Jewish Taliban

This was a drasha I delivered three years ago on Shabbat Ki Tissa. I received quite a lot of criticism for this because people felt at the time: "What are you criticising Chareidim, haven't the non Orthodox got enough ammunition without our own people throwing them a present?" However, the issue is still here and has become increasingly more popular despite the condemnation from the mainstream Chareidi Kehillah.

Here it is...

The main body of our Sedra today deals with the cataclysmic event of the Golden Calf. Forty days earlier, the people have witnessed the greatest revelation in history, the Giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai. They had seen all the wondrous miracles of G-d. According to our Sages there has been no point in our collective history when we have been on a more elevated spiritual peak than at that time when we saw the revelation of God at Sinai.

Yet forty days later the descent could not have been worse. From an Igra Rama- a high mountain to a Beira Amikta- a deep pit. The Children of Yisrael have turned their backs on Hashem and have created a Golden calf around which they dance and declare Eleh Ehokecho Yisrael- These are your God O Israel.

How could they- the generation which was full of knowledge of God- How could they fall to the depths of despair?

My friends I am not going to give an in depth answer to that question. But there is I think an important message for all of us.

We should never think in our minds because we are frum that we cannot fall. Because here we have a generation that was full of connection to God -yet they fell- and boy did they fall with a mighty thump. Indeed our Rabbis say that the greater the person, the stronger is the Yetzer Hara- the evil inclination trying to pull- to schlep that individual away from Torah and Mitzvot. And the Yetzer Hara comes in many guises to try to entice somebody away from God. The higher the mountain an individual climbs, the greater the fall.

Now what I’m about to say perhaps will upset some people – so I apologise in advance. There was an article in the JC two weeks ago – a report of a group of women who had taken it upon themselves to be extra frum – to go where no Jewish woman had gone before, to start wearing the Burka. The “Minhag” began from a group of women who live in Bet Shemesh. Very pious women who want to keep the laws of Tzniut to the greatest level.

Let me begin...and say I am always in support of people who want to do more, to daven three times a day, to keep Shabbat, Kashrut and Taharat Hamishpacha – all the laws of the Torah. And indeed the laws of Tzniut are an integral part of being a Jew. Tzniut- modesty means not just in the way we dress, it has also a lot to do with how we speak and interact with people and how we behave, all have to be done in a way of tzniut, of modesty and reserve.

Indeed the Navi declares. “Vehatzneah Lechet im Hashem Elokecha”- Walk modestly with the Lord Your God- wherever we are, we should pursue the characteristic of Tzniut

However, according to the JC report- and I can only go according to what I read in print, these women are taking the laws of modesty to the furthest extreme. Many are covering not only their hair, which is according to Halachah but they are covering also their entire faces, something which is not prescribed by the Torah. They are covering up areas of their body that should be concealed according to Halachah but then they are wearing up to ten coverings of clothing- again something not required by Halachah.

So what’s the matter with people who want to be extra frum to this extent- it’s a free world let them do what they want to do and leave them alone.

However I believe that with trying to keep a Chumrah- a stricture, one sometimes ends up doing the exact opposite of what one really wants to achieve. Let me explain. The Talmud in a number of places talks about something which is called Yehurah- that means unnecessary drawing attention to oneself through trying to be extra pious, more than what the Halachah desires, because by doing that you are causing people to say; Look how frum this person is- he really is great. That is frowned upon in many instances in the Gemorrah.

The whole concept of Tzniut is modesty. That means not to draw any unnecessary attention to oneself. Therefore when one dresses in a non tzniut fashion one draws attention to ones state of dress or undress. When however one covers oneself to the extent that you are fulfilling the requirement much more than needed one is also unnecessarily drawing attention to oneself and doing the opposite of what was intended. Or perhaps that is really what is intended these women wanted to draw attention to themselves and say “Look how really frum we are- we are frumer than everybody.” One can imagine how therefore a faulty sense of religiosity can lead to a Yeridah- a descent rather than an Aliyah.

Perhaps we should be listening to the words of the Rambam in Hilchot Deot who speaks about the middle way and how in all our middot we should try to pursue the median.

