Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Rabbi David Silverstein sits down with Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer — dayan, author, and founder of the Iyun Institute — to ask one of the most charged questions in contemporary Israeli Jewish life: how does the Haredi world actually think about its relationship to secular and religious Jews who aren’t Haredi?
The conversation opens with a viral protest video in which a yeshiva student questions a secular woman's Jewish identity, then uses it as a window into two thousand years of halakhic categories. Rav Pfeffer's provocative argument: the classic rabbinic frameworks — mumar l’hachis, mumar l'teavon, tinok shenishba — are largely just words. What's really happening beneath the surface is a return to the national, biblical model of Jewish identity that predates two thousand years of diaspora community life. R’ David pushes back: the vocabulary people absorb in yeshiva shapes how they actually see the world, and without new ideological language, the default categories always win. Together they map the internal Haredi struggle between isolationism and engagement, assess what thinkers R’ Kook, R’ Hirsch, and R’ Soloveitchik can and can't contribute, and ask whether October 7th has cracked open a space for Haredim to see themselves as part of a larger national story.
About the Guest
Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer is a dayan, author, and founder of the Iyun Institute, dedicated to developing a Haredi identity that engages deeply with Israeli society. He lives in Ramot, Jerusalem, where he is Rav of the “Ohr Chadash” community, with his wife Tamar and their eight children.
Questions? Feedback? Have a topic you'd like to hear discussed? Let us know: thecuriousjew@orayta.org
Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer is a dayan, author, and founder of the Iyun Institute, dedicated to developing a Haredi identity that engages deeply with Israeli society. He lives in Ramot, Jerusalem, where he is Rav of the “Ohr Chadash” community, with his wife Tamar and their eight children.
Questions? Feedback? Have a topic you'd like to hear discussed? Let us know: thecuriousjew@orayta.org
00:00 Welcome & The Protest Video That Started It All
03:22 Two Thousand Years of Insider/Outsider: Chazal, the Rambam, and Tinok Shenishba
16:04 The Deeper Story: It's Not Tinok Shenishba — It's a Return to Tanakh
19:02 Does Language Actually Matter? A Pushback
21:44 The Lived Haredi World: Every Jew Is Still a Brother
27:56 Them and Us — But It's Sociology, Not Theology
32:23 What Vocabulary Can Haredim Borrow? R' Kook, R' Hirsch, and R' Soloveitchik
41:01 Building the Library: The Iyun Institute's Original Project
49:10 Army Service, October 7th, and the Case for a New Language
53:33 Closing Thoughts & Where to Find the Iyun Institute
Creators and Guests
Host
Rav David Silverstein
Rabbi David Silverstein is the Sgan (Assistant) Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshivat Orayta in Jerusalem, and previously served as the Director of the Overseas Program at Yeshivat Hesder, Petach Tikva. Originally from New Jersey, Rabbi Silverstein lives with his wife and four children in Modiin, Israel.
What is The Curious Jew?
Judaism is a civilization built on big ideas—about God, morality, community, purpose, and what it means to live a meaningful life. But in a rapidly changing world, how do these timeless concepts speak to our modern reality?
The Curious Jew is a forum for thoughtful conversation, spirited debate, and intellectual exploration of Judaism’s most enduring questions and contemporary challenges. Through engaging discussions with leading rabbis, scholars, authors, and communal figures, we go beyond the surface to examine the core ideas shaping the Jewish future.
Hosted by Rabbi David Silverstein and produced by Yeshivat Orayta, our goal is not simply to provide easy answers, but to cultivate curiosity, challenge assumptions, and inspire a more thoughtful, self-aware, and committed Judaism for the twenty-first century.
Whether you're deeply learned in Torah text or just beginning your intellectual journey, The Curious Jew invites you to join the conversation. New episodes drop bi-weekly.
Questions? Feedback? Have a topic you'd like to hear discussed? Let us know: thecuriousjew@orayta.org
Intro music by Mykola Odnoroh.
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: If you live
by books, you'll end up dying
because of a printing error.
Look at how people actually live.
Nobody thinks in those terms.
Rabbi David Silverstein:
Judaism begins with questions.
Welcome to The Curious Jew, a podcast
by Yeshivat Orayta, where we challenge
assumptions, explore big ideas, and
think about what it means to live a
Jewish life in the twenty-first century.
R' David Silverstein: Hello
everyone, and welcome back to
another episode of the Curious Jew.
I'm David Silverstein.
Today I have the honor of
welcoming Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer.
Rabbi Pfeffer, thank you so much
for coming on the Curious Jew
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Thank you very much.
Great pleasure to be here.
Good to see you
R' David Silverstein: Okay, great.
For people who aren't familiar with your
work, aside from being a Rabbi Bashul,
also being a Dayan, also being a, an
author you also run the Ayin Institute,
which correct me in term- if you wanna
modify the description, but basically it's
an attempt to present a sort of a nuanced
perspective on contemporary Haredism.
And it's a forum where people Haredim
talk, and dialogue, and write about
sort of various perspectives on Israel,
on modernity, Haredi life, et cetera.
And I thought it would be a great
opportunity for us to have a dialogue,
given your background and your interests,
particularly about the question of
what is the Haredi perspective on
Jewish peoplehood, on Klal Yisrael.
To provide some context for the
conversation today, so as everybody in
Israel knows, over the past few weeks,
there have been lots of protests going
on in Israel by a more extremist faction
of the Haredi community called the
Palgu Shaumi protesting the arresting
of various yeshiva students who didn't
show up to receive their army deferrals.
And there was one video going around
which really caught my attention.
It was a video basically where you had
a protest going on and a woman in her
car, and she can't get to the protest
'cause they're blocking streets.
And she gets out of her car and she
says to this young Haredi yeshiva
student, "How can a Jew behave this way?
How can a Jew block streets, prevent
people from, going about their day?"
So he said to her something to the effect
of, " In what way are you actually a Jew?
You don't observe Shabbat.
You don't observe the laws of kashrut."
He said, "I'm sure your husband doesn't
wear tzitzit," et cetera, et cetera.
So you got in this whole back and forth
about what is the nature of Jewish
identity, and more specifically is there
any possibility for a Jewish identity
divorced from a religious Jewish identity?
So I'm-- I doubt this, yeshiva
guy is a great theologian.
He was re-reacting probably impulsively.
But I thought actually it was
an interesting framework for
thinking about this question.
And before we get to contemporary
iterations, maybe you could speak
for a few minutes about Talmudic
paradigms for thinking about Jewish
peoplehood specifically categories like
the Umma Lechachis, Umma Lechaavon.
'Cause if you look in classical Talmudic
literature, y-you do get the sense a
lot of times that, Chazal had a very in
versus out conception of Jewish identity.
