Re: A survey of Yeshiva high school graduates

I would like to begin by adding my thanks to Zvi for bringing his intriguing study to the group. Many people have commented on *problems*. I would like to comment by describing a *solution*. I will also bring two illustrative examples. At the end of the posting, I will mention which aspect from Zvi’s study motivated this.

EXAMPLE 1: Let us deal with the very severe prohibition of ribith, taking fixed required interest on loans. Let us suppose this is taught to a high-school class. Let us further suppose we find that 5-20 years later, students who learned about this in high-school find themselves not following it. Let me echo, transfer and rephrase some of the approaches mentioned to correct this and then explore a correct one.

APPROACH 1: HARDLINE: This approach would tell students how serious ribith is. For example, ribith involves six negative prohibitions and is equivalent to denying the Exodus!

I would argue (as we all know?) this will not stop people 5-20 years later from violating it.

APPROACH 2: MIDDOTH / CHARACTER TRAIT APPROACH: A 2nd approach would emphasize how people who don’t take fixed required interest develop tremendous character traits. They rise to great spiritual levels. Furthermore, such traits are consistent with Judaism’s very rich business ethic.

I again argue (as we all know?) this will not stop people 5-20 years later from violating it.

APPROACH 3: EXPERT APPROACH: A 3rd approach is to tell students that when they have a problem they should go to Jewish business experts.

I believe this is the worst of the 3 approaches. First, you are telling the student that you don’t know the answer. Second you are hinting that perhaps the business expert will say “Everyone violates this” thus encouraging the future sinner to at least stay in Judaism even though they are in violation.

APPROACH 4: OPERATIONAL APPROACH: The correct approach is to explain that Halachah is aware of the need to get compensation for loans. It therefore created the heter iskah. I would follow by a detailed discussion showing when this heter iskah works and when you have to abstain. I might also cite responsa (Did you know that 60% of the Bar-Ilan response are on monetary/civil matters not ritual matters?). I guess it is ok to mention the 6 prohibitions, the denial of the exodus, and the good character traits but I wouldn’t spent more than 5 minutes on it and I would make it clear that such material is not on the “test”. The test would test student’s knowledge of how to respond and react in a variety of business contexts.

Before discussing Zvi’s study let me give two more examples of an operational approach

EXAMPLE 2: I had an uncle, a businessperson, who was not so religious (But he became religious later in life). My mother (his sister) once treated him on his birthday. We went to a fancy restaurant in New York (La Difference which I believe has since gone out of business). At the end of the meal, my uncle thanked my mother for the treat. He then commented on the décor of the restaurant: “Had I known there were restaurants like this, I would have kept kosher my whole life.”

The statement struck me. It is the type of statement that educators would say is a “poor attitude.” But it is “emeth”. It says what is needed. My uncle had no desire to rebel against Jewish law; he had a need to take business colleagues out to lunch. He needed operational not religious or character trait guidance.

EXAMPLE 3: The following example is from my High School years. In some Hebrew class, the teacher wanted to show the roots of a law in the bible. So he asked us to take out our Tanakh. A friend of mine did not have a Tanakh so he went over to the student cubbyholes and took someone’s Tanakh. Upon seeing this, the teacher commented that it was wrong to take something from someone’s cubicle without asking him. My friend nevertheless, completed the taking and sat down. The teacher continued about proper character. I arose, went to the student who took the Tanakh and gave him my Tanakh; I simultaneously took the Tanakh he had taken and returned it to the cubbyhole. I returned to my seat and beamed at the teacher. He asked, “But what will you use?” Happy to show off, I recited by heart the particular parshah he probably wanted to quote.

This example also illustrates that an operational approach is superior to other approaches. My friend had no desire to steal. He just wanted a Tanakh.

What prompted this posting were two items in Zvi’s study: #1) Apparently “orthodoxy” seems to be defined by kashruth and holidays. What happened to Taharath Mishpachah which is more uniquely a definition of Jewishness (Every religion has holidays and laws on what you can eat; very few religions have an institution like Taharath Mishpachah); #2) The statement (caught by others) that intimacy relation prohibitions seem to be frequent prior to marriage but after marriage normal norms resume.

I was initially going to write a posting on Taharath Mishpachah (including premarital intimacy) but the topic is too charged. Because of the content people would miss my point. And what is my point? To recap: My point or solution to the problems Zvi’s raises is an emphasis on operational teaching, on teaching “how to”. I would deemphasize hardline, character trait approaches or sending people to secular experts.

I will close with another example. I was once speaking to a Conservative Rabbi who I found very knowledgeable. I remarked, “You seem very knowledgeable about Judaism and Jewish law; why did you leave us?” He immediately responded, “I left because the businesspeople in my congregation regarded me as living in an ivory tower in a world totally divorced from theirs and therefore couldn’t relate to me.”

Russell Jay Hendel; Ph.D; www.Rashiyomi.com/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/12/2018 06:45AM by mlb.