Therefore- says the Rambam – Our Sages declared that a person should only prevent himself from doing those things that the Torah has prohibited, and he should not take upon himself vows or oaths that prohibit him from doing things that are permitted by the Torah. Is it not enough what the Torah prevents one to do- that you prohibit other things that the Torah does not prohibit?

The Rambam then criticizes those who spend their time needlessly fasting because by focussing on these things it can God forbid turn one away from what one should be doing.

Friends and Facebook

I realised I was on to a loser with this sermon two Shabbatot ago in my community when I asked the question: Who uses Facebook here? -and only about four people put their hands up...

Well here it is anyway.

Today I want to talk about friends and friendship-

This is all initiated thanks to a lady in the community who frequents my Monday afternoon Shiur and said “Rabbi, it’s really important that you speak from the pulpit about Facebook and its dangers”- so dutifully I listen.

Who uses Facebook?

After all Mark Zukerberg- the founder and inventor of Facebook is a Jewish boy and happens to be one of the richest people on this planet!

Don’t get me wrong-it’s not all bad.

Facebook is a fantastic invention and I use it. It allows me to make contact with friends whom I haven’t seen in years. It allows family who are living on the other side of the world to keep in touch- to upload photos and videos. It allows me to engage in conversation with my friends from the privacy of your home at any time of night and day. It allows me to contact people with whom I may not see on a day to day basis.

Have I sold the idea to you?

However-with all this - You know I’m quite jealous- many of my generation use Facebook. Nevertheless, if you look at peoples profiles you will see that there are many out there who have so many friends. 300- 500- is not unusual. I have one Rabbi friend from Stamford Hill with a beard and peyot down to his pipick who has over 1800 friends, and it’s not rare for some to have as many as 3000 friends on Facebook.

I consider myself quite a public figure-yet until recently I only had a meagre 40 friends on Facebook. Am I unpopular, do I not get it? Am I out of touch? Do I not have any friends?

So two weeks ago I embarked on a find-friends-on-Facebook crusade- and I’m up to 180 friends- not bad huh?

And this is the point that needs to be made. If you are on Facebook you are living a delusion.

You think that everybody out there is your friend, but they’re not necessarily. You’re having a private conversation with one person, but the truth is that it’s not really private because other people get to see it. And Facebook with it’s exhibitionism destroys boundaries between the public and the private.

But not only that- it’s the usage of the word friend- I think Facebook cheapens that word by using verbal inflation.

The Mishneh in Pirkei Avot says “acquire for your self a friend”. Rambam explains there that there are three aspects to being a true friend – a chaver.

First a friend is someone to whom you can turn at a time of trouble. Someone in whom you can rely without the need to ask.

Second, a friend is a person to whom one can communicate one’s deepest thoughts, no matter what they are.

And finally, a friend is one with whom you can share common goals and values.

If you cogitate on these words you suddenly realise that in life we have very few true friends.

Think about Joseph who was told by his father Yaakov:

“Go and see the well being of your brothers who are shepherding in Shechem”. Note the word Shalom- which means well being, but of course also means peace. See if your brothers have peace and pursue peace with one another.

Yet he comes to Shechem and he finds the man in the field who asks him: “What are you seeking?”

He answers:

“Et achai anochi mevakesh- I seek my brothers!”

My father Z’L used to say on these words that Joseph was making a qualitative statement

I seek my brothers- I look not just in a physical sense but in a spiritual sense as well- who is really my brother? Who is somebody in whom I can confide? In whom I can really trust and who shares my goals and my vision in life?

And this is all connected with the Mishkan-that we have been studying these past two weeks- because just as the Mishkan was built on a physical plain so too there are deep hidden mystical interpretations of each part of that Mishkan.

The kapporet was the covering on the top of the Aron. On these were two Kerubim – cherubim- in English that were fashioned from the same piece of gold. The faces of these Kerubim had, according to one interpretation- the faces were of children- a boy and a girl or malachim- angels.

Vehayu hakeruvim porshei kenafayim lemaalah- the Keruvim spread out their wings above.

Upheneihem ish el achiv and their faces pointed towards each other.

The Medrashic statement is that when Israel is good with one another then Cherubim would face each other- a sign of Divine happiness when there is peace and brotherhood in Israel.

