Tag Archive for Kennedy

THE PERSONAL LIVES OF GREAT LEADERS

May 19, 2016 Uncategorized No comments
his article was constructed with the help of either writings, lectures or shiurim of Rabbi’s  Berrel Wien , Yossi Bilus, Asher Hertzberg, Jay Shapiro, Yitzchak Frankfuter, Abba Goldman


The first lady Jacqueline Kennedy was very much a private person.  When she went on mini vacation her husband, the President, decided to have a public photo shoot with the kids….opposite attract
One advocate of a dethroned leader complained “How can you disclose embarrassing information about our great leader?” The reply was, “Why not? He has committed himself to the public, therefore he has exposed everything about himself to the world. Nothing is private anymore for him. He’s fair game! A public figure has no right privacy.”

However that is insane!! It’s a recipe for disaster for any leader or public figure, or really anyone for that matter, as we all have skeletons in our closet. No one is ‘squeaky clean perfect’ and if someone happens to actually be the “white puritan”, frankly my dear, that would constitute abnormality and would be considered a freak of nature.

Does the reader agree?
Perhaps the reply of “a public figure has no privacy” is rooted in this week’s parsha. In parshat Emor, it teaches us special laws and obligations that the Torah places upon the High Priest, he Kohen Gadol. He is limited in his marriage choices, his bereavement behavior and in other matters of seemingly personal life. Is it not sufficient that he perform his duties – especially his detailed Yom Kippur duties – in a competent and efficient manner? After all, is not one entitled to a private and personal life, even if one holds high public office? Apparently the Torah does not feel so. Being the High Priest is not a job. It is not even what our non-Jewish friends refer to as “a calling.” It is rather a position of moral leadership and a role model stature in Jewish life. What is the lesson involved in these restrictions and guidance of the High Priest?

The scrutinizing of the High Priest has may have been a springboard for all leaders thought history to be hounded and examined with a magnified glass, but in truth there is no comparison between the High Priest and other leaders. That is because the High Priest’s chief scrutinizer is none other than G-d. Evidence of this is that if he has skeletons in his closet, G-d will smite him on Yom Kippur.

As explained by the historian Rabbi Berel Wein: One of the signs of corruption that doomed the Second Temple Commonwealth of Judea (Bais Sheni) was the unethical behavior of many of the High Priests who served in the Temple during that period of Jewish history. The Talmud teaches us that many of them died when entering the Holy of Holiness because of their unworthy private behavior. There where Kohanim that seemingly had the confidence of the people however “G-d examines the hearts.” He determines which Kohen Gadol is worthy and moral. For this reason a rope was attached to their leg so they can be pulled out in case they perish. Nobody but the Kohen Gadol is allowed in the Holies of Holies.

The public figure, the leader has been the object of the paparazzi and the National Enquirer ever since.

A question is posed: With the exception of Kohen Gadol, is it fair to judge personal behavior of a leader, such as Rabbi, head of State, or congressmen to determine if they are suitable for such a lofty position? Shouldn’t we look at other factors – economic issues, issues concerning our rights to live as Orthodox Jews, religious freedom, and liberty issues? There are issues that relate to bringing resources into our communities. There are other issues, too. Who services the constituency best? Who is most likely to be responsive to individual phone calls for assistance on individual matters? Aren’t these issues just as important as morality?

We need to look where the leader stands on other issues, such as the resource issues, the economic issues, the religious liberty issues, and accessibility. You have to judge a candidate based on the totality of the situation. Though moral issues are certainly a relevant factor, they are not the only factor.

THE MORAL ISSUE
Reflecting what we discussed earlier, morality is the classic Jewish tradition of picking a leader. Interestingly, there was clever message conveyed by a Politian (scholar) who felt the importance, or for that matter non-importance, of the moral issue: “The Jewish children in exile were always dependent on intermediaries to represent their interests in the countries where they sojourned…. Such an intermediary is nothing more than a messenger. No one ever checked the morality of a messenger, or was interested in his private life, as long as he gave the desired results-i.e., the proper representation of Jewish interests.”

That was the language of an ad that ran in Der Yid, a Satmar paper based in Williamsburg, during a re-election campaign for Fred Richmond, the congressional representative for Williamsburg during the late ’70s and early ’80s. Richmond had a depraved personal life; the ad was promoting the idea that the chassidic readers of the paper, who were so careful in their own lives about any hint of immorality, should overlook Richmond’s immorality because he was helping the community with its needs. The ad was obviously countering those who had objected to Richmond on those grounds.

RESPECT
Dr. Abba Goldman mentions the number one factor is that the leader has to earn the respect of the people. Perhaps, he says it might override in some instances the morality importance.

