June 27, 2012 | 1:10 pm

Is All of Jewish Leadership Work Holy? The Notion of Meta-Holiness!

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz

Follow JewishJournal.com on

We often think of clergy, scrolls, and the synagogue as the realm of the holy. But is the work of all Jewish communal leadership holy? What does it even mean to do holy work?

In searching for a compelling Jewish notion for the holy, we can review many different approaches.

1. Coming Close to the Other —For Chassidim and Kabbalists, many Rabbis were known as HaKadosh (the holy one), since they achieved a spiritual and cognitive level closest to the Divine (as compared to other approaches of holiness dealing with the behavioral realm). For some, holiness means anything having to do with G-d; holiness is about embracing the Other. Levinas took this vertical theology and made it horizontal (embracing the Other includes in its deepest sense embracing the other). Levinas writes: “Holiness represents the moment at which, in the human…the concern for the other breaches concern for the self.”

2. Separatism and Asceticism—For Ramban and Rashi, holiness is more individualistic, concerned with separatism and asceticism. For the Ramban, attaining holiness is about going beyond the letter of the law (naval birshut haTorah) and avoiding excess (she-ni’hi’yeh perushim min ha-mutarot). For many this is about purity, and for others it is about ethics. The rabbis of the Talmud teach that to be holy is to be “poresh mei’arayot”, one who abstains from prohibited sexual acts. Holiness as asceticism goes further. The Vilna Gaon was the exemplar of the concept of “pat bemelach tochal,” that one should subsist on bread and salt. The ultimate asceticism is to separate from the nations of the world (Leviticus 20:26: “You shall be holy to Me, for I, the Lord, am holy, and I have set you apart from other peoples to be Mine”). The Jewish people are considered holy since they have a unique mission.

3. Communal Ethics—Holiness is about community. Jewish law requires a minyan to say kaddish and kedushah and other prayers concerned with holiness. It is not only about giving to others, but also to seeing value and utility in all others (all in the community have a purpose and a way to contribute to building holy community of shared values through partnership). Moshe tells the people: “vli’hi’otkhah am kadosh l’Hashem Elokekhah,” that we be a holy nation to the Lord (Deuteronomy 26:19). There is an individual ethic as well, of course, of “Kedoshim ti’hiyu” (you shall be holy, Leviticus 19:2) is a mandate that each individual should collectively be a holy nation through the emulation of the ways of G-d.

4. The Good for its own sake—Many have claimed that the land of Israel is holy, and thus the Jews must fully own and possess it. Professor Moshe Halbertal has made the opposite claim, arguing that because the land is holy, it is G-d’s and no person or group of people can ever fully take ownership of it. Halbertal has argued that the holy is that which cannot be instrumentalized (i.e., used for political gain) rather the holy is good for its own sake, not to achieve some other benefit. For example, Jewish law says that one cannot pass through a synagogue because it is a faster route, a short cut. The holy is an end in itself, not an instrument for gain. Holiness does not simply exist in the world, rather an act that brings holiness into the world is a creative act. One makes a chillul (desecration) when emptying the value from the valuable and one makes a kiddush (sanctification) when filling a void with that which is true and good. 

Of course, none of these models are mutually exclusive. We may or may not buy into them and we could favor portions of these approaches. But as Jewish leaders, we play a role in “meta-holiness” (by providing the space for the synthesis of different approaches of holiness). Whether one is a rabbi, educator, director, philanthropist, academic, social worker, or volunteer etc., when one holds and nurtures the system that enables other individuals and the community to actualize its holiness potential, the leader actualizes a role of meta-holiness. Of course, there must be transparency and accountability when dealing with possible abuses of the holy, especially for those who influence and control our eco-system of meta-holiness. While we should strive to live as individuals along the holy path, and should join and contribute to holy communities, we can also play a role of actualizing meta-holiness, providing sacred space for others to think, grow, and have impact. This is perhaps the pinnacle of holiness when we embrace the humility to create a space for creative holy expressions.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Founder & CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on Amazon. In April 2012, Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the most influential rabbis in America.

June 25, 2012 | 11:30 pm

The Culture of Bullying: It’s Not Just Kids!

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz

ABC News reports that close to 30 percent of students are either bullies or victims of bullying, and around 160,000 kids stay home from school every day out of fear of being bullied. Up to 10 percent of students either drop out or transfer to another school due to bullying. In the Internet age, cyberbullying has become a significant additional problem. According to research on cyberbullying by the PEW Research Center Internet & American Life Project, 88 percent of students surveyed have witnessed peers being mean or cruel online. This translates to 2.7 million students being bullied by 2.1 million other students, according to 2010 statistics.

But it is not just children. Up to 25 percent of adults experience bullying at work, where criticism focuses on the employee rather than the work. Bullying can also happen when students and teachers bully each other, or in adult social groups and in families. Apparently, the failure to build social and educational communities that cultivate respect for the dignity of the other has an effect that carries over into adulthood.

Bullying has serious consequences for physical and mental health. Among kids, suicide is the third-leading cause of death (about 4,400 deaths a year), and for every suicide, there are over 100 suicide attempts. Bullying is heavily correlated with suicide, as more than half of suicides among young people are related to bullying.

Conversely, bullying also influences teen murder: students of all ages who commit homicide are twice as likely as their victims to have been victims of bullying. Among adults, those who are bullied have a higher risk for anxiety, clinical depression, stroke, and myocardial infarction (heart attack).

