Snakes: A Counter-Response

Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz of "Breaking Israel News" recently responded to my article “Snakes in The Vineyard” with an article of his own. While I appreciate his ability to address these contentious issues without resorting to defamation, Adam is wrong on this issue. Hayovel is indeed a missionary organization. My response is featured in The Jewish Press: Snakes: A Counter-Response

• The original article:Snakes In The Vineyard

Snakes In The Grass

My latest post on the insidious missionary organization Hayovel, who slither through the fields of the Shomron region thanks to the support of religious Jews. Today's focus is the unscrupulous Jewish vintners who sell out Am Yisrael for greed. It is a veritable horror story but it is true.

Be careful which Israeli wines you purchase. Any vintner who uses xtian labor should be boycotted as far as I'm concerned. We should all make an effort to support those Jews who resist the economic temptation of "free labor". "Snakes In The Vineyard" is now featured in The Jewish Press: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/fuchs-focus/snakes-in-the-vineyard/2017/08/07/

Preemptive Attack Or Premature Burial

Video by JerusalemOnline

Originally posted in The Jewish Press: Preemptive Attack Or Premature Burial

Monstrous video footage from Yavne, where an Arab savage repeatedly attacked a Jewish worker with a knife in the middle of a supermarket. The victim remains in serious condition. All Arabs have access to knives, and you don't need a combat knife to attack someone. Basic kitchen implements. They all have them. It all begins with awareness. Basic awareness, and a head that perceives one's surroundings. I am reposting a piece I write a little while back, in response to a renewed series of Arab knife attacks on Jews. Be safe! http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/fuchs-focus/pre-emptive-attack-or-premature-burial/2017/02/13/

Painted In Blood

Reflections on the recent terror attack where an Arab savage murdered three Jews in Halamish. Now featured in The Jewish Press: Painted In Blood

May Hashem avenge their blood! And may the creature who murdered them be beaten to death in his hospital bed.

Reform's Naked Agenda

Reflections on the recent controversy relating to the issue of egalitarian prayer at the Western Wall. Now featured in The Jewish Press in my column "Fuchs Focus". Find out a true Torah perspective on this issue: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/fuchs-focus/reforms-naked-agenda/2017/07/10/

The New Peace Movements

My reflections on a pernicious movement coming from the camps of Jewish indigenous rights activists.
Download File

We Are Not Indigenous

Featured in "The Jewish Press"

“When G-d began to create heaven and earth.” (Genesis 1:1)

“Abram passed through the land as far as the site of Shechem, at the terebinth of Moreh. the Canaanites were then the land. The L-rd appeared to Abram and said, “I will assign this land to your offspring”. And he built an altar there to the L-rd who had appeared to him.” (Genesis 12:6-7) - JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh

When it comes to serious Jewish matters, I have zero patience for stupidity. When “hasbara” (public relation) champions celebrate nonsense to curry favor with any group of non-Jews feigning friendship, it strikes a visceral cord. The Jewish failure to act logically and behave with self-respect is an affront to Torah. We cannot defeat the Arabs if we cannot understand what it is to be Jewish, or to appreciate what our correct reason for being is based upon.

The Indigenous Rights Movement

One of the more troubling fads of late is the hasbara version of the “indigenous rights” movement, which posits that Eretz Yisrael belongs to us Jews because we are somehow indigenous to the region. (What region, you may ask? The Levant? The Fertile Crescent?) Jews did not arrive at this novel notion by themselves, since those advocating for indigenous “rights” are generally activists and leftists who hate Jews and eagerly defend Arabs as supposed victims of Jewish aggression and Zionist imperialism. To date, the majority of such groups side with the Arabs. Only recently, have we seen the phenomenon where a handful of lone individuals representing “indigenous peoples” aligned themselves with popular hasbara movements.

Contrary to the assertions of many popular online “hasbara” champions, we Jews are NOT “indigenous” to Eretz Yisrael. An honest analysis of the term (always defined by those advocating for such a concept) reveals that to the extent that a definition of “indigenous” could theoretically apply to Jews, it could surely also apply towards other groups, including Arabs.

What is indigenous? The problem with defining the term is that those who advocate for indigenous rights created the definitions. They set down the definitions as divine revelations whose tenets are infallible. They tell us what indigenous means as it relates to their personal beliefs. Many Native Americans (indeed most) who advocate for “Palestinians” will interpret it one way to include Arabs. One particular prominent pro-Israel and “indigenous rights” activist, Ryan Bellerose, a self-identified Metis from Paddle Prairie Settlement in Canada, maintains the opposite. He asserts that Jews are indigenous, while Arabs are not. In any event, in his article, “Israel Palestine: Who’s indigenous?” Ryan sets down his accepted criteria for being an indigenous people:

“To begin, let us acknowledge that there is no rule that a land can have only one indigenous people; it is not a zero sum game in which one group must be considered indigenous so that therefore another is not. However, there is a very clear guideline to being an indigenous people. It is somewhat complex but can be boiled down to the checklist below, as developed by anthropologist José R. Martínez-Cobo (former special rapporteur of the Sub-commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities for the United Nations).”

