Adventures in Chinuch Classics: The Superbowl

As much as I would like to write another humorous post about the Superbowl, I don't really have time. So, here's a good one from last year:

As I see it, there are 6 categories of Rebbeim who respond differently when asked by their students if they watched the game:

1) The Rebbe that excitedly discusses all the details, like how Pittsburgh used great play calling to dominate on their first few drives, or how the Cardinals would have won if they didn't go into a prevent defense during the last drive.

Goal: Students view him as more of a regular person, increasing his identify-with-ability. Also helps him forget that he is no longer 17.

2) The Rebbe that discusses all the details, but makes sure to add the fact that he watched it at his parents' Super Bowl party, or a comparable excuse for being "forced" to watch. This Rebbe usually adds in some Yiddish as well ("That catch by Santonio Holmes was gevaldik!").

Goal:Trying to have something to talk to his students about, but avoiding being viewed as too much of a regular person. Also avoids any allegations of T.V.-having.

3) The Rebbe that tells his student he listened to it on the radio.

Goal: To seem cool in that retro sort of way. (See also: Rebbe who rollerblades to school)

4) The Rebbe who didn't watch it, but knows, and cares, what happened. Yet, he purposely messes up details that include his knowledge of previous years ("Did the 49ers win? Joe Montana is a great quarterback."), or turns the conversation to Super Bowls from his time.

Goal: To sound like a former cool guy who is hiding his coolness.

5) The Rebbe who didn't watch it, and knows what happened, but does not care. He pretends not to know the names of the players ("I hear Ben Rothberger is really good"). This Rebbe also mocks the game by referring to it as a bunch of sweaty men bumping into each other over a ball made of chazzer. He may or may not use the word shvartze as well. (This guy is my personal favorite)

Goal: To convince his students he is from another planet.

6) The overzealous Rebbe. Chas v' shalom should he watch the super bowl. This Rebbe goes off on a lecture about American culture, Yevanim, and bittul zman. (this reaction is also common amongst shana bet guys).

Goal: To rule the world.

Whichever rebbe, parent, or other role model you happen to be, please realize who you are talking to. Saying what you believe may not necessarily be the best way to teach, and may have the opposite effect.

Lowering Tuition?

Recently, there has been a lot of talk at Honestly Frum about the tuition crisis. A major portion of the discussion has centered around the schools' exorbitant expenses and the consequential need for a low(er)-cost option. I claim no expertise on the subject, however, I think I can lend some insight on the subject coming from the eduaction angle.

A large part of the tuition hikes center around the fact that schools are constantly upgrading to a) provide the finest educational experience possible and b) to stay in competition with other schools. The question is whether all this is necessary. I think the answer is yes, it is, but it shouldn't be.


Ideally, chinuch should be a process that involves both parents and schools equally. Not only should this be a quantitative split,but each party should be chiefly responsible for a different aspect each child's chinuch. The parents should chiefly be concerned with instilling their children with Jewish values and teaching them to appreciate Talmud Torah and shmiras mitzvos. Schools, on the other hand, should primarily be concerned with educating the children. This means teaching skills and basic Jewish knowledge.

This applies equally to secular studies: Parents have to be the ones to motivate and to encourage learning. Whether or not children value education and hard work will mostly be a function of how they are brought up. The school's main function is to teach, but the prerequisites to learning must come from the home.

Obviously, I don't mean that schools have no responsibility to instill a love of learning in children and that parents have no need to educate. However,each must realize that they have a primary concern for one aspect. This avoids spreading themselves too thin, and avoids having one aspect hamper the other. If one focuses primarily on educating, instilling values must, in some way be set aside, and vise versa.

The problem is that many parents, for whatever reason, have decided to let the schools step in for them. Schools nowadays are left with double-duty. What is the major result? Schools now must create environments that are conducive to learning and instilling Jewish values. This means that we need beautiful buildings, tons of extracurricular activities, and as many administrators and assistant teachers as possible to make sure the schools watches over every student like their own child. Kids now need to feel as if school is their home because they less encouragement coming from their actaul homes.

This is what I would call a necessary evil. For whatever reasons (job pressures, the need to make more money, the constantly diminishing existence of family values), many parents transferred some of their parental responsibilities to school. The schools have reacted kind, creating a more intimate and pleasant environment for kids,and the tuitions have increased in kind. Before we consider limiting our school's expenses, we must outsource responsibilities to our communities and homes, which is actually where they belong.