There has been a recent surge of interest in bullying with studies on the nature of animal bullying, movies about bullying, campaigns against college hazing, and the research of social inclusion. In addition, there have been efforts to curb bullying in schools. There are comprehensive programs, such as the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program, created by Norwegian professor Dr. Dan Olweus, that attempt to modify behavior in elementary and junior high schools. However, even a simple approach can sometimes work. In a Middle and High School program in Rochester, Minnesota, this year, intervention has been the key, with the premise that most students do not bully and can become part of the solution. Focusing on a pattern of repeat abuse, the school administration has encouraged students, teachers, parents, and bystanders to report instances of bullying to the school administration, which then quickly acts to stop the bullying. As a result, bullying is cut off before it can become a chronic problem. In the middle school, for example, 76 percent of students had no visits to the principal’s office, and 10 percent only had one visit during the school year, allowing the administration to work on the 14 percent who were more likely to engage in bullying. 

This program is in accord with the fundamental modern principle of in loco parentis (in place of a parent), in which a school legally takes the place and responsibility of parents when a child is left in their care. Teachers and administrators must be attentive to the emotional harm that happens outside of the classroom (hallways, recess, lunchroom), but this does not dismiss the responsibility of parents to take the emotional pulse of their child. Ultimately, chief responsibility falls upon each student who is privy to the interpersonal dynamics firsthand. We must not merely teach our students to cease from bullying. We must teach them to intervene when we witness acts of bullying. “Don’t stand by the blood of your fellow!” So much of bullying happens not because of bad intentions but due to group dynamics and social pressures. We must diffuse and attack these group forces. There is no place for threats, put downs, spreading rumors, and pretending to be someone else.

In Jewish thought, technology is neither good nor bad, as it can be used either way: to heal, build bridges, and to learn, but also to create real damage. According to the Jewish laws of lashon hara (evil speech), real damage can happen through words. At the least, it can hurt another’s image or self-esteem and cause emotional pain. At worst, however, it can lead to bodily harm and suicide.

It is very difficult, due to the human tendency to be self-absorbed, to truly value another as much as oneself and to fulfill the rabbinic value that “Your friend’s dignity should be as precious to you as your own” (Avot 2:10).

The effect of social intimidation and mockery truly is lethal. “Why is gossip like a three-pronged tongue? Because it kills three people: the person who says it, the person who listens to it, and the person about whom it is said” (Arakhin 15b). Shaming another is considered a life and death issue. The Gemarrah teaches that “Whoever shames his neighbor in public, it is as if he shed his blood,” (Bava Metzia 58b) since “Life and death are in the hands of the tongue” (Proverbs 18:21). The rabbis teach again and again that to shame another is akin to murder.

Another form of bullying is through nicknames. The Rambam teaches that “It is forbidden to call someone by a name they dislike” (Deot 6:8). The rabbis of the Talmud teach that “One who gives his neighbor a bad name, can never gain pardon” (Jerusalem Talmud, Bava Kamma 8:7).

We need a new educational model to address bullying. It cannot simply be with the stick punishing bullying. Rather, it is about educating students about power dynamics as a psychological practice and cultivating meditational practices and group exercises around the awareness of the feelings of others as a spiritual practice.

Whether bullying is emotional, verbal, or physical, and whether it is among adults or children, it can never be tolerated. Bullying does not just happen where we would expect it in schools, prisons, and on playing fields. It happens in the workplace across industries.  Most of all, if we wish to address bullying among kids, we must address it among the role models of children. Bullying happens right before our eyes every day in subtle ways. We can model for our children what it means to see the dignity in all people that we encounter.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Founder & CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on Amazon. In April 2012, Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the most influential rabbis in America.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

June 24, 2012 | 1:29 am

Praying with Compassion: Time for Vegan Tefillin!

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz

Tefillin (also known as phylacteries) are a set of small black leather boxes which contain scrolls of parchment with verses from the Torah written on them. They are worn by observant Jews during weekday morning prayers.

Could we create vegan tefillin? By vegan tefillin, I do not, of course, mean tefillin made from corn. That would not fulfill the holy mitzvah. But could we ensure that our Jewish ritual objects, which must come from animals, are obtained in a cruelty-free manner?

Tefillin is a very important mitzvah that originates in the Torah and is mentioned daily in the Shema recited twice a day (Deuteronomy 6: 4-9). Similar to tefillin, many mitzvot require objects that come from animals, such as the parchment inside mezuzot, Torah scrolls made from parchment, and the ram’s horn (shofar). Embracing these rituals should be the exception to a Jewish vegan’s rule of trying not to buy leather and other animal products.

There are, of course, some possible alternatives to buying what is currently on the market to explore. One can try locating a used (but still kosher) pair of tefillin, or use a pair received in one’s childhood or one passed down through the family so a new pair would not have to be purchased. The number of animals killed for the leather tefillin straps are very minimal, so the emphasis of animal welfare activists would be better placed addressing the factory farming industries that are killing billions of animals each year. 

There are some attempts to make non-leather tefillin, but wearing those do not fulfill the traditional mitzvah. We are in need of the first kosher and truly cruelty-free tefillin produced in the most humane way possible. The Shulchan Aruch, one of the most authoritative Jewish legal codes, writes in the laws of tefillin that parchment may even be made from a neveilah, any animal that either died naturally or was not slaughtered in accordance with Jewish laws. Therefore, it is possible to wear tefillin from a cow that lived a long, happy life. We are in search of a farm that will donate hides from cows that lived full lives and died natural deaths. There was one sofer (scribe) working to make vegan tefillin in Sefat, Israel, but he found it unsustainable. Perhaps animal shelters for farm animals might be able to supply this need.