King David didn’t care about his honor by dancing with the Torah; he did it for the sake of G-d. Michal, his wife, who witnessed this, didn’t think it was dignified to do so. She thought it was unbecoming that the king dance and show a glimpse of his legs. The act shows a disregard for modesty and would hamper the respect and dignity of the King. Nevertheless, G-d was honored by David’s devotion and Michal was punished for criticizing. It’s not an easy understanding for Michal’s train of thought was in line with her father, Shaul’s, philosophy of modesty and respect.

Not with standing, one sees at what degree our ancestors value modesty and respect of a leader. Here is another example pertaining do King David again: When Shimi ben Gerah insulted King David the incident was not forgotten. On his death bed the King instructs his son Shlomo to “do what is right”. At the end Shimi ben Gerah was executed and the King’s honor had been defended.

Dr. Goldman and many relates that the blame and failure of 9/11 should be pointed to the Clinton administration. A year before, there was a terrorist attack against the United States Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Cole (DDG-67) on 12 October 2000, while it was harbored and being refueled in the Yemeni port of Aden. 17 American sailors were killed, and 39 were injured. This event was the deadliest attack against a United States Naval vessel since 1987. The terrorist organization al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the attack. Clinton had such a poor relationship with congress following the Lewinsky debacle that any proposal including how to deal with Al Quade would and did go on deaf ears. Congress had no respect for the President and in turn he was ineffective.

Part of the blame has to be directed to the press for reporting and making a mockery of the Clinton/Lewinsky incident. Interestingly, John F Kennedy was just as immoral as Clinton, however he was an effective President. The press never reported his indecency even though it was occurring regularly in the White House.

Can one imagine if they did report the indecency and made light of the President? Does one think Cuba, neighboring communist country at the time, would have backed down and pulled their missiles?

As an example, in Syria, before the civil war there, it was a crime to make fun of the president of the country. No comedian was immune. This concept was taken to an extreme where no one was permitted to laugh in Nevuchadnetzar’s Babylonia, for the king had an inferiority complex and thought they were laughing at him for being short. It was ‘respect through fear’ that these leaders tried to force on their people. Seemingly respect is needed to have an effective leader. Astonishingly, respect is what Ronald Reagan received without the use of force and with the late night comedians whose job it was to ridicule politicians and the establishment.

One of our beloved leaders who had to admit an embarrassing moment in his private life was Yehuda, Yaakov’s son. Even though his act was considered lowly, Yehuda admitted and faced up to his guilt and was hailed in high regards for doing so by his brothers and by G-d. He took responsibility for his action. Yehuda is a prime example of “nobody’s an angel, but be a man and pick up the pieces”. For reward for his admission he and his genealogy were appointed royalty, leaders of the Jewish people forever

ABILITY TO GET ALONG
Some say there are more crucial character traits we should look for then to poke into the private life of a candidate. One of the aspects of a good leader is the ability to get along with others. This character trait is a must when dealing with subordinates, heads of state and so forth. In the up and coming election, there happens to be such a person. One has to ask can he make rational decisions if he has constantly dismissing and berating everyone. Can his subordinates do the optimal best in their field dealing with such mental abuse?

NIXON AND RABBI AVIGDOR MILLER

In the late 60’s many religious Jew broke from the mold and voted Republican. Although, the Democrats supported Jewish cause and education the Jewish Rabbinical leaders including Rabbi Avigdor Miller were vocal in voting for Nixon. “Don’t make calculations concerning the yeshivas – it’s not a concern because the Ribbono Shel Olam feeds and gives sustenance to all. Don’t rely on princes. They are not a source of parnassah. G-d has many messengers. The reason to vote” – this was even with Nixon – “is because Nixon is against Russia, and Russia was the enemy of Hashem. It says, ‘Ohavei Hashem sinu ra.’ Comunist were atheist. [Those who love Hashem hate evil.]’ He said, ‘I have no love lost for Nixon or for any of them, but when I come to shamayim, they’ll ask, “Did you stand on my side?”

Rabbi Avigdor Miller said that when we vote, we vote the same way. He said, ‘I’m not afraid of Russia personally. The President, who is against Russia, is against them for his own reasons, because they are the Big Bad Wolf and they are having an arms race with nuclear ballistic missiles. Our interest has nothing to do with that. We’re not afraid of them; we just have to stand against them because they are kofrim [deniers] in Hakadosh Baruch Hu.’ That was his position.

It is important to note many clarify the moral issue: not so much the moral personal life of the candidate but what does he/she morally stand for. Perhaps that is the moral issue!! This brings us to the other prime candidate of this election. Perhaps it’s commendable that she had taken the abuse and humiliation of her husband and stuck with the marriage, however does she approve of same sex marriage and abortion, which is directly against the Torah?