Further on, Mr. Bellerose continues:

“Martinez-Cobo’s research suggests that indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.

This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:

·        Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them

·        Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands

·        Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.)

·        Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language)

·        Residence in certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world

·        Religion that places importance on spiritual ties to the ancestral lands

·        Blood quantum – that is, the amount of blood you carry of a specific people to identify as that people. The concept was developed by colonialists in order to eventually breed out native peoples.”

Frankly, I am not interested in this general discussion since I cannot concern myself with the issues of the “indigenous peoples” of the world. Furthermore, the pseudo-academic ramblings of some leftist sociologist who writes statements for the United Nations has no bearing on my beliefs. Nor are they relevant to Jewish concerns. From a Torah perspective, the Arabs have no rights to Eretz Yisrael, nor do any non-Jews, even among the most noble and righteous of them. Mr. Bellerose is willing to grant Arabs “rights of longstanding presence.” I am not. Because the Rambam and the classical rishonim and acharonim say differently.

Fortunately, such concepts are both irrelevant and unnecessary for Jews who follow Torah. Eretz Yisrael belongs to us Jews exclusively, for one simple reason: G-d gave it to us. From a Torah perspective, the false claims of other groups who argue likewise are irrelevant, since their ideologies arose long after G-d revealed Divine truths at Mount Sinai.

Yet the indigenous rights movement as it relates to Jews is not only foolish, it is dangerous, since even the most well intended advocates harbor un-Jewish notions far removed from Torah values. They have become spokespersons for Jewish values, when their ideas are antithetical to Torah. They would like to see indigenous rights applied to other groups in Israel, not just Jews. From the Torah perspective, this is entirely incompatible with Halacha. Whether advocating for a purely secular Israel, or a pluralistic Israel allowing equal rights to all faith communities, none of these are in accordance with Halacha.

On a more troubling note, some of these indigenous rights activists have alliances and friendships with missionary groups and prominent messianic personalities. On their trips to Israel and across the U.S., they often meet and greet these individuals, and in doing so, betray that they are not people who have our best interest at heart. They are not a monolithic entity, yet it is fair to say that these activists all have their own agendas. Many sensible Jews support their campaigns, and the dangerous claim that our right to Eretz Yisrael is, at the very least, partially due to indigenous rights.

Racial Nonsense

“Indigenous rights” is a multicultural strain of thinking that ironically many normal Jews who usually reject such notions accept without question. They accept the definitions of indigenous activists, which always remain vague enough to avoid scrutiny, and are imbued with the kinds of racist, blood-based theories that would be rejected outright if suggested by any mainstream group. Anyone who cites “blood quantum” in any context, other than to provide a blood transfusion should trouble us. Such ideas certainly have no basis in Torah. Yet in this case, since a handful of activists are willing to apply this exotic term to Jews, many hasbara types enjoy the prospect of appearing native.

Historical Difficulties

“Most writers on American Indian subjects are bothered by changing intellectual trends and fashions, which dictate new mythologies. Anglo-Americans, above all, have been troubled by guilt feelings, morality, and hypocrisy, whether direct or in reverse. Any ideology tends to obscure perspectives and reality.” (Comanches: History of A People, Fehrenbach, T.R. Preface xiv)

“Every, as the lords of the conquered Mexica admitted to Cortez, it was the way of life for men to seize new lands with shield and spear. The Amerindian world of North America was rent with ancient festering hatreds. (ibid. 25)

Consider the situation with Amerindians in North America. Contrary to the tenets of politically correct history, the notion of indigenous rights as it is often applied to them is historically problematic. Never one to take unbridled political correctness sitting down, I reject the contemporary portrayal of all “native Americans” as peaceful environmentalists. Savagery was not the sole domain of “the white man,” since long before there were white men on the continent, Native Americans butchered one another. The archeological records attest to this fact; they expelled and killed one another.

As an example, one can look at the histories of the migration of Native American whose peoples originated in Asia and migrated towards North America. Given the origins of their people, the following questions are surely reasonable:

Ø  Did such people abandon their indigenous status to their original lands when they migrated? Did they retain indigenous statuses in both regions?

Ø  What is the indigenous natures of tribes who displaced and exterminated other tribes from different regions during the many brutal campaigns of warfare that tribal people’s engaged in with other Native Americans?

Ø  In the case of American Indians who earned indigenous claims through blood and warfare towards other tribes, might Europeans who came to North America not make the same claims? Those who came later simply bested those who lacked better weapons and resources. (I state simply in the interest of theoretical discussion, without opining on nuances of the morality of the overall conflict.)