Indeed the Baal Haturim points out that the end letters of these words upheneihem ish el achiv spell out shalom- peace!

So back to Facebook- it’s a great tool to be used- but that’s it.

We have to realise the importance of each and every real friend and thank Hashem for the true friends that we have.

Tikva/Hope in Odessa

I introduce here Madeleine Whiteson as my guest post this week. Originally this piece was supposed to have gone out two weeks ago before their embarkation to the Ukraine. However they are now back from their visit to the Tikva children’s home in Odessa Ukraine.

For more information about Tikva please go to;

http://tikvaodessa.org/

I think this is the first time that a group from the United Synagogue has ever done such a thing and I as the Rabbi of the community, am extremely proud of their achievements. This Shabbat, 19^th February in Kenton Shul there will be a Shabbat Kodesh Programme which will centre on this trip.

Here are the words from Madeleine:

Almost two years ago, David Harris delivered an inspiring Shabbat Kodesh Programme centred on his visit to the Tikva Children’s Home in Odessa, Ukraine:

I resolved there and then that I should like to undertake something similar. I realised that a few people might be interested so eventually I put a notice in Mah Chadash asking for anyone wanting to go to contact me. Enough people responded for me to decide to follow it up with the Tikvah Organisation, who gave me Rebecca Nahon as a contact.

We arranged a meeting for 5^th October, and as a result, fifteen of us are visiting Odessa from the 3^rd to the 6^th February. Fourteen are members of Kenton Shul : David and Vivian Harris, Daniel Harris plus a family friend Chantal smith, Geoffrey and Irene Herman, Jenny Lamsli, Rivka Conrad, Aubrey Kutner, Danny Tuchband, Ruth and Michael Topper, Sharon Arad, Robert Brody and myself; Madeleine Whiteson.

This is probably the first group going from a Synagogue, but it is certainly the largest.

We are taking twelve sets of Tefillin as a result of donations to a Tefillin fund by members of the Shul and beyond. These are badly needed according to the information David harris gave us. In addition we are taking new clothes, toys, books etc, to suit children from babyhood up to sixteen.

Sydney Faber will be our leader in Odessa and he has warned us to expect temperatures of -15° to -20°!

So, see you on Shabbat in two weeks time when we return to the tropical climate of Kenton! We shall hope to give you much more first hand information then, once we have thawed out!

Finally to all those who have donated time, money and/or goods to this trip a very big thank you.

The Rabbi's Speech

Here is my sermon from last Shabbat- enjoy!

I went to see a film last week.

Usually I would not share this trivial piece of information with you- What does your Rabbi do in his spare time? (apart from writing blogs) you are thinking- but The King’s Speech is really a wonderful film.

Have you seen it yet?

If you haven’t- go and see it.

It’s a true story about a Prince-known as Bertie whose brother Edward was King and forced to abdicate the throne. Bertie was then thrust into the position of becoming the King, something he and his wife Elisabeth had never expected.

Of course this was particularly problematic because he had a really bad speech impediment.

He stammered.

He found it very difficult to get his words out and to communicate.

In the past he had tried to deliver speeches but had failed miserably.

The film explores his relationship with his speech therapist Lionel Logue who uses very modern and controversial methods for the time to help Bertie or King George VI as he is later known.

But George doesn’t really want the position- It’s just a matter of circumstance

I just want to share with you one very powerful scene before the coronation. They’re in Westminster Abbey in preparation and all of a sudden Logue sits on the throne.

George is furious at him and tells him: “you can’t sit there!-it’s a place reserved for K-K k k kings and you are but a commoner.”

To which Logue responds “Why not?- you don’t want to be the king – you said so yourself”

King George responds to him “But I have a voice!!”

That was a turning point in his life and King George finds his voice and leads his country throughout the war years.

It’s a powerful, emotive and wonderful film.

I can relate to the predicament of King George- it’s never been an easy thing for me to speak publicly. It doesn’t come naturally. It might look easy but it takes hours upon hours of preparation which can be blown in a very short time.

I remember speaking to my father ZL-Rev Sidney Black, who was a very learned and experienced speaker- who told me that still at an advanced age whenever he got up to speak he was quite nervous.

