Talk:Haredi Judaism

Haredi Jews, Abortion and Interfaith

While Haredi Jews are not particularly known for their interfaith efforts, it should perhaps be noted that Haredis and Roman Catholics share many common positions on the topics of Abortion, Contraception and Euthanasia. Rabbi Yehuda Levin, who is a Haredi, has for instance participated in several joint efforts with Catholic leaders in order to oppose Abortion. [1]ADM (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Quite big nonsense. There are very big differences. Judaism allows abortion under certain circumstances: when the life of the mother is in danger - including in psychologic danger. It must be noted that abortion needs the permission of a very big rabbi who is well-aquainted with these laws. However, it is possible, which is quite different from the Catholics, where it is forbidden under any and all circumstances. This difference is because Judaism does not regard the unborn child as a living being. Don't ask me about further specifics - I'm not a rabbi. But I do know enough to tell you that the Jewish position regarding abortion is absolutely not the same as the Catholic one. And the fact that conservative (ie, Orthodox Jewish) religious people of any religion opposite abortion doesn't need to be explained. So I see no reason at all to add this to the article. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 20:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, "if medical treatment or surgical operation, necessary to save a mother's life, is applied to her organism (though the child's death would, or at least might, follow as a regretted but unavoidable consequence), it should not be maintained that the fetal life is thereby directly attacked." Non-abortive abortion is kosher. From a Katholic perspective, of course :D Pietru (talk) 11:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Interesting, but it doesn't really change things. It's still not related. We could make links between all religions then. For example, Haredim forbid homosexuality, and so do Pentecosts - so then they must be very similar and we must include it in the article? Haredim don't eat pork and neither do Muslims, does that have to be mentioned? It's an unnecessary exaggeration to include such things in articles. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 12:00, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Commonality in different perspectives on something so fundamental as life is more important than you make it sound. Either way, I have no interest in this debate, I just wanted to correct your msinformation. Good luck with the article guys. Pietru (talk) 12:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

That is actually incorrect, Piz. IIRC, the fetus IS considered a living being, which is why abortion is forbidden in general. However, it is no different than any other living being, and at times may be considered a rodef, a murderer, and there are times when killing someone in self-defense is permitted (Ba L'hargecha...). -- Avi (talk) 21:14, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but my point was that Haredi rabbis will oppose abortion in 90-95 % of cases, while Reform and Conservative rabbis will oppose it in only 20-50 % of cases. Pardon the casuistry, but in a sense the Ultra-Conservative Jews have a slightly similar position to that of the Church. ADM (talk) 20:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

The topic of divorce also seems relevant in Christian-Haredi relations, since the Haredi are known to be quite hostile to divorce, in a way that in a sense mirrors the attitude of the Roman Catholic Church on the matter. ADM (talk) 21:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, regarding abortion: as I said, I'm not a rabbi. Don't ask me for details. But there are instances in which rabbis permit abortions. With the Catholics, there are none, which is a fundamental difference. Also, please tell me where you got those statistics. Secondly: divorce is accepted and occurs quite frequently in the Haredi world. There is no taboo on divorcees; they simply remarry (usually with another divorcee). My own very big Haredi rabbi has two divorced children. Divorced youth usually return to their parent's house until they remarry. So, there is no likeness whatsoever in the Catholic and Haredi view on abortions. Now, tell me, just why do you seem to think you know everything about Haredim? Are you actually even Jewish, Orthodox? I'm sorry to say so, but it seems to me like you don't really know what you're talking about, both regarding the abortion issue and the divorce issue. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 21:46, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not talking about sociology and statistics (and your friends), but about official opinions, views and teachings, for example in the topic of comparative religion, which may or may not yield comparisons to magisterial doctrine and dogma on abortion and divorce. ADM (talk) 21:54, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

And I'm telling you I know a **censure** lot more about Judaism than you do, and you're plain wrong. So I suggest you try to find another topic to get involved in. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 08:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Officially, divorce is permitted under halacha, and entire sections of Maimonedes, The Tur, The Shulchan Aruch, and tens of thousands of pages of post-Shulchan Aruch responsa are dedicated to it. There is no sweeping prohibition per se against divorce as there is in the Catholic religion. There may be times where it is counseled against, for the sociological reasons that divorce can be extremely destructive to children and extended families, but divorces happen all the time (unfortunately). Please do not confuse a respect for the sanctity of marriage and a desire to keep families together with a religious doctrine against divorce. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 23:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Please. The question isn't whether the Haredi view on abortion (or divorce, or stem cell research, or anything else) is exactly the same as the Catholic view: obviously there is some common ground, and some differences. It is whether there has in fact been any joint work between the two on those aspects they happen to agree on. No one seems to have commented on this. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 10:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