Originating in the Torah, humane treatment of animals has been an eternally cherished Jewish value. In the industrial age, where we no longer have cows in our own backyards, a lot of those cherished values have been forgotten as we’ve assimilated to the mass commercial production of all of our products. We must return to the values of the Torah. When done with compassion, we truly can elevate an animal that has lived a full life. Rabbi Moshe Cordovoro, 16th century Kabbalist, explains well:

He should not uproot anything which grows, unless it is necessary, nor kill any living thing unless it is necessary…to have compassion as much as possible. This is the principle: to have pity on all created things not to hurt them depends on wisdom. Only if it is to elevate them higher and higher, from plant to animal and from animal to human.., (Tomer Devora, chapter 3).

Rabbi Cordovero explains well we can elevate an animal up to the service of G-d through our service but that it must be done with absolute compassion. We cannot be assured today that the leather used for tefillin did not come from abused and cows slaughtered inhumanely for their meat.

It is worth considering why the Torah intentionally mandated that tefillin come from leather. Perhaps we are binding ourselves with animal to fully commit ourselves to serving G-d and living a moral life. One of the great moral imperatives we have is to reduce suffering for all sentient beings. When we put tefillin on each morning, we are reminding ourselves of our life commitment to be merciful to all creatures. As with all moral convictions, ritual helps us to recharge our commitments on a daily basis. Tefillin is an animal welfare mitzvah at its core! 

Many have suggested that it is impossible not to benefit from animals in some way today. There are animal products and/or the results of animal tests wrapped up in everything from our paints, wallboard, and car tires to the asphalt we drive on. This needs to change but in the meantime we must live with the current option we’re presented in the world while we continue to strive for our ideals. One can still be vegan by refraining from eating animal products while continuing to engage in required ritual use. There is a growing community looking to return to our traditional roots by wearing vegan tefillin or perhaps “tofu-llin.” Now is the time for a paradigm shift to return to the intention of this holy prayer ritual.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on Amazon. In April 2012, Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the most influential rabbis in America.

11 Comments — Leave your comment

June 22, 2012 | 7:08 am

Addressing the Plight of the African Refugees in Israel

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz

A few days ago, 120 refugees were sent back to South Sudan, where they will face existential danger in the shape of hunger and threat of war. Things have been getting worse in Israel, with militant violence. There is some hostile, intolerant language coming not just from crowds at protests, but also from politicians. Authorities are arresting refugees and deporting them. The Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society has termed this anti-foreigner wave “the largest one in scope and severity” in Israel’s history.

Israel is experiencing great difficulties with rising immigrant populations, as are other nations around the world. Significantly, Israel is the only democratic state with a land connection to Africa, so it is inevitable that a large portion of African refugees would seek to go there. These undocumented migrants cross into Israel either looking for work or fleeing from severe persecution. The social and economic burdens are immense and Israel is already struggling with very limited resources. Clearly, Israel cannot be a home for all refugees who wish to come. This is not a fair request of this tiny state already overwhelmed with social and economic issues. However, there is no justification for the racism and violence that some Israelis are showing toward this population.

This crisis has developed over decades. During the 1990s, Israel opened its borders to migrant workers, and about 180,000 came. Only about half were able to obtain the necessary work contract and visa, while the others tended to work at very low-paying, unofficial jobs. On the other hand, since 2006, about 60,000 refugees have come to Israel, mostly from Eritrea (34,000) or Sudan (15,700), and 2,000 more enter every month. The Israeli government has regarded these refugees under the law as “infiltrators,” and regards them as migrant workers, subject to deportation. Of the 4,603 new applications for asylum filed by other refugees, only one was approved in 2011.

Ironically, Israel, a nation of refugees, has not fully developed a legal process for non-Jewish refugees. Since Israel did not have diplomatic relations with Sudan, and since Eritrea has deteriorated into a lawless state, most of the refugees from these countries could not be immediately deported. Nevertheless, they have not been given the opportunity to apply for asylum (in contrast, 85 percent of Eritreans who reach the United States are granted asylum, and 70-90 percent of refugees from Sudan and Eritrea are granted asylum in Europe). While Israel has given some of these refugees temporary group protection, this has to be renewed annually, and most importantly, it does not confer the right to work within Israel. The result is that refugees have little access to work, health care, education, or other services.

Who are these refugees, and how are they treated? Stephen Slater recently wrote about his 2007 encounter with a Sudanese refugee, George Kulang, whose wife and children had been murdered by the Janjaweed (armed militia on horseback who have committed many atrocities in Darfur). He fled to Egypt, where he was tortured, so he continued his journey to Israel. When he saw an Israeli flag, he felt that “I must walk to that flag, because the Israelis are good, they have democracy, they will not turn us away.” However, as is typical for most refugees, he then spent several months in jail, and (usually when the detention centers are overflowing) was released to an urban center to fend for himself, often working below the minimum wage.

South Sudan won independence from Sudan in July 2011. Israel established relations with the new state, and this is enabling Israel to deport Sudanese refugees, even though the political situation there is far from stable, with much military activity. This spring, events took an alarming turn. Some Israeli government officials raised a more intolerant tone:

• Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said Israel had to prevent “illegal infiltrators flooding the country.”


• MK Miri Regev called the refugees “a cancer in our midst.”


• Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai and the mayor of five other cities called for the imprisonment and expulsion of African refugees.


• Minister of the Interior Eli Yishai said that infiltrators are “all criminals,” and that they spread disease. He set up a special task force to solve the “infiltrator problem,” with the expressed purpose “for Israel to be without infiltrators.”


• MK Danny Danon claimed that Israel now has “an ‘infiltrator’ enemy state” within its borders, and has called for the detention and mass-deportation of all infiltrators.


• MK Arye Eldad of the National Union Party suggested that the IDF shoot infiltrators trying to enter Israel.

In addition, unsubstantiated reports of a rising crime wave among African refugees in South Tel Aviv raised tensions, and then apartment houses (including a daycare center) in the Shapira neighborhood of south Tel Aviv were hit by four firebombs in April; fortunately, there were no injuries. On May 24, tensions reached a breaking point. Politicians incited the crowd with xenophobic rhetoric, and then the crowd smashed the windows and destroyed goods in stores owned by African refugees, and then attacked Africans on the streets. Fortunately, many courageous Israelis rose to denounce this act of hatred:

• Yair Lapid, a member of the opposition, called the attack a “pogrom” (an extremely hateful term describing the tsarist attacks on Jewish communities in Russia), adding: “They don’t understand the meaning of Jewish morals or collective Jewish memory, nor do they understand the meaning of Jewish existence.”


• President Shimon Peres said: “hatred of foreigners contradicts the foundations of Judaism.”


• In an editorial, Haaretz condemned the rioting against African refugees and human rights activists: “The history of the Jewish people—rife with instances of incitement, persecution and pogroms—does not resonate with the inciters…. it is becoming a badge of shame on an entire society.”

The statements of the beleaguered refugees supply an added poignancy. One Eritrean who experienced the violence said: “…when we try to explain that we fled murder and torture no one is interested. We did not believe that things like this could happen in a democracy like Israel.” A Sudanese resident of Tel Aviv spoke in a manner disturbingly familiar to many: “You don’t know when you will be taken by the police, arrested and deported. You don’t know how long it will be. We’re living in an uncertain future. We are living in fear.” Others wonder if their neighbors will attack them, and know that the police will not help them if an attack occurs.

In response, some Israelis have gone out of their way to show kindness to the stranger, such as walking African children home from school. Others have pointed out that, according to official police data given to the Knesset in March 2012, the crime rate among foreigners was 2.24 percent, while for the general population the crime rate was 4.99 percent, significantly higher, refuting the myth that Africans are disproportionately involved in crime. Lifting the prohibition on work would probably help lower the foreign crime rate even further.

June brought many new developments. An Israeli court approved the deportation of 1,500 Africans currently living in Israel. The government then arrested 240, and 300 others chose to leave rather than face arrest. There was also a spate of bills passed based more on political expediency than a coherent policy. On June 3, a law went into effect allowing the detention of “infiltrators” for up to 3 years, yet another attempt to deter refugees.

On June 10, another bill increased penalties for those who aided infiltrators and for those employers who hired workers illegally. By the middle of June, deportees were being sent back to South Sudan on weekly flights. Since South Sudan looks forward to Israeli investment to build its economy, it is cooperating with the deportations.

The government’s pledge to enforce a ban on work for refugees will have consequences. Israel is rapidly working to finish its southern detention center, Ir Amim (City of Nations), which will be the world’s largest prison for immigrants when it reaches its capacity of 10,000-15,000 inmates. In addition, Israel is building a barrier covering most of the border with Egypt to discourage refugees. However, even this will not succeed in taking all the refugees out of Israel’s cities. As a result, there is a plan to set up 20,000-25,000 tents in the Negev, which will probably not have a sewage system and will severely overtax the water and electricity supply of the region. As Ramat Negev Regional Council head Shmuel Rifman said: “I’m told it’s temporary, but in Israel the transient becomes permanent.” (Haaretz, June 12, 2012).

It must be pointed out that the instability in much of Africa cannot, of course, be solved by Israel alone, and that international efforts must be coordinated to reduce the level of poverty and human rights abuses that leads to mass migration of refugees. There must be more international support and collaboration to support the State of Israel and other democracies facing these challenges. It could also be noted that, on many occasions when Jews were persecuted, there were few voices raised to defend the Jews, whereas here there is a significant revulsion against the rioters. Many nations have refugee problems, and few have resolved the issue with humanity. There are no perfect solutions to these immense challenges. Nevertheless, as the refugees themselves have often said, Israel is a place where you should expect something better. Defining refugees from places where murder, torture, and rape are common as “infiltrators” and “criminals” shows a poor example to the world.  Up to 50,000 asylum seekers should not be ignored or routinely detained by the Prison Service.

Israeli rabbi and scholar Rabbi Donniel Hartman teaches the importance of embracing our Jewish responsibilities toward refugees that come along with our political sovereignty.

As a Jewish state committed to the continuity of values and as a co-signee of the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the value of Jewish continuity cannot be allowed to cause us either to shirk our responsibility or to be deaf to the needs of others. As a strong and successful country with a clear and sustainable Jewish majority, we have the ability to assimilate thousands of individuals a year without weakening our national identity. Given the size of Israel and the value of Jewish national continuity, however, this number is not unlimited. We need to determine a realistic policy which recognizes both our responsibility as Jews and our responsibility to the Jewish people.

Rav Donniel continues showing how our Jewish response to crises like this determine the future of our nation.