“If you’re not nervous- you’re not going to succeed.” he told me…

I thought about this film and I realised that the greatest of our leaders, Moshe suffered from exactly the same problem:

In the initial conversation he has with Hashem he declares time and time again:

“I am not a man of words. For I am heavy of mouth and heavy of speech.”

And our commentators explain that Moshe the greatest of our leaders had a speech impediment. He found it difficult to speak and communicate.

I don’t want to delve into the Medrashic account of how he came to have a speech problem

However, G-d responds that Aharon would act as the spokesman for Moshe and as the communicator with Israel and with Pharaoh

Later, during the ten plagues Moshe again declares to Hashem, “Behold I am of uncircumcised lips therefore how could you expect Pharaoh to listen to my words?”

Yet it would be Moshe Rabbeinu- who would be the true shepherd of his people. He led them out of Egypt across the Red Sea. He led them in the war against the Amalekites, and he was the one who gave them the instruction throughout, and it was Moshe about whom we read in this sedra who went up the Mountain alone to receive the Torah. Moshe was the judge, the shepherd, and he was Rabbeinu, our teacher par excellence.

So how comes he had a speech impediment?

Why should the greatest leader that we ever had- about whom it is written – “there never arose and never will arise in Israel a prophet of the stature of Moshe”. The only one of our leaders who spoke to G-d face to face-about whom it is also written that he was the most humble of all men- yet he had a speech impediment? He had problems with communication?

Why should that be? I hope you understand the question and that I have communicated this properly to you.

First- that the Torah comes from G-d and is Emet- the truth. It wasn’t the might of Moshe Rabbeinu’s oratorical skills that made the difference, it wasn’t his smooth persuasive tongue that brought everybody around to his way of thinking. It was just the fact that the Torah comes from Hashem and is His word that meant that it didn’t need any embellishment. And they had all witnessed first hand as a people the ten plagues, the crossing of the Red Sea, the manna from heaven and the words of Hashem at Sinai. So therefore Moshe did not need to have that skill of speaking because when you are transmitting the truth you don’t need to package it.

Second, that even though Moshe suffered from the outset with a confidence problem with his speech and seemed to be unable to communicate, yet later on Moshe Rabbeinu communicated the word of Hashem direct to the people. He acted as a direct intercessor between G-d and the B’nei Yisrael. The Book of Devarim is a book comprising the speeches that Moshe delivered to Israel

Could it be possible that Moshe found his voice?

My friends: I think the message is important. Today we have more than just the conventional modes of communication to deliver the values and the messages of Judsaism.

There is more than just speaking the ten minute drasha on the Shabbat morning or the traditional shiur structure.

Today we can reach a wider audience. There is the internet, facebook, there are websites – video logs and blogs.

We’ve found our voice.

We’ve got to use it!!

Middle of the roadism 2

Here is a photo of a dear friend and colleague; Rabbi David Mason, the dynamic community rabbi of Muswell Hill synagogue. He recently read my blog: "Is there such a thing as Middle of the road Judaism?" and he sent me his thoughts on this subject.

I thought it would be a good idea to invite the Rabbi to be a guest blogger over here on my blog. and share his excellent ideas with us. So here he is:

Please note my comments at the end...

United Synagogue, Centrist Orthodoxy and ‘the Middle Ground

It is great to see more and more of my colleagues blogging and expressing their opinions on important issues. This is healthy for the Rabbinate and for our organisation. In this vein, I noted an article by my colleague Rabbi Yehudah Black on the concept of the ‘middle ground’ and his seemingly unsuccessful search for its definition. In fact the reader would be easily left with a negative conclusion about applying this motif to our organisation. I feel that this is a fundamental debate and I would like to contribute my thoughts.

Rabbi Black defined ‘middle of the road’ in a sort of arithmetical manner. In other words this definition of the United Synagogue puts it half way between one extreme and the other, right in the middle point. This of course would be an extremely parve definition empty of any dynamics and emotion and quite rightly Rabbi Black was critical of this approach. It is also simply not backed up by the diversity of engagement with Judaism expressed by our membership.

But I think that the wrong definition of ‘middle of the road’ was chosen and I would like to use as my source, an article written 1989/1990 edition of the Yearbook of Religious Zionism by Rabbi Norman Lamm who was until recently the Dean of Yeshiva University. His article was entitled ‘Centrist Orthodoxy and Moderationism’.