The answer is very short. Haredim generally do not participate in any interreligious dialogue whatsoever. And the Chief Rabbinate of the State of Israel (which is primarily Modern Orthodox though with a significant Lithuanian Haredi influence as of recent) just cut all ties with the Vatican a few days ago, as did the Italian Jewish community, so I understood. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 11:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

No, there has been no joint work on any religious issue. -- Avi (talk) 13:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I did however mention Yehuda Levin, a noted Ecumenist AND a Haredi, although it is not clear what is Mr Levin's standing within the Haredi community. ADM (talk) 20:04, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

One person's actions do not alter centuries, if not millenia of tradition backed by written responsa and texts. -- Avi (talk) 22:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Levin's standing? Pretty much similar to the standing inside Catholicism of those Catholic clown bishops who deny the Holocaust. Levin is a small person, a non-important 'rabbi' with very controversial points (including his alliances with Christian right-wing extremists and his advocacy of violence against gay parades, and IIRC alson the pullout from Gaza 3 years ago). Normal Haredim do not see Levin as a normative Haredi rabbi. If you want some reading material about normative Haredim, check: http://chareidi.shemayisrael.com (especially check in the left column "TOPICS IN THE NEWS" and on the right side "A CHAREIDI VIEW ON...". You'll find a lot of interesting reading material there (though some of it contains certain Jewish terms which you might not understand). Feel free to ask me on my talk page if you need help understanding something there. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 23:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

One more thing: I'll give you a short list of really representative Haredi rabbis. Check the following list, which is a random quickly comprised list of some prominent living and deceased Haredi rabbis.

• Rabbi Moshe Feinstein
• The Chofetz Chaim
• The Chassam Sofer
• Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum
• The Chazon Ish
• Rabbi Ovadia Yosef
• Rabbi Elazar Menachem Shach
• Rabbi Yosef Sholom Eliashiv
• The Rebbes of Satmar, Ger, Belz, Vizhnitz, Munkatsh, Dushinsky, Nadvorna, Boyan, for example, and many others - see List of Hasidic dynasties.
• Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky
• Rabbi Nissim Karelitz
• Rabbi Yaakov Yisroel Weiss
• Rabbi Yitzchok Yaakov Weiss
• The Steipler Gaon
• The Vilna Gaon
• Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch
• Rabbi Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg
• Rabbi Aharon Kotler

Now if you go and read all that these rabbis wrote about issues such as abortion and divorce, and any other issue on your mind, then you'll have a clearer understanding of the matters involved. These are all rabbis who are recognized by virtually the entire Haredi world as being important leaders of immense posture. Some examples of rabbis who belong to the Hardal world, which combines Religious Zionism and Modern Orthodoxy (sociologically, they are closer to the Modern Orthodox world) with halachic observance on a higher level than the regular Modern Orthodox, see for example Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, Rabbi Dov Lior, and also this Rabbi Yehuda Levin you mentioned (I think). --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 23:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

OK thanks ! ADM (talk) 23:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Again the recent posts seem all to be about similarities between Haredi Jews and other religions, not about joint work between them.

One question. Jewish and Muslim organisations sometimes do establish joint lobbying groups for the defence of shechitah/halal. Some people involved in these may be dayanim of broad-brush "Orthodox" organisations, who are personally Haredi in the sense that they attended relevant yeshivot and look and dress like Haredim; but Haredi groups and organisations as such are not generally involved. Does this count as "Haredi inter-faith contact" or not? --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 12:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

No. There are quite a few 'rabbis' who are actually from the Modern Orthodox cq. Religious Zionist sector, but wear black coats and hats. For example: Rabbi Avraham Shapira, Rabbi Dov Lior, Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, Rabbi Yona Metzger, Rabbi Moshe David Tendler, and many others. For example, see this picture of Moshe David Tendler, who went on the Temple Mount - something that is strictly forbidden by all great Haredi rabbis from all streams and is 'permitted' only by a few extreme right Religious Zionist people. The fact that these people wear black coats and hats does not turn them into 'Haredim' nor 'Haredi rabbis'. In their environments, they are basically the only ones who dress that way. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 13:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Again you are talking about Israel. In other countries e.g. England mainstream "Orthodox" (MO) bodies sometimes recruit genuine Haredim as dayanim, e.g. Yitzchok Yaakov Weiss, who sat on the Manchester Beth Din before becoming a dayan at the Edah Haredis in Jerusalem; older examples include Yehezkel Abramsky and many others. In Israel, Rabbi Elyashiv himself once sat on State-sponsored battei din. I am asking whether you know of people of this type who became involved in joint issues such as the defence of shechitah and halal slaughter (obviously not in Israel, where it needs no defence). --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 14:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

