In this final part of our series on the move to the religious right in Toronto’s Orthodox community, we hear from other centrist voices about what they see as the growing influence of haredi religious leaders and practices in the rest of the Orthodox community. Much of their concern centres on the prominence of Kollel Avreichim on Coldstream Avenue, located in the heart of the haredi community near Bathurst Street and Lawrence Avenue. As the leading haredi post-yeshiva educational institution in Toronto, its rulings have come to exert significant influence in the wider Orthodox community. (Rabbi Shlomo Miller, its rosh kollel and av beis din – head of the institution and its rabbinical court – declined to speak directly to The CJN, saying that the media have misquoted and misunderstood him. However, he authorized a spokesperson to speak on his behalf.)
Many people in the Orthodox community are troubled by what appears to be a refusal of non-haredi rabbis and other Orthodox leaders to speak out against the current situation. Several people interviewed for this series expressed the view that many Orthodox rabbis and leaders are afraid of being censured by Rabbi Miller and the haredi community, and these sources contend this fear is behind the silence of Orthodox leaders. It is this context – and our belief that issues that generate such vehemence should be discussed openly – that has led The CJN to investigate the situation.
From left: Rabbi Reuven Tradburks, Rabbi Immanuel Schochet and Martin Lockshin
Rabbi Reuven Tradburks, secretary of Toronto’s Vaad Harabonim and spiritual leader of Kehillat Shaarei Torah, a Modern Orthodox congregation, paints a more positive picture than some others of the move toward more stringent religious practices and views in the Orthodox community.
“I feel that, often when there are dramatic changes in policy, people look at it as being a step backward, or as the Orthodox world becoming more fundamentalist. I don’t view it that way. I view it as a positive change, that the number of people who want to live a rich and full life completely consistent with what the Torah wants from us is growing.”
He said he does not see the discrepancies between Modern Orthodox and haredi philosophy as a division between the two groups.
“I think there are different approaches. It’s not a new issue. It’s a new manifestation. Part of the reason [the issue seems more pronounced] is because of e-mail, the Internet and instantaneous communication. And to some extent it’s also the ascendancy of Torah and knowledgeable Jews in the Orthodox world in general.”
However, he noted, there are Orthodox Jews “grappling to find a way of negotiating their allegiance to science and also their allegiance to Torah and Torah leaders.”
Rabbi Tradburks was referring to the debate about British-born, Israel-based Rabbi Natan Slifkin, a haredi scholar who touched off an ongoing controversy in the Orthodox world with his views on creation and science.
Three of his books – including Mysterious Creatures and The Camel, the Hare and the Hyrax, which offer ideas about the origins of the universe that are anathema to his fellow haredim – were banned by Israeli and North American haredi rabbis in early 2005. Especially troubling to them are Rabbi Slifkin’s assertions in The Science of Torah that the world was created not in six days, but over millions of years.
The young rabbi’s profile remained relatively low in Toronto until his visit to the city this past winter to speak at an event sponsored by Torah in Motion, a Modern Orthodox educational organization that hosts lectures and programs.
At that time, Rabbi Shlomo Miller of Kollel Avreichim issued “a letter of admonishment” stating that Rabbi Slifkin’s opinions on the six days of creation were “definitely heretical,” even “boorish.”
A book ban, such as the one imposed on Rabbi Slifkin, is “not something I would do, but I understand the rationale as to why that’s being done, even if I don’t agree with it,” said Rabbi Tradburks, whose synagogue also hosted Rabbi Slifkin as a speaker when he was in Toronto.
* * *
Jonathan Ostroff, a computer science professor at York University who was authorized by Rabbi Miller to speak on his behalf, said that Rabbi Miller had no connection with the original ban on Rabbi Slifkin’s books and that he only issued his own condemnation of his work after he was asked for his opinion on the subject by members of his own community. The letter was intended only for his followers, and not for the general community, Ostroff said.
He also told The CJN that Rabbi Miller distinguishes between “operational science” and “origin science.” Operational science, which Rabbi Miller accepts, examines how things work in the universe, while origin science looks at what caused things to begin.
Ostroff stressed that there is a difference between disagreeing with someone, and hating or looking down on them. “We object to his views, not to him as a person,” Ostroff said. In fact, he said, when Rabbi Slifkin came to Toronto to speak at the Torah in Motion event, he was invited to speak to Rabbi Miller and Ostroff, but was “unresponsive.”
“We would still be willing to talk to him anytime,” Ostroff said.