Those activists who argue for Jewish indigenous rights ignore the historical record conveyed in the Torah of indigenous “First Nation” people who fell under our sword. Non-believers may question the authenticity of the biblical account, but even a bible denier cannot reject the historical record. They were here first. Most honest Native Americans see parallels with Jews who entered “Canaan” with colonizing Europeans, who “stole land” from the Indians.

From a Jewish perspective, the notion of a blood-based identity is an affront to Judaism, which accepts the genuine convert. Our connection to Torah is based upon adherence to the law rather than imagined notion of race. In a sense, the Jewish desire to argue “indigenous rights” is a reaction formation to absurd Arab assertions that they are the descendants of Canaanites.

G-d gave us the land of Israel, despite the presence of “indigenous” peoples who were there long before us. It did not matter, since The Almighty created everything. Upon entering the land, our mandate was clear. Clean the land of the “indigenous” inhabitants.

I understand that many secular Jews are uncomfortable with religious claims that contradict their worldview. I disagree with them, but I understand where they are coming from. In the absence of Torah knowledge, religious claims are meaningless. What I cannot fathom is that so many religious Jews latch on to un-Jewish theories to justify our Divine inheritance. I do not require an indigenous claim. I have the same claim that motivated the great Joshua to conquer Eretz Yisrael from the pagan Canaanites who were already residing there when we Jews first arrived.

We Jews are not Philistines, Canaanites, nor Jebusites. We were the conquerors of the former on a Divine mission. Indeed, our failure to purge Eretz Yisrael of these indigenous types is something the Torah repeatedly warned about, and is the direct cause of the land vomiting us out. Divine rights are the only arguments that have any meaning to me as a religious Jew.

A self-respecting Jew need never be ashamed to speak the truth of Tanach, which records our only true claim to Israel. Balfour Declarations and U.N. votes are of zero worth for the Torah Jew. A disconnected Jew may be ashamed of the religious claim. A genuine tragedy, since it is the only moral claim we Jews can hang our hats on. In the absence of that, we are merely one more example of colonizers who claimed a plot of land.

Indigenous Definitions

Perhaps the greatest response to Ryan Bellerose relates to the dilemma he raises at the conclusion of his article, “Israel Palestine: Who’s Indigenous?”:

“Now you might ask, why is this important? It is important to indigenous people because we cannot allow the argument that conquerors can become indigenous. If we, as other indigenous people, allow that argument to be made, then we are delegitimizing our own rights.

If conquerors can become indigenous, then the white Europeans who came to my indigenous lands in North America could now claim to be indigenous. The white Europeans who went to Australia and New Zealand could now claim to be indigenous. If we, even once, allow that argument to be made, indigenous rights are suddenly devalued and meaningless. This is somewhat peculiar, as those who are arguing for Palestinian “indigenous rights” are usually those who have little grasp of the history, and no understanding of the truth behind indigenous rights.”

Those Troublesome Canaanites
Therein is our Jewish answer. Based upon our biblical claims, we Jews cannot be indigenous, since we conquered the Canaanites. According to Bellerose’s definition, our Jewish biblical account renders us as conquerors. As such, those who believe in Torah cannot subscribe to his theories. Advocates for indigenous Jews can never answer these questions. What do we do with the Canaanites? Perhaps a better question is, what did we do, or what should we have done to the Canaanites?

The great biblical and talmudic commentator Rashi destroys the “indigenous rights argument” with his commentary on the first verse in the Book of Genesis. He cites Rabbi Yitzchak who questioned why the Torah began in this manner detailing creation rather than from the first mitzvah. This would make sense since the Torah essentially deals with Halacha. He answers that the Torah began with creation so that the nations in the future when they pointed out our conquest of the 7 Nations, the Jewish people could answer that the whole world belongs to Hashem. He can give it to whichever people He desires. At the time, he saw fit to give it to the Canaanites, and then he removed it from their control and gave it to us.

Case closed. The indigenous argument loses.

From a Torah perspective, the notion that we Jews have a claim to Eretz Yisrael based upon “indigenous rights” is absurd. We are not "indigenous" to Israel. Indigenous is a nonsense term which race obsessed multiculturalists use. Israel belongs to the Jewish nation, because G-d gave it to us. We conquered the Canaanites, and now it is ours. Our claim to Eretz Yisrael is Divine inheritance. Indigenous claims amount to pseudo-science, which in turn, would grant indigenous rights to practically every other minority group living in Israel today. In fact, this is the intention of many who advocate for such a concept.

Fellow Jews: leave the indigenous argument where it belongs. In the halls of the U.N. G-d gave us the land of Israel and that is enough.