That sort of you're in if you observe
the mitzvah, and if you don't, then you
have the status of Umma Lechachis or Umma
Lechaavon, which you can elaborate on.
And both of those are outsider insiders.
They're Jews who are in a certain
sense part of the community, but
there are all types of restrictions
placed on their Halakhic identity.
So maybe if you could speak for a few
minutes about how you conceptualize the
world of Chazal, specifically when it
comes to this question of, whether or not
there is any room for the open secularists
in the context of normative Jewish life.
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Okay.
So thank you, David.
Just to be a little bit more
precise about Machon Ayun Institute.
Ayun Institute is the engine and
leadership engine for the project
of a Haredi society that is deeply
responsible for Israel, that partners
deeply with Israel, that is part of
Israel's institutions and public space,
and that needs an infrastructure of
ideas and people to lead those ideas,
to be the ambassadors of those ideas.
And that's what we do
at the Ayun Institute.
We have 700, 800 graduates of our
programs, and our content is geared
to be that formative content for
what it means to be Haredi on the
one hand, and yet to be deeply
participant in Israel on the other.
That is the Ayun Institute, and this
is very relevant for your question once
we get to the modern iteration of this.
Now, before we get there, you're
talking to me about Hazzal.
So yes, Hazzal, of course, have a picture
of being in and out of the Jewish fold,
so to speak, of Klal Yisrael- Which is
deeply en- enmeshed, deeply ingrained
into the Halakhic mindset that Chazal
want to emphasize, want to bring us.
And therefore, somebody
who is not itcha, right?
Betura umitvos.
He's not amitecha, right?
What is amitecha?
That is with you in Torah mitzvot.
A- and the mitzvos that are
relevant for amitecha, for your
fellow, for your friend, okay?
Specifically, the passing says,
"Lo tonu isha samito," right?
You're not allowed to onah,
to defraud your fellow.
And from there we also learn that
you're not allowed to make somebody
upset, oinas devarim, meaning saying
something that will be hurtful.
But to whom?
So the Chofetz Chaim is busy with
this in his Sefer Chofetz Chaim, and
he says, "Yeah someone that's not
with you in Torah, mitzvos, so these
Halakhah wouldn't apply to him," right?
Because he's out, quote, unquote.
And we have the same thing with
people that are called achicha,
who's your brother, right?
It says, "Ki amuch achicha."
Everywhere in the Torah, the, your
fellow Jew is called a brother.
But that brotherhood is a brotherhood
that relates to somebody that is a part
of the covenant with Hashem, which is
expressed in terms of at the very least,
a rudimentary awareness of obligation,
of duty, of being a part of it.
And the murmur, like you said, the murmur
le'al avain, somebody who shirks or
throws off from himself, laachis, right?
In a rebellious way.
The yoke, the basic idea
of being duty-bound to that
covenant and all that it entails.
So Chazal see him as somebody who
is outside of the fold, and that has
very significant ramifications in how
we speak about him, how we look at
him, how we treat him in identity.
Now, Chazal have other definitions also.
There's the Tamud Chacham
and there's the Am Ha'aretz.
Who is the Am Ha'aretz?
So in the Gemara there's a few different
definitions of what is an Am Ha'aretz.
Somebody that doesn't learn, somebody
that doesn't wear tzitzit, somebody that
doesn't wear tefillin, I don't know.
All kinds of definitions.
But that's another important category
in the world of Chazal, Tamud Chacham
versus Am Ha'aretz, and that was a, that
was a caste, as we would call it, right?
That was a grouping that
was- A standalone, right?
In itself.
We are the Talmidai Chachamim.
And the question is, to what degree are
those groupings, are those conceptions,
are those paradigms relevant for today?
And
R' David Silverstein: Okay.
May-maybe, may-maybe before we get to
today going, 'cause there's so much
time in between Chazal and today, maybe
just do a little jump forward before
we get to, the contemporary iterations.
Obviously, there's a lot
of discussion about how you
apply the Talmudic categories.
But maybe if we can just move a
little bit out of Chazal for a second.
As you alluded to before, certainly in the
Rambam the Rambam sort of codifies similar
language, talks about that even resembling
another, same idea that it's only real-
only really relevant when we're talking
about people who are, achi chaver mesuba,
people who are sort of part of your camp.
And the Rambam also seems to have
kind of a maximalist conception
of being in or out, right?
The Rambam even expands the category
to the realm of theology, right?
That if you reject certain theological
principles, so you're also out, right?
So you do have a strong sense from my
understanding that not only in Chazal
but also in the Rambam that there again,
there's this continuous conversation of
those being in and those being out, right?
And where things start to shift and
it will move a little bit to some
contemporary iterations i- is in the
early modern period where all of a sudden
identity becomes more complicated, right?
In other words, you mentioned
before the Ama Haris.
If you look, for example, at the teshuvahs
of the rabbis who are dealing with like
life in Germany whether it's the Binyamin
Ze'ev or the Melamed L'hoil, right?
So these rabbis are dealing with the
reality where all of a sudden with the
rise of modernity, you have Jews who
are behaving in a way which is very
different in the Talmudic Ama Haris
no, for sure
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: They're
speaking about, they're speaking
about, they're speaking about
people who are not Shomer Shabbos.
Meaning that the
R' David Silverstein: No but let me
just clarify that one point, 'cause I
think that's an important distinction.
Because in other words, in, as
I point, in other words, in the
time of Chazal, in the time of the
Rambam, there's this sort of symmetry
bet- between, behavior and belief.
There's a certain sense that, for
example, if you're a mechallel
Shabbos, so you don't believe,
for example, in, God as a creator.
When you get to the time of the Rambam
says, for example, people in his time say
Kiddush and then get in the car, right?
So all of a sud- so all of a
sudden you have a situation
where identity now is more
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: He
doesn't say get in the car.
He
R' David Silverstein: No
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer:
kiddush and then go to work
R' David Silverstein: Go to work, exactly.
So the idea basically is that, you
start to invoke a new category during
this time, which is no longer a
mumar le-chach et mumar le-teavon.
It's certainly not the amar.
It's the tinok Shenishba, right?
And so the tinok Shenishba is a new
vocabulary that, these rabbis are
using to try and make sense of the
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: so
you mentioned Ibn Ezra.
Ibn Ezra is the w- is the first
to really invoke that category
as a wholly new category.
But I do want to make another point
that I think-- I do not think that it's
about belief, meaning you mentioned that
there's practice and there's belief.
I think there's a third element which you
mustn't ignore, and I think it's probably
the most important element of all of them.
Belief, by the way, that's the Rambam.
Rambam brought in catechisms into
the Jewish world, and many didn't
agree with this in the Rambam.
Do we want to go with that all
the way like the Rambam did?