Rabbi Lamm begins by clearly distancing ‘centrist Orthodoxy’ from the definition that puts it arithmetically in the middle between two points. In fact he is quite vocal on this point:

“It is no compliment to our intelligence to imagine that in the name of centrism we advocate walking about the religious terrain with a yard-stick, callipers and a pocket calculator measuring the exact distance between Neturei Karta and Humanistic Judaism in order to locate the exact middle or centre. We are not and do not aspire to be ideological geographers or spiritual surveyors who search out the exact point between right and wrong, religious and non-religious, mitzvah and aveirah and settle upon that centre as our religious goal.”

Strong words. So how does Rabbi Lamm define ‘middle of the road’ if not an attempt to find a point that is mathematically in the middle of the ‘road’? Well he uses Rambam’s theory of the mean, which was derived itself from the Aristotelian theory of the Golden Mean. This theory as Maimonides applies it begs us in most cases to aim towards a central point between two extremes. So one should not for example be overly greedy or overly extravagant with money but find a position in the middle. On the face of it, this theory also looks too arithmetical and according to Rabbi Lamm. ‘bloodlessly parev…emotionally inhibiting, passionless and uninspiring’ However Rabbi Lamm explains to us an idea which he had received from his Rav, the great Rav Yosef Soloveitchik. Maimonides adds to his recipe for the mean this statement:

“our earliest Sages instructed us that a man ought always weigh his dispositions and measure them and direct them to the middle way”

According to Rav Soloveitchik and Rabbi Lamm, what Maimonides is telling us is that the result of being on the mean, the midpoint is not the be all and end all. The process of getting there is also important and possible more so. In Rabbi Lamm’s words:

“In other words, the process of arriving at the determination of one’s own life and character is more important than the results. It is the dynamic quality of rationally weighing and assessing and then out of freedom deciding and choosing…that qualifies this activity as the way of God”

This is crucial. We are asked here to firstly be aware of where we are on the spectrum of characteristics. Then we should direct them to the ‘middle’ point, but we do this by being aware of all the points on the spectrum. In fact we may take up different valid points on any spectrum as long as they are expressive of the mean, the average. Rabbi Lamm has transformed the theory of the mean from a cold, mathematical decision making process to one which engages all options and then involves a decision which takes heed of these options. In fact a decision based in moderationism will actual engage both extremes, whereas an extremist will not veer from one side of the argument. I will give you an example from my approach to the issues facing our beloved Israel. I sometimes find myself sympathetic with a more right wing and entrenched view of how Israel should relate to the Palestinian leadership and people. But not always. I often find myself sympathising with a more left wing and dovish approach. Is this because I am indecisive? Maybe. I am more worried about the trap of extremism which blocks one from considering any other valid point of view. But I am not frightened of listening and engaging with diametrically opposed views.

So ‘centrist orthodoxy’ or ‘moderate orthodoxy’ is careful and moderate in the process of making a decision. But when a decision is made it is made with clarity, passion and strength. This approach can equally apply to the realm of halacha. A posek, or halachic decisor will also need to relate in his decision to a multiplicity of opinions before he makes his decision. And this decision will not always be strict and not always be lenient. The Rav who is a posek may look therefore inconsistent in his approach. He is not. He is carefully weighing up each situation before deciding according to the specific conditions. Here is how Rabbi Lamm puts it:

“A posek is not a computer in human form who accesses his halachic data-base for the relevant and dominant halachic opinions and offers them ‘as is’ without considering minority views and without insight into the unique human situation of the one who posed the questions”.

One small example. In my Synagogue there is a custom, as with many, that milk and milk products should be supervised. I stick by this as I feel that the standards of kashrut in a Synagogue kitchen should be high. But that does not mean to say that I have toyed with the alternative approach. Some have said to me that if one does not allow chocolates from the kashrut guide, one gives the message that they are not kosher enough. Possibly, yes. I do not reject this view, but after weighing things up another view is taken.