Dhimmi Netanyahu

Originally featured in The Jewish Press:  Dhimmi Netanyahu

“We saw the Nephilim there-the Anakites are part of the Nephilim- and we looked like grasshoppers to ourselves, and so we must have looked to them.” (Numbers 13:33) JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh

I didn't make aliyah to become a grasshopper or to live in a society of Jewish grasshoppers. I see no such reflection when I peer in the mirror. Baruch Hashem, I don't suffer from this complex which plagued too many Jews throughout history. But I can't speak for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, since his actions suggest that he very well may see this winged creature whenever he looks at his visage. How else can we explain the incomprehensible fact of a prime minister placing the status of the dhimmi upon his own people?

Nothing ever changes in Israel. Wars are always fought, or not fought, in the same impotent manner. And so it shouldn't surprise us that Netanyahu debased himself (yet again) before the make-belief “king” of Jordan, by maintaining the degrading status quo on the Temple Mount which prohibits Jews from praying. This insanity began long ago during the Six Day War, when Moshe Dayan returned a Divine gift by refusing to destroy the Dome of the Rock, Al Aqsa, and all vestiges of Islam's sovereignty. To compound his sin, Dayan gave the mufti custody of the Mount. His shameful act became Israel's de facto national policy on Har Habayit. We won the war;the mufti retained control of our sacred site. Today, the Jordanian Waqf reigns supreme. And Israel continues to take marching orders from Jordan. Even in the midst of the latest intifada for which Jordan blames Israel, Netanyahu had the audacity to utter the following:

“We respect the importance of the special role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, as reflected in the 1994 peace treaty between Jordan and Israel, and the historical role of King Abdullah II.

Israel will continue to enforce its longstanding policy: Muslims pray on the Temple Mount; non-Muslims visit the Temple Mount.”

We? Speak for yourself Bibi. No self-respecting Jew believes this garbage. A rudimentary look at history reveals what the “moderate” Jordanians did to our synagogues and cemeteries when they occupied Jerusalem. Stables. Latrines. They defiled our holy places, and debased our resting places.

How tragically ironic, that while it may be unsafe to do so, Jews can legally pray in the streets of Germany, Spain, or France. Wherever Jews legally reside, they are permitted to pray. Ironically, it is only in Israel that there are restrictions on Jewish prayer.

On Judaism's most sacred site where two Jewish Temples stood, the state of Israel forbids Jewish prayer. Ishmalite enemies caterwaul to their blood deity. They shout at Jews, harass them, spit and beat upon them, yet  the Jew cannot pray or even make a blessing on a cup of water.  The Arabs destroy precious artifacts from atop the Mount, in a crude attempt to remove any vestige of Jewish identity. They can hurl stones on the heads of the groveling Jews below who are satisfied with retaining Herod's retaining wall. Sometimes, Arabs even spill acid on the heads of Jews, another horror which the media never reports.

Jewish Prayer

I want to emphasize that I am speaking solely of the right of Jewish prayer, since halacha cannot permit christian prayer on The Temple Mount. The oft distorted argument by certain activists (who crave interfaith alliances) that the Temple will be “a house of prayer for all nations” speaks of righteous gentiles worshiping the One True Creator. We only lose, if in order to defeat the Arab predators, we compromise basic halachic tenets on the altar of a false hashkafa. The halacha is clear in permitting righteous gentiles access within the Torah framework. Nothing more needs to be said.

As far as  those timid sorts, rabbis and laity, who try to solidify their preferred halachic position by noting that Jews who go up incite Arabs, these frightened nebs need to leave the shtetl. If they oppose ascending the Mount on halachic grounds then they should argue their position solely within that context. Unless of course they follow a Satmar-esque philosophy, in which they should be inellectually honest and refrain from even visiting Israel until the Moshiach arrives riding atop a griffin vulture. In Judaism, we don't rely on miracles. So if the state per-say is a sin, one who visits Israel relies on the security of the IDF.

Without belaboring the point, there are legitimate halachic positions which permit a person to ascend and visit certain areas. Naturally, since most people are not expert on such matters they require the aid of a learned man. All sides need to respect the halacha. And the oft mentioned argument that we are speaking of matters of karet is a false one. No one would argue that one Rav may render a different p'sak than another on a given question pertaining to the laws of niddah (ritual purity). Also an issue of karet (an act punishable by spiritual excision), and yet two equally respected men of Torah may arrive at two different conclusions. “Elu V'elu.....”

Bibi The Dhimmi

Jews always lived as dhimmis under Islam. It wasn't pleasant. The myth of Jews living well in Muslim countries is a liberal fairy tale. Yet these same lovers of fantasy cannot explain why nearly a  million Jews from Muslim/Arab countries fled their places of birth, to migrate to Israel. The reason is simple: it sucked to live with these people. Even the “good times” were terrible. Many scholars have exposed the reality of being a dhimmi. At the end of the day, Jews and other dhimmis faced daily debasement. Violence. Theft. Murder. Sexual assault. Over-taxation. Injustice. A life of shame and debasement.