Do we want to minimize it like
the Sefer Ikrim and other Seferim?
So I'll leave that aside because I want to
emphasize a third category that I think is
very significant, and that is community.
belonging.
Somebody who didn't keep mitzvot in
times of Chazal and throughout the
generations all the way until the
modern world, not modern secular, modern
individualist, up until the modern
world, somebody not keeping mitzvot
is simply not part of the community.
He's setting himself outside
of the community belonging.
Our belonging is a communal belonging.
Our sense of partnership, our sense
of traversing together the historical
progression of the Jewish people
is done in what we would call in
modern parlance a faith community.
And if you now, you leave aside,
you abandon the faith, right?
Or you abandon the kind of way of life
that the faith predicates, that the
faith obligates, then you're placing
yourself outside of the community.
And by placing yourself outside
of the community, you cease to be.
"Am Sheitcha BeTorah Umitzvot"
you're not with the nation.
What is the nation?
The nation is a nation.
The community is a community
of Torah and Mitzvah.
That's who we are.
Once you stop doing that,
you're outside of the community.
I think that many of these norms
and these ideas that we find in
Chazal-- Think about, for example,
the idea of coercion, right?
Koifin al hamitzvot.
You coerce mitzvot, right?
The Gemara says, "Kofin osei et
sheomru rote ani kzobot pivam" right?
You force-- You coerce a
person to fulfill a mitzvah.
I wouldn't go too deeply into this,
but one reading of the Rambam will
say that coercion is something that
depends on community belonging.
That is what we do in the community.
If you wish to belong to the community,
then you must fulfill the community norms.
You cannot have standing in the
community and then abandon, rebel, go
diametrically against our community norms,
because you undermine the community.
And that's why-
R' David Silverstein: but that's my point.
In other words, when you get
to the time of the Binyan Cion
the community has changed,
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Yes, but not nes-
but not only because of secularism.
Also because of individualism,
meaning life stops being a community
way of life the way it used to be.
The modern world, not only
did it bring into the world a
s- a secularist perspective.
And by the way, secularism doesn't mean
necessarily not keeping to a mitzvah.
Secularism in terms of authority, okay.
The rabbi isn't the authority.
That's what secularism
s- where it started.
Doesn't mean we all become,
non-practicing Jews.
It means that the centr- the central
authority that was the rabbis were a deep
part of that central auth- authority is no
longer considered to be the primary source
of authority by which I lead my life.
And that's something, I think a deeper
motion, internal motion of the modern
person that makes these questions of
belonging, that shifts them, changes them.
The fact that I have autonomy, that
I can do what- whatever I want,
and that doesn't affect my standing
because I'm not thinking in those
same terms of community belonging.
It's not quite the words that are
used in the Binian Tzion, absolutely.
And Chazon Ish, yes, he
uses Tinok Shenishba.
But I think you, you need
that Tinok Shenishba.
Why do you need that Tinok Shenishba?
B- not just because otherwise there'll
be too many people outside, right?
Most people say you need the Tinok
Shenishba because otherwise, m-
90% of the Jewish people cease
to be Jewish people," right?
So we have to find a solution, and
the solution is is Tinok Shenishba.
I think there's something else
going on, and that's the new way
that we perceive ourselves as being
Jews outside of a faith community.
R' David Silverstein: But again
just to push on this, 'cause I
think it's an important sort of qualifier,
is that when ⦠Again, we're still
historically in a period of Jewish
history where y- you know, the r- rabbis
are encountering this new individualist
thrust, this new secular thrust, right?
So the only language, again, maybe there's
other language that you're familiar
with that I'm not, but it seems to me
the only language that they use in the
context of normative rabbinic texts is
basically the language of Tinok Shenishba.
In other words, it could be right that
the impulse that's driving it is an
awareness of the complexity of identity
and the nature of being an individual
versus being part of a collective.
But bottom line, in terms of how
you as a yeshiva student or as a
rabbi encounter the category of the
non-observant Jew, it's no longer
the ⦠It's no longer the ⦠All
of a sudden you have this new category
called the Tinok Shenishba, right?
And it still creates a
category of us versus them.
It's a category-
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: going on,
what's real- David, what's really
going on is not the Tinok Shenishba.
Don't be fooled.
That's just, it's just words.
It's not ⦠I don't think it's important.
I know you're giving it a lot of
credence because you're reading books,
and all the books say Tinok Shenishba.
I would not go that way.
Don't be fooled.
That is our rabbinic way of saying that
what, the way we used to look at things
is not the way we look at things anymore.
What's really going on
is not Tinok Shenishba.
What's really going on is
a return to the Tanakh.
That's really what's going on.
It's a ret- it's a motion that goes
away from the com- from the community
model that we've become accustomed to
for 2,000 years back to a different
kind of model, a national model of the
Tanakh, which is a different model.
And yeah, so you have to find
rabbinic words to be able to say this.
So we use the word Tinok Shenishba,
but that's not the point.
The ⦠It's the ⦠don't
get sidetracked.
Don't be ⦠Like, people are obsessed
with this Tinok Shenishba this.
An enti- Entire books are
written about, about this.
There's something deeper going
on In the last 200 years,
there's this bas coil, right?
There's a heavenly voice coming down
from heaven and calling the Jewish
people back to their homeland.
The call of a national awakening of
the Jewish people, the call for a
seismic shift in, in who the Jews are.
This is a tremendousâ¦
B- beginning with Rav Kalisher in the 18,
I don't know, 20s and Rav Alkalai, and the
Talmidi HaGra, a- and all of the others.
And that calling that so many of
these great Rabbonim heard, and of
course others didn't, but so many of
them did hear that calling, and that
went together with this shift from a
community belonging and identity and
way of life to one that actually goes
back to something that was there before
this national belonging and way of
life because it's a national awakening.
And then you have to
rethink these categories.
Now, from a rabbinic perspective,
of course, I'm a community rabbi,
and then you have to work within
the toolkit that Chazal gave you.
And so we have a rubric called Tinok
Shenishba, which is just helpful to okay,
we're gonna put this question aside.
We're not gonna worry about
it too much because we have a
rubric called Tinok Shenishba.
But what's going on is something far
more profound than just saying, "Oh we're
switching mumar for a Tinok Shenishba."
And, Tinok Shenishba is so condescending.
I'm gonna go to my friend in
the street and say, "Hello,
you're a Tinok Shenishba."
Whatâ¦
How is he gonna think about me?
This is not how people walk
around Israel or anywhere else in
the world and go around looking
at others as a Tinok Shenishba.
It's not like Chazal.
In Chazal, yes, we looked at others
as a Am Ha'aretz, or we looked at
them as being a mumar l'-- l'teavah
or mumar l'acharit or whichever way.
