I think the above refers to that Shas Educational System especially the Haredi College founded by Rav Yosef’s Shlita daughter.

See snippet below from “Why an Ashkenazi academic is voting for Shas”
SHIRA LEIBOWITZ SCHMIDT, THE JERUSALEM POST may 7 2006

“A SECOND area of moderation and openness is the attitude to higher education. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the founder of Shas, has given full backing to his daughter’s Herculean efforts to establish a college. Adina Bar-Shalom started the Haredi College in Jerusalem five years ago to enable haredi Beit Yaakov graduates to obtain fully recognized academic degrees in several professions”

I don’t believe that to be the case. I think that the issue is foreign influences, and the delay of marriage. This could apply to boys as well, theoretically. The issue is framed in terms of a B.A. degree, because potential teachers do not get an education just for the thrill of it, without an economic gain.

I think you are referring to machshava; Jewish thought or philosophy. I think of hashkafa as “point of view” or orientation. Obviously, intellectual giants of previous generations agree with you that machshava is important, as evidenced by the many seforim on machshava that exist. But all of these seforim are based essentially on early works; i.e. Talmud, Midrash, Zohar etc. as viewed through the hashkafa of their respective authors. So, inasmuch as machshava seforim are a reformulation of yesodos founmd in primary seforim, the notion of learning machshava as a discipline is necessarily a modern one.

That would make sense. However, I saw today an old article in Haaretz about Sephardi girls in Israeli seminaries, and the term “Mizrahi” was used consistently in place of “Sephardim”. So we need to get ask someone who read the original editorial.

Questions of semantic aside, the real issues lie between the lines of the article and Kol Korsh. In an incisive piece by Miriam Teicher, the daughter of Slabodka Musmach and a professor at Bar Ilan, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/809281.html the author delves into why the Charedi leadership only banned continuing education for women rather secular education in its entirety. Her conclusion is the Gedolim are trying to socailly engineer away one of the contradictions of Charedi life.

The almost universal adoption by Charedi men of a life of Torah study as a “profession” has caused its monetary value and stature to dccline. All professions including Torah Study are goverened by the law of supply and demand: Cetreris Paribus(all other things being equal) an increase in the supply of a good or service will lower its price. Rabbi Rosenblum has complained,in a previous article about the phenomenon of the decreased stature of the Torah profession in the eyes of charedi public without specifying its cause.

Charedi women on the other hand have been forced to go ro work to support their husbands and their large families. Achieving an “advanced” degree with high earnings potential these women become the real “baalhbatim in their housholds. This ceratinly upsets the traditional concept of family life and further lowers the self esteem of the Avrachim. To counteract this threat to the status of men, Charedi leaders have decided on a practical implemntaion of Achashverushes procalmation that “each man should be the ruler in his house”

“For some reason, we have found, in recent years, that courses are taught by foreign lecturers,” ran an editorial in Beit Ne’eman, Yated Ne’eman’s women’s supplement. “Some of these lecturers *belong to the Mizrahi stream*, and others, to great shame, are secular through and through … there is danger here of contamination.”

Compare with the Haaretz quote in the previous post:

” The absence of ultra-Orthodox lecturers with academic degrees in diagnostics and consulting required bringing in lecturers from “outside” the community. Yated Neeman’s women’s supplement, Bayit Neeman, blasted the trend of bringing in lecturers *from the “Sephardi faction”* and even “completely secular” ones, warning of the women students’ defilement. ”

Can someone quote from the original Bayit Neeman? While I don’t think that Mizrachi teachers should be automatically rejected–ki haadam yireh laniyim v’ashem yireh lalevav–still, the Jewish Week translation is substantially different than the Haaretz translation. Perhaps there is confusion between the terms “Edot Hamizrach” and “Mizrachi”.

Binyomin,

Faranak Margolese mentions this issue in her book on “kids at risk”, but she was challenged in a recent critique published in the Jewish Observer(the JO had previously published a positive, overall, review as well).

I do believe that there will be some change in this area. The phenomenon of “kids at risk”, the Slifkin Affair, and the blogosphere will force the Yeshivah World to, in the words of Rav Matisyahu Salomon, “… strengthen all of our children, and give them the ammunition with which to fight back when their beliefs are attacked”.