He added that, for a time, he was involved in dialogue with Rabbi Slifkin, both via the Internet and other means. “I wanted to continue the dialogue, but he cut it off. I don’t believe he wants to discuss substantive issues.”
When contacted by The CJN, Rabbi Slifkin said he had been advised by two Canadian rabbis against meeting with Rabbi Miller, because the rabbis felt the purpose of the meeting would be to try to change his views and not to have an open discussion of the issues.
Rabbi Slifkin added that he stopped his online communication with Ostroff “when the pressures of the ban began.” He said that at that time, his posts on an online discussion group were being passed on “to non-participants in order to stir up opposition to me. I have absolutely no idea what Dr. Ostroff means when he says that I don’t want to discuss substantive issues. I have done nothing else for the last few years!”
* * *
What makes the Slifkin affair unique, according to Yossi Adler, a Toronto lawyer who wrote about the controversy in a CJN column in January, is that in similar past cases, other people have retracted the material that was deemed offensive, “and everything [was] fine and dandy.”
Not only did Rabbi Slifkin not retract his assertions, Adler said, but rabbis who condemned his work went beyond banning his books to condemn him personally.
“It’s censorship,” said Adler, who fears that if someone like Rabbi Slifkin, who is part of the haredi community, can be singled out, then everyone is “potentially a target.”
To a lesser extent, Adler was singled out for his CJN column by some Orthodox Jews who criticized him for airing the issue in public. “They don’t understand that this is a significant issue that merits discussion and analysis,” he said, adding that the response he received to his column was overwhelmingly – perhaps 95 per cent – positive.
The naysayers are “creating an environment where debate is non-existent or only discussed behind closed doors, and that’s regrettable,” said Adler.
He also noted that some haredi Jews feel he and others are “right-wing bashing” out of enjoyment, an accusation he denies. “We came from that world. We feel an affinity to that world, and we care about its direction.”
The bans are increasing in number and seriousness, says Adler, who was raised in the “yeshiva world” but has moved toward what he terms “centrist” Orthodoxy. “I prefer the more centrist [community],” he said. “They’re less likely to build walls and to exclude what modernity has to offer. They’re more interested in secular education, and more Zionistic.
“As each group has become more confident, they feel they can live independently. I feel a significant disrespect [on the part of the haredi community toward] non-Orthodox and less Orthodox Jews.”
A lot of the haredi “suspicion” toward the outside world stems from a perceived breakdown of morality, as exemplified by societal changes that include same-sex marriage and sexual promiscuity, Adler explained.
“They will exclude media from their households. A lot of stuff in the media today is very trashy. At the same time, I think they’re throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
“It was probably like that before,” he admitted, “but not to the same extent, and they weren’t as bold in the way they impose certain rules in the community.”
Rabbi Miller “has a brilliant mind and is well versed in the sources,” said Adler. “No one’s willing to stand up and say that [what he is saying] is not acceptable, or that this is a stringency going beyond what the community requires.”
Adler said that, as a result, “there are people who have considered walking away from Orthodoxy.”
* * *
Not all rabbis were as forthcoming as Rabbi Tradburks when asked to be interviewed for this article. One said he didn’t even want to be quoted as saying that he declined to comment.
When asked repeatedly about the issue of possible repercussions for people who might challenge the growing influence of haredi religious leaders and practices, Ostroff’s only comments had to do with the reaction that Rabbi Miller has received for publicly expressing his own views.
“He has had repercussions for defending Torah Judaism. Should not a Torah teacher stand up for Torah? That’s what he did. Should he allow people to wallow in ignorance?”
Ostroff added that Rabbi Miller expected that he would face consequences for speaking out, just as anybody who comments publicly on any issue would. “But you have to protect your children, and you have to protect the truth of Torah.”
* * *
Martin Lockshin, a York University professor who is an ordained Orthodox rabbi, remains sanguine about the current environment in the Orthodox world.
The former director of York’s Centre for Jewish Studies says he still feels at home in most places in the Orthodox community and is heartened by the presence of Modern Orthodox institutions in the city, citing the examples of Netivot HaTorah Day School, and Bnei Akiva’s Ulpanat Orot and Or Chaim high schools.
“I see something like Torah In Motion, which tries to do intellectual types of things, as a positive force in the city,” he said.
“I know there are people I see as kindred spirits who I can talk to, who unabashedly call themselves Modern Orthodox.”