This is not how Tinok Shenishba works.
Nobody does this
R' David Silverstein: Okay, so ironically
enough, I think in this specific
discussion, I think that I'll probablyâ¦
not that I'm Haredi, but I'll probably
be advocating for a more Haredi reading
of what's going on here than you.
In other words, I don't fully
agree, and I'll tell you why.
Because I think that language
is quite substantive.
I'll demonstrate what I mean by this.
We can move to the sort of really
modern period, because I think it
really demonstrates what I'm saying.
Is that it could always be there
are undercurrents that are at play
that we're not aware of, right?
But when push comes to shove, we only have
the language of our text that becomes the
default way through which we dialogue.
So for example, when you get to the modern
state of Israel, and you start to see,
like even the example of the Hazon Ish.
The Hazon Ish- He reluctantly
uses Tinok Shenishba, and he
puts qualifications on it.
He'll say, for example, "Ah, it's only
for somebody if you know that, using
this language that if you tell them
something, they'll respond positively,
they'll do teshuva," et cetera, et cetera.
And over time, there's a very interesting
article I read by , Ronen Lupitz, who
analyzed the evolution of Tinok Shenishba.
And one of the things he points
out basically is that if you
look as sort of society evolves,
particularly in the state of Israel,
that Haredi poskim, specifically
Haredi poskim, are more resistant
to use the phrase Tinok Shenishba.
In other words, there was an attempt
by the Binah Al-Tzion, maybe the
Chalidish a little bit, to invoke it.
But you get a sense that actually
Haredi poskim in, particularly in the
state of Israel, don't wanna use that
model unless they really have to.
And I think probably the most important
Haredi posek, or one of the most
important Haredi poskim, Rav Elyashiv
he, at least in one of his teshuvot,
and it's actually very interesting.
I, I researched this a little
bit, and I found that everyone
says he says different things.
But at least in one of his teshuvot,
he explicitly says that Tinok Shenishba
doesn't apply for secular Jews living
in the state of Israel because they're
aware of the reality of Jewish life.
Now, if you think for a
second experientially, right?
Now, you live in the Haredi world, I
don't, so maybe you can tell me I'm wrong.
But if you think about it experientially,
you have tens of thousands of
yeshiva guys who are internalizing
the language of Chazal all the time.
And you can claim to them really
what's going on is there's a sense
of return to a Tanakh model,"
but that's not their vocabulary.
Their vocabulary is Tinok Shenishba,
Mu'um Har'achas, Mu'um Hatevon.
That's what they're hearing,
that's what they're internalizing.
And when Rav Elyashiv says that basically
all of secular Israel are not Tinok
Shenishba so what do they default back to?
You default back to the Mu'um
Har'achas, the Mu'um Hatevon, and
that's why I started the conversation
with the story of what I saw of
that yeshiva guy at the protest.
'Cause again, that's the language
that people are receiving.
You're describing it more
anthropologically, that there's-- you're
describing it almost as an academic.
But in terms of the way the which
people experience the world of
ideas I'm not sure it's true.
Meaning, how would you conceptualize,
let's say, in the world of modern
Israeli po- Haredi poskim, right?
How do they conceptualize in your
reading, the issue of modern Israel
and dealing with these complexities
of Chazal versus, the challenge
of new Israeli identity today?
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: So I
wouldn't say you're wrong.
I would say you're completely wrong.
In fact it's ac- you're totally
wrong and it's wonderful to have
R' David Silverstein: is gonna be
our, this could be our be- most
popular podcast, you're gonna see
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: No I you're missing
the boat completely on this, and it's
wonderful to hear it because you're right.
If you look at the text, if you
live from texts, then you say,
"Yeah, Tinok Shenishba and Rav Yosef
Chavel, who's a real Tinok Shenishba?
What about a Datlash that he was
from and then he now he's not?
So is that a Tinok Shenishba?"
And we have we have all these
problems and categorizations, and
it's amazing that when you look at
the experienced world, you look atâ¦
You go into a Haredi community, look
and look at how people actually live.
Nobody thinks in those terms.
Meaning, in the real life, when you have
to save somebody who's had a car accident
on Shabbos, and you're thinking, "Should
I break Shabbos to save his life or not?"
There's literally nobody who would
blink an eyelid and start making
calculations whether he's a real Tinok
Shenishba or not, and whether I'm
allowed to break Shabbos on his behalf.
When a nurse qualifies to become a
nurse and has to work on Shabbos to
for some for, on, on behalf of some Jew
or another, there is nobody who would
blink an eyelid or would think twice.
And by the way, and no
posek would do that either.
And not just that.
When we think about even-
Kidney donations, okay?
People who donate kidneys, so there
are Haredim who donate kidneys,
altruistic kidney donations.
You would think I'm only gonna
donate to someone who's fromâ¦"
No, not at all.
And Iâ¦
it's a, it's an area that I'm
closely familiar with because my
sister-in-law runs Matnat Chayim,
which is a wonderful organization
that facilitates kidney donations.
And no, the Haredim that are donating
kidneys, they, they do say, "We
wanna donate to a Jew," meaning
they say, "I'd like to donate
to a Jew rather than a non-Jew."
But then the next question, like within
the Jewish, space, no limitations.
And anyone, he's a Jew, he's my
brother, meaning there is a close
sense of Jewish brotherhood.
Now, I got to your story, your
anecdote in the demonstrations,
and I'll be happy to get there.
But I think just before we get
there, very important, I think
to mention this, that in people's
mindsets, in the way that Haredim
grow up, all Jews are our brothers.
And much stronger than any other
statement is the statement of
Chazal that
That's much stronger than
any other slogan of Chazal.
Irrespective of sinfulness, irrespective
of where they've come, still Yisroel hu.
The one place where, of course,
there's more of a disconnect is those
Jews who are anti Judaism, those Jews
who are fighting against Judaism.
And then, of course, there's aâ¦
That creates a wedge.
That creates a real distance,
but even that is not articulated
in Halakhic parlance.
And the fact that we have these
categories, tinok Shenishbe and so
on, yeah, we have a lot of categories
in Bava Kamma, Bava Metzia, Bava
Batra, but it's very abstract.
These are all abstract ideas.
When it gets to the hands-on,
the real-life world, every
Jew is considered a brother.
Rav Shach said in his famous
, "These Jews of the kibbutzim,
in which way are they Jewish?
They're eating rabbits."
They're these kibbutzim Jews."
This is Rav Shach's most famous speech
the whole of Israel was watching
because it was a very, a weighty
political decision that he had to make.
Are we gonna go with the
left or not go with the left?
And his answer was no, but the way
he gave that answer was, like, what
do we have in common with these Jews?