With Zionism the Jewish people have entered into the arena of political sovereignty with all of its gifts, challenges, and opportunities. We need to defend our borders and defend our national identity. We must also make sure, however, that we do not create a state whose border policies are Jewish but where life within those borders is not conducted with the highest standards of Jewish moral principle. As Jews we have matured sufficiently in our treatment of our border policy but we have yet to do so when it comes to our internal policy. We have created our Jewish state precisely for such an opportunity. It is time for us to embrace it.

Call upon Israeli government officials to ensure the safety of the African refugees so that they not live in fear. The building of the detention facility in the Negev to indefinitely detain refugees should be halted. A thoughtful, ethical and comprehensive immigration policy needs to be developed for how the State of Israel receives African refugees. Creating a true policy for dealing with refugees in accordance with international law should be a priority. We not only need the Israeli government to stop wrongs done to innocent vulnerable refugees but to fully swing the pendulum to being the global leader to fight the genocides occurring in the world today and to support refugees in all ways possible. Due to our unique Jewish history, we are best positioned to be at the forefront. Israel cannot become just another nation struggling with the refugee problem like other nations; rather there needs to be a distinctly Jewish compassionate response that raises the global standard. Israel, our beloved homeland, is a light in so many ways and this is another opportunity that cannot be missed to demonstrate how we care for the vulnerable.

As Jews, we are a nation of immigrants commanded to love and protect the stranger in our midst. This imperative is highest when we have sovereignty. It is not only our historical condition but also our eternal identity as the children of Abraham, the paradigmatic stranger.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Founder & CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on Amazon. In April 2012, Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the most influential rabbis in America.

2 Comments — Leave your comment

June 21, 2012 | 1:00 pm

The Present and the Future: Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle!

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz

Quantum Mechanical Model

In 1927, Werner Heisenberg set the world of quantum physics on its ear with his Uncertainty Principle. In relation to a subatomic particle (e.g., electron), Heisenberg stated that the more precisely we measure its location, the more imprecise becomes our calculation of its momentum, and vice versa. Thus, in a physical seesaw, we cannot measure both an electron’s location and momentum simultaneously, for measuring one thwarts the measuring of the other.

In practical terms, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle relates to knowing either where an object is or where it is going in the future. We can calculate exactly where something is in the present moment, but then its momentum (i.e., knowledge of where it is going) is completely unknown. I would like to use this uncertainty principle as a springboard to the broader question of how we live our lives.

Notwithstanding the past, is our present the electron and our future the momentum? Can we be cognizant of the present and simultaneously be aware of our future, or is there an uncertainty principle here?  If so, which deserves more of our attention: being present in the moment, or being prepared for the future? We would like to fully embrace both, but our human experience seems to demonstrate that the more “present” you are, the less aware you will be about where you are going, and vice versa. Both of these mindsets are important; however, should we give more weight to being present-minded or future-minded? Is there another possibility?

Judaism has tended to place more value on the past (memory, zakhor) and the present (observing and protecting, shamore) than the future. However, while acknowledging that the future remains uncertain, there are significant responsibilities upon us to plan for and consider the future. In fact, one rabbi argues that our consideration of the future outcome of our actions is the most important virtue for man to cling to (Pirke Avot, 2:13).

G-d is the ultimate model for living in all times simultaneously, as is learned from the revealed Divine Name (Yud, Hey, Vav, Hey, “to be” in past, present, and future). But this is one of the attributes of G-d that we cannot emulate. We learn from the Seven Blessings recited at a Jewish wedding that at that holy moment of union, the Garden of Eden and the messianic times are connected. It is a moment of transcendence in a cosmic connection between past, present, and future. Perhaps only at a Divinely embraced union of love such as this is such a phenomenon possible.

Aside from a unique moment of transcendence, we cannot simultaneously know our current position and our trajectory. However, we must strive to make the effort to consider the future implications of our actions today, and perhaps we can then achieve more balance in present and future thinking. An imbalance of present and future thought can create problems. Many are constantly late because they get so caught up in current activities that they neglect future commitments. Others struggle with present obligations because they are so consumed with upcoming events. We must learn to constantly alternate between present and future thinking. Ron Heifetz, Harvard professor of leadership studies, teaches that when we “dance” we must also be “on the balcony” watching ourselves. If we are only dancing, we are unaware that the dance is changing. However, if we are only observing, then we fail to dance properly in the present.

This cognitive exercise provides an important lesson about creating social change. We must attend to the needs of those suffering before us in the moment (chesed). However, if we only do this, then we risk neglecting the paradigm shifts that are necessary to understand to attack the root causes of injustices (tzedek). As moral agents, we must consider the current situation and the future outcome of our actions. We cannot merely embrace current obligations (deontology), nor can we merely act based upon future expectations (consequentialism). Rather, our moral lives transcend these temporal paradigms.

While we must always strive our best, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle reminds us that we must have the humility to embrace that we cannot fully live in the present and engage in future thinking simultaneously. The best we can do is teshuva: working to change the future by actively changing ourselves and our world in the present. The world is constantly changing but together we must tackle the greatest moral issues of our time.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Founder & CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on Amazon. In April 2012, Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the most influential rabbis in America.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

June 21, 2012 | 6:07 am

The Religious Value of Rest and Leisure

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz

Rav Shmuly

We are immersed in responsibilities and commitments to work, family, community, society, and the world. I do believe that a primary purpose for human existence is to toil, work, and serve. The value of work is expressed throughout Jewish sources: “Great is work because even Adam did not taste food until he had performed work” (Avot d’Rebbe Natan, ch. 11). But we might ask: is there a religious value to rest and leisure?