However, he noted, “it may be a well-placed concern that congregational rabbis find themselves in the difficult position – the modern centrist liberal kinds – worried about losing their bona fides because of a possible attack from the ultra-Orthodox.”
At his own synagogue, Congregation Bnai Torah, which has a more right-wing philosophy than his own, the rabbi “has been very tolerant of me,” Lockshin said.
* * *
Rabbi Immanuel Schochet, a retired philosophy professor at Humber College and a leader of the Lubavitch movement in Toronto, said the Jewish community has been inundated with dissent and anger, as well as stringencies that go beyond halachah in an attempt to protect tradition.
“We live in a society where under the guise of political correctness, all systems are go. Moral boundaries which were observed by everyone are being trampled,” he said by way of explanation. In today’s “permissive, licentious society,” observant Jews try to take precautions, he added.
Like immunizations, “we may inject kids with poisons to protect them” – in other words, expose them to the non-Jewish world so that they are equipped to deal with it. Or, he added, observant Jews may try to defend tradition by creating more closed enclaves and putting up behavioural fences such as not allowing television or Internet in the home, in an effort to circle the wagons around the community’s children. “It’s not foolproof, but it’s an attempt to protect kids and the young from being corrupted.”
The ideal, he said, is “the golden middle path,” though he admits this path is hard to find.
Rabbi Schochet added that there is “great hostility” within the Orthodox community, which he said comes from divisions that are more about ego than personal ideology.
There is a fight over “my gedolim [rabbinic sages] vs. your gedolim – my way or the highway,” he said, adding that this is not what the pursuit of Torah means. “You have to realize that you aren’t God’s policeman.”
There is nothing wrong with having a difference of opinion, so long as the discussion is kept to the issue and avoids the personal, he said. You condemn the act or action, not the person doing it, he added.
For instance, different schools serve different parts of the Orthodox world, but they should still be conscious of the bonds between them. “I may not send my children to schools whose views I disagree with. But show hostility to them? No.”
Rabbi Schochet said he disagrees with the approach of those who banned Rabbi Slifkin’s book.
“The answer is not to ban a book – that just gives publicity, and popularizes it, the opposite of what is intended. The answer is to discuss, and to question, to say why you think he is wrong.”
You don’t argue with a Jewish heretic, said Rabbi Schochet, speaking hypothetically, and “banning went out with the dodo.” The rabbis who banned Rabbi Slifkin’s books have “moved beyond what society needs. They shot themselves in the foot.”
“Not that I necessarily disagree with their views, just their methods.”
As to whether the Orthodox community will ever be united in the future, Rabbi Schochet said he “won’t place any bets on it. But then, that’s one good reason to hope for the coming of Moshiach.”
Many people in the Orthodox community are troubled by what appears to be a refusal of non-haredi rabbis and other Orthodox leaders to speak out against the current situation. Several people interviewed for this series expressed the view that many Orthodox rabbis and leaders are afraid of being censured by Rabbi Miller and the haredi community, and these sources contend this fear is behind the silence of Orthodox leaders. It is this context – and our belief that issues that generate such vehemence should be discussed openly – that has led The CJN to investigate the situation.
From left: Rabbi Reuven Tradburks, Rabbi Immanuel Schochet and Martin Lockshin
Rabbi Reuven Tradburks, secretary of Toronto’s Vaad Harabonim and spiritual leader of Kehillat Shaarei Torah, a Modern Orthodox congregation, paints a more positive picture than some others of the move toward more stringent religious practices and views in the Orthodox community.
“I feel that, often when there are dramatic changes in policy, people look at it as being a step backward, or as the Orthodox world becoming more fundamentalist. I don’t view it that way. I view it as a positive change, that the number of people who want to live a rich and full life completely consistent with what the Torah wants from us is growing.”
He said he does not see the discrepancies between Modern Orthodox and haredi philosophy as a division between the two groups.
“I think there are different approaches. It’s not a new issue. It’s a new manifestation. Part of the reason [the issue seems more pronounced] is because of e-mail, the Internet and instantaneous communication. And to some extent it’s also the ascendancy of Torah and knowledgeable Jews in the Orthodox world in general.”
However, he noted, there are Orthodox Jews “grappling to find a way of negotiating their allegiance to science and also their allegiance to Torah and Torah leaders.”
Rabbi Tradburks was referring to the debate about British-born, Israel-based Rabbi Natan Slifkin, a haredi scholar who touched off an ongoing controversy in the Orthodox world with his views on creation and science.