I think that this will take place according to the Beis Halevi’s understanding of the Baal Hagada’s response to the rashah; i.e., we are strengthening ourselves, as opposed to debating others. I am therefore uncertain if this will meet the bar which you set in your comments.

Personally, when I am involved in internet discussions or debates on other blogs, I am careful to admit any perceived weaknesses in my own positions, and I avoid flippant sophistry–better no answer than a weak one– especially since I never received any training in the dialectics involved in discussions of ikkerei emunah with those challenging or questioning them.

Anything Haaretz writes on Chareidi life should be viewed with suspicion, as it conveys the negative feelings of its authors to the extent of being unprofessional by American journalistic standards. Thus, “the rabbis were mostly infuriated…”, and the issue of womens’ education is put in terms of “[women being able to] break out of the ‘teaching ghetto’ “. On the other hand, charedi interests are sometimes not competently represented even in their own media. Rabbi Berel Wein is quoted as saying “don’t judge Judaism by [some] Jews”, and one should probably not judge Chareidim, or chareidi-Orthodoxy by some of their own editorials!

Assuming the Haaretz accurately quoted the editorial in question which “blasted the trend of bringing in lecturers from the “Sephardi faction” and even “completely secular” ones, warning of the women students’ defilement”, then I believe that this represents an extremely insular faction. While it is understandable that a school would not want to change its character by changing the Ashkenazi majority, speaking of “Sepherdai faction” in such terms is simply unacceptable.

While the crux of the issue of teacher training is protecting charedie education from influences hostile to Torah life, the reader of such articles also focuses on basic issues involved in a Charedi lifestyle. As I see it, living in the American, and particularly the Israeli chareidi communities involve trade-offs. They include acceptance of a more non-nuanced rejection of secular education and society, a more intense Rabbinic authority structure, a more intensely regulated media , and some degree of economic hardship. All of these items are perceived by outsiders as negative aspects of life.

On the other hand, one is able to partake in an unadulterated and unique kind of spiritual life, and perhaps take greater responsibility for the continuance of the Torah nation. Presumably, many charedim view this trade-off as worthwhile, and are satisfied with the above reality. It is also possible that with time, the Israeli system will move slightly in the direction of the model of the American Yeshiva World, in terms of being more accepting of advanced vocational training for both men and women, and accepting the value of secular knowledge, including acceptable elements of secular psychology–chochma b’goyim taamin. Also, as is known from past experiences, there are conservative, or zealous elements, in the Chareidi world who resist any type of change.

This article about teacher education is merely a prototype of an article which generates negative internet posting, elsewhere on the web, even amongst Orthodox bloggers. Often, people focus on the language of the posts in question, accusations of “charedi basher” are then hurled, and the discussion doesn’t get to the heart of the issue. I think what worries and concerns bloggers is the possibility that the Israeli Chareidi model might be imported by Western countries. This is an entirely understandable thought, and there is nothing wrong with discussing it respectfully.

Notwithstanding that the American Yeshivah world, influenced by its more insular factions, appears to be shifting to the Right, I still think that in reality, adopting the Eretz Yisrael model in its entirety is an unlikely occurrence, given the different environments. The fact that the Israeli chareidi community, as per a recent Jewish Observer article, discourages potential Olim who are unable to accept the above trade-offs and “leave their hashkafos back in America”, would seem to show that the differences in the nature of the two communities is indeed still being recognized and respected, at least at the current time.

I should clarify what i mean by hashakfa. I am not refering to the important concepts of how a ben/bas torah should live - that is taught very well. I was refering to the philosophical foundations of judaism. This is taught irregularly. It is also taught in the manner of defending obvious truths, without presenting any other way of viewing the world. for example, “The world must have been created by G-d - just look around at its beuty and egularity! How can people believe we come from monkeys?” Such an argument does not present any legitimate alternative, and is therefore very easy to defend with basic arguments. Very often these arguments are overly simple or completely wrong. Hashakfa is taught, but not in a way which is intellectually rigorous or which gives tools for dealing with alternative ideologies.