Leisure was once a high priority in America. Those who grew up in the period after 1945 experienced a world of increasing leisure time, usually with a husband making the income and a stay-at-home-mom taking care of the home and children. This trend peaked in 1969, when the U.S. Labor Department’s American Time Use Survey recorded the most leisure time. Since then, there has been a marked trend toward less leisure time, as this Harris Poll Table indicates:

Year Average Weekly Leisure Time (Hours)
1973 =  26
2007 =  20
2008 =  16

By 2000, abc News noted that “Not only are Americans working longer hours than at any time since statistics have been kept, but now they are also working longer than anyone else in the industrialized world.” Since then, some studies have contended that Americans have more leisure time than ever, or work less than people in industrializing countries. However, these studies often use faulty methodology, such as assuming that today it takes less time to do housework, errands, and other tasks, so therefore there is more leisure time. This ignores the additional tasks that have been added to modern housework as a result of living in larger homes with more devices and furniture, a longer commute, and an obligation to check text messages and emails from work 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, even on vacation. Indeed, many Americans do not even take their full amount of vacation days (already much fewer than for European workers) annually for fear that they might lose the “competitive edge.”

Regardless of the causes of this trend, there is a consensus that working long hours of overtime is deleterious to one’s health. Studies based on data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Psychological Association, and peer-reviewed journals reveal that workers with the most overtime had:

• An increased risk for injury, illness, and mortality, along with poorer perceived general health
• Higher levels of anxiety, depression, and stress
• Greater interference with their responsibility to family and home

Conversely, companies that try to balance work and life reap rewards; their employees demonstrate greater innovation, creativity, and productivity, and make fewer mistakes. In short, physical and psychological health is enhanced by leisure time.

Thus, one might suggest that rest is not only for Shabbat (naturally its highest actualization) but is also an ongoing necessity of great religious value. The great 18th-century Rabbi Baruch Epstein argued this point:

And now let us consider, and we can say that for a young man working on Talmudic analysis for five or six hours straight can certainly affect his health… and I therefore came upon you at daybreak and told you to go have some tea, and my focus was not the tea but rather the fact that you would have a break… And this, too, I believe, that when one rests in order to reach a certain goal, then that rest is as valuable as the goal itself… for the goal of the rest is to add strength and power to the actual pursuing of the goal, whether it be learning or good deeds. And this is the very reason why the Rabbis have said that that which leads to a mitzvah is as important as the mitzvah itself, for the mitzvah cannot come about without it, and so we consider the mitzvah and that which leads up to it as if it is all one long mitzvah (Makor Baruch, part 4).

Rav Epstein taught that rest was not only necessary to prepare to properly fulfill important religious duties (heksher mitzvah), but that it is a mitzvah itself. Some in education today have actually embraced the value of rest and leisure through curricula based on “leisure education.” Professor John Dattilo explains:

“Leisure education provides individuals the opportunity to enhance the quality of their lives in leisure; understand opportunities, potentials, and challenges in leisure; understand the impact of leisure on the quality of their lives; and gain knowledge, skills, and appreciation enabling broad leisure skills.” (Inclusive Leisure Services, p. 211).

From a Jewish perspective, we tend to value mindful rest more than mindless rest. Taking a break does not mean the primary value is to turn off one’s own core unique human faculties but the opposite. Mindful rest, where we engage our mind, heart, and soul in different and meaningful ways from the norm, is not only more effective to recharge, it also ensures that our rest helps promote self-actualization. We must never sanction laziness but rather work to elevate all aspects of human experience including our time of leisure.

Maimonides teaches the importance of engaging pleasures that do not just feel good but strengthen us toward our core goals.

For example: one should try to achieve through his eating, drinking, intercourse, sleeping, waking, movements and rests—the goal of his body’s health, and the goal of having a healthy body should be that one’s soul finds its tools whole and ready to engage in wisdom, and to acquire good characteristics and advance in learning and understanding, until the above mentioned final goal is reached. And in the same vein one should not be considering only how pleasurable those actions are—which might cause him to choose only that food and drink which tastes good, and so too with the other physical aspects—but rather one should choose that which will be most helpful and effective, whether pleasurable or not. Or, alternatively, one should always look for that which will give him pleasure according to medicine; for example, if one’s appetite is weakened he might need to awaken it with the help of good and spicy foods, or if one’s mood is darkened he might need to lighten it through hearing songs or going for walks in the gardens or museums, and sitting amongst beautiful statues, and the like, (Pirke Avot, Ch. 5 Introduction).

The Torah’s promise of Shabbat is a subversive revolution reminding us that as important as work is in our lives, holy rest is in a sense the highest aim. Rest does not merely mean fun, but elevated leisure. Our character can best be assessed by how we choose to use our free time. Does it elevate ourselves and those around us? Does it give us more energy, ideas, and positivity? Do we leave more passionate and committed to our core life goals? Does it broaden our sense of the possible? Does it bring us closer to our loved ones?

The “Mirrer Mashgiach” (Rav Levovitz) taught that Noach’s name comes from menuchah (rest), since he was a person concerned with the comfort of the people of his generation. Embracing menuchah for ourselves and enabling it for others is an act of emulating the Divine since G-d created rest and personally enacted it (Genesis 2:2). What is the nature of this rest? The Shabbat minchah prayer describes the Jewish notion of rest in the following way: “A rest of love and magnanimity, a rest of truth and faith, a rest of peace and serenity and tranquility and security, a perfect rest in which You find favor.” Rest is about achieving the deepest of virtues when we are relaxed and focused enough to internalize their truths.