But what he was saying was,
he was critiquing the Jews.
He was saying, "Guys, be Jewish.
Live like Jews."
But he wasn't saying,
"You're not brothers."
He was saying, "You are brothers.
That's why we care about you.
That's why we feel for you.
That's why we want to draw you close."
Like the Hazon Ish writes, to draw them,
Hazon Ish, b- of, b- avotot ha'ahava,
to draw them in with cords of love.
And that's the experienced
world in the Haredi space.
It's a strong I would say a religiously,
it's a very strong religious
sense that all Jews are brothers.
Now, what about the protests?
R' David Silverstein: Sorry, go ahead.
I'll get to the process in a second.
But again, just to j- you know, just to
respond to that again, experientially,
you live in the Haredi world, so I'm
gonna have to trust your judgment on
this 'cause I don't live in that space.
But I would say is that I would say
it is probably more complicated and
when it comes to integration of the
larger secular community in things
that aren't necessarily, as I would
say, frontally ethically challenging.
As for example, the issue
of like chilul Shabbos for
somebody whose life is at stake.
For example, religious Zionist posekim,
are much more inclined for the most
part to broaden the category of tinok
shenishba as much as possible for the
exact reason you mentioned, I think.
It's because I think in the religious
Zionist world, there really is an
intuitive sense that identity is much more
complicated in the twenty-first century.
And here you maybe you're reviving
back to a more biblical paradigm,
thinking about people differently.
I'll get to Rav Kook in a second.
But basically as opposed to that, you do
see that when it comes to, for example,
counting people in a minyan ⦠rav Yaakov
Ariel is a religious Zionist posek, right?
Rav Ariel, he has this teshuvah whether
you can count people in a minyan on
Yom Kippur if they're gonna eat, right?
So I'm willing to bet that when it
comes to those types of things, for
example, counting somebody in a minyan
in a space where the person is not
from, there I think it probably would
be more complicated in a Haredi space.
And for the exact reason I mentioned.
Because again it's like there you
default back to, as I'm trying to
say, is that the lived experience
when it comes to those types of
things is always anchored in the text.
So you're right, when it comes to
extreme examples of kidney donation or
chilul Shabbos, I agree with you, and
that's a larger question of like how
does Halakha navigate ethical conflicts
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Even there it's not
true, meaning you, when you need a minyan,
you'll rely on a non-religious Jew.
When ⦠Yeah, absolutely.
And you'll say, and it ⦠And again,
some Haredi poskim do say this, but
certainly in the lived experience
you'll say if he's coming to daven with
us now, then right now he's with us."
And the one place where you'll
find maybe a distinction in this
is the question of stam yeinom
R' David Silverstein: but that's right.
Okay.
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: or the question.
But you know what, Dovid?
My, one of my great rebbeim, the Gromek of
Rancharuv, Moshe Shapira, used to say, he
used to say, "If you live by books, you'll
end up dying because of a printing error."
And this is what I
strongly would say to you.
If you live by these books, oh, these
disputes, what's a tinok shenishbe, what's
not, then you'll get the sociology wrong.
There's the there, there's this,
there's always this pristine level of,
the discussion in, in a Talmudic-based
midrash of to which degree can we
expand the realm and the boundaries
of tinok shenishbe and so on.
In the lived experience that it,
that's not reflected, what we
try to, do kiruv to all Jews.
We try to show them love.
N- no one's going to be, killing
people in the mikvah because they
don't fit the tinok shenishbe.
So meridim ve'ein ma'alim.
All of this is so remote, so un-
really disconnected to the experienced
reality in the Haredi space.
But to your point, this is
true on a religious level.
When it comes to the sociology, so-
The Haredi world at the very
least some spaces of it certainly
lives with a them and us mindset.
But them and us mindset, not religious
them and us, sociological them and us.
Them and us as a strategy, them and
us but as a way of ensuring the Haredi
isolationism from the dangers of the
non-Haredi modern Zionist nationalist
secular space of Israel, and the Haredi
isolationist impulse certainly affects
that sense of identity, that there,
there's a them and us, but that them,
by the way, can include Frum Jews and
traditional Jews and secular Jews.
They're all together.
There's the them, non-Haredi Jews,
and there's the us, the Haredi Jews.
That's not a religious distinction
because parts of the them
could be very Frum or not Frum.
That's not the point.
The point is a sociological distinction
between those who are us, Haredim,
those who are living Torah true Judaism,
those who are dedicated to without
any hyphens, without anything else
attached, those who are perpetuating
and preserving the way of life that
we've always lived with a dedication
to Torah and to Mithras, and that's it.
That's the us and there's the
them who are doing other stuff.
And for the Haredim, that distinction,
again, for the Haredim, I'm generalizing
in a very dramatic and crass way, okay?
Because my whole project is to develop
a Haredi identity that's not predicated
on them and us, but rather speaks
about a collective we and nevertheless
manages to preserve a lot of what's
good and pure in the Haredi space.
So that's my work, that's my project.
But if I'm speaking for your
yeshiva guy at the demonstration,
that's where it's coming from.
It's coming from a deep perception
of them and us, and of course, for
each them, quote-unquote, right?
If it would be a religious Zionist guy
who would be coming out the car and
shouting at him, then he would hurl
other types of slurs against him, and
if it's a secular guy, then it would be
other types of slurs, but it's a them.
All of the non-Haredim, all of those
who wish to destroy the Torah world, all
of those who wish to draft Haredim- And
who wishes the most to draft Haredim?
Religious Zionists, meaning they
feel most passionately about
this, and for good reason perhaps,
meaning we could explain that.
We could talk about that if you want.
But all of that is, is within the
them and us on a sociological level
to ensure that the Haredi insularity,
that the Haredi isolationism won't
be penetrated by the outside.
And of course, it's not working,
meaning it worked for a long time,
but today so many in the Haredi
space feel deeply Israeli, really
R' David Silverstein: But again, the
way I would think about it is that the
sociology and the theology are linked.
In other words you were
describing it basically as
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: but they
wouldn't say no I don't think that.
They would never say that a religious
Zionist guy is a murmur, and
R' David Silverstein: no, for sure.
But I'm trying to say, my reading of
it basically is that it's still always
a hybrid of theology and sociology.
And I think you can see this
really with Rav Kook, right?
Religious Zionists have a language
now, and even American modern
Orthodox to a certain degree,
have a language now where they can
conceptualize the larger Jewish project.
So when Rav Soloveitchik talks about
Brit Sinai and Brit Avot, right?
So he provides a language for Jews
to conceptualize the other, right?
When Rav Kook talks about the image of
the secular Jew teaching us something
fundamental about Judaism that somehow
it clarifies our conception of God, it
teaches us about the value of nationalism,
the revival of the Jewish body, right?
