigs are not allowed? not tzniyus? What does he want - the judge should wear a tichel??? I thought that was funny.

Then continuing on I saw his issue was with the Lo Tilbash. The answer seems obvious to me, even if perhaps some might not agree - this is not the type of wig that is a woman's wig, and therefore is not under the "Lo Tilbash" issue. It is unique for the justices, most of whom anyway have always been men, and therefore not an issue.

Then his suggestion that it might be "chukas ha'goyim" led me to wonder. His wearing a wig is chukas ha'goyim? His whole existence on the court is dealing with chukas ha'goyim! And he should be worried about the wig?? In Israel the chief of the Beis Din ha'Gadol had been offered the position of a Supreme Court Justice and had supposedly been told by gedolim not to accept it so as not be part of "erchaos" - the secular court system, the man-made laws rather than the laws of God - and this fellow is worried about the wig being chukas ha'goyim??!!

Besides for the specific points, as mentioned they each can easily be responded to, what bothers me is more the attitude that people feel it is ok to poke their nose in the relationship others have with God. If this fellow is frum, and he is, and he has a relationship with rabbonim and gedolim, can't we just assume he asked his own questions on issues he needed resolved? Do we really have to look for the things other people might be doing wrong?

If he was harming people with his actions or court decisions, by forcing non-Jewish ways on the jewish community, I could see room for such a discussion of justifying, or lack thereof, of his actions. But to dig into his personal life and ask how he can do this or that, is just too much, and unfortunately too common.

I must say, I am no expert in science. Nor am I an expert in theology. One of the great debates is how, or if one even should try, to reconcile ancient rabbinic statements with modern scientific findings.

There are various approaches I have heard over the years, such as Chazal were mistaken with faulty assumptions of the time, or Chazal were referring to different things despite similar names to things in our day, or Chazal were not wrong at all but said things that now seem wrong but at the time they were just trying to fit the modern day thought, among other explanations.

One thing I never heard anybody say in the form of an explanation, no rav or anybody else, was that today's science is wrong. It was always an attempt to explain why Chazal back then were not wrong despite the conflict with modern science.

Until today.

The following Letter to the Editor was printed in this week's Hamodia newspaper:
That's right. According to this fellow from Tzfat, modern science has never proven that the Earth rotates and revolves  around the sun, and one day it will be proven that Chazal was right when they said way back when that the sun revolves around the perfectly motionless Earth.

I don't even know what to say, but am impressed by how much emunas chachomim this guy has... Instead of trying to find ways to explain and make things fit, he just sticks with Chazal...

I am translating this "Letter to the Editor" that I enjoyed reading in this past week's edition of the Haredi newspaper Chadash of Bet Shemesh:

Mehadrin Needs Strengthening 

.... 

Much has been written, and surely much will be written, about the mehadrin transportation in our city. In practice, it was arranged with Egged for the bus lines 418, 497 and 454 to operate under the mehadrin format, meaning the driver is supposed to open both the front and back doors, and women getting on in the back will "punch" their tickets with the hole-puncher hanging near the back door, or they can pay in cash when the driver stops to collect money..


However, out in the field it is a whole different story. The drivers have received clear instructions to only open the front door, and only after payment has been made can the female passenger go down, to the back and get on from the back door if she requests it. This has in effect cancelled out any benefit of the mehadrin arrangement because even if men and women are sitting separately in transit, since the women are standing near the driver while paying  - a high percentage of them will pass through the men to go to the back of the bus. 

After many attempts to straighten this out through Egged, we can only turn to the righteous women who are definitely only doing this without realizing the seriousness of the matter. We know it is much easier to pass by quickly than to ask the driver to open the back door, to then go down and back up in the back, but for this Chazal have instructed us to consider the reward of a mitzva against the loss [and there are 2 prohibitions being violated here, causing men to look at women and the prohibition against a woman passing in between 2 men].


Please be strong and do not be ashamed to do what is right. Stand on your rights to guard the holiness of the Camp, and request from the driver each time to give you the ability to alight in the rear, and by that you will not be a part of those who want to uproot the mehadrin concept.
With the merit of standing strong on issues of holiness, we should merit all the blessings that are written in the Torah for those who make themselves holy. [ and I am confident that at the time of going down and alighting through the back door it is defintely an eis ratzon - a time of mercy - to daven for what is needed as it says in the sefer Shomrei Emunim about the time one closes his eyes in public to avoid seeing something inappropriate]

I love it!

Hamodia has been running a series of articles on what Jewish poverty looks like in this generation with the economic downturn, people losing jobs or having salaries cut, etc.

In this past weeks Hamodia there were two letters to the editor about a certain facet of one of the most recent article. They were both comments on a picture posted of an elderly man rooting through the garbage searching for food.

One letter said "the pictures brought home the message in a way that really touched my heart...picture worth a thousand words..."

The next letter said "...but I was very disturbed by the pictures you used to illustrate your article...if poor people know that someone out there is taking pictures of them trying to find food in dumpsters, they will no longer do so fearing that one day they will appear in.."

As they say - you cannot please all the people all of the time...

