Editorial: A recap and an olive branch

Issue of November 20, 2009/ 3 Cheshvan 5770

It's been quite an interesting two weeks here in the newspaper office, ever since we devoted this space to advocate spending tzedakah dollars locally before sending them anywhere else. The same editorial suggested, in some detail, that if money must be sent out of the community in these troubled economic times, it should go to people and causes that generally represent our community's ideals.

It's tempting to be flip about some of the reactions we received and suggest that “they can't take a joke,” but the fact is, we weren't joking and we stand by what we wrote: anti-Zionist Chassidic groups in Israel that make the news for staging violent protests deserve to be at the bottom of the collective list of tzedaka recipients; not honored guests in town — and certainly not while local families lack funds for food, mortgage or tuition.

The reactions really were interesting, by the way.

An article in a Charedi paper in Israel began with the word “Chutzpah” and ended before it fairly presented our contention that charity begins at home (neither the words aniyei ircha kodmim nor the thought behind them appeared).

There was a spiteful, rather hypocritical essay in the domestic charedi paper Yated Ne'eman that labeled the writer of our editorial an “enemy of Torah” and an “heir to the Maskilim.”

An interview with the Toldos Avrohom Yitzchok Rebbe himself seemed to cross the line from advocacy to gullibility when it presented without challenge the rebbe's contention — for Five Towns consumption only, no doubt — that his only problem with Zionists is that they don't observe Shabbos. Other than that, it seems his Chassidus and the tzionim would get along just fine. That would probably be news to his chassidim.

A woman in Maryland submitted a bizarre conspiracy theory buried in derisive invective penned by her son in a kollel in Israel; there was a lone cancelled subscription that you read about last week in the letter's column; and plenty of the usual nasty comments on the web by nasty people shielded by anonymity and lack of common sense.

On the other hand, there were literally dozens of warm, grateful comments in the form of letters, phone calls, emails and in conversations on the street, from readers who felt that the editorial spoke their mind and expressed their feelings in a very deep and meaningful way. One local physician even sent a box filled with fine wines, just to say thanks.

One theme that many writers returned to was Ahavat Yisroel. Some praised the warmth they felt visiting Toldos Avrohom Yitzchak and Toldos Aaron chassidim in Israel. We have no doubt they were sincere and truthful. While this is a wonderful example of the unity of the Jewish people, it is not, in and of itself, Ahavat Yisroel.

Ahavat Yisroel is not agreeing to spend half-an-hour in the company of a fellow Jew; nor is it taking a Jew to sit by your rebbe.

We submit that Ahavat Yisroel is accepting someone for who he or she is, and knowing that, despite your differences, the two of you are brothers or sisters, descendents of Avraham Avinu and Sarah Imeinu, whose forebears marched through the desert together and who waged war for Jerusalem.

Simply put, a piece of kugel just won't cut it.

Still, arguing is tiring and we would like to extend an olive branch, for despite our myriad differences, there are many more things that unite us and we are all a part of Klal Yisroel.

Even the people behind J-Street. But perhaps that's next week's editorial.