One Above And Seven Below_scribd Edition

One Above and Seven Below

1

One Above and Seven Below This book is about chareidim - I believe. I assume that it is being read by someone who is either a chareidi or not a chareidi (that pretty much covers all the possibilities). If you are chareidi, this book is about ‘us’. If you are not chareidi, this book is about ‘them’. This, then, begs the question: is this book about ‘us’ or ‘them’, or neither? Are you chareidi? Am I chareidi? Are you a chareidi who does not think that I am a chareidi? Does Moses our Teacher qualify? How about Korach? Pinchas? Zimri ben Saleu? Is Elijah the Prophet chareidi? Will the Messiah be chareidi? What about Adam the First Man? Noah? Samson the Mighty? King Achab?1 Your local Orthodox rabbi? Your great grandfather? Do you think you qualify and actually do not? Is it possible that you would not prefer to be a chareidi but actually are? And, what about the man on the Quaker Oats cereal box? In short, what exactly is a chareidi? (And, how do I know?) I suppose that this is a fine setting for the classic cliché of three Jews and seventy-five opinions. These opinions will range from: • Ultra-Orthodox Jews • Followers of the Eida HaChareidit • Very traditional old style Jews • Ancient backward out of date Jews • Jews with beards • Jews with beards that aren’t trimmed • Jews with beards that aren’t trimmed, funny black hats, long coats and long dresses, thick stockings, and wigs. • Jews with big families • Jews who [say that they] don’t watch television • Jews who don’t watch television, listen to the radio, read books, go to movies, nor to college and, therefore, haven’t got a clue about what’s going on • Jews that don’t work • Jews that don’t pay taxes even if they do work • Jews that go around collecting money 1

The Mishna in Sanhedrin (10:2) lists Achab as one of three kings who have no share in the World to Come. You are justified to ask, “By what measure is Achab even up for consideration for this list?” The answer is that the scripture (Kings I 17:6) relates that when Eliyahu HaNavi hid from Achab in the Jordan, he was provided with meat brought by ravens. The Talmud (Chullin 5a) offers an opinion that the food was brought from the table of Achab. It seems that Achab was partial to mehadrin level kashrut.

2

• • • • •

One Above and Seven Below

Jews that don’t go to the Israeli army, who throw stones on Shabbat and burn Israeli flags Jews that are deeply committed to Torah observance Jews that send all the boys to Yeshivas and girls to Bais Yaakovs Jews that won’t eat in your house Chassidim

All of the above are true at least some of the time but none of them can constitute a real definition. Even the one that is most benevolent and altruistic - Jews that are deeply committed to Torah observance - cannot be used as a definition as there are plenty of Jews who will identify themselves as such, and who truly are very committed to Torah observance, who would be loathe to identify themselves as chareidi and indeed do not meet any of the other descriptions that are listed. As a point of fact, let us try to apply the list of descriptions to one of the personages that are mentioned in the second paragraph of this chapter: Moses our Teacher. My assumption is that even non-chareidim would visualize Moses as a chareidi (especially if they consider Charlton Heston to be chareidi). But was he to be considered ultra-Orthodox?2 I suppose Korach thought so.3 Did his people think he was traditional old style? Ancient out of date? I wonder what was considered out of date in 2448.4 Did he have a large family? Only two sons. Did he send them to yeshiva? Not the first one.5 Did he not work? He was a shepherd, then a diplomat, a demagogue, a judge and a Head of State. Did he dress differently than any Jews? He probably didn’t watch TV or listen to radio. Was he clueless? Did he go around collecting money? Okay, he took those half shekels, but not for a living. Was he Chassidic? Ask any mitnaged. So, again, what is a chareidi? I actually saw an article focused on chareidim that defined chareidim as: Hebrew for Quaker. My first impulse - actually, my first repulse - was that, aside from a strange similarity in habiliment, chareidim are the furthest thing on earth from the Quakers. On reflection, however, I had to appreciate the 2

The prefix ‘ultra’ is defined in Webster’s as: exceeding the norm; extreme. It is paradoxical for any person to call themselves ‘ultra-Orthodox’ because in the eyes of each individual, his level of observance personifies the norm and does not exceed it. It is only logical when expressed by someone whose view of Orthodoxy is more subdued than that of the subject. It emerges that the expressor and the subject can never be in agreement as to this status. 3 Moses, however, did not. G-d seems to have sided with Moses on this one. 4 Approximately 1312 BCE. 5 This concurs with the Mechilta that states that Moses conceded to Jethro to expose his oldest son to idolatry. There are numerous interpretations of this Mechilta, many of which maintain that this is not to be understood literally.