I love Letters to the Editor. They always provide one of two sorts of satisfaction:

1. they provide insight in the way the regular person thinks, providing new thoughts and ways at looking at things.
2. they can be downright funny.

The following Letter to the Editor, printed in today's Yisrael HaYom newspaper, is particularly humorous. the writer demands that the world recognize November 4th as a holy day (Rabinfest), and claims America has tremendous chutzpah for holding elections on the day of the anniversary on which Yitzchak Rabin was assasinated. The writer compares it to Israel holding elections on September 11th.


There are just so many things wrong with this letter, and I think it belittles it to even start pointing them out. I think I prefer to let it stand on its own in and stew in the ignorance and imbecility of the author.

I always enjoy reading Letters to the Editor. It is probably my favorite part of any newspaper/magazine, aside from the sports section of course.

The local BS rag "Chadash" that came out yesterday had some pretty boring letters printed, except for one short one. I present it to you here, translated to English:

As you know, whenever the mayor feels he is in distress from a public point of view, he arranges an "open line" in which he enables people to call in and talk directly with him. We have not heard or experienced anybody actually being saved by this "open line", rather just being offered platitudes.

However, everybody should know that in the mayors office, all sorts of other people with various responsibilities are invited to be present during the "open line" times, and listen in on the calls, and your discussion is broadcast over the speakerphone to everybody in the room, despite the possibility that your call is regarding them or their functioning, and you don't necessarily always want them to be there when you are talking about the issue, with them hearing what you are saying. This is "gneivat daas" of the highest degree to a public that thinks they are talking to the mayor alone, yet that is not the case, and people have already been hurt by this.
Everyone should know and beware.

With blessings,
D.C.

Did you really think you were calling the mayor and getting a private line into his bedroom or bathroom? Have you ever been to the mayors office? There are always people in and out of it. Even if you have never been there, you have to be pretty naive to think the mayor sits alone all day waiting for your phone call.

While I am no fan of the mayor, he has had this open line for years. Not just when he needs some public relations (though maybe when he first opened it that was the purpose). I have no idea if anything actually gets accomplished by calling the open line, but that is a different story. The mayor has the open line, he takes your calls, and he has people from various departments on hand so he can get an immediate answer to a question asked by a resident or give instructions and delegate immediately based on a complaint by a resident and know whether there is something they can do and how quickly.

So, if you want to make private calls to the mayor and talk intimately with him, get his personal number. If you want to report problems in the city and get responses and possible solutions, call his open line and speak with him and his staff.

The Mishpacha (Hebrew) magazine a couple of weeks ago ran a "Letter to the Editor" about the separate buses. This past week they ran another "Letter to the Editor" that was a response to the original. I do not have the original any longer, but the response quotes the relevant part of the original, so I will rely on that...

[the original letter is quoted]"On the way to a Haredi city, they requested from 4 grandmothers (they were not so old and infirm) to move out of the front sets of 8 seats. The young man asked politely and was holding a letter from the Rav of the town (a recommendation? a demand? a request?). Of course we did not refuse his polite request. Still, all my life I grew up with the concept that the front rows of seats on the bus are for the handicapped and/or older people. What will happen to [the mitzva of] Respecting the elders?"

[the response now begins]"I, reading this, want to note:
1. Why is it called a "polite" request and not a "just" request? Honored grandmothers, the ones that had enough energy and strength to walk to the bus-stop, to wait for the bus, to alight the bus, suddenly they have no more energy to take a few more steps further into the bus in order to avoid causing (even if only m'safek - even if only possibly avoiding) men to falter with an issur d'oraisa?
2. If they were grandmothers, how can they not be aware that not too many years ago smoking was allowed on buses by law and people smoked with no limitations. Yet today if anybody would dare smoke on the bus, and if people would "politely" request the person stop smoking, would the person write a letter to a respectable newspaper that he did no refuse a "polite" request even though he grew up and remembers a time when smoking on buses was permitted?
3. What about [the mitzva of] And you should be holy, that is written in the Torah?"

This letter leaves me without many words.
I am not sure what issur d'oraisa" the writer is referring to in point #1. Looking at women is an issur d'oraisa? it does not say it anywhere in the Torah. It might be a middas chassidus, but an issur d'oraisa? I doubt he can be referring to erva in general, because he does not say there were dressed improperly, or their hair was uncovered, which even then I am not so sure it is an issur d'oraisa.
If the men are concerned about issurei d'oraisa (that as far as I know do not exist), they do not have to look. That in no way obligates the women to move to the back of the bus.

I am not sure how he compares elderly in the front of the bus to smoking on a bus. Smoking has been declared illegal. Elderly sitting in the front of the bus is not illegal.

If you go to any parking lot or public place, the reserved seats or parking spaces for the handicapped and the elderly (when applicable) are always in the easy access areas and where it would be quicker for them to come and go (closer to the stores, near the aisles and/or front of a room), etc. It is basic humanity, aside from the mitzva of respecting the elderly, to be considerate of the elderly. Yet this fellow says "If they could walk this far, they can walk a little farther".