You have a vocabulary.
So in, in your sort of framing of
it, given the project you're trying
to do, and this is what I was trying
to get at here, is, and maybe I'm
misreading here, but again, I do think
the vocabulary is critical, 'cause
the vocabulary you alluded to earlier
on was the vocabulary of the Tanakh
and stuff, and, the return back to a
kind of a tribal, biblical paradigm.
Again, maybe I'm misreading the
sociology here, but that really is
not the language of the Haredi world.
What does the Tanakh have to do with
contemporary Haredi yeshiva students?
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: right?
So naturally today we're seeing a
remarkable blooming of the study
of Tanakh in the Haredi space.
Whi- which, which of course comes
over time as you live in Israel
and you become a part of the
Israel project then of course that
comes together with the return to
R' David Silverstein: Where,
but where do you see that?
Where do you see if you go to
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Oh, there,
there are so many tremendous, Yes,
there's so many tremendous Rabbonim
in mainstream Haredi space who are
giving, Tanakh shiurim in yeshivas,
in s- purpose-made batei midrash.
It's a true revival that's going on.
But leaving that aside, 'cause it's not
the main topic I think that you're right.
That there is a need for
this kind of language.
Now, some in the Haredi space are
adopting the kind of Rishonot-ic language.
Brit Kol or Brit Yehudah.
That's one po- potential language.
But I don't think that
language, a barrier, so to
speak is going to be the issue.
The one thing I can tell you is that
the language in the Haredi space
is not one of Tenach Sh'nishba.
That's a religious language.
That's a language in the books.
That's a book language, right?
In the real-life language, it's a
much more political language, right?
Of Æironim, Mesortim, right?
Of, of what they call in the
Haredi parlance Mizrachnikim.
That's, th- those are the
categories that we work with in the
language, in the everyday stuff.
It's not the language of the Sefarim.
And in terms of the theology, then
yes, the theology that supports the
isolationist model is a theology that
doesn't give a lot of space to the earthly
existence, to what we callDerech Eretz.
And indeed in, in the kind of the
underlying theology that supports the
isolationist model is a theology that
says that, Hashem does everything,
a kol b'reshit shamayim, and human
initiative doesn't do much anyway.
There's no connection between our
human initiative and the outcomes.
Hashem is doing everything anyway.
And therefore, that's a theology
that supports the isolationist kind
of motion on a sociological level.
And it means that all those
guys, all the them, right?
And like I said, the them could
be from, could be not from.
And the them, meaning the them versus
us, is the them that they are investing
all of their energies in this world,
they're investing in the earthly,
they're investing in the worldly,
they're investing in the physical,
they're investing in in, in the science
and the developing of the world.
And we that we are investing in ruchnius.
We're investing in spirituality,
we're investing in growth, we're
investing in Torah, we're investing
in . That's the kind of them and we.
If you wanna know the soci- what
that sociology is rooted in,
it's not in secular and religious
even because there's a lot of the
them that are religious people.
It's more on where you're
placing your emphasis.
Is your emphasis on this world,
or is your emphasis on the next
and on the spiritual and so on?
And as Haredim in Israel become more and
more engaged with the earthly because
they have to by definition, and of course
that's happening over the years on a
much, much greater level than it used to.
Again, than it used to
in the last few decades.
It's, the whole story is
not such a long story.
Then that also leads almost
inevitably to a weakening of the
them and us because we're all
engaged in the same project, right?
As soon as we're engaged in the
Israel project on whatever level,
even if it's just the workforce.
But yeah, we're a part of the economy.
We're partners in that.
if you're going to the army.
If you're a Haredi guy going to
the army, then you are now engaged
in the same project of the state
of Israel in the spearhead of
that project which is the army.
And then by definition you
lose that them and us language.
And like I said, it's not related
to religious, not religious.
It's mu- it's much, I think it's,
I think it's deeper than that.
It's not, "Oh, let's see if this
guy is a murmur or type of murmur."
Nobody, no- nobody would
even think that way
R' David Silverstein: But again, the
army is a good example - when it comes
to the army, like for example, even
like religious Zionists had a hard time,
conceptualizing and creating a language
to engage in the question of military
force and the question of militarism.
If you look, for example, at
the essays of Rav Lichtenstein.
You do get a sense in his essays,
Zo Torata Hesder, that he's a little
uncomfortable with military force, and
he realizes it's an important means to
an end of being able to live in peace.
But it's not something he advocates.
Now, Rav Kook is much more ambitious.
Rav Kook is a much more ambitious
theologian in terms of thinking about the
idea of returning back to a Tanakh model.
So I guess what I'm still struggling
with is that you-- even if you're right
about all these questions of how the
sociology moves if you think about
trends a- across religious communities,
there is always an ideological current.
And what I don't think you, provided
or maybe you haven't described what
are-- what would be the ideological
current that would create a culture
of peoplehood for the Haredi world?
Because again, are they gonna
go Brit-- vote Brit Seini?
'Cause at the end of the day, even if
it is rooted, if there's a sociological
pull ideas do matter, right?
So the question is what language would
you advocate for, let's say, in your
EU and project when you're starting to
talk about this idea of a society built
by different types of people, right?
Whereby, there are fundamentally
different approaches to how people
navigate their day-to-day Jewish life.
Is it only Yisrael afapi
shechatah Yisrael hu?
Is it back to an idea of a return
back to an, a biblical model?
Do you have a specific
theological framing?
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: First of all, it's
important to note that the Haredim are the
most right wing of any group in Israel.
So they don't haveâ¦
And that's in every single
survey, every single polling.
Haredim are the most right wing.
They're much more right wing
than religious Zionists that
have this whole liberal wing.
Haredim don't have a liberal wing, okay?
They're very right wing, and
R' David Silverstein:
sh- except for of shock
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: except for
Rav Shaz, that was a long time ago.
They don't have any problem
with using military force.
In fact, one of the only places in
newspapers that still have military
Katavim, military journalists that are
dedicated to the military, is these
Haredi newspapers because the readers are
involved and so engaged with military.
So e- even though they don't serve, so
there's something paradoxical about that,
but that's the reality in the field.
They're the most right wing, and
all polling finds that to be true.
And now of course, the
challenge is, you're right.
Once the Haredim move into Israel, which
they're doing in great numbers, that's
going to need a religious language.
I can tell you it won't be
the language of Rav Kook.
I think that for the Haredim, the concept
of taking the secular and making it holy,
sanctifying, meaning hallowing, right?
Seeing the sparks of kedushah in the
soccer fields and dancing around, a
minister of government in Merkaz HaRav,
the Haredim look at that as being absurd.
Theyâ¦
Th- that's not a Haredi mindset.
We didn't grow up like that.