I remember in my time at Kingston Synagogue as Rabbi, that someone criticised me for being ‘middle of the road’ and not strong minded enough as I had allowed a woman to speak to the community (from her side of the mechitza) on Shabbat morning. I was told that in the middle of the road one would get run over. My reply was that I may only seem to be in the middle of the road as a leader because I need to hold the community to together, and to do so I would need to have my arms symbolically around each side of the community on each issue. My decisions would rarely be middle decisions – rather I would be constantly getting off the fence – but I would share these jumps off the fence with both sides of the community. Of course each decision needs to be made with reference tightly to halacha and Talmud Torah. But being the Rabbi of a United Synagogue community is a challenging and important role because of this challenge. Our goal is to ensure that Jewish people can find a place under the umbrella of our Orthodox community. To be passionate about this we need to be clear that our community is not based on a boring and passionless concept of decision making but a dynamic and creative one that is careful and tolerant, but in its result is firm.

I will finish with the words of our Chief Rabbi in his book ‘Community of Faith’

“It would mean that Jewish leadership would have to be exercised in a way that was faithful and yet open, tolerant without ceasing to be firm”

This I feel is our definition of ‘the middle road’.

Thank you Rabbi Mason for your thoughts. Here are my questions to you. First and foremost I better tell you that I am an admirer of both Rabbi Y Soloveitchik Z'L-The Rav as he was affectionately known by his followers, and Rabbi Norman Lamm who is perhaps one of the greatest exponents of Torah Umaddah alive today.

• When using the term "middle of the road" I wasn't referring to Jewish leadership. The message was in relation to your everyday Jew who refers to his/ her Judaism as a middle of the road Jew. what does that mean?
• So in relation to Jewish committment, are you going to advance the counsel of Maimonides that he keep the golden mean?- I know I'm supposed to read the shema- should I read only the first paragraph? and that makes me a middle of the road Jew? should I eat kosher at home but when I go out I eat treif? Do you see what I mean - in these cases middle of the roadism cannot be your philosophy - it gets you nowhere, and it creates stagnation.
  
• I don't think I disagree with you in relation to seeing both sides of an argument. But is that really called Centrism or is it just the fifth Chelek of shulchan Aruch which is as you well know just common sense?
  

Is there such a thing as Middle of the road Judaism?

A few years ago, I delivered a sermon on Shabbat Mishpatim on the subject of Middle-of-the-road Judaism. It created quite a stir in the community. Some people agreed others were not so happy- especially when I spoke about it again the next week. But it gave a lot of people some food for thought whilst ingesting their Shabbat afternoon cholent.. Here it is...

Middle of the road Judaism

This is the term which we tend to commonly use for the United Synagogue brand of Judaism. My question is what is the definition of this term and is it a correct expression to describe who we are? Isn’t it strange how we use these words all the time-"I am a middle of the road type of Jew"- but we really don’t stop to think about what we are saying. In America the middle of the road Judaism is called Centrism- But we still need to know what it means.

“There’s nothing in the middle of the road but yellow stripes and dead armadillos”- a quote from Jim Hightower.

In a physical sense when I say middle of the road I think of the fact that if you are walking you are vulnerable from both sides and you can get hit from a passing vehicle coming from either direction, because the middle of the road is not a sensible or usual place to be!!

On a spiritual sense when I think of middle of the road- I think of the fact that I am neither veering to the left or right- it suggests a certain parevness, a mediocrity- a certain sitting on the fence, but is that necessarily a good thing for Anglo Jewry?

Before I go any further let me just give you insight from my own experience. I was brought up in a United Shul. My father as you all well know was the Rabbi, yet at that time I’ve got to be honest,I was not turned on at all by United Synagogue Judaism. It was in the mid seventies that Rev A.D Sufrin – a Lubavitch shaliach and his wife Henny and family came to town and I was enticed by firstly the fact that here were people who were frum and at the same time they were modern and trendy and who definitely did not class themselves as middle of the road Jews. Tolerant and open minded yes- but not middle of the road Jews. Dare I say it but perhaps it was the fact at the time that Lubavitch Chabad was not mainstream meant that I was drawn towards this brand of Judaism. Could it have been- the very fact that they offered more obvious truth and were uncompromising on Jewish issues that attracted me to that way of life.