Traditionally Jews in this country have always voted Democrat for they help financially to our Yeshivas. We value a Torah education which is our prime directive. However the Democrats of today are in favor of same sex marriage and abortion, someplace they weren’t 20 years ago. It seems like though todays Republicans are yesterday’s Democrats.

We can learn much from the two king that Avraham and Sarah visited. Both were immoral. Avimelech did everything in secret while Pharoah was not discreet and shameful, he did everything in the open.

On the last meeting between Avraham and Pharaoh, Pharaoh suggested something to Avraham which the latter acknowledged “This place is not for you.” In other words, we have different moral values. Perhaps, we should take some of the suggestions of some of the prominent Rabbis who denounced President Clinton. If he can do what he did and not feel remorse, it’s time we should depart this country. However there are those that say “Let’s remember we are in a non-Jewish state, what do you expect?

We see that although traditionally the primary decision on a leader was the moral issue many Rabbi’s or heads of communities look for other factors in picking a leader. Perhaps yes or perhaps not the private lives of leaders is best be left alone and not disclosed there are other important issues? That is a hot debate in today’s times.

Sibling Rivalry

May 15, 2015 Uncategorized No comments
This article was constructed with the help of either writings, lectures or shiurim of  Rabbi’s Yisschar Frand, Berel Wein  Baruch Dopelt, Yossi Bilus, Dr. Abba Goldman and Mr. Shmuel Yosipov

Siblings’ rivalry.  A number of years ago in the most coveted sport events of the year, where 100 million viewers tuned in, Footballs highest honor, the two best teams that played the Ravens and the 49ers had an interesting twist in their story line. Baltimore Ravens head coach John Harbaugh and his younger brother Jim, head man of the San Francisco 49ers, became the first pair of brothers to coach against each other in the Super Bowl. If one thinks that’s super, in the early 1960’s President John F Kennedy needed help to run a super power and named his younger brother Robert -the Attorney General. Here are two brothers heading the most powerful country in the world.
 Whether it be the Marx brothers,  Groucho, Chico, Harpo and Zeppo making the world laugh or watching the parents of the Williams sisters, who competed against each other on Tennis’s grand stage, uncomfortably not knowing who to cheer for, siblings can put the best performance, on the highest level, out there!!!.
There is something very interesting in this week’s Parshiot that one should take note.  Parshat Acharei-Mot contains the list of forbidden sexual relationships. Vayikra 18:18 contains the Biblical prohibition for a person to marry his wife’s sister. In expressing this prohibition, the Torah uses the word “litzror” [to make a co-wife].
The Ramban comments: This verb expresses the reason for this prohibition. Most of the forbidden relations (e.g. — mother-in-law, daughter-in-law, etc.) were simply forbidden without stating a reason. However, the Torah does state a reason by a sister-in-law, namely that it is inappropriate to make two sisters into co-wives of the same husband. These two women should ideally love one another. Placing them into a situation of rivalry will inevitably cause those who should have been best of friends to have a hostile relationship with one another.
The Ramban continues: The Torah does not state this regarding a daughter or mother of one’s wife, because they remain to be forbidden even after his wife’s death (unlike the situation with the sisters, where a sister is permitted to marry her brother-in-law if her sister — his first wife – dies). The Ramban distinguishes between the “ervah”-forbidden relations of two sisters and that of other relations. Here the Torah did not forbid the marriage because of “ervah” but because of the social harm it would bring to the sibling relationship, which at any rate is subject to rivalry. To avoid aggravating that natural sibling rivalry to intolerable levels, the Torah forbade a man to simultaneously be married to two sisters. The proof that this prohibition is different than all the others (and that it is not because of “ervah” or “she’er basar” [close relationship] but for some other reason) is the very fact that the prohibition expires upon the death of one of the sisters.
We learn two novel ideas from this Ramban.
First, we see from the fact that the Torah includes this prohibition in the chapter of forbidden relationships (arayot) that the Torah treats the matter of causing sisters to hate one another with the same severity as it treats the cardinal sin of arayot.
Second, we see how important it is in the eyes of the Torah for children to get along with one another. The Torah bans two sisters from marrying the same person for the simple reason that the Torah does not want siblings to fight with each other. Whether we are ourselves siblings or whether we are parents who have children who are siblings, we all know that this is indeed a very big challenge.
As a matter of fact, the book of Bereishit, which comprises a substantial part of the entire written Torah, contains within it almost no commandments and is basically a book of narrative tracing the development of one family – eventually seventy in number – and of the difficulties that this family encountered over generations, purposely waits till the very end, till we finally correct the flaw we’ve had throughout the book, where then the family is elevated to a nation.
One has to realize the first man, Adam’ sons, Kayin and Hevel did not get along. Moreover, the pattern continues, Yitzchak and Yishmael, Yaacov and Eisav, Leah and Rachel, Yosef and his brothers didn’t see eye to eye either.
It wasn’t till the end of the book, where we see that Menashe, Yosef’ eldest son, not bothered by his grandfather Yaakov placing his right hand over his younger brother Efraim where he gave a more important blessing. It’s no coincidence that the optimal blessing is, one should be like Efraim and Menashe.
The book concludes with Yosef and his brothers at peace with each other. Unity is in place with the fine end taste of Efraim and Menashe – the ultimate “giving” brothers.
When we start the next book, Shemot, it’s no coincidence that we find nation is led by two brothers Moshe and Aharon. We learn in the beginning of the story line, one of the reasons, that Moshe was not willing to take the mantle of leading the Israelites out of Egypt was that his older brother Aharon might be slighted. It wasn’t until G-d reassured him that quite the opposite – Aharon will be elated with Moshe being chosen over him. It seems like a healthier family structure: where the respect and sensitivity replaces jealousy and strife, found all too often in Bereishit.