(( The reason that hashkafa is taught like this is partly because we do not want to allow the secular world into our schools. Defending our view of judaism would expose the students [and teachers] to alternative ways of doing things. This is why I mentioned the importance of isolation in my previous post. ))

Again, I do not think that there is anything wrong with this for someone who does not feel a desire for a better understanding. It is also not likely to be a practical problem in the chavrusas set up by Ayelet Hashachar. Secular women are also not known for having a comprehensive ideaology, and here they are already looking for something else. The problem that I was rasing is that chareidi women (and men) do not have the tools to respond to secular culture, and have always been told to stay away from it. Even if in this setting it is not a practical probelm, it is like;ly that many do not feel ready for the interaction.

hp,
What organization are you part of?
Do you give your members special training, or do you accept them based on what they learned in high school? I assume you train them. Ayelet Hashachar is not offering this training.

Are chareidi women expected to try to debate with there secular colleagues, if they work in a secular business setting? I now that men are told to do kiruv when they can, except that they should not hitchhike and get stuck in a discussion they can’t handel.

The Charedi Leadership has just banned women from taking advanced(BA) degrees who do so to support their husbands’ learning(see link below). The gedolim have thus confined educated Charedi women to the profession of teaching where the supply far outstrips the demand. Now there will be many women without much to do who can participate in your worthy program.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/808316.html

this is an unfair and, by definition, inaccurate portrayal of charedim. Hashkafa is not a subject that you can “know”. It is one’s overall orientation to life. Charedim understand in their gut the primacy of Torah, and live their lives through this prism of this ikar. People who don’t organicially “get it” need volumes of “hashkafa books” to explain it. These are unnecessary for charedim because they understand it viscerally are are living it!

We must live on opposite sides of the planet. Perhaps on different planets altogether. The organization I am involved in has many deep thinking, philosophically thought out and intellectually developed women who engage our secular brethren on every level. Torah hashkafah, versus halachah, is the primary focus.

Our women, as well as our men, are doing an incredible job, inspiring others with their Torah wisdom while having the intellectual honesty and personal integrity to do the requisite research as the need arises.

Ours is not a religion of feel-good culture, nor does it embrace a “leap of faith” approach. Our men and women who are saturated with the wisdom of Torah are ideal representatives of Torah-true Judaism.

I am not sure how Israeli women are expected to deal withtheir secular counterparts. They can teach halacha and alot of nice ideas, but they generally cannot explain or justify why mitzvos are important.

I presume that the secular women are not looking for philosophy, and they just want to learn about the culture. However, at least basic philosophy is an important part of such discussions. It seems that there are many religious women who cannot provide that to someone who does not already think like them.

I do not think that too many women are worried about the minimal exposure to secualr culture that is involved. However, it is possible that many of them do not feel comfortable taking on such a job where they are lacking basic preperation. This may not be a real problem for the project, since the secular women are not looking for intellectual discussions. It is still a problem to get volunteers who were always told not to take the risk of intellectual exloration.

There are also many people who are scared of doing kiruv. I have seen signs up warning bochrim not to hitchhike, partly because they may engae the driver in a religious discussion, which they will lose. (Wouldn’t it be better to teach them enough that they could win, or at least remain religious?) I was also once at a speech where the rabbi strongly opposed kiruv for anyone with young kids at home. (He was stressing the importance of total isolation).

Drs. Hall and Kaplan ask a good question. Although the Israeli religious scene is much more polarized that the American one, theoretically, a Religious Zionist woman who’s observance of Halacha is impeccable, shouldn’t pose a problem just because she may say the tefillah for the Medinah. On the other hand, Religiou-Zionist institutions would need to take on chareidim as well in their outreach programs.

Religious Zionists can reach in places, and in ways where chareidim could not. Lichyot B’yachad is an Israeli OU program where teens from several religious high schools meet with secular students to study together and learn Torah texts. The truth is that there are enough opportunities for RZ, Lubavitch and chareidim to engage in kiruv, whether jointly or individually, and everyone should recognize the other’s efforts. As the Chafetz Chaim said, when there is a fire burning, one shouln’t care about the purity of the water.