Above and Beyond

One of the more uncomfortable things of being a fake Rabbi is the undue kavod that comes with it. Being called "Rabbi" is one thing, as that title has really lost its meaning by now. But there are other things that are make me uncomfortable. Number one on the list is when students stand up when I get an aliyah or enter the room. This is the kind of respect that is halachikally delegated to actual talmidei chachamim and someone's Rebbe muvhak. I definitely do not fit the first category, and the second could only apply to my students, and it would be sad if I have taught them (in 1.5 years) most of the Torah they know.

So...why do we (they) teach the kids to do these things? Well, respect for Torah, of course. If I am teaching Torah, and therefore, represent Torah, shouldn't they stand for me? Or alternatively, since they have no access to people who deserve such kavod, they won't learn this practice of kavod haTorah, so we work with what we have.

Either way, what happens is that we become more machmir, above and beyond what halacha calls for, in order to teach a lesson. So my question for you (and myself) to think about is whether this is a good practice because kid: a) need to learn certain values and b) have a hard time drawing distinctions, or, should we teach based on what is required only.

Two more examples to stimulate the opinion glands:

1) Wearing tzitzis when playing ball with your students if you normally don't, to teach the importance of the mitzvah.

2) Not talking at all in shul, even when completely allowed, so that your children will learn the importance of tefillah.

Any thoughts?


.

Primacy of Gemara: R' Aharon Lichtenstein

In his book Leaves of Faith, R' Aharon Lichtenstein has an article succinctly titled "Why Learn Gemara?" In it, he discusses his philosophy as to why the study on Gemara has taken on such a primary role in yeshiva learning. I would like to summarize his points and investigate how applicable they are within our school system.

1) The relationship between the Jewish people and G-d hinges on the understanding and acceptance the Oral Torah. The essence of Oral Torah is Halacha.

Quotes:
"On Hazal's view, this relation to Halakhah lies at the heart of our covenental existence."
"Whereas the written text is an amalgam of the literary and the legislative...Torah she-ba'al-peh...is overwhelmingly halakhic."

How Applicable?
Presented as a universal Jewish precept, presumably applicable to all.

2) The in depth study of Halacha is an encounter with the D'var Hashem, and a window into divine wisdom.

Quotes: "Every student of Halakha is exposed, once again, to his Master's commanding presence. Each page is a regenerative Antaean (huh?) return to Sinaitic roots."

How Applicable?

Again, this is presented universally.

Here's the Catch:

3) There must be an acceptance of and openness to this idea, in order for it to be effective.

Quotes: "There should be a measure of faith in oneself - in personal readiness and openness to let the power of divine will instill, directly or osmotically, both knowledge and love."

How Applicable? Survey says: ehhhh! How many of our students truly appreciate the concept of having a window into the divine will? Not many. This is not exactly a simple concept to grasp or appreciate. We starting off on the wrong foot if there is a prerequisite appreciation required to learn Gemara properly. For many students, due to how they were brought up/their personalities/ their intellectual level, this is almost impossible. So what is the solution?

RAL mentions two solutions to this problem:

1. The learning of Gemara itself can create this type of inspiration.

RAL does admit that this is cyclical; how can you get them to appreciate it enough to learn it properly in the first place. This is not so problematic, as there are many kids who enjoy the analytical and intellectual challenge that comes with Gemara. However, this is not the case for most.

2. Teaching topics that lead to appreciation of G-d and his will.

Even R' Chaim Volozhin writes in Nefesh HaChaim that yiras shamayim is a prerequisite for learning Gemara properly, and that learning about G-d is important to prepare oneself for a life of learning. So, what about learning about G-d? Do we ever actually teach about G-d? Not really (fluffy stuff doesn't count). And even if we do teach this stuff, for many students, due to how they were brought up/their personalities/ their intellectual level, they won't/can't really grasp it in the necessary way.


This is all in addition to the fact that there are many student who just aren't smart enough.


