interesting layout of the issues involved..

MK Omer Yankelevitch (Kachol Lavan) went to pay a visit to a seminary called "Sharansky's Seminar". Yankelevitch is an alumnus of this school and in her role as MK has helped the school with something procedural and has promised to work on getting them recognition for one of the courses they offer that is currently no accredited.

As part of the ceremony with Yankelevitch, the school administration gave her a copy of her teacher's certificate she had qualified for as a student years earlier.

The visit upset MK Moshe Gafni (UTJ). In Gafni's opinion, only official Haredi MKs with the official stamp of approval are allowed to visit Haredi schools and perform publicity stunts with the Haredi schools in the backdrop.

Gafni sent a letter to the school administration expressing his shock at hearing that an MK from a secular party , whose goal is to hurt everything holy and valuable to the Jewish nation, visited, and was received with great honor by the school administration. Shameful, Gafni says. Also, Rav Sharansky zt"l would never have allowed such a thing.

It seems that Gafni is worried that despite the campaigns and the using Rav Chaim Kanievsky and other gedolim to ensure that everyone in the Haredi community votes only UTJ, still perhaps someone in the school might appreciate MK Yankelevitch's help, help that was not offered by the UTJ MKs, and get confused by her Haredi appearance and by calling herself Haredi and think Kachol Lavan is not so bad and is even a somewhat Haredi party and might vote for them, God forbid!

By the way, a simple search about the Sharansky school brings up a notice about a visit 3 years ago aid by then Minister of Education Naftali Bennett to the Sharansky school. With pictures. There was no mention of any protest from Gafni at the time. I guess nobody would confuse Bennett as Haredi and think he can be voted for.






sources; Behadrei and Kikar and Charedim.org

This broadside/pashkevil is up and around Haredi areas:



The broadside is warning people to not buy an air-conditioner without a hechsher (in this case the Kahsrut Badatz Mehadrin of Rabbi Rubin) because when you walk into a room with air conditioning the heat of your body causes the temperature to rise slightly in the room thus causing the air conditioner to work harder.

Air conditioners have always had thermostats and have always worked to keep the room cooled to whatever temperature you set it to, yet now we need hechshers on our air conditioners. There are also some people (even though most do not) who  only open the fridge door on Shabbos when the compressor is running - this seems like a similar argument.

But marketing is marketing, even if it creates a new chumra in the process.

I will not run in these elections, though I will consider it in the future. If they have a choice which Ehud they prefer, the public would prefer, they would not prefer the Ehud who is running. [Ehud Barak] coming back won’t make a difference. I will look at politics as an outsider for the time being.

  -- former PM Ehud Olmert, at the Jerusalem Post Conference, regarding speculation that he is considering running again for office. So he is, but not until next time at least. And he thinks Ehud Barak running is a waste of time.

A Guest Post by Mendel Horowitz

One evening each week in Jerusalem, in a space that functions during daylight hours as a children’s playroom, I honor Orthodox Jewish fathers and celebrate fatherhood by attending to their emotional needs in group psychotherapy. 

Dump trucks, dolls, and plastic devices fill plywood shelves and primary-colored bins. On a diminutive corner table, Legos are pushed aside in deference to adult-friendly coffee and tea. As if in a boardroom or office, these men sit cross-legged and rigid, addressing mature themes with the abstractions mature people use. Some members have been attending these 90-minute sessions for years. These adults do not come to play.

The dynamic group, which consists of two co-leaders from the same homogeneous community, happens in the basement of a neighborhood clinic. In these meetings, men learn about themselves from understanding each other, their moods become improved from mutual appreciation and respect. Insight, in group therapy, results from interpersonal exchanges and not only from a therapist’s contribution. The notion of collective learning fits well with Jewish principles of mutual responsibility, just as the possibility of cooperative healing is suitable for every culture and way of life.

Treating Orthodox Jewish men in psychotherapy requires appreciating their particular vulnerabilities. As an Orthodox Jewish father myself, I am aware of and sensitive to those concerns. 

In Jerusalem and in other religiously conservative settings, traditional husbands and fathers struggle within their patriarchal roles more than popular periodicals suggest. Patriarchy is not only about the subjugation of women, but also demands the distinct obligations of men.

Orthodox Judaism is a patriarchal society preserved by matrilineal descent, a way of living born to mothers but passed on traditionally by fathers to sons. At the head of their households, Orthodox Jewish men experience their religion in gender-specific ways. From leading public services to orchestrating domestic traditions, an Orthodox father is expected to achieve proficiency in Jewish scholarship, liturgy, and theology. Some observant men struggle to reconcile secular and religious ambitions. For some traditional fathers, leadership overload is isolating and severe.

The caricature of the reticent male unwilling to disclose his emotions is recognizable and not easily dismissed. An elaborate synthesis of nature and nurture lead some men to rely on monosyllabic responses and some women to not perceive what men non-verbally express. Some men are more objective than emotive, and more inhibited. Other men maintain rich emotional vocabularies, ask more questions, and are less reserved. While the number of males who favor silence may be equaled by the number of men who prefer conversation, the unhelpful categorization persists.

In addition to the effects of gender stereotyping, the Orthodox Jewish men in this group have been shaped by a worldview that emphasizes right and wrong and leaves less room for the morality of individual experience. Biblical doctrine and associated Talmudic tradition govern all areas of the human adventure, from the exalted to the mundane. From fashion to diet, no endeavor or encounter is beyond the scope of regulation. Moral triumphs and ethical failures are constant possibilities, as are the associated likelihoods of pride and shame.