A call on everyone who reads this page: Let's get some more pictures

Hi everybody. I would like to call your attention to the fact that we lack pictures. We need more pictures of Haredi life, of yeshivos, botei knesses, etc. I am planning to hold a small picture tour of my own neighborhood (Givat Shaul), Geulah and Meah Shearim this coming Sunday. I call on the others who are involved in these articles to do the same. We need to get some good illustrations of Haredi Judaism all around the world. I can take care of Israel, but I need you to take care of other places. London (Redaktor?), New York, and other places. I will present my pictures here next week, probably on an external hosting site first (I don't want to clutter Wikimedia with unnecessary pictures), so we can decide together which of them to use. Sign up here. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 19:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

dress

Hi there. I was wondering if perhaps tzitzit should be given a mention under the "dress" section? Tad Lincoln (talk) 03:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Tzitit are not particular to Chareidim. Do you mean wearing them out? I believe Rav Moshe Feinstein was against it, so it is certainly not universal. Probably better under Chasidim.62.219.96.219 Michael Krumbein (talk) 10:49, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the vast majority of chareidim in Israel wear their tzitzis out, at least 97% or so. That includes chassidim, litvaks, mizrachim (who used to have them in I think, in the past). A very large number of dati leumim also wear them 'out'. Maybe in the US it is different (never been there), but the vast majority of chareidim can be found here. As for the original question: I'm not sure. Need more opinions. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 13:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

From my observations, most chareidim in the United States wear them out as well. And yes, that was what I was referring to. I should have been more clear on that. Tad Lincoln (talk) 07:00, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Not only that...many non Haredim where them out as well. I know people who where Tzitzis and no Kippa...no big deal. 72.208.165.190 (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

style

does the following really belong in the opening statement?:

"Hamodia reports that New Jersey attorney Stephen E. Schwartz, Esq., convinced the largest newspaper in New Jersey, The Star-Ledger, to drop the term Ultra-Orthodox.[4] "64.129.127.5 (talk) 19:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it does. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 19:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it does not belong there and I have moved it into the body of the article. I don't think that the fact that some New Jersey lawyer convinced some New Jersey newspaper to stop using the term ultra-Orthodox is so central to Haredi Judaism that it qualifies to be in the lead section. shirulashem (talk) 01:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, ok, I can agree with that. I misread this comment earlier - I thought it was about whether it belongs in the article at all. It does. I do agree that it doesn't necessarily need to be in the lead section. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 07:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Haredi poskim who permit television and using the internet for non-business purposes

Has anyone heard of any Haredi posek who permits television and using the internet for non-business purposes? I challenge you. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 18:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

You do not know every single Haredi Jew in the world. Wikipedia is not a place for generalizations, so please stop. Tad Lincoln (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I happen to be a Haredi Jew with hundreds of books who lives in a Haredi neighborhood in Jerusalem and, honestly, I think I am quite more deeply involved with the subject matter than you are. I repeat again to you: stop this nonsense. Give me the name of one single Haredi posek in the world who permits television and using the internet for non-business purposes. All other religious Jewish editors will gladly confirm that I am correct here. I must note that any religious Jewish editors who do not live in Israel will not be online until Saturday night (their time), since they have Yom Tov Sheini shel goluyus and then shabbos right after that. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 18:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... that's interesting. Then what are you doing on the internet, since this is not business? You are not all-knowing. Clearly the editor who first wrote that part did not believe that it was forbidden across the board. Unless you know every single Haredi posek in the world, you cannot say that all of them forbid using television and internet for non-business purposes. Change it to "most" if you'd like, but, I say again, generalizations do not belong on wikipedia. Tad Lincoln (talk) 18:35, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Now, if you want some sources: first of all, I am not going to waste time on this. You are asking me to prove a negative - asking me to prove something that isn't. About television: the issur against having a television in the house is so well-known and wide-spread that it is difficult to find anything about it, just as it is difficult to find a place where it says that Haredi Judaism forbids Jews from eating pork. About the internet: see these: 1, 2, 3, 4. These are from Israeli Lithuanian Haredi rabbis. As for others, don't ask me. I can merely assure you that I am absolutely 100% sure that there are no Haredi poskim in the world who permit people to have a television in the house and use the internet for non-business purposes. If you want to prove that there are, then give me the name and location of that posek, and I will verify it.

