Part of our collective self-criticism: A few days ago, here in Jerusalem, I heard the story of two or three of our young equivalents of Centrist Orthodoxy – the kippah serugah generation – who were driving and saw a hasid asking for a hitch. They picked him up and began a conversation. He was dressed in typical Hasidic garb, and they were in their shorts and knitted kippot. They asked him why he wears that particular outfit, and he replied, quite directly, “Because our teacher Moses dressed this way.” They were stunned, shocked, until one of them said, “Do you really think that Moses dressed this way?” He replied, “Well, maybe not – but he certainly didn’t dress the way you are dressed...”

Commentary of Rabbenu Yonah on Avot concerning machloket l’shem shamayim she-sofah le’hitkayem – also, see Bereishit Rabbah on the second day of Creation: reason for absence of ki tov is because of vayavdel – even if the havdalah is l’tikkun olam.

For Centrist Orthodoxy Book April 12, 1988 Karl Popper (The Open Society and Its Enemies, page 265, Note 4, Fifth Edition, 1966) makes reference to the "paradox of tolerance," which admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance.

The January 13, 1989 edition of Per Yid, the Satmar organ (which announces itself as the "Voice of American Orthodox Jewry"), carries an article on page 45 by a Rabbi Landsman, one of a series on, "The Trials of the New Generation." In this particular column, which otherwise has certain perceptive ideas on Talmud education, we read some rather astounding things about this group's formulation of the trials and temptations of being a Jew in the modern world. This particular article is directed to a relatively large amount of publication of halakhic works by people of suspect ideological purity. The Satmar Rebbe taught that no volume of pure Halakhah, even if it does not contain any questions of ideology, may be used if the author is not one of the "in-group," that is, those who identify with their brand of Orthodoxy. In the previous issue of Per Yid, in the article by the same author in this series, he tells of the late Tzehlemer Rav, Rabbi Levi Greenwald, who in the middle of a sheur asked a student to bring him a classic halakhic work (Shitah Mekubetzet on Pesahim), and when the student brought it he noticed that it was a fairly new volume, and he asked who issued it. The student answered that it was a Gershuni (the rabbinic title was removed from the story, although Rabbi Yehuda Gershuni has been prominent for ears as a distinguished talmudic scholar). The Tzehlemer Rav inquired whether this ws the same Gershuni who was active in Mizrachi, the organization of religious Zionism, and when the answer was affirmative he asked that the book be taken out immediately. When the student returned and the rabbi asked him what he did with the volume, and the student replied that he put it with the Shemot—the scraps of sacred literature that are prepared for being discarded and buried—the rabbi was alarmed and said, "No, that is not good enough; I want it out of this house altogether..." How does one examine the religious credentials of standard halakhic works which are otherw…

חומר להרצאות ושיעורים: 1. תורה ומדע – מהתוי״י: "כולא עלמא כהלולא דמיא". כמו בחופה – אם לא אמר החתן "הרי את", הרי כולם טורפים ואוכלים ולא נעשה דבר. כך גם ב"כולא עלמא": אם אין כאן "הרי את" – כלומר ברית, מחויבות, קשר מהותי – בין האדם לאלוקיו, אז כל החיים הם נטולי משמעות. כך גם לגבי תורה ומדע – למדע על כל ענפיו יש ערך ומשמעות, אבל רק כשיש ביסודו את ה"הרי את" של תורה לשמה – את המחויבות של תלמוד תורה לשם שמיים. 2. אורתודוקסיה מודרנית – (מדודי הרי״מ בוימל שליט״א): בחומש מסופר שמשה עשה מנורה אחת, ואילו במלכים מסופר ששלמה עשה עשר מנורות. מדוע? כי המשכן היה עשוי יריעות, ולא היה מקור אור חיצוני – כך שמנורה אחת הספיקה כמקור לאור עליון. אך בבית המקדש של שלמה, שבו היו חלונות שקופים – האור מבחוץ חדר פנימה, ואם היה מדליק רק מנורה אחת, לא היה ניכר כלל אור הקדושה. לכן היה צורך בעשר מנורות – כדי שאור התורה והקדושה יאיר ויורגש. כך גם בזמננו – בחברה שאין בה תרבות כלל, די בקצת תורה כדי להאיר. אבל בחברה שיש בה מדע, תרבות, טכנולוגיה, והשכלה כללית – יש צורך פי כמה וכמה בתורה כדי שאורה יוכר ויורגש. כלומר, בחברה מודרנית יש צורך בעשר מידות של תלמוד תורה – לא באחת בלבד. 3. בכלל – השאיפה היא למצוינות (excellence). מה שאמרתי לגבי הפסוק: "ונתתי עשב בשדך לבהמתך ואכלת ושבעת... השמרו לכם פן יפתה לבבכם וסרתם" – אם יש לכם שאיפות קטנות, כך שאתם מסתפקים ושבעים מעשב – שהוא מאכל בהמה – אז אתם בסכנה של עבודה זרה, שהיא מאכל־בהמה של הנפש.

One of the visible differentia between the Right-Wing and Centrist Orthodoxy is the black felt hat, or black suits. There is a good argument to be made for such outward identifying marks... However, there is equally good argument to oppose them. For one thing, they set apart Orthodox Jews from others, and thus make them immune to whatever beneficent influence Orthodox Jews can have on other Jews. The "Alter" of Mir used to insist that his students dress "normally" and be shaven... (Check on this). Moreover, excessive emphasis on outward appearance often becomes a cover-up for inward moral flabbiness. The Kotzker once said: We read in the Torah that, at the occasion of the spies who entered Canaan, that Joshua and Caleb tore their clothing. Why so? The answer is: When the two saw that twelve spies who were all distinguished princes could wear their shtreimlech and white "chupitzes" and yet speak ill of the Land of Israel, they came to the conclusion that outward appearance no longer has any significance whatever, and they therefore tore their clothing, i.e., the clothing of the spies. Why, he asked, do we need any shtreimlech and "chupitzes", when the outward clothing no longer protect inner purity?