That's something whichâ¦
But there's certainly a lot to take
from the language of Rav Hirsch
that emphasizes derech eretz.
Now, you can't copy-paste because Rav
Hirsch had his own derech eretz, a German
derech eretz that he was very enamored by.
He had philosophical underpinnings
that were deeply German, and
that shapes and molds the way
that he writes, and he didn't
R' David Silverstein: and anti-Zionist
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: and he
didn't have a nationalist project.
He didn't haveâ¦
The whole nationalist conception
isn't part of his writing.
So you can take from Rav Hirsch, and
Rav Hirsch is going to be important
in this project, but you have to embed
it in an entirely new framing, in an
entirely new conceptual framework.
You can take Rav Soloveitchik.
Rav Soloveitchik is, has wonderful brisk,
Haredi roots that he then- he didn't
leave them behind ever, but he adopted
new ideas and he paid a price for them,
of course, as he himself goes on the
record saying when he moved to Mizrahi.
And there's a lot there that
can also be adopted be used, but
at the end of the day, it will
have to be an original project.
You won't be able to take
something and just copy-paste it.
And that indeed is the work that, that
we're now doing, meaning we're now in, in
the pipeline is a, is an entire library
of books that's going to provide those
Torah and theological and ideological
and so on foundations for this movement.
You have that.
Every movement needs to have that.
And as the Haredim make this new internal
motion toward Israel to, to being
a partner from the them and us to a
collective we, then that will also need
to come with its own intellectual activity
to ground that in these great ideas,
and we have a lot to lean on, right?
There are great thinkers to lean on.
The book that's been on my table
for the last couple of years is
Rav Teichtal's Ema Banim Smecha,
which is somewhere in between.
It's not Rav Soloveitchik, it's
not Rav Kook, it's something else.
But all of these are great works
that were written by, deeply
Haredi, if you want, authors.
But you need to be able to embed
them in a context that will be
relevant for what's going on today,
and that requires original work.
There's nothing that you can just
pull out of your pull a rabbit out of
the hat and say here's what we have."
No, it's gonna require a lot of work
R' David Silverstein: Are there any,
would you say just in terms of reading
the general map of Haredi society,
are there any like Haredi rabbis,
obviously there's you, obviously
there are, the larger Iyun Institute.
But i- is this a project that's gaining
traction among like the Haredi mainstream,
let's say for example, places like
Bnei Brak, like in terms of books.
Let's say for example, it's Kurie.
One of the interesting things where Meir
Lichtenstein wrote an article in the
Makor Rishon like about, I don't know,
probably four or five months ago, where
he said that Haredim should be more open
to his father's approach, which is based
on Kiddush Hasadim, just civics, right?
And he said, basically it's very
simple, not complicated, no Messianic
theology, just based on civics.
And but I'm saying in terms of like
your experience, like i- is there
anyone-- in other words, like if I
want to read right now an essay that
someone's trying to provide, Ein Ayim
Bemismecha was written a long time ago.
Is there anything between Ein Ayim
Bemismecha and now of people trying
to at least provide like some framing?
I know you can look on the Iyun website.
Trust me, I, I read many of the
articles on the Iyun website.
But this, but but in, in addition to the
Iyun website, is there any place that
you could point to of you get a sense
that these things are being dealt with
in, in a some type of scholarly forum?
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Y- yes.
There, there are but they're sporadic.
It's not organized.
There are places.
There are Rabbonim, as I mentioned
before, the kind of Tanakh revival.
That's not Tanakh on its own.
It comes as a package deal with a whole
set of values and ideas and ideals
that are being promoted by Rabbonim
like Rav Eliyahu Feivel Zisen, who's
a very popular, rabbinic figure.
And, young Haredim are deeply attracted.
He's from, a little bit from
the Zilberman camp, right?
The whole Zilberman camp is deeply Haredi
in its ways of life, in its sociology,
but with a kind of redemptionist mindset.
They're there in the Old City
and they see themselves as the
teachers of Tanakh to the Haredim.
There's other Rabbonim teaching
Tanakh and these kinds of ideas.
Uri Halsman, even Rav Natan
Rotman, who's really mainstream.
Rosh Yeshiva, mainstream and he's there.
And there are other figures.
They're a little bit sporadic.
It's not organized but certainly exists.
There- there's within Ger Hasidism,
there's a couple of Ger Hasidim who
are doing this, meaning, again, the
fact that I can name you them, meaning
the fact that I can, count them on
maximum a couple of hands, shows
you that this is a nascent project.
It's still in, in its early stages, but
there- there's certainly early efforts
to try to work this out to think about
this, to there- there's a Chabad.
He's not Chabad.
I take that back.
Not Chabad at all.
But he's also not quite Haredi,
somebody called Rav Gai Alaluf
R' David Silverstein: Yeah.
I actually read on the UN
website that he made a statement.
Actually, when I was preparing for
this podcast, I was reading anything
I could find on Haredim and stuff
that I, besides stuff that I had.
So I figured I'll look on the UN
website, and actually I meant to
bring that up 'cause he claimed at
least on the UN website in an article
that somebody wrote there, that
Chabad is not Haredi, Dafka because
they care about Kol Yisrael, right?
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Yeah, so he
claims so he claims that Haredim
don't care about Klal Yisrael.
And you know what?
The like every claim, it's a very
grandiose and all-encompassing
claim, which he likes to
make these kinds of claims.
It
R' David Silverstein: yeah, for sure.
For sure.
It gets good likes.
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Yes, it gets you
good numbers, gets you good figures.
R' David Silverstein: You can tell
he's internalized about secularism.
See, he's l- he's attracted to the likes.
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: If you want.
But so on, on the one hand, there's some
truth in that because, come on, if you're
isolating and you're investing all of
your resources and energies internally and
you're not thinking about the consequences
for the army, for the economy, for the
public space, who's gonna fight the
struggles of Israel's public space?
Who's gonna fight the struggles
of Israel's wars against its
enemies, so that's what he means
and there's something to that.
On the other hand, religiously,
every large kiruv organization, I
don't every, again, I'm generalizing,
but there are so many kiruv
organizations that are all Haredi.
They're all Haredi
organization from the old, old-
R' David Silverstein: I went online
'cause I was curious, doing my
own research about Rav Elyashiv.
So Rav Elyashiv's quoted as saying
there's no tinok shenishba in Israel.
So I found a webs- website called
NLE, which is Ner L'Elef, some
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Not at all.
R' David Silverstein: yeah,
English-speaking Haredi
outreach organization.
Like, how are they gonna
deal with that Rav Elyashiv?
So it's actually very interesting.
They have a long essay about this
question, and they quote in the
footnotes, lots and lots of people
saying, "Oh, Rav Elyashiv didn't say that.