In social contexts, and in group therapy, Orthodox men are often reticent to discuss taboo subjects, and regularly use generalizing pronouns to avoid personal responsibility. The dishonor associated with nonconformity to religious and cultural expectations renders some observant men hopeless and forlorn.

Orthodox Jewish fathers are burdened in ways unbelieving fathers are not. Tasked with transmitting tradition in ways meaningful and lasting, an effectual Orthodox father functions as a breadwinner, historian, philosopher, and guide. The stakes are impossibly high. Orthodox fathers often feel accountable for the mistakes of their children and shameful for making descendants suffer for their faults. To a dutiful father, assimilation is as dangerous as persecution. When Orthodox men struggle to be more effective fathers, they are struggling to perpetuate their culture and their beliefs.

The Orthodox Jewish male is tasked, three times each day, with joining other observant men in prayer and shared experience. Orthodox men study religious texts collectively, and communal observance offers camaraderie and opportunities to self-reflect. 

Still, in a scheme that emphasizes rituals and ceremonies, it is easy to hide behind platitudes and rote behaviors. Some men find serenity in religious rites, their spiritual journeys provoking empathy and personal growth. Other men find in Orthodoxy a place to hide from self-examination. Some men find assurances in ceremonial living. Other men feel anonymous and suffer in loneliness, remorse, and doubt. 

For emotionally isolated men, group therapy can help. In his guide on masculinity, “Man Enough,” the American psychiatrist Frank Pittman described men frightened of their own inadequacy, unhappy and alone. In some traditional communities, men are conditioned to be resourceful, independent and strong. At the same time, manhood can be demanding and lonely. “Sometimes there is something that a man needs to reveal, needs to talk over with another man, and there may be no man available to him,” counseled Pittman. Group psychotherapy is a forum where men can interact candidly and learn from each other how to make changes to maladaptive cognitions and behaviors. A withdrawn male can learn to be more assertive. An aggressive male can come to communicate with more grace.

A powerful source of relief in the early stages of group therapy is the disconfirmation of an individual’s sense of uniqueness. After hearing peers reveal worries similar to their own, men often describe feeling more validated and less by themselves. 

The premise for psychotherapy exists in Orthodox tradition, too. “When there is a concern in a man's heart,” suggests the Talmud in Yoma (75A), “let him verbalize it to others.” “Two are better than one,” advises Ecclesiastes (4:9), “but woe to him that is alone when he falls.” To the sages, comfort is to be found in an available, empathetic ear. More than the skills discussed and the content of their discontents, in group therapy, the process of telling their stories becomes restorative for lonely men over time. Sadness lessens without specific solutions. Desperation lifts without definitive results. My experience in Jerusalem shows that group therapy can help traditional men and families without redefining what it means for them to be a man.

This Father’s Day in Jerusalem, I will celebrate fatherhood by taking it seriously. I will consider the men in our psychotherapy group and appreciate the distinct struggles of men in other faith communities. In our meetings, I will encourage direct communication and discourage the use of generalizing pronouns and cliches. I will empathize with the shame and loneliness associated with transgression against cultural and religious expectations. And in the basement playroom, I will remember that for some men of deep conviction, fatherhood may be rewarding but is not always fun and games.

Ho Hum

According to a Mako News report (as reported by TOI - I did not see the original), an IDF soldier was punished, by being required to stay on base for a weekend, for putting meat and dairy products on the same shelf in the same refrigerator. According to the report this soldier was aware of the rules against this and did so anyway.

Some are shocked about what happened, calling it religious coercion or another step along the way to a halachic state.

My only comment is that the army is all about its rules, and rules are enforced with strict disciplinary measures very harshly.

Obviously there is nothing halachically wrong with milk and meat products being on the same shelf in the refrigerator. The issue here is that the army has a rule that was broken, not that a halacha was transgressed. When my son was in the army I learned that the first punishment they go to is to require an offending soldier to stay a weekend he otherwise would have had off.

Why does the army have such a rule that is seemingly halachic, even though it is not really? I can surmise, without actually knowing, that it is being overly cautious. With the need to keep bases, kitchens and refrigerators kosher, and being aware that many soldiers are not religious and do not know the halacha or the nuances of halacha, the army, probably via the IDF Rabbinate, has determined a set of rules to keep everything as kosher as possible in the least confusing manner. Are you going to start teaching non-religious soldiers the intricacies of kashrut and hope they get it right? That is not realistic, so they make all encompassing rules to ensure the kashrut status without worrying about what individual soldiers might do on their own.

What happened here though is that a soldier broke a rule, like any other rule. This one just happened to be one involving a religious issue on base. That does not mean he is any more in the right for doing it. It is the army and the rules are the rules.

This is a very strange story..

The head (mayor?) of a Palestinian village, Dir Kadis, married off his son on Thursday night. AMong the guests were several people from Modiin Ilit. In the pictures and video, at least some of them look to be Breslavers, but not all of them.

I don't know that this is the first time this has happened, but it was turned into a big deal. Some Palestinians got upset about it, claiming proof that the mayor, Radi Nasser, is in favor of normalization of relations with Israel and Israelis. The Palestinian Authority got very upset and wants the mayor to resign. The mayor himself denies any involvement, claiming others invited the Jews, not him, and as soon as he saw them he stopped the dancing and had them banished from the party. Supposedly Fatah has banished Nasser from being a member.
sources: Ynet, Actualic and Behadrei and more

I see nothing wrong with such participation. If they have become friends with him over time, probably by sending their cars for repairs to garages in his town or using his services in other ways (such as construction or whatnot) and they feel safe going there, more power to them, but only they are responsible for their own safety.

Perhaps it is a sign of some sort of normalization. And maybe it is not a bad thing. Just the fact that they got out of there alive and without any security incident or crisis is already a good sign!