There is a famous Midrash (a body of interpretations of Torah texts along with instructional stories as taught by Chazal (Rabbinical Jewish sages of the post-Temple era) that provide an intrinsic analysis to passages in the Tanach.) where there were two brothers, a rich man, who was married with a big family, and a poor man who was not married who were concerned about the other’s well-being. They lived on the opposite side of the mountain. The rich man, at night, secretly placed grains in his brother’s property; knowingly he would be too ashamed and not accept his kindness. He rationalized my brother is too poor and has nobody to look after him. While the poor man, at night also secretly placed grains in his brother’s possessions reasoning my brother has a big family and would find it difficult, for he has too much on his mind, to  fetch the grains himself.
One night as the both, covertly, were going to the other, they unexpectedly collided on the top of the mountain. Startled and surprised, they realized it was the other who were placing the grain at the other one’s property where then they joyfully embraced. G-d loved the moment and the tremendous affection they showed one another so much that He proclaimed this site, on top of the mountain, is where the Temple will be built.
 My Mother had mentioned that when she and my father migrated to this country, basically without family, they were joined by another couple whom they arrived together with on the same ship. She mentioned fondly that she had such an intense friendship with her, Nurit Alibayof, the first year, not surprising since they had no family and difficulty in language and culture. Although I wasn’t born yet, however, when I did experience how they interacted years later, I could not imagine their friendship any better for it was very strong for 50 years until Nurit’s death. However, it seems the closeness my mother has with her sister is quite different in nature. That too is one of extreme closeness. The common bond of having the same parents, same gender, similar of age and same upbringing translates to a very powerful closeness which I’ve experienced and observed over the years. Similarly, my wife and her sister have a relationship that has that sibling/of the same gender great intensity.

However, for the most part siblings of the same gender are more prone to fighting sometimes in the most vicious and extraordinary way. Despite the odds though, we have to look at the flip side, the same gender sibling relationship could positively be translated as extremely productive and for that reason, perhaps, the Torah does not want to tamper with that relationship.
What are the measures to prevent the “bad blood” between the two siblings? One has to realize as Dr. Goldman says, that “it’s all up to the parents, they set the stage; the atmosphere is in their hands”. He mentioned one method often used to motivate a child to excel is to belittle his actions by showing the other sibling doing better. Although it might be a motivation, however, animosity, jealousy and tension will develop among the siblings. An inevitable common thought will be “Mommy and Daddy love you more than me” enraging the rivalry. The mother and father as well as teacher and camp counselor are leaders and set the tone. The mother and the father have to show that they enjoy their children’s company. Often parents come home from work not wanting to be disturbed. They are doing an injustice to their children. A happy “I want to come home to my family” attitude has to be presented!
It’s very important that a child not feel slighted in any way. I met a parent who is sending one of his twins to one school and another to a different school. I asked him, “wouldn’t just sending them to different classes in the grade be sufficient? Why go to the extreme of a different school altogether? He answered, his wife is a twin and she often felt slighted even in separate classes. Besides, he continued, often schools don’t have same level grades, it’s the “A” class and the “B” class.
The main message of the “midrash” of the two bothers on the mountain is one of brotherly love and ahavat chinam. The pasuk in Tehillim (Psalm 133:1) states: “Hinei matov u’mah naim, shevet achim gam yachad, Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to dwell together in unity. There is something very primal about brotherly love, which may explain why it is so difficult to achieve, and why it is such a rare, valuable gem when find it. Dovid HaMelech wrote about the very thing Yaakov wanted to do: settle among “settled brothers.” Alas, the fulfillment of his dream was premature, not achieving completion in his lifetime, the lifetime of Yosef, or even, within the lifetimes of his surviving brothers.
In fact, we’re still waiting……..
May we speedily in our day have the unity that will lead to the Temple being rebuilt on Mount Moriah.