Every day we recite in the Shema- the statement of faith in Judaism: "Veahavta et Hashem Elokecha bechol levavecho uvechol nafshecho uvechol meodecho"- "and you shall love the Lord your G-d with all your heart with all your soul and with all your might"- Meodecho- means the meod shelcho- with all your muchness- (which is not really a word in English)with all your strength, force, capacity. Love of G-d, the connection with which a Jew forges with Hakodosh Boruch Hu- should not be bound by middle-of-the-roadism. Completely the opposite, Judaism requires that a person be totally dedicated and committed to Hashem and His Torah.

There’s no room for half measures or compromise.

It means to me as a Jew for example that when I recite the Shema my mind should be totally absorbed with what I am doing. I cannot half recite the Shema- there’s no middle ground here. I am either doing it or not.

A story from the Book of Melachim that I am fond of reading is the showdown between Eliyahu Hanavi and the Priests of Baal. It was a time in Eretz Yisrael when Ahab and Jezebel sat on the throne and ruled the Northern Kingdom. Their influence had become so great that they had managed to implant idolatry- Baal worship throughout their Kingdom. So Eliyahu demanded that they come together- the Priests of Baal- the entire B’nai Yisrael on Har HaCarmel to ascertain whose was truth.

Now listen to the words of Eliyahu addressing the B’nai Yisrael;

"Ad mosai atem poschim al shtei haseifim"

How long will you vacillate between two opinions

"Im Hashem Elokim lechu acharav- veim habaal lechu acharav"

If Hashem is the G-d-follow Him! And if the Baal-follow it!

Eliyahu is saying; there is no room to stand in the middle. You’ve got a choice between idolatry and following Hashem, you cannot stand in the middle. Middle of the roadism for such a decision cannot be the way forward. Dithering and indecision is worse than even following Avodah Zarah, because at least then even though you may have turned away from Hashem, at least you have made a decision.

The quote however has been from quite a clear cut situation- on one side of the road is idolatry on the other is Judaism and following Hashem- in such a state of affairs there’s no middle ground- it’s definitive- Once you’ve made the choice then you’re either for Hashem or you’re not.

But within Judaism is there such a thing as the middle ground?

On one side of the equation is Secular Humanistic Judaism- the other side is Neturei Karta- Middle of the road means a middle point between the two. Once again this is a very difficult suggestion. Secular Humanistic Judaism means a non Halachic way of life and United Synagogue which is an Orthodox institution cannot use that as the barometer-way to measure the middle ground.

So I am at a loss. I do not know what is meant by middle of the road Judaism.

If it means inclusivist and tolerant- which the United Synagogue endeavours to be- you can also find inclusivism and tolerance amongst the Chareidi and Yeshivish world. So what do we mean by middle of the road Judaism-Could it be that perhaps we are just playing with words -food for thought- perhaps a theme to which I will return in coming weeks

Organ Transplants

Here is a copy of my sermon delivered this past Shabbat. My Chairman quipped that I really murdered this one. Read on to find out why.

The Jewish Chronicle sometimes makes my blood boil.

Last week was no exception. It decided to use its front columns to report on The Beth Din’s decision in relation to Organ Donor Cards and Organ transplantation.

I have no problem with that.

It must be emphasised that this is not an easy subject. The RCA- The Rabbinical Council of America, which is a body representing 1000 mainstream Orthodox Shuls in America recently held an investigation into what is the Halacha in relation to Organ Transplants. After producing a 110 page document and bringing all the various viewpoints on this subject, they came to the conclusion that for their Rabbinate it was better that each individual rabbi use his own discretion to rule in the way he seemed fit in Halacha.

However our Beth Din are more forthright in their opinions: They issued a ruling that whereas Organ donation is permitted in many instances according to the Torah especially in connection with a live donor and even after death, for example kidney or cornea donation, and not only that, but it is a good and upright thing to do. However, when it comes to people carrying blanket donor Cards to be used after death , this was against the Halacha.

The JC in an editorial took a rather emotive and irreverent stand on this issue. They showed complete ignorance of the issues- they could not understand why the Chief Rabbi and the Beth Din do not come in line with Israel and other countries who already allow Organ Donor Cards and could not understand why they do not classify brain stem death as death as if there was an international three line whip on the issue.