We are created to work, to change the world for good. But we must not dismiss the religious and ethical value of rest and leisure for through its responsible actualization, we can truly learn to live fully in emulation of our Creator.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Founder & CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on Amazon. In April 2012, Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the most influential rabbis in America.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

June 18, 2012 | 5:05 am

Why I Am Fasting Today!

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz

Rav Shmuly at a Protest to End Torture & Prolonged Solitary Confinement on Friday (downtown Los Angeles, CA)!

Today and tomorrow, I am fasting as an individual in solidarity with tens of thousands of American individuals in solitary confinement. I am also fasting in solidarity with hundreds of faith leaders across the country calling for an end of solitary confinement.

Tomorrow is a historic day, as the Senate will be holding its first-ever Congressional hearing on solitary confinement. Leaders from Uri L’Tzedek, RHR-NA, the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, and other clergy around the country will be fasting for 23 hours prior to the hearing to draw attention to the physical and emotional harm caused by prolonged solitary confinement.

The fast symbolizes the 23 hours prisoners spend in solitary confinement cells daily. We view this as an important opportunity to advocate on behalf of the tens of thousands of individuals languishing in solitary confinement across the country.

We have seen in recent prisoner hunger strikes in California, Virginia, and across the country that prisoners are refusing food as one of the few means they have to protest their conditions in solitary confinement. 

U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, the Senate’s Assistant Majority Leader, will chair this first-ever hearing on the human rights, fiscal and public safety consequences of solitary confinement in U.S. prisons, jails, and detention centers. At this hearing (open to the public), they will explore the detrimental psychological and psychiatric impact on inmates during and after their imprisonment, the exorbitant costs of running solitary housing units, the moral human rights issues surrounding the use of isolation, and some of the successful state reforms that have taken place.

The United States is a world leader in its use of prolonged solitary confinement. This extreme treatment had been used sparingly for more than 150 years. However, after a federal supermax facility to hold inmates exclusively for solitary confinement opened in 1983 in Marion, IL, the number of state facilities mirrored the exploding prison population over the next generation.  There are now 44 state-run supermax prisons, and at least 80,000 people in the U.S. criminal justice system are kept in solitary confinement on any given day, with some serving for years, even decades. 

From 1995 to 2000, the growth rate of these segregation units significantly surpassed the prison growth rate overall: 40 percent compared with 28 percent. While authorities claim that this is necessary due to the presence of gangs and other violent offenders, the reality is that the United States has decided to quadruple its prison population (now the largest in the world), while not providing adequate funding. Thus, throwing prisoners in solitary confinement for even minor violations is now the norm.

Solitary confinement has a tremendously adverse effect on health. For example, a 2006 study found that up to 64 percent of prisoners in solitary confinement were mentally ill. Clinicians have even created a term for those affected by this confinement: Special Housing Unit (SHU) syndrome. Some of the symptoms include:

• Insomnia and paranoia
• Uncontrollable feelings of rage and fear
• Distortions of time and perception
• Increased risk of suicide

University of California at Santa Cruz Psychology Professor Craig Haney studied 100 solitary confinement inmates at a California supermax, and found that 90 percent experienced “irrational anger,” thirty times the rate found in Americans who are not in prison. A high percentage of the inmates also experienced lethargy, depression and despair to the point where they were unable to initiate any activity. Since the United Nations Convention Against Torture defines torture as an intentional act that causes “severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental,” then surely solitary confinement is torture.

We use a hunger strike because it is a time-honored tradition among those seeking redress for social injustice. Over the past century in Asia, for example, the hunger strike has been used by Mohandas Gandhi (India), Benazir Bhutto (Pakistan), and Aung Suu Kyi (Myanmar) to protest religious warfare and the suppression of civil liberties. In the United State, Cesar Chavez was noted for his hunger strikes to promote labor and civil rights for Latinos in the Southwest. In addition, it is not well known that Alice Paul and her group of militant suffragists, the National Woman’s Party, engaged in a hunger strike after being jailed for picketing in front of the White House in 1917-1918 in an effort to get President Wilson to support a federal woman suffrage amendment. In addition to enduring force-feeding, many were put in solitary confinement, and Paul had the added torture of having a flashlight shined in her face every hour of the day. In spite of opposition from moderate suffragists and those who saw picketing during wartime as unpatriotic, Paul and her organization witnessed the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment giving women the right to vote by Congress a year later, and its eventual ratification in 1920.

Jewish values are opposed to the abuse of prisoners and to the practice of solitary confinement. The rabbis teach us that one important way to inspire mercy from above is to take fasts upon ourselves. We do so with trepidation and caution to remember the frailty of the human condition and to stand in solidarity with all who are suffering.

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Founder & CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel,  and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on Amazon. In April 2012, Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the most influential rabbis in America.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

June 13, 2012 | 5:16 am

Is College Working? The Decline of the Humanities!

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Shmuly Yanklowitz

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz

As a campus educator who has taught students on more than 30 campuses around the country, I see how stressed students are to compete for grades, jobs, and organizational positions. Most students seem more focused on achievement than on their personal life search and intellectual journey. They are, of course, not to blame as a transactional culture has become overwhelming but we have much to fear for the future of the university and the intellectual culture of our country.