Three of his books – including Mysterious Creatures and The Camel, the Hare and the Hyrax, which offer ideas about the origins of the universe that are anathema to his fellow haredim – were banned by Israeli and North American haredi rabbis in early 2005. Especially troubling to them are Rabbi Slifkin’s assertions in The Science of Torah that the world was created not in six days, but over millions of years.
The young rabbi’s profile remained relatively low in Toronto until his visit to the city this past winter to speak at an event sponsored by Torah in Motion, a Modern Orthodox educational organization that hosts lectures and programs.
At that time, Rabbi Shlomo Miller of Kollel Avreichim issued “a letter of admonishment” stating that Rabbi Slifkin’s opinions on the six days of creation were “definitely heretical,” even “boorish.”
A book ban, such as the one imposed on Rabbi Slifkin, is “not something I would do, but I understand the rationale as to why that’s being done, even if I don’t agree with it,” said Rabbi Tradburks, whose synagogue also hosted Rabbi Slifkin as a speaker when he was in Toronto.
* * *
Jonathan Ostroff, a computer science professor at York University who was authorized by Rabbi Miller to speak on his behalf, said that Rabbi Miller had no connection with the original ban on Rabbi Slifkin’s books and that he only issued his own condemnation of his work after he was asked for his opinion on the subject by members of his own community. The letter was intended only for his followers, and not for the general community, Ostroff said.
He also told The CJN that Rabbi Miller distinguishes between “operational science” and “origin science.” Operational science, which Rabbi Miller accepts, examines how things work in the universe, while origin science looks at what caused things to begin.
Ostroff stressed that there is a difference between disagreeing with someone, and hating or looking down on them. “We object to his views, not to him as a person,” Ostroff said. In fact, he said, when Rabbi Slifkin came to Toronto to speak at the Torah in Motion event, he was invited to speak to Rabbi Miller and Ostroff, but was “unresponsive.”
“We would still be willing to talk to him anytime,” Ostroff said.
He added that, for a time, he was involved in dialogue with Rabbi Slifkin, both via the Internet and other means. “I wanted to continue the dialogue, but he cut it off. I don’t believe he wants to discuss substantive issues.”
When contacted by The CJN, Rabbi Slifkin said he had been advised by two Canadian rabbis against meeting with Rabbi Miller, because the rabbis felt the purpose of the meeting would be to try to change his views and not to have an open discussion of the issues.
Rabbi Slifkin added that he stopped his online communication with Ostroff “when the pressures of the ban began.” He said that at that time, his posts on an online discussion group were being passed on “to non-participants in order to stir up opposition to me. I have absolutely no idea what Dr. Ostroff means when he says that I don’t want to discuss substantive issues. I have done nothing else for the last few years!”
* * *
What makes the Slifkin affair unique, according to Yossi Adler, a Toronto lawyer who wrote about the controversy in a CJN column in January, is that in similar past cases, other people have retracted the material that was deemed offensive, “and everything [was] fine and dandy.”
Not only did Rabbi Slifkin not retract his assertions, Adler said, but rabbis who condemned his work went beyond banning his books to condemn him personally.
“It’s censorship,” said Adler, who fears that if someone like Rabbi Slifkin, who is part of the haredi community, can be singled out, then everyone is “potentially a target.”
To a lesser extent, Adler was singled out for his CJN column by some Orthodox Jews who criticized him for airing the issue in public. “They don’t understand that this is a significant issue that merits discussion and analysis,” he said, adding that the response he received to his column was overwhelmingly – perhaps 95 per cent – positive.
The naysayers are “creating an environment where debate is non-existent or only discussed behind closed doors, and that’s regrettable,” said Adler.
He also noted that some haredi Jews feel he and others are “right-wing bashing” out of enjoyment, an accusation he denies. “We came from that world. We feel an affinity to that world, and we care about its direction.”
The bans are increasing in number and seriousness, says Adler, who was raised in the “yeshiva world” but has moved toward what he terms “centrist” Orthodoxy. “I prefer the more centrist [community],” he said. “They’re less likely to build walls and to exclude what modernity has to offer. They’re more interested in secular education, and more Zionistic.
“As each group has become more confident, they feel they can live independently. I feel a significant disrespect [on the part of the haredi community toward] non-Orthodox and less Orthodox Jews.”
A lot of the haredi “suspicion” toward the outside world stems from a perceived breakdown of morality, as exemplified by societal changes that include same-sex marriage and sexual promiscuity, Adler explained.