One Above and Seven Below

3

fact that the writer was technically correct; the precise translation of the word chareidi is indeed Quaker.6 And the similarity in habiliment does project a comparable external image: that of a group of people who are traditional, simple, old fashioned, non-materialistic, devoutly religious, family oriented, self-contained, non-conformist, and, despite all the above, quite ostentatious. And yet I maintain that chareidim are the furthest thing on earth from the Quakers. So, after all this, what is a chareidi? And to whom does this accolade apply? I think that if one really wants to know what a chareidi is, the first thing to do is to consult with the one who coined the term – the prophet Isaiah. If I remember correctly from the Introduction, a chareidi is one who is anxious to hear the Word of G-d which, at first glance, would seem to indicate one who is anxious to do what G-d wants. As simple as this may be, it doesn’t really work in practice. This is because anybody and everybody who claims to be religious is convinced that they are doing precisely what G-d wants. Be it the Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionist, or Masorati Jew, any flavor of Orthodox Jew and even religious non-Jews. Everybody is certain that everything he does is just hunky-dory with G-d. But if we take a closer look at the words of the prophet, we may notice something a bit more profound. It’s not so much that we do what G-d wants as much as it is that we make it our business to know what it is that G-d wants us to do. The prophet is talking about somebody who is anxious to hear what G-d has to say; somebody who is listening to what G-d wants. These are the chareidim. So now we have the prophet Isaiah’s definition of a chareidi: A chareidi is somebody who is anxious to hear the “Word of G-d.” But, how do I apply this definition to the society of people who are known today as chareidi? And how are we to distinguish the chareidi from his “brethren”? Well, since this is my book, I will give it my spin. Here is how I wish to adapt the prophet’s definition of what is chareidi (and what is not chareidi and to apply it throughout this book: A non-chareidi Orthodox Jew (NCOJ) knows the Chumash. A chareidi 6

Most people follow a conventional translation for the word “charada” to mean trembling - or quaking – in fear. I have chosen to follow the commentary of Rashi and Metzudot Tzion in Isaiah 66:5. Rashi says “Those who rush with trepidation”; Metzudot merely says “Those who rush”. These imply that the emphasis is on the rushing which is due to fearfulness. The most succinct term for this (IMO) is to be anxious.

4

One Above and Seven Below

knows the Chumash with Rashi’s commentary. What do I mean by that? This statement can be understood on several levels. The simplest and most superficial explanation is as it sounds. Chareidim collectively place a heavier emphasis on being knowledgeable about the scriptures and religious texts. As such, they are not content with a bare bones superficial Sunday school level familiarity. Their study of the scriptures is accompanied by Rashi’s commentary as a matter of course. This is essentially true. Nevertheless, such a distinction would be dismissed as ‘fuzzy’. After all, are there not numerous non-chareidi Orthodox Jews who are well versed in the scriptures including the principal commentaries? And are all chareidim so learned? Clearly, this is not my true intent. On a deeper level, the implication is that the chareidim garnish their understanding of the scriptures by imbuing them with the words and ideas of the great sages. So much so, that any interpretation of the scriptures that is not supported by, or that blatantly contradicts, the meanings that are presented by the sages, Midrash, and the commentaries, is deemed invalid. In this sense, when I say Rashi, I do not mean Rashi exclusively, but rather, Rashi as a representative of all the recognized Torah commentators including the sages of the Talmud, the Midrash, Rashi’s contemporaries such as Ramban, Even Ezra, Rabainu Bachyeh, later commentators such as Abarbanel, Alshich, Ohr HaChaim, and relatively recent scholars such as Malbim and Rabbi S.R. Hirsch. Similarly, in this sense, I am not referring to a level of scholarship but rather to a consensus on the perspective of the scriptures that is shared by all the above and, consequently, shapes the religious philosophies of the camp of Jews that I am terming as the chareidim. This is much closer to what I have in mind, though it is obvious that it falls short of giving a precise definition of what qualifies as chareidi and what does not qualify. So, dear reader, what is the true meaning of my catchy definition? Believe it or not, what I am really referring to is a specific passage in the Chumash along with Rashi’s elaboration on that passage. It is one of the most fundamental passages of the Torah where, in all of eight words, G-d tells us precisely what He wants. The Torah states (Leviticus 26:3-12): If you are to walk within my statutes and guard my commandments and perform them. And I shall give the rains in their time and the land will