And there was no recourse for justice, since a dhimmi's word was useless against a Muslim's.

The dhimmitude continues today in Israel. In the sovereign state of Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu placed the yoke of the dhimmi on our necks. All in the name of maintaining the unacceptable statu quo toward the same Islamic Amalekites who defiled our synagogues and graveyards when Jerusalem was under Jordanian occupation.

After this latest disgraceful display of Jewish weakness, how can any Jew with a vertebrae still support Netanyahu? After two thousand years of being grasshoppers, how can the leader of modern state of Israel debase himself time and time again in the manner of the original meraglim?

Today we live as dhimmis in Israel. Not only will the country not protect us adequately, they deny us the right to defend ourselves. Draconian gun laws permit only elitists to arm themselves. The rest of us are entitled to pepper spray; not to use it mind you. We are told that we cannot carry flags in some areas. We cannot drive in other areas, lest Fatah gun us down. We cannot legally vote for a candidate who wants to throw Arabs out. And we cannot pray atop Har Habayit. Self-debasement is the spine of our countries superstructure.

Those who ascend Har Habayit halachically generally do so with dignity. By merely ascending, they strengthen our ownership. The important thing is not to ascend as a dhimmi. There are opportunities to elevate the kiddush Hashem in some capacity. An added display of Jewish strength. Remember: silence is not golden atop Har Habayit. Any opportunity to recite a Jewish prayer: a blessing over a glass of water, or something else, is an opportunity to contest Bibi's status quo on the greatest stage. And lest we forget, there will now be video cameras. How ironic that an unacceptable concession to antisemites can now become a magnificent tool to publicize Kiddush Hashem.

The time for Kiddush Hashem is now.

The Real Lynching

A version of this article was featured in The Jewish Press on October 22, 2015: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/fuchs-focus/the-real-lynching/2015/10/22/

There was another terror attack the other day. Another Jewish soldier, Sergeant Omri Levy (may G-d avenge his blood!) was killed by an Arab. A Bedouin Arab, one of Israel's supposed “good” Arabs murdered a Jewish soldier, Sergeant Omri Levi (may G-d avenge his blood!) and wounded several others before being put down by police. (It's time to put the terribly popular myth of good Bedouins to rest. See “The Looming Bedouin Intifada”.) And lest Jews start feeling good about the security of their particular section of the country, this attack occurred in the central bus station of Beersheba. A place many believe too remote and unimportant to be affected by urban Arab terror. In truth, there are no safe places in a country where angry Arabs have access to knives, cars, stones, and guns. They have the weapons and they have the intent.

Another Blood Libel: Allegations of a “Lynching”

The hallmark of too many liberals today on both sides of the Atlantic is that they seize any tragedy to exploit it. During the terror attack, there was another tragedy. During the chaos, police shot an Eritrean man, mistakenly believing him to be a terrorist, and in the aftermath, a crowd of angry Jews beat him. After the man eventually succumbed to his wounds, the Israeli Press smelled blood.

Jew-haters never miss an opportunity to demonize us, either with pornographic Arab allegations of organ harvesting and blood drinking, or the more cleverly crafted western libels who commit the same sin, but with the polish of pseudo-journalism. A rudimentary perusal of the most recent blood libel against Jews and Israel reveals a terrible horror, which one necessarily expects in Israel. The grotesque charge of the willful lynching of a black man, propagated by the judenrats of Haaretz, Ynet, and other perverse publications. The anti-Semitic non-Jewish papers naturally ran with it, noting that “many Israelis are referring to it as a lynching.” The same judenrats who make careers out of demonizing “settlers” while sanitizing terrorists, these same reprehensible types were the first to throw Jews into the fire. And once it was out there, the Jew-haters fed.

The shrill voices. The cacophony of blood libels and charges of racism. And then we heard the word. Lynching. Another thing entirely. Lynching. A word which conjures up those terrible silent black and white images of hundreds of thousands of blacks lynched by lawless white mobs during and after reconstruction in America's south. The murder and maiming of innocents who often committed no crime at all. In this case as the libel went, the alleged lynching had something to do with this man's skin color. Imagine how sick a person would have to be to associate this as the cause, and not a situation where a terrorist started stabbing people. This was an obvious error, but it didn't matter. The Israeli media already had their story. “Black man lynched to death by irate Jews.”

Yet in this instance, as in so many others, the murder of a Jew by a Bedouin assassin was the second story. On the first stage, the journalists of Haaretz, Ynet, and numerous other rags which often mirror the perverseness of Der Sturmer (but without the pictures), performed a secular Passion Play for the eager audiences of the world.