“They will exclude media from their households. A lot of stuff in the media today is very trashy. At the same time, I think they’re throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
“It was probably like that before,” he admitted, “but not to the same extent, and they weren’t as bold in the way they impose certain rules in the community.”
Rabbi Miller “has a brilliant mind and is well versed in the sources,” said Adler. “No one’s willing to stand up and say that [what he is saying] is not acceptable, or that this is a stringency going beyond what the community requires.”
Adler said that, as a result, “there are people who have considered walking away from Orthodoxy.”
* * *
Not all rabbis were as forthcoming as Rabbi Tradburks when asked to be interviewed for this article. One said he didn’t even want to be quoted as saying that he declined to comment.
When asked repeatedly about the issue of possible repercussions for people who might challenge the growing influence of haredi religious leaders and practices, Ostroff’s only comments had to do with the reaction that Rabbi Miller has received for publicly expressing his own views.
“He has had repercussions for defending Torah Judaism. Should not a Torah teacher stand up for Torah? That’s what he did. Should he allow people to wallow in ignorance?”
Ostroff added that Rabbi Miller expected that he would face consequences for speaking out, just as anybody who comments publicly on any issue would. “But you have to protect your children, and you have to protect the truth of Torah.”
* * *
Martin Lockshin, a York University professor who is an ordained Orthodox rabbi, remains sanguine about the current environment in the Orthodox world.
The former director of York’s Centre for Jewish Studies says he still feels at home in most places in the Orthodox community and is heartened by the presence of Modern Orthodox institutions in the city, citing the examples of Netivot HaTorah Day School, and Bnei Akiva’s Ulpanat Orot and Or Chaim high schools.
“I see something like Torah In Motion, which tries to do intellectual types of things, as a positive force in the city,” he said.
“I know there are people I see as kindred spirits who I can talk to, who unabashedly call themselves Modern Orthodox.”
However, he noted, “it may be a well-placed concern that congregational rabbis find themselves in the difficult position – the modern centrist liberal kinds – worried about losing their bona fides because of a possible attack from the ultra-Orthodox.”
At his own synagogue, Congregation Bnai Torah, which has a more right-wing philosophy than his own, the rabbi “has been very tolerant of me,” Lockshin said.
* * *
Rabbi Immanuel Schochet, a retired philosophy professor at Humber College and a leader of the Lubavitch movement in Toronto, said the Jewish community has been inundated with dissent and anger, as well as stringencies that go beyond halachah in an attempt to protect tradition.
“We live in a society where under the guise of political correctness, all systems are go. Moral boundaries which were observed by everyone are being trampled,” he said by way of explanation. In today’s “permissive, licentious society,” observant Jews try to take precautions, he added.
Like immunizations, “we may inject kids with poisons to protect them” – in other words, expose them to the non-Jewish world so that they are equipped to deal with it. Or, he added, observant Jews may try to defend tradition by creating more closed enclaves and putting up behavioural fences such as not allowing television or Internet in the home, in an effort to circle the wagons around the community’s children. “It’s not foolproof, but it’s an attempt to protect kids and the young from being corrupted.”
The ideal, he said, is “the golden middle path,” though he admits this path is hard to find.
Rabbi Schochet added that there is “great hostility” within the Orthodox community, which he said comes from divisions that are more about ego than personal ideology.
There is a fight over “my gedolim [rabbinic sages] vs. your gedolim – my way or the highway,” he said, adding that this is not what the pursuit of Torah means. “You have to realize that you aren’t God’s policeman.”
There is nothing wrong with having a difference of opinion, so long as the discussion is kept to the issue and avoids the personal, he said. You condemn the act or action, not the person doing it, he added.
For instance, different schools serve different parts of the Orthodox world, but they should still be conscious of the bonds between them. “I may not send my children to schools whose views I disagree with. But show hostility to them? No.”
Rabbi Schochet said he disagrees with the approach of those who banned Rabbi Slifkin’s book.
“The answer is not to ban a book – that just gives publicity, and popularizes it, the opposite of what is intended. The answer is to discuss, and to question, to say why you think he is wrong.”
You don’t argue with a Jewish heretic, said Rabbi Schochet, speaking hypothetically, and “banning went out with the dodo.” The rabbis who banned Rabbi Slifkin’s books have “moved beyond what society needs. They shot themselves in the foot.”
“Not that I necessarily disagree with their views, just their methods.”
As to whether the Orthodox community will ever be united in the future, Rabbi Schochet said he “won’t place any bets on it. But then, that’s one good reason to hope for the coming of Moshiach.”