One Above and Seven Below

5

give forth its yield and the tree of the field will give its fruit. And the threshing will linger until the grape harvest… And I will give peace to the land… And you shall pursue your enemies… And I will devote my attention to you, and multiply you… And I shall put my sanctuary in your midst… And I shall walk in your midst and be your G-d and you shall be to me for a nation…

Here, G-d is clearly making a deal with us; specifically, if we meet the requirements of verse 26:3, G-d promises to deliver all the benefits that are listed in verses 26:4-12. Quite an attractive offer, in my opinion (actually, we will soon see that it is an offer we can’t refuse). So then, it pays (behooves us, actually) to fully understand what exactly are the requirements of verse 26:3. Here is where the chareidim and NCOJs part company. The NCOJ will say, “That’s easy. All we have to do is ‘walk within the statutes and guard the commandments and perform them’. Says so, right there.” Just tie a string from there to there. The chareidi says, “Hmm. I’m not exactly sure. Let’s see what my teacher says on this.” We know who that is. The chareidi now examines the first Rashi on the verse (26:3): If you are to walk within my statutes: I would assume that this is [merely] the fulfillment of the commandments, [however,] when the verse states ‘and guard my commandments’ the fulfillment of the commandments is indicated. So, how am I to maintain ‘If you are to walk within my statutes’? That you must toil in [the study of] Torah.

“Aha!” says the chareidi “Now I understand. I must toil in the study of Torah. This is not going to be as easy as it looks. It will require no small amount of toiling.” The chareidi takes the words of Rashi very seriously. There are a number of reasons for this. One being that Rashi is renowned throughout the entire Jewish nation as being a very wise and holy man and an exceptional scholar. He is believed to be a conduit of divine inspiration. Secondly, there is scarcely a full-bred Ashkenazi Jew who cannot trace some path of ancestral lineage up to Rashi. He is our grandfather. But the third and most important reason is, like most of what Rashi writes on Chumash, he did not make up this idea by himself. Rashi is merely quoting what was written a millennium earlier in Torat Kohanim. Did I say written? Shame on me! I mean compiled. Torat Kohanim (a.k.a. Sifra D’Bei Rav) is the Halachic midrash on the book

6

One Above and Seven Below

of Leviticus that was compiled from the teachings of the Tanaim by R’ Aba bar Ayvu (Rav) who was a disciple of R’ Yehuda HaNasi (compiler of the Mishna) and who bridged the generation between the Tanaim (Mishnaic scholars) and the Amoraim (Talmudic scholars). As any student of Pirkei Avot is aware, any statement recorded by the Tanaim is a legacy of teachings that have traveled through an unbroken chain of sages originating with Moses our Teacher himself at Mt. Sinai. Rashi has quite a hefty approbation for his commentary. Let us review the passage (Leviticus 26:3-13) and understand - through the eyes of the chareidi - what it is saying to us: G-d is giving us his exclusive recipe for successful living. He does not mince words. Like an itemized invoice, He details exactly what is included in the package. Though it is succinct, it leaves out nothing: economic stability, prosperity and wealth, peace and harmony, victory and international dominance, children and, best of all, a lasting relationship with G-d. But wait! The goods are not for free. At the top of the invoice appears the price: If you are to walk within my statutes and guard my commandments and perform them. And now (no, not now, but already for generations) comes Rashi and reminds us that the Torat Kohanim spells out exactly of what this currency consists - fulfilling the commandments with toil in Torah. We now have a revised definition of a chareidi: A chareidi is one who believes that success in life can only be achieved by observing the commandments and toiling in Torah. Ok, are we done? Can I go home now? Well, not just yet. Rashi - and, by extension, Torat Kohanim -is not quite finished. The NCOJ may say, “Ok. I see the price quote for the full-blown premium package. I’m just not up to buying in to this plan with all the bells and whistles. How about I stick to just fulfilling the commandments like the verse says and leave out the ‘toil in Torah’ part and I’ll take a scaled down version of the benefits? I can manage with a slower economy and a few dry spells and what’s so bad if we need 10 guys to chase 100 of them instead of 5 and a six day war every 30 years or so?” I would think twice about that (at least). Our Italian cousins (the children of Esau) pay respects to ‘the Godfather’. We respect ‘G-d the Father’. Our G-d the Father warns us that it is not healthy to turn down his offer.