While the assumption that the beating MIGHT have contributed to his death is in theory a reasonable one, the deliberate mischaracterization of the incident as one of racism and willful malice is not. Here's the latest news. There is now forensic evidence that the initial shooting was the cause of death. So much for the forensic experts of Haaretz: Read the full “The Jewish Press” article here.

Critical Point #1: This was an unfortunate accident to be sure, but it was an accident nonetheless. Unlike our pathetic Prime Minister eagerly jumped on the bandwagon to attack “vigilantism” I'm not going to condemn the actions of a crowd burning with righteous indignation and the desire to destroy a wounded Arab terrorist on the floor. If Israel had sanity, the police and military would shoot all wounded terrorists with three slugs in the head as standard protocol. In my personal opinion, in the the absence of such sane measures to deal with Arab Nazis, I am all for the police stepping back and allowing a Jewish mob to destroy a wounded Amalekite. The intention of the crowd was to kill a terrorist. In this case, a wounded man shot by police was viewed by the crowd as a terrorist to be terminated. This doesn't detract from the tragedy of an innocent man being killed. Terrible mistakes happen when the sky starts to fall. The most trained security forces in the world often make such mistakes.

Lynching? Lynching implies malice. Racism. Hatred. There are indeed lynchings in Israel, practically every day now. Lynchings of Jews by Arabs who tear Jews limb from limb and rip out their vitals. Never forget the lynching of two Jewish reservists by ordinary Palestinians and police officers in Ramallah some years back. The daily stabbings, stonings, riots, shootings, and the ever popular Arab sport of running Jews over with the family car. These are all lynchings. A Jew in East Jerusalem can be lynched if he makes one wrong turn with his car.

There are lynchings in Israel. Lynchings of babies, and women , and fathers, infants still nursing, tiny children. No Jew is safe from the Arab hatchet. And in addition to the physical lynchings, Israel gets hammered again by the world, the Jew hating pundits, politicians, and populations who see the modern state of Israel as a Jewish cabal of murder and malice. Of course the worst arrows are the ones shot from within the vamp, bu those who insist in shooting other Jews in the back. If Haaretz will write it, The Guardian will certainly print it. The enemy within is always the worst. In the interest of full disclosure, Arutz Sheva even erred in jumping on the phrase and including it's usage in their articles. Shame on them.

The lynchings in Israel happen every damn day. Jewish blood is cheaper than water, and even in the rainy seasons, Jewish blood flows more copiously. And after all these lynchings Israel gets it again on the international stage. The greatest crime of all, is that the pervayors of this filth come from within our own tribe.

What a crazy people we are. Arabs kill Jews because Jews lack the fortitude and wisdom to throw them out. Terror persists because the government refuses to protect the people. And when an angry Jewish mob, sick of being killed in their own country, react as any normal group would be when faced with a captured murderer, the self-haters of Israel turn the story on its head and exploit a tragedy, to argue that it was a willful malevolent example of racist violence. Of course, these are the same ivory tower types who defend the mass infiltration of illegal aliens from Africa. As they see it, why not accuse Jews of lynching if it opens the doors for the Sudanese and Eritreans?

If Benjamin Netanyahu doesn't like civil unrest, let him do his job and protect Jewish lives. In the absence of that, he should silence himself and refrain from attacking the few normal people who react with righteous indignation and zeal when Jews are killed.

Mistreating Men, Trusting Man: Impediments To True Repentance

Elul is upon us, and with it comes the requisite obligation to engage in the process of “teshuva gemura,” the highest most comprehensive form of repentance. In this period of the coming Yomim Noraim (“High Holidays”) the severe and somber concept of Divine judgment is fused with the joy afforded us by this unique opportunity. It is the season for the most efficacious form of personal and national repentance, and we Jews have supreme confidence that we can obtain it.

The ability of man to spiritually elevate himself has its price: the ever present potential for spiritual degradation. Unlike the animals who are expressions of instinct, man can degrade himself to a status lower than an animal whose life is dictated by biology. Sin is a reality, and Judaism has a specific formula for avoiding it, including the mechanisms of preventing sin, and the opportunity to return from it.

Judaism has an essentially positive approach to man’s spiritual development. The fundamental belief that given a proper healthy nurturing environment, a life of Halacha will articulate the best in man, while restraining and containing the negative. At its core, Judaism rejects the deterministic outlook of another faith system which deems man sinful from birth. Christianity is premised on the negative belief that man cannot perfect himself, and the solution proposed was contrary to everything that Judaism believes in, including the most fundamental beliefs relating to the one true Creator, Hashem. Idolatry became the mechanism for repentance. Like the former, Islam also rejects personal perfection, and instead glorifies the attribute of subjugation, cruelty, and coercion. Subjugation via the sword negates the basic Jewish tenet of free will.