I'm not saying everyone shouldn't be exposed to Gemara, or be given a chance to be a Gemara learner. I'm just saying that at a certain point, we must concede that (to quote R' Lichtenstein:) "in some cases, (for those) sufficiently exposed to Gemara to resent it but not given the wherewithal to appreciate it, a Mishna-oriented curriculum would be preferable." Maybe Mishna, maybe Chumash, maybe Safrus, maybe Chesed. I think we need to reevaluate what we teach in order to give our student what they need, not what we want them to need.

If you are in chinuch, you should really see the movie...

Doubt.

Talmud Torah K'neged Kulam

Just to start the discussion:

Rambam (Hil. Tal. Tor. 3:3) explain this statement as meaning Torah is more important than all other mitzvos b/c it leads to action (meivi li'dei ma'aseh). I assume this fits in with the simple reading of the Mishna as follows:

All these mitzvos [and others that are added in Maseches Shabbos (127a)] have benefits in terms of inter-personal relationships. By following these mitzvos, you are improving your life in this world. Talmud Torah is more significant in that area, because it can lead to countless other good deeds and mitzvos, and therefore improves your life more than any other mitzvah.

Debunking Volozhin (again)?

I kind of feel uncomfortable with this title, as if I have any right to disprove the philosophy that fueled one of the most successful yeshivas in our history. But I (mistakenly) used it once, so I'll use it again. Plus, it sounds controversial.

If you ask many yeshiva high school graduates what the most important mitzvah is, chances are, they will tell you Talmud Torah is. If you ask for proof, they could probably recite the phrase by heart: v'talmud torah k'neged kulam: and learning Torah is as valuable as them all. Sounds like a good proof, right?

Problem is, this phrase is at the end of a very specific list: The mishna begins, Elu devarim she'ein lahem shiur, these are the things that have no bound, and then lists a bunch of mitzvahs that fulfill the criterion of being boundless. Talmud Torah is one of these. The mishna continues: eilu devarim she'adam ocheil peirosei'hem baolam hazeh, these are the things that have benefit in this world, v'hakeren kayemes laolam haba, but the essential action lasts forever. Then it lists a few things of which Talmud Torah is not included, and then says the famous line: v'talmud torah k'neged kulam.

So, you could interpret this as saying Talmud Torah is the mitzvah that has the most reward in this world although you get benefit in the next, or even that Talmud Torah is greater than or equal to all the previously mentioned mitzvos. But a simple reading of the mishna says nothing of Talmud Torah being at the top of Rolling Stone's top 500 Mitzvos list.

Just some more food for thought. (Some mekoros on this, Moshe Tzvi?)

Debunking Volozhin?

Many students, no matter how little they care, can tell you that if nobody learned Torah the world would cease to exist. This is based on the teachings of R' Chaim Volozhin (I'm sorry if that isn't the scholarly spelling) among others.

Actually, there is Tosfos that seems to disagree. The Gemara at the beginning of Avodah Zara (3b I think) discusses proofs that the Jews have kept the Torah. Tosafos asks, isn't the greatest proof that the world still exists? One answer given is that the Jews accepting is enough to keep the world going. But, of course, we go with R' Chaim's opinion. Are we trying too hard to turn our schools into weird versions of Volozhin?

Just some food for thought.

Active vs. Reactive Leadership

Although the recent events at YU have triggered much thought both for myself on for many others, I will not post my thoughts on the event itself for two reasons: 1) I haven't come to any conclusion about what I think; I am very torn on the issue. 2) It's been written about by so many so I don't want to overdo it. So, I want to suggest some analysis on a topic a bit peripheral to, but intertwined with, the entire debate.

In the most recent post at Curious Jew, Chana lauds the leadership and courage on both sides of the debate. R' Blau, for being brave enough to stand up and show support for those in need, albeit knowing he would be risking his reputation, and Rabbis Twersky and Reiss for having true bravery to stand up and defend the honor of their G-d, Torah and religion. I'm not sure if Chana is being diplomatic, but I think it's a bit of a chutzpah to compare the courage of the both parties.

Right and wrong notwithstanding, I believe that the leadership shown by R' Blau goes far and beyond that shown by the other two Rebbeim. This is not to take away from R' Twersky and R' Reiss; they did all they could given that they were working after the fact. However, R' Blau showed true leadership by actively embracing a cause as opposed to reacting to a situation that was thrown in his face.