One Above and Seven Below

7

The Torah continues (Leviticus 26:14-15): And if you do not hearken to Me and you do not perform all of these commandments. And if in My statutes you will display loathing; and if your souls will repulse My judgments; to desist from performing all of My commandments for you to nullify My covenant.

After this passage begins another itemized list. It is a much longer and more detailed list. It is a list of chance misfortunes that are liable to accidentally befall people who think that it is not worthwhile to buy into G-d the Father’s protection service. G-d the Father indicates that it would be a big shame to see such misfortunes occur to such righteous and deserving people as us, heaven forefend. It would be a good idea to clearly understand exactly what modes of conduct are those to which G-d the Father disapproves. Again Rashi - And if you do not hearken to Me: To toil in Torah and to be knowledgeable of the exegeses of the sages: One might presume [that these words refer to failure] to fulfill the commandments. When the verse says ‘and you do not perform, etc.’ [failure of] fulfillment of the commandments is [already] indicated. So, how am I to maintain ‘And if you do not hearken to me’? To toil in Torah. We now have a clear definition of a non-chareidi: A non-chareidi [Orthodox Jew] is one who does not toil in Torah even though he observes the commandments. Rashi says later in the verse - And you do not perform: Once one does not study one does not perform. Here there are two transgressions. In geometry they say that two points determine a line. Rashi continues: And if in My statutes you will display loathing: Loathe others who perform. And if your souls will repulse My judgments: Hate the sages. To desist from performing: Prevent others from performing. All of My commandments: Deny that I have commanded them. For you to nullify My covenant: Deny the main concept [that G-d is Master of the world]. Rashi concludes: Here there are seven transgressions, the first one draws in the second one and so on until the seventh. And these are they: Does not study; does not perform; loathes others who perform; despises the sages; prevents others

8

One Above and Seven Below from performing; denounces the commandments; denounces the main concept.

In the original draft of this chapter I wrote the following (somewhat blasphemous) words: G-d the Father has divided his people into two camps: Camp A - the camp that is buying the benefits package. Camp B - the camp that is rejecting the benefits package and exposing themselves to ‘chance’ misfortune. When I reviewed these lines I realized that they are wrong. G-d did not divide his people into two camps. Never did. Never will. We are and will remain one camp until the end of days. What is more accurate is the analogy that the Baalei Mussar (Masters of Ethical Jewish thought) relate: G-d the Father is offering us tickets to one of two destinations - the Bracha (Blessing) to the Port of Life and the Kelala (Curse) to the Port of Death. The tricky part is that we are all on one boat. The boat will dock at both ports. Every individual will disembark at his or her proper destination port. The question is: what kind of journey will be collectively endured by all of the passengers on the entire boat? Will it be a pleasant peaceful luxurious journey? Will it be a stormy, wavy, frightening experience fraught with trepidation and seasickness? Will they be attacked by pirates or held up at foreign ports by the authorities? Will it be a quick voyage or a long roundabout ordeal? Most important, to which port does it arrive first? I suppose, since we are all in one boat, it would depend on how many people hold tickets to Port A versus how many to Port B. I realize that I am getting a bit carried away. The purpose of this chapter (and, indeed, of this book) is not to preach to anybody but to define what is a chareidi and what is not. Let us return to the main discussion and rewrite the ‘blasphemous’ lines. We have divided ourselves into two camps: Camp A (Camp Bracha) - the camp that is buying the benefits package, i.e., the Bracha ticket and encouraging the Captain to sail the entire ship on a straight course to ‘Paradise Island’. Camp B (Camp Kelala) - the camp that is rejecting the benefits package, i.e., buying the Kelala ticket, and exposing all of us to ‘chance’ misfortune.7 It is Camp A, Camp Bracha, that I am calling the chareidi camp. Camp B, the 7

See Rashi’s commentary on Leviticus 26:37 s.v. V’Kashlu

One Above and Seven Below

9

non-chareidi camp. From Rashi we understand that members of Camp Bracha meet a single (albeit multi-faceted) definition: 1. Those who perform the commandments along with toil in Torah [study]. The members of Camp Kelala comprise seven levels: 1. Those that perform the commandments but do not toil in Torah.8 2. Those that do not perform the commandments. 3. Those who display loathing commandments.