He didn't say that.
He didn't
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: mean it.
R' David Silverstein: Yeah, exactly.
Exactly
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: so yes.
And all of them are Haredi.
Why?
Because Haredim do care about the
Jewish people, for they, they're part
of the greater Jewish people, and
it's, and there's a tension going on.
Absolutely, and we all live with
contradictions and tensions and
Haredim certainly live with them
and we have to try to resolve them.
And each one's trying to
resolve in his direction.
My direction, of course, is that we
need to be partners, that Israel is
waiting for us, that we're big enough
and strong enough and confident enough
to be able to go into Israel in a deeper
way and be a source of light rather
than being, destroyed by the strength
of this secular world, which is much
weaker than it was in the past, which is
much frailer, and people are searching
for meaning and we can provide it.
But of course, my rivals in the Haredi
space, like the Peleg Yerushalmim
people, the Jerusalem faction, those
are the guys demonstrating from their
perspective anybody who is a part of
Israel in the army or in academia or
even in the workforce in a significant
way, that's not being Haredi.
Being Haredi is being
militantly isolationist.
That's what our Rabbis Seinu gave
us, and we need to preserve that.
So there's a struggle
within the Haredi space.
I'm representing one version.
They're representing the other one.
Most people are somewhere in the
middle waiting to see where's
this going, which side am I
gonna be on how's it going to go?
So there, there's a lot that's going
on in terms of the internal dynamic and
this is, of course, of tremendous import
for the future of the state of Israel.
This is not just a small Haredi
discussion that's going on.
It's the future of Israel.
R' David Silverstein: Okay, maybe I could
just end by asking you one question.
You mentioned before this question of army
service, and you mentioned the issue of
Haredim being actually very right-wing
politically, very intrigued by sort of
military activity, that they have articles
in newspapers that describe what's going
on in terms of different military spaces.
I- is your sense in terms of your own
project of thinking about a broader
landscape for Israeli society, and in
particular integration of of Haredim.
When you think about, for example, the
question of service in the military
just in terms of thinking about it
theologically do you think about,
the return to the land of Israel and
the ability to fight and integrate
the body and the soul as being, in
a certain sense, a more authentic
representation of the package of Judaism?
Certainly, when, guys were studying in,
in intels or other yeshivas in Europe,
they didn't have the possibility of
defending themselves in a meaningful way.
So just, like, when you think
about that do you see that, thisâ¦
Forget about the politics and the
sociology about whether the army
is right now a place for Haredim.
But in terms of your larger project
of thinking things through do you, do,
does that orientation that Haredim have
reflect a deeper sort of theology that
there is something powerful about the
revival of the more earthly, bodily
dimension of Jewish life in Israel?
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer:
That's a nice question.
I would say yes, but it's
not always articulated.
Often the Haredi person is so busy
with the struggles that are going on a
day-to-day level with the rest of Israel.
These are struggles over resources,
and the politics, and religion and
state, and secular versus religious,
or non-Haredi versus Haredi.
There, there's so many struggles going
on, that when you grow up in that
environment of struggle, you sometimes
miss the wood for the trees, meaning
it's hard to leave those kind ofâ¦
I don't want to belittle anything,
but small-mindedness, and to see
the big picture of Hakadosh Baruch
Hu bringing his children home to
their homeland, to the land promised
to Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov.
The incredible privilege that we have
of having our own, of living on our own
land, of having sovereignty over the
historic land of Israel, of being able
to defend ourselves in our own army.
All of these are incredible privileges
that many Haredim find it difficult
to articulate because they're
not seeing that bigger picture.
At the same time, that bigger picture, it
hits you on the face, even if you're not
seeing it, even if you're looking away.
But sometimes it strikes you
with such force that you're
just unable to look away.
And in, in times that we've been going
through recently, since October 7th
the, these kind of biblical events, and
again, it's been good, it's been tough-
It's b- it's been everything together.
We've had this emotional rollercoaster,
but it takes a lot of energy, both
ideological and just every day to close
your eyes and say this is w- this isâ¦
You mentioned Tells, whichever other
European place that we were in this
is just a continuation of that.
We were in Galus there,
we're in Galus here.
It's like all the same."
That rhetoric might still be found.
You'll find it if you do your
research, and you'll open books,
you'll find that rhetoric.
But it no longer defines or it no longer
represents the average Haredi guy.
Not that he'll have some
alternative rhetoric.
We have to build it.
It's still not there.
But that rhetoric of this is just
another Galus I don't think that
squares anymore with your average
Haredi guy in the street, and at that,
I haven't done that test, meaning I
haven't g- gone over to people in shul.
But, the things that are happening
are just the magnitude, the
scale, the, it's too much.
And so I think that, yes,
that is getting through.
It is penetrating the mindset.
At the same time it's very important
to provide an alternative language
or alternative vision, way of
seeing things i- in order because,
like you said to cross over to Rav
Kook, that's not going to happen.
It's, that, no, that's not
intuitive for the Haredi guy.
So it is i- important to provide that
infrastructure in order to give those
awakenings a voice and a language
R' David Silverstein: Okay.
Amazing, Reph.
Reph, thank you so much.
Just one last question.
For people who wanna learn more
about the Ayud Institute, you
have a website not only in Hebrew,
but also in English, right?
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Yes.
The Tsaref Ion Journal
has a version in English.
Unfortunately, it's not as rich
and and and large as the Hebrew one
because we don't manage to translate
all our articles into English.
But today translation is
becoming easier and therefore
we will try to translate more
R' David Silverstein: and you also
have a new podcast I saw on your
mailing list, The Rabbi's Daughter
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Ha.
Yes, this is a podcast
with my daughter Shira.
We started it a while ago.
When we started it, I told Shira
the sole purpose of this podcast
is to find you a shidduch.
Baruch Hashem, it did, meaning it was
successful in finding her a shidduch.
It really, the podcast
was instrumental in that.
A- and nevertheless, we're still
continuing it on and God willing, soon
we'll be able to also have a whole
library of books also, please God, in,
in Hebrew and in English and we have
many more plans for the YU Institute, Im
R' David Silverstein: Very excited.
Very excited.
Okay, Re- Reffer, thank you so much again.
This was
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: Rab David Shankoach
was really a great privilege to to be
on, and also to have a real conversation.
This was, it was good.
It was
R' David Silverstein: was great.
It was great.
Exactly.
It was great.
I have a feeling, I have a feeling
this is gonna be very well received.
It
R' Yehoshua Pfeffer: All right.
Well, thank you, Rabbi David.
Rabbi David Silverstein: Thank you
for joining us on The Curious Jew,
a podcast of Yeshivat Orighta!
Subscribe to make sure you
catch our next conversation.