I think this distinction is crucial to understanding where our community is headed. You want to understand a people, see who the superstars are. There is no question that within the Torah-Conscious Modern Orthodox community, the superstars are the Roshei Yeshiva. Just go to a chupa and see how many people stand when they call up a Rosh Yeshiva. Then see how many stand when the call up the Young Israel Rabbi. I actually think some people sink lower in their seats when the Rabbi is called upon. Clearly, in my eyes, much of our community identifies more with the Roshei Yeshiva as role models. What is the significance?

As I wrote in an earlier post (which was apparently quoted by R' Reiss in a sichos mussar this year, but I have been unsuccessful in finding the audio), the YP program at YU is completely Torah-Centric. So you will ask, why should that be a problem? It's a Yeshiva! Shouldn't it all be about Torah? My response is three-fold: 1) We are dealing with students who have are part of a college as well. So clearly, the students are not exactly your future Kollel members/ Roshei Yeshiva (though some are). Therefore, they need guidance from role models that take other things than Talmud Torah into account. 2) Many of the talmidim are future pulpit Rabbis and Rebbeim, and therefore, need to be able to inspire and guide others in various ways. 3) We need future community leaders (Rabbonim and lay-leaders) who are interested in, and know how to actively promote and fight for causes within our communities. We need people who can do more than give a weekly Minchas Chinuch shiur (not that it's not important as well).

As long as we limit our role models to Talmidei Chachamim, we will be slowly killing off a huge part of what we need as a community. I admit ignorance of what many Roshei Yeshiva do to help guide their talmidim and congregations. I am sure they do so much behind the scenes that doesn't make the papers. But we also need public activism. We can't afford to wait for things to happen and then react.

Another outgrowth of this problem is that we don't have role models that are completely appropriate for many of our communities. As much respect as I have for a Rosh Yeshiva that uses Talmud Torah as his barometer, I believe in a more balanced approach for the hamon am. I do not believe that most people are able to find complete meaning in learning Torah, nor do I believe that we were all meant to. There are many other ways of living a meaningful Jewish life, meaningful both in our eyes and the eyes of the Creator. But if we don't have role models that personify our ideals, then we are in trouble. If our schools have Yeshivish Rebbeim (pardon the categorization) who are only trying to turn our students into Yeshiva Bochurs, then we have no future.

If we want our community to grow and flourish, we need to become and develop leaders who are interested in action. This will only happen if we find role models that preach activity as well as learning. But as long as we only have learners as role models, our capacity for growth will be severely limited.

You can't make this stuff up (Part II)

We went on a trip this past week to the Museum of the Moving Image in Queens. Although a museum trip sounds boring, we made sure to tell the kids that they have a small arcade there as well (obviously containing vintage games, as it is a museum). The day before the trip, the an administrator (Rabbi F.) came around to each class collecting permission slips. Here's is an actual conversation that went on between him and one of my students, Kevin (not real name).


Rabbi F: Okay, so we are leaving tomorrow at 9:30, please be on time.

Kevin (defiantly): Rabbi F, Just so you know, if they have the Playboy game there I'm gonna play it.

Rabbi F (confused): Huh?

Kevin: Yeah, I heard Playboy came out with an arcade game, and I'm gonna play it if I want to.

Rabbi F: Okay, Kevin.


Rabbi F leaves


Me: Kevin, what planet are you on?

Kevin: What?

Me: Do you really think there is a Playboy video game at a museum?

Kevin: Whatever.

Sometimes I think someone's playing a huge joke on me.

Representing Torah (Part I)

I have been struggling to come up with a proper answer for this question:

To what degree is it important that a Rabbi/Rebbe/Morah/"Ben Torah"/"Bas Torah" change their outward appearance (dress and how they act) because they represent Torah?

I'll give you a similar example of this question: I was talking to someone who said he thought the greatness of a pulpit Rabbi is to what degree his congregation identifies with him. Meaning: if he's just "one of they guys," but with a little more knowledge, that it good. However, if the perception is that he is a different type of person, no good.

So I asked him, what about Barack Obama? Are you happy to see him throwing out the first pitch in a pair of jeans, or should he be wearing a suit like every other president in history? He responded that he approved of Obama's actions (although that was about it for his approval).