toward

those

who

perform the

4. Those who despise the sages - i.e., rabbis and teachers. 5. Those who prevent others from performing the commandments. 6. Those who denounce the commandments. 7. Those who denounce the oneness, omnipotence, majesty, and sovereignty of G-d. In other words, G-d has drawn a red line. Above the red line is a list of those who are in the category of “If you are to walk within my statutes…” One entry. Below the red line is a list of those who are in the category of “And if you do not hearken to me…” Seven entries. One above and seven below. The red line seems to be very thin. There is no twilight zone or no-man’s land.9 One must belong to one camp or the other. This is to say that there are seven levels of non-chareidis. Only the first level (that does perform commandments) can be considered Orthodox. Granted that a Level 1 non-chareidi is not a Level 3 non-chareidi who is not a Level 5 non-chareidi who is not a Level 7 non-chareidi. (I know that I skipped a few.) 8

Rashi (Leviticus 26:14 s.v. V’Im) qualifies this to mean “one who acknowledges his master and conspires to rebel.” I am not sure what constitutes “one who acknowledges his master” but my assumption is that this would refer to anybody with an Orthodox education. 9 See Yalkut Shimoni Leviticus 26 Article 671: The Yalkut asks why the Torah must elaborate both sides of the contract, i.e., “if you hearken” and “if you do not hearken”, is it not sufficient to state the positive side and we can deduce the inverse? The Yalkut continues that according to Rabbi Meir who consistently maintains that all contracts require duplex stipulations, this question is irrelevant. However, according to Rabbi Chanina ben Gamliel who maintains that for all contracts we can deduce the negative from the positive (and vice versa) the question stands. The Yalkut answers that according to Rabbi Chanina the negative side must be stipulated so that one will not say, “If I observe the commandments, I will be blessed and, if I do not observe them, I will not be blessed nor will I be cursed.” Thus the scripture must elaborate that to neglect to fulfill the stipulation for blessing is equivalent to fulfilling the stipulation for the curse. There is no neutral.

10

One Above and Seven Below

It is also obvious from the scriptures that the brunt of the Tochacha10 is reserved for the sin of idol worship, i.e., the lowest extremes of the seven below. Nevertheless, it is clear from Rashi that one who stands at any of these levels is in danger of descending all the way down to Level 7. Though many individuals have the strength to resist deteriorating to lower levels, the danger passes to subsequent generations.11 12 At this stage, I can present a more complete definition of a chareidi (albeit, not the final one13): A chareidi is one who believes that success in life can only be achieved by observing the commandments and toiling in Torah. Any activities that do not concur with these are subject to happenstance and hold little chance of success. I am more than happy to assume all the credit – and the blame – for this definition; but I cannot. This is not really my definition. This is the prophet Isaiah’s definition. It must be so because it’s what G-d wants. G-d tells us so Himself in Leviticus, Chapter 26. Am I sure this is what He means? Sure I am. Rashi says so. 10

Literally: Admonition. The colloquial term for the warnings and curses in Leviticus 26. This seems to be the message of the verse in Deuteronomy (30:19): “I am assigning as my witnesses in [regard to] you today the Heavens and the Earth [that they may attest to such that] the [gift of] life and the [punishment of] death I have placed before you, the blessing and the curse; and you shall choose in life, so that you may live, you and your offspring.” See Klei Yakar ibid. 12 Although, for my purposes, the One Above and Seven Below is the most suitable model for portraying this factionalism in Judaism, , there are yet other, more prevalent models. One of the most popular of which is that of the four sons that are discussed in the Haggadah of Passover. The conventional interpretation portrays them as four brothers of one household. I have seen a more profound interpretation that they are actually portraying the decay of ensuing generations. Thus, the grand patriarch is the tzaddik who performs the Passover service meticulously. The son of the first generation is the chacham. He is wise but not a complete tzaddik. Though he strives to emulate his father and inquires sincerely as to the rituals and he fulfills them, this fulfillment is lacking in full conviction. The son of the chacham is the rasha (wicked son). He observes his father and grandfather performing the Passover service but he senses that his father, the chacham, is acting more out of tradition than faith. As one of even less faith, he refuses even to buy into the tradition. He is aware of the service but he doesn’t bother to transmit the tradition down to his son, the tam, who consequently remains simple and unlearned. Still, the tam observes his grandfather, the chacham, performing the Passover service, thus he is aware that there is a tradition that was not taught to him, so he inquires, “What is this?”. His son, the fourth generation, has no knowledge of any tradition as even his grandfather, the rasha, does not perform the service. Thereupon, the only remedy is for the community to indoctrinate him from scratch. 13 We will not reach that plateau until the end of Chapter 2. Please bear with me. 11