Further: I am not the issue here. I will gladly admit that all Haredi poskim forbid using the internet and yes, I do violate that, since I am not perfect. Again, this is not about me. Next: I do know that there is not a single Haredi posek in the entire world who permits these things. The Haredi world is 'organized' in ranks. The smaller rabbis (lower poskim) will forward any big and difficult questions to the higher, greater poskim. These are the rabbis who are mentioned on Wikipedia also, such as for example the members of the Badatz of the Edah HaChareidis, or Rabbi Yosef Sholom Eliashiv, or Rabbi Nissim Karelitz, or Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. Only their opinion is relevant (ie, them and several others of similar stature), since all 'lower' rabbis will only decide on 'lower' issues. The issues of television and the internet for non-business purposes have both been decided upon by the great poskim of these and previous generations, and their decision around the world has been unanimous: both of these things are completely forbidden and not allowed in any way. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 18:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I have removed both "most" and "all" as a compromise. Just saying "Haredi poskim", in my opinion, might be acceptable to both of you. Another alternative that you may want to consider is "The leading Haredi poskim ...". I do believe that just saying "Some" would be misleading, because all the leading poskim have forbidden it and I've never seen, and cannot imagine, a posek who allows it. shirulashem (talk) 01:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

That's fine with me. I had actually been thinking about doing the same thing. I just did not feel that it should say "all" without specific, reliably sourced evidence to back it up. I would agree that removing the qualifier altogether makes sense in this situation. Tad Lincoln (talk) 02:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Fine with me, this way. However, I really don't see the difference between this and writing "all". The way it looks now it is also obviously implied that all Haredi poskim hold this view. But Tad, as you see, Shirulashem confirms my words: there are no Haredi poskim who permit these things. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 07:19, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

No, he doesn't, he says he's never seen one and can't imagine. That's my point. I am fully willing to believe that is the case. But Wikipedia generally does not support usage of words such as "all" without out specific reliable sources supporting such a word. Anyway, as I said, this wording is fine with me. Tad Lincoln (talk) 07:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

As someone who grew up in that community, i can testify that TV's are practically non existent, and internet, though does exist, is generally considered 'evil'. if you look hard enough, you may find a rabbi that will permit it, but that is beside the point, TV is not tolerated in their society, and internet is frowned upon. and as a result, TV is virtually non existent, and internet and computers are only in houses of people that are less compliant/dedicated/faithful or "modern" as they re called by the haredi's.

Hrneo (talk) 13:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

In view of the consensus above I'll remove the {{Disputed-section}} template. Debresser (talk) 21:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Fine. Thanks! --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 22:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

History

This section is almost entirely devoid of references and much of it is subjective interpretation of historical events. As it stands it reads as a personal essay, verges on POV and falls well short of the standard set by much of the rest of the article. Please can we have some citations to make it more verifiable?

In the subsection "Effects of the Holocaust" an anon editor deleted the phrase "Although illegal, and sometimes socially suppressed" in relation to the spread of anti-semitism "in the 1930s in many countries of the World". With the greatest respect to Tad Lincoln who re-instated the phrase, describing its removal as vandalism, I agree with its deletion as it implies that antisemitism was, at that time, generally illegal throughout the world; the "social suppression" of anti-semitism also needs to be explained to warrant inclusion. I've left it in place for now, but would welcome either references to back it up or an explanation as to why such a sweeping generalisation should be entertained without backup. -- Timberframe (talk) 11:01, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Use of Haredi outside of Israel

Last year I had a section here about the fact that the term Haredi is strictly an Israeli term, not used in the US or elsewhere. I brought numerous proofs from Jewish contemporary sources that this was accurate. Do the talk sections fall off with disuse? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuvia613 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

It was archived to here last October, unfortunately the link to the archive has subsequently disappeared from the top of the talk page. -- Timberframe (talk) 23:01, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Ultra-Orthodox

I have removed all content claiming that the term Ultra-Orthodox is a pejorative for the following reasons:

1. No sources supported this claim.
2. The source cited in the lede (Encyclopedia Britannica) does NOT say that the term Ultra-Orthodox is used by outsiders or that it is perjorative.
3. The one Haredi source (Hamodia) that the article claimed reported on this issue actually uses the term itself on its own website! (see this).
4. A google web search that specifically searches Vosizneias.com, a major Haredi news source, shows that Vosizneias.com uses the term constantly.
5. A google web search of another major Haredi news source, theyeshivaworld.com, reveals the same thing.
6. A google web search shows that this term is used by all major, mainstream media (e.g., CNN, NPR, NBC, New York Times, Haaretz, Huffington Post, Washington Post, Washington Times, ABC, CBS, Forward, Guardian, etc.)
7. A google book search shows that this term is the standard term used in books - even from "Orthodox" Jewish publishers.

Please do NOT add this content back in without providing reliable sources for it first. -shirulashem^(talk) 23:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay. -Lisa (talk) 19:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Neither of your (Shirulashem and Lisa) positions are good enough. According to NPOV we are supposed to report all non-fringe opinions which can be cited to reliable sources. It is perfectly obvious that there is widespread disagreement over this question. The article should openly state that both opinions exist and give sources for both. Zero^talk 00:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)