A recent study makes us question whether college is actually working to produce the results expected from such an expensive and time-consuming project. Sociologists Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa, in their book Academically Adrift, report that 45 percent of college students have not improved their critical thinking and writing skills after two years, and 36 percent still have not improved after four years. What are these students paying so much for?

The cost of a single year in college has soared over the past generation. The College Board estimated that annual tuition and fees is $7,020 for public colleges and $26,273 for private colleges, along with room and board that can add $7,000-$9,000 or more, and expenses for educational materials. Not surprisingly, most students now have to take out student loans to help pay for college, and for the class of 2010, the average college student debt (for those who took out a loan) was $25,250. By 2012, outstanding student loans reached the $1 trillion mark, surpassing the total U.S. credit card debt. Future projections are even grimmer; at the current rate, college tuition will increase to $123,000 (public) and $288,000 (private) for four years by 2034, and Ivy League colleges will then cost $422,000.  What is it exactly that students are paying for?

Upon graduation, these students understandably want to pay back their debt and get a start on life. As a January 2012 report released by the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce noted, recent college graduates who majored in the liberal arts earned less than many other majors, as the following Table indicates.

Recent College Graduate Unemployment and Average Annual Income (by Major)

It is not surprising that Engineer and Computer/Mathematics majors make more than those whose major was in the Humanities, Psychology/Social Work, or the Arts. However, Business majors, once dominant among the upwardly mobile, now have a much higher unemployment rate than Education majors, so not everything is predictable.

This trend, while apparently accelerating during the Great Recession, has been under way for more than a generation. During the early 1970s, the effect of college overexpansion and a stagnant economy dealt a serious blow to the Humanities, as there were now few academic positions available. From 1970-1982, for example, while the total number of undergraduate degrees increased by 11 percent, the number of degrees granted in the Humanities decreased dramatically:

Academic shifting, in addition to affecting our intellectual culture, impacts moral judgment. Studies have shown that college education has a positive influence on moral judgment, but this effect is significantly weaker for business students and is largely absent for accounting students (Cohen, Journal of Business Ethics, 2001). There is, of course, great importance to Mathematics and the sciences, but somehow the Humanities have gotten lost in the process.

Fortunately, the Humanities still have an array of champions. Conservative columnist David Brooks, for example, extols a liberal arts education for developing a progressively rare talent for reading and understanding the meaning of a paragraph, adding that it also enables you to write a coherent memo. He urges students to take advantage of the cumulative learning of many civilizations over millennia: “…doesn’t it make sense to spend some time in the company of these languages — learning to feel different emotions, rehearsing different passions, experiencing different sacred rituals and learning to see in different ways?”

Harvard Professor Michael J. Sandel takes a different approach. He notes with alarm that America has transformed from a market economy, in which monetary considerations were confined to economic issues, to a “market society,” which greatly expands the areas subject to the bottom line of economics. This has highlighted the gap between rich and poor and damaged the possibility of equal access to the political system. As Professor Sandel warns: “We are in the grip of a way of looking at the world and social life and even personal relations that is dominated by economic ways of thinking. That’s an impoverished way of looking at the world.”

Judaism has much to add to this defense of the Humanities. Rav Aharon Lichtenstein, the great rosh yeshiva who also holds a PhD from Harvard in literature, has been a great defender of the Humanities: 

The contention that a Torah hashkafah (worldview) should sanction scientific studies to the exclusion of the humanities, as only they deal with God’s world, blithely ignores man’s position as part of that world. To the extent that the humanities focus upon man, they deal not only with a segment of divine creation but with its pinnacle. The dignity of man is not the exclusive legacy of Cicero and Pico della Mirandola. It is a central theme in Jewish thought, past and present. Deeply rooted in Scripture, copiously asserted by Hazal, unequivocally assumed by rishonim (medieval rabbis), religious humanism is a primary and persistent mark of a Torah Weltanschauung. Man’s inherent dignity and sanctity, so radically asserted through the concept of tzelem Elokim (humans created in the image of G-d); his hegemony and stewardship with respect to nature; concern for his spiritual and physical well-being; faith in his metaphysical freedom and potential—all are cardinal components of traditional Jewish thought…How, then can anyone question the value of precisely those fields which are directly concerned with probing humanity? (Torah and General Culture: Confluence and Conflict, 245).

Rav Aharon reminds us that the study of philosophy, literature, and history can broaden our ethical, spiritual, and religious worldview as committed Jews. If one is going to take loans worth more than $100,000, one should take on the challenge to grow as a human being, not merely as a future worker. Training professionals but failing to teach humanity will destroy the creative fabric of our country.

How we, as adults, spend our leisure time helps to model for our children and students what values and activities they should cherish for their own sake. If we act as though we value money, prestige, and work more than relationships, ideas, and service we can only expect what lessons the next generation will learn from us. If we do not emphasize the importance of personal growth and intellectual search then we should not feel surprised if our children view the primary purpose of university as a way to increase their earning potential.

Maimonides, the greatest Jewish philosopher, taught that one must “Accept the truth from wherever one finds it.” As Jews we must have the intrigue and humility to engage the great intellectual traditions that preceded us. The Torah, of course, takes primacy but as Rav Kook taught we must draw from all truths to “expand the palace of Torah.”

Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of Uri L’Tzedek, the Founder & CEO of The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on Amazon. In April 2012, Newsweek named Rav Shmuly one of the most influential rabbis in America.

1 Comments — Leave your comment