On the other hand, I was speaking to someone else who could not get over the fact that Obama wore jeans to throw out the first pitch. He felt it was "unpresidential" and that it made Obama "look like a joke." Now, I can appreciate both sides of the argument and couldn't really come to my own conclusion.

This is the question I am troubled by: Am I, or any religious figure, or even a yeshiva bochur required to act differently because we represent Torah? Do I have to curb my sense of humor? Do I have to dress differently if kids will see me on the weekend?

My gut reaction to this question is, in a perfect world, no, but in this world, yes. Although, in all honesty, a person can be a role model if they dress like everyone else and goof around like everyone else. However, human nature is to need role models that are seem different. There may be adults and kids who don't need that, but most people do.

If anyone has any insight on how to answer this question, please share. I will include the comments/ideas in the next post.

Israel "Guidance"

It's that time of year. When students go to shiurim they can't understand from Roshei Yeshiva of places they have no intention of applying to just to get out of class, when young men and women are allowed to make life decisions based on a pamphlet, and of course when Rebbeim and Morot try as hard as they can to convince, prod, and influence students to commit to going to Israel and avoid being lost forever r"l. I have some thoughts on this process that I hope will get some people upset (a blog without controversy is pretty boring).

The phrase "Israel Guidance" is a misnomer. I think the phrase should be changed to "Israel Coercion." This name would properly describe the process by which students are urged to spend a year in Yeshiva or Seminary. However, I can't really imagine that being such a great PR move:

Welcome prospective parents to our open house. I would like you to meet Rabbi Finkel, head of Israel Coercion. He will do whatever he can to convince your kids to spend a year in Israel, whether they want to or not, whether you want them to or not, and whether you can afford it or not. He does so because he wants to make sure they reject the way they were brought up. Any questions?

Am I being overly dramatic? Let's think about it:

I can confidently say that many (most?) of our students are living with less-than-ideal Orthodox Jewish values. The problems range from Kashrus and Shabbos to focusing their social lives on drinking, fooling around, and emotionally ruining the social lives of other kids, to being obsessed with pop culture and video games. Many (most?) kids are lazy and spoiled and could care less about living a meaningful Jewish life (Not to say that I wasn't part of this demographic in high-school).

If we make this assumption, it should be part of our responsibility to address these issues as much as possible: to show beauty in living a religious life, to show how being religious and having a good time or being normal are not mutually exclusive, to teach objective, easily appreciated Jewish values etc.. etc... This responsibility is clear from the requirements of Kol Yisrael areivim ze ba zeh, and Hochai'ach tochi'ach es amisecha. This responsibility is compounded for educators who are in a position to make a difference, as opposed to a stranger on the street, who a teenager has no reason to listen to.

So, shouldn't it be our responsibility to make sure these kids get to Israel where, chances are, they will in some way have their sense of Judaism enhanced and where there is a possibility they will adopt a way of life with religion at or near the forefront?

Here's where I draw the line:

I think it's pretty accepted that the ends of Kiruv do not justify any means, For example, if you initially get someone to start doing mitzvos by threatening their life, and they eventually start following the Torah without coercion, you are not a hero. Anyone disagree? Good. Here's the next step: I think that taking away someone's free will also qualifies as illegitimate means.

As we discussed in one of our first posts, a free-will decision only qualifies as such if a person uses morality as the deciding factor. So, if someone chooses vanilla over chocolate because they like it better, that is not exercising free will, but if they choose vanilla because it's healthier even though they'd prefer chocolate, that is using free will. Let's apply this to our situation:

Here are ways you can get kids to go to Israel even if they don't want to:

1) Tell them all the stories about you being drunk, so it sounds like fun.
2) Tell them they will not be religious at all in a few years if they don't go.
3) Tell them how nice it will be to be away from their parents for a year.
4) Tell them that they will lose their friends if they don't go.
5) Act as if it is a foregone conclusion that they are going, until they believe it themselves.
6) Imply how disappointed you will be if they don't go.
7) Show them how beautiful the Yeshiva facilities are (only applicable to Reishit).
8) Tell them they will get college credit for doing nothing all year.
9) Talk to them about the glory of the flag football league (only applicable to guys)
10) Tell them about all the great food in Israel (only applicable to girls)

To convince a student to go to Israel based on these factors would be to take away the student's ability to make a free-will decision. If all of a sudden they are choosing to go because they think it's all fun there, or because they are excited about the food, that is no longer a moral decision. Now, they have the right to make a decision like that if they want; nobody is saying that all decisions must be moral ones. However, I think that is up to them whether superficial factors are enough to make a decision.