The correct system of repentance is contingent upon one’s personal belief in the overall system which encompasses biblical and rabbinic prohibitions and positive injunctions. A breakdown of commandments relating to man and The Almighty, and those between man and man.
 I would like to share a few thoughts on the latter category, since there is a tendency for many to define their religiosity with actions relating to our Maker, while sometimes neglecting issues related to man. The Almighty is all merciful and in many ways teshuva with our Creator is an easier process than the tedious task of repairing a wrong with one’s fellow man.

Man vs. Man 
“Ahavas Yisroel, jackass!” The words I hollered at a Jewish driver some 17 years ago, when this allegedly religious miscreant nearly ran me over with his station wagon. Evidently, he wanted to arrive in shul before borchu to pray maariv (the evening prayer service). The absurd irony of a man who would run over someone to pray to G-d! This episode, though humorous now, conveys for me a prime example of this fundamental problem, when man’s obsession with matters between man and G-d, comes at the expense of normal relations with other people. I see this as a tragically dominant phenomenon in many circles, where people place extraordinary emphasis on ritualistic matters of man and G-d, while sometimes neglecting and abrogating those mitzvoth relating “bain adam la’chaveiro,” between man and man.

A Torah life. Here we have a semantic and a label that all too often is misapplied. Identifying with and accepting the divinity of Torah is surely one way of defining who is religious, particularly when the individual subscribes to the “big three.” Yet if one’s flawed behavior is manifest to the public, in the form of theft/dishonesty, cruelty to others, aggression can one be truly deemed “frum”? Can an obsessive adherence to matters between man and G-d while simultaneously abusing and mistreating his fellow Jew be a truly religious person?

I am not Heaven forbid discouraging or minimizing the importance of fulfilling those mitzvoth relating to matters between G-d and man. I am stating that a fixation with the former sometimes results in undermining those issues relating to man and his fellow man, which by its very definition, expose the fact that one is greatly lacking in all matters of observance, including those with his beloved Creator.

Flawed Figures: Reflections on Disgraced Torah Leaders 
The most tragic examples of this tendency are found when people representing Torah betray the system, since while man sometimes has the tendency to mistreat his fellow man, he has the ironic tendency to sometimes idolize specific men. In such instances, the chillul Hashem is even greater, since the damage to the Jewish community irreparable. The system is ruptured when men who are supposed to lead, teach, and embody Torah fall on their faces before our eyes. Ironically, even as we sometimes sacrifice our obligations to our fellow men, the tendency to elevate individual men to such high standards allows for the potential for devastation when they betray the system.

It matters not whether these religious men are “our rabbis.” While the greatest examples of this can sometimes be seen in the popular cult of the “tsaddik” who is sometimes the antithesis of the true man of Torah, the individuals needn’t rise to this level of worship. To the extent that they represent some faction of Torah based Jewry, the damage affects us all, when the Torah is disgraced in front of the world.

All too often today, we read horrific stories where purported men of Torah took advantage of vulnerable people and preyed upon them sexually. From a psychological perspective, it is only natural for the victims of abuse, (and abuse manifests itself in many ways), to abandon Judaism after a negative experience, particularly when they believe that there were other parties involved that enabled the abuse. It’s sad to see people lose faith in Torah. Yet too often Judaism is judged by the practitioner rather than the system. The inherent dangers to the system are manifest when this becomes the anchor for one’s faith. And it’s not only the extreme case of sexual abuse which tests men. Lesser offenses also present Torah as a flawed system, though the desire to see it as such is naturally based upon emotional reactions and betrayed expectations, rather than the perfect rational system of Torah itself.

Several months back, we had the chillul Hashem of a prominent American rabbi, who was found guilty of a crime of moral perversion. Fortunately, the disgraced sexual “rodef” was convicted and sentenced to six years in jail, which although a ridiculously inadequate punishment, will hopefully keep him away from people for many years. And prison is no cake-walk for sex offenders, so the opportunities for additional punishments in prison certainly exist.  Here was a man heading a prestigious Washington synagogue, a scholar in Torah, an academic, a supposed voice of moral reason. He sat on prominent rabbinical boards in high positions. And nevertheless, he undid himself after what must have been a protracted period of idealization of sin followed by comprehensive steps to actualize his thoughts. His actions required extensive research and planning which included but was surely not limited to the following:

• Indulging and engaging in the kinds of dark sexual fantasies whose articulation jeopardized his spiritual integrity, personal reputation, personal standing (not to mention the image of Orthodox Judaism as a whole), and personal freedom.
• Making a concrete decision to actualize these thoughts in deed. Researching the kinds of cameras that could be covertly placed in the women’s mikvah, actually purchasing the model and mastering this usage.
• The final nail in his coffin: installing it. Maintaining his addiction by maintaining the device. Downloading the videos. Allowing it to remain affixed in the mikvah.