This morning we read from the Decalogue, commonly known as the Ten Commandments.

Every body knows that the Ten Commandments are divided into two parts. The first five speak about the Mitzvot Bein Adam LeMakom, the Mitzvot that are between man and G-d and the second five speak about those Mitzvot that are interpersonal-between man and his neighbour.

We all know that and I haven’t said anything new.

But the question is that if you look at the Aseret Hadibrot there appears to be two separate elements. There are those mitzvot that are fundamental to being Jewish like "I am the Lord Your G-d" which speaks about Belief in G-d and "Remember the Shabbat day to keep it holy". These are the Mitzvot that are high, reaching up towards the heavens- if you know what I mean.

And then there are those Mitzvot that if the Torah hadn’t told us about them you would have known about them anyway for example: Lo Tirtzach – Thou Shalt not murder. After all it makes sense for any civilised society that if people are going to live with one another, that the first rule of thumb ought to be that you would not murder one another.

It’s a matter of human survival.

So we need to understand if Lo Tirtzach-Thou shalt not murder is self understood and self explanatory and makes sense, why include this commandment in the Top Ten?

There were before and after the Torah had been given, societies, who had as the main framework of their rule book the law that murder is against the law.

Let’s just look at how the Ten Commandments are written on the Two tablets of stone.

You have five on one side and five on the other. The mitzvah of Anochi Hashem Elokecha- I am the Lord Your G-d- belief in Him is placed next to the Mitzvah of Lo Tirzach – Thou Shalt not murder. Why is that so?

Because there might be an occasion where you or I in our finite limited minds will rationalise and say

You know the Torah says You shall not murder- So in the blatant truth of it all of course it is against everything we believe. But maybe there is a sort of grey area where it’s not so easy to make a decision. Perhaps in certain instances it is muttar, you can rationalise forfeiting life- for example a case when somebody is in the last stages of life. They are about to die anyway- why not hasten the experience? In Switzerland there is the Dignitas clinic where people can elect to go and die in a humane fashion before they have to go through the suffering.

It makes sense- end the life a little bit earlier and make it easier why not make it law over here?

However let me just paraphrase the words of Chief Rabbi Lord Jacobovitz Z’l on this very issue.

A parable.

Imagine a person is about to jump off the Empire State building in an attempt to commit suicide. He takes the plunge and on his way down a person with a shotgun shoots and kills him.

So you say- he was going to die anyway?

However according to Jewish law even though he had only twenty seconds to live before he hits the ground nevertheless the person who shoots him is a murderer. But- you say- he was going to die anyway-and his life was very limited- Yet the gunman is a murderer.

Why? Because human life is human life and is sacrosanct- and it makes no difference the quality or the quantity of that life. The Torah says Lo Tirzach- Thou shalt not murder and next to it are the words – Anochi Hashem Elokecha- it is not for us to decide when a person should or should not die- It is in the hands of G-d and He ultimately makes the decision.

So now we come back to the view of Beth Din in relation to Brain Stem death. It’s very easy to become emotive on this issue but it’s a matter of debate: when is a person dead? Now that is a very simple question to answer. When the Neshama-soul departs the body?

But can somebody tell me exactly when that is? How can you tell that a person is dead? When you don’t see signs of neshimah – of breathing? When the heart has stopped? When a person is brain or brain stem dead- yet those organs are still functioning with the help of a ventilator? It’s a grey area- it’s difficult to know- and there are Poskim on both sides of the view.

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, Rabbi Moshe Tendler. Rabbi Nachum Rabinowitch are amongst those that accept brain stem death as being true death.

Yet there are Rabbis like Rabbi Eliashiv, Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and others who say that Brain Stem death is not necessarily death.

And it makes a difference when it comes to Heart Transplantation. The heart can only be taken from the donor for transplantation when it is still beating. But the question is – is the person alive or dead?

If he/she is still technically alive, to take out the heart would be tantamount to murder according to those authorities. And it’s not just Rabbis but some secular ethicists as well hold this view.

And this is from where the London Beth Din are coming.

I deliberately left out all the sources to this debate.

It’s important to know because when it comes to Lo Tirtzach –it’s no laughing matter.