Every student should be given the all facts in an objective way and be allowed to make their own decision (hopefully with their parents' input as well. This means helping them go through all the pros and cons of spending a year in Israel.

This doesn't mean that a guide shouldn't respectfully state their argument for spiritual growth; they should try to persuasively convey this value as much as possible. They should also try convince them that spiritual growth should carry more weight than other factors. However, it is important to realize that spiritual growth in Israel doesn't happen in a vacuum, and that there may be other reasons their student doesn't want to go and maybe shouldn't (gasp!) go.

To be fair, I would agree that most of Israel guidance is choosing the yeshiva or seminary that is the best fit for a students already planning on going. But how often are certain options omitted because the "guide" doesn't approve of their hashkafos, or feels that the kids won't get as frum there?

Just to be honest, I am a bit uncomfortable writing this. I'm not sure if it's because it just goes against everything that I have heard or learned from Rebbeim, or because I don't actually agree with what I am saying but can't figure out why. I could use some guidance.

Camp Counselors = Mechanchim?

This summer, I will begin a stint as the boys head counselor at Ruach Day Camp in Uniondale, NY. It is a standard NY-area co-ed day camp, which, from what I hear, has a very good reputation (that I hope not to ruin). We are currently looking for 6-8 college-aged young men and 6-8 college-aged young women to serve as counselors for kids ages 8-13. We are particularly looking for energetic people who will enhance the atmosphere (both in general and religiously). We pay pretty well, so if you, or someone your know, or your kids, or even your enemy is looking for a job, you can email me at ruachday@hotmail.com for more information.

On that note, it's worth pointing out to anyone interested in teaching, that being a camp counselor is a very good experience. A major part of chinuch is being able to balance a friendly relationship with a sense of discipline which is exactly what a (responsible) camp counselor must do. It's not easy to get kids to respond to you while at the same time getting them to like you. So if you are good at being a counselor, you have a step in the right direction being a mechanech.

The Importance of Dance Parties

When I came home on Wednesday, my kids were really, really cranky. This was after having a really bad day teaching; not a good combination. Additionally, my wife had to go out so I had to do bath-time and get-ready-for-bed time on my own. This is normally pretty doable, but not with the current level of parental and child crankiness. So, I whipped out the secret weapon: the dance party. The dance party almost always a cure for crankiness, for as long as you can keep it up.

Why am I writing about this? Well, I think it is a good practice for parents to have dance parties (or something similar) every once in a while. Besides a great way for kids and parents to have some silly fun together (very important), it teaches kids to be comfortable expressing themselves in a somewhat unrestrained manner. This type of comfort can go a long way in life (if channeled properly). Plus it is good advice for anyone who needs a way to combat a bout of crankiness. The only downside is that you may be exposing your children to the devil.

This brings me to a great moment in my shiur's history (aka a moment I could get fired for):

There is one kid in shiur who always sings You Give Love a Bad Name, but has a bad voice, and only knows about 11 words of the songs. And it drives everyone nuts. So, I said: "Brian (not real name), if I print out the lyrics and get the song up on my computer will you sing and dance for us?" He said: "sure." So, in the blink of an eye, I had the lyrics and song ready to go. It was amazing; the off-key singing, the awkward dance moves, the pure high-school male idiocy.

Here's the thing: although he normally (unintentionally) drives people nuts, and this could have easily been a "laugh at him, not with him" moment (risky for me to allow it), it didn't work out that way. No matter how stupid this kid looked, the other students really appreciated the fact that he was not scared to make a fool of himself. This is an important quality to have and can really be respected. So, I guess the lesson is, have dance parties, but realize that your kids will learn their dance moves from you.

Here is the official D family dance party playlist:

Upside Down - Jack Johnson
Sitting, Waiting, Wishing - Jack Johnson
I Only Wanna be with you - Hootie and the Blowfish
Piece of my Heart- Janis Joplin
Get off my Cloud - Rolling Stones