Throughout this entire process, one would think that a flawed but G-d fearing person suffering from such a sexual addiction would have time to find some outlet, possibly serious therapy and counseling, to redirect his energies. A certain Gemara comes to mind where it is deemed preferable to sin away from one’s domain in the confines of anonymity. Here we have an intelligent man endangering everything in his life for the pursuit of sexual fantasy. There are two dangers when reacting to this incident:

•  Failure to learn from this negative spectacle.

• Drawing the wrong conclusions.

Both are likely possibilities. Religious Judaism has had enough sexual scandals in recent years that came to the public eye and no groups are free of this shame. In many instances, the abusers were enabled both willingly and unwillingly by those who apologized, looked away, and often ignored what was before them. I want to reiterate that from the chareidi world to those in the “modern-orthodox world”, no group can say that they have clean hands. The historical account can attest to this.

And then there are the asinine conclusions of those who don’t understand Torah. The shrill voices of those not personally affected who insist that Judaism needs to change to adapt to this and other incidents. Judaism needs to change? Of course change is needed! Every person, organization who could have prevented such incidents betray this fact! Yet, the Divine system of Torah is perfect, and requires no changing, despite the sentiments of too many who clamber onto the wagon which demands that “orthodox Judaism” needs to evolve. The hysterical reactions of those who view spiritually depraved evil people as representing the system need to reassess their thought process. If change is needed, it is in the practice of Judaism which have become corrupted and politicized. The morality of Torah is perfect. Man is not. And some men are more imperfect than others. Some desecrate G-d’s name while wearing the cloak of the religious G-d man.

The warning signs are usually there. And by warnings, I mean red flags of strange behavior that may not even be motivated by abusive motives but by a distorted dysfunctional personality. It requires a discerning eye and some seichel. Sometimes it boils down to a hunch. A gut feeling that something is amiss. The sense that a rabbi shouldn’t be acting this way.

Several years back, while attending a bat mitzvah in a “modern-orthodox” circle with my wife, we witnessed a peculiar spectacle which led me to opine certain sentiments. The bat mitzvah girl’s “rebbe” was jumping rope with his class of pre-pubescent girls. It was undignified and perverse, yet in this “open” environment no one seemed to notice or think something amiss. Let’s avoid the most blatant halachic issues that come to mind which certainly forbid/discourage such behavior. Even if one could interpret the actual context in a way that didn’t involve prohibitions, one’s internal hunch screams (the hashkafa bone if you will) that something is terribly inappropriate. No normal religious man (rabbi or otherwise) would ever place himself in such a position. A sane cogent man would not want the public to even have a “haavah aminah” that something not so kosher was transpiring. I’m not accusing this man of any sexual indiscretion, G-d forbid. But we have seen too many examples of such close-knit “kiruv encounters” over the years, have we not?

So my second point is this. We need to celebrate the perfect system of Torah, and be wary when it comes to idealizing or idolizing man or men, all the while rejecting the equally un-Jewish notion that man is essentially evil and flawed. Certainly we should honor and revere and seek to emulate true men of Torah, who in the vast majority of cases will not disappoint us. We should make for ourselves a “rav” as instructed by chazal in “The Ethics of The Forefathers.” Yet we should internalize the words of Rav Soloveitchik of blessed memory who noted the following:

“We may trust man, have confidence in him, but we may not have faith in him. Faith connotes absoluteness and no man is worthy of absolute faith. Faith is only applicable to G-d.” (Reflections of the Rav, Abraham R. Besdin, pg. 67)

With these ideas entrenched, we are in a position to truly rehabilitate ourselves and the dysfunctional aspects of contemporary Jewish life, which rupture the ideal Torah system and bring man to sin. And the teshuva process itself becomes grounded in real things, true perfection, and not the trappings of “popular” teshuva which is sometimes monolithic in scope and simple-minded in its articulation.

For a truly comprehensive treatment of issues pertaining to repentance, I suggest people study the Rambam’s “Hilchot Teshuvah” in the Mishneh Torah, and Rav Soloveitchik’s classic work, “Al Ha’teshuvah” (On Repentance, available in English and Hebrew) which represents a treasure trove of gems discussing every nuance of the subject. In my humble opinion, as one who merely benefited from this gadol through his writings, I firmly believe that the “Rav’s” legacy of Torah on the process of teshuva are unparalleled in history.

May Hakadosh Baruch Hu grant us the wisdom to discern His truth, the strength to pursue it, and the fortitude to spread His Torah message to the entire world, both Jew and gentile.  And may we all engage in a process of genuine “complete teshuva” to hasten the coming of the true Moshiach.

Featured in the Jewish Press: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/fuchs-focus/mistreating-mentrusting-man-impediments-to-true-repentance/2015/09/07/