A Senator Remembers Joe Lieberman
Rabbi Menachem Genack’s heartfelt tribute to Joe Lieberman (“Reflections on the Life and Legacy of Joe Lieberman—On the Occasion of His First Yahrtzeit,” spring 2025) brought tears to my eyes because like Rabbi Genack, John McCain and countless others, I admired and loved Joe.
Joe’s principles, his courage, his faith, his sincerity, his modesty and his sense of humor defined one of the very best citizens ever to serve our country. How we who knew Joe cherish his memory and mourn his loss!
Gordon Humphrey
Former United States Senator
Concord, New Hampshire
Seeing Mezuzot Everywhere You Go
The OU is to be commended for its project to supervise and standardize the kashrut of mezuzot, as described in Rachel Schwartzberg’s article (“The Making of a Mezuzah,” spring 2025). One factor in the need for this supervision is the marked increase in demand. The article attributes this to several circumstances, including, as Rabbi Moshe Elefant puts it, “We simply have more doorways than ever before.”
It should be noted that most of these doorways are in Israel where, almost without exception, the approximately eight million Jews living here have mezuzot on their doors. That’s true also for each and every room of all Israeli offices, stores, restaurants, hotels, hospitals, schools, museums and other public buildings, and there’s a huge amount of new construction going on here all the time.
Seeing mezuzot everywhere you go is just one more constant reminder that we live in a Jewish country, and that the entire country is suffused with a Jewish identity and consciousness that cannot be duplicated anywhere else in the world.
David Olivestone
Jerusalem, Israel
What Not-Yet-Religious Jews Really Want
Liel Leibovitz’s article, “What Jews Really Want” (winter 2024) was really on the mark. What not-yet-religious Jews are really looking for, Leibovitz writes, is a “real, serious, meaningful, character-building challenge.” This reminds me of an experience I had about twenty years ago when I was working as a summer intern for a secular Jewish newspaper in Cleveland, Ohio. During the Three Weeks [the period of mourning the Churban when it is customary to refrain from haircuts and shaving], I along with my fellow intern, also an Orthodox Jew, stopped shaving. One of our co-workers, who was interested in learning more about Judaism, asked us about it. Feeling a bit uncomfortable, I responded with a humorous quip. Well, the co-worker was a bit taken aback and said, “So this is all just a joke for you guys!” His response hit me hard. He was looking for a more meaningful answer. A couple of years later, I came across an article written by the same co-worker about a Discovery Seminar he had attended, where he describes being very inspired. Yes, meaningful discussion is one of the best ways to bring Jews back to the fold.
Ariel Galian
Beitar, Israel
A Key Ingredient to Success in Outreach
In “Rabbi Dovid Bashevkin on Jewish Identity Post–October 7,” (winter 2024), Rabbi Bashevkin provides a troubling analysis of the state of Yiddishkeit in America outside of the ghetto walls. One thing was missing from his analysis: Chabad.
Chabad is already doing all the things that Rabbi Bashevkin correctly says needs to be done, and that is the entire focus of their movement.
The reason why no one else under the Orthodox umbrella has been able to even tangentially replicate Chabad’s success, their good ideas and motivations notwithstanding, is because a key ingredient of that success is missing: mesirus nefesh. What other group has young couples willing to move 1,000 miles away from the nearest minyan to set up shop?
Full disclosure: I am not affiliated with Chabad and my sons learned in Brisk, Mir, Ner Moshe and other Litvishe yeshivahs. But facts are facts.
Meir Zev Mark
Beitar Illit, Israel
Avoiding Mixed Messages
The recent collection of stories about people who have left the Orthodox fold (“Leaving the Fold: The OU’s new study provides insight into attrition,” spring 2025), and the role of families and schools—sometimes in conflict with each other over a child’s level of frumkeit—reminded me of something that happened in my life a few decades ago.
One of my colleagues was a proud but not-strictly-Torah-observant Jew, who had worked at a series of jobs with Jewish institutions.
This co-worker (I’ll call him Stan) and his wife sent their two young daughters to a Modern Orthodox day school in their New York neighborhood. At the same time, Stan, an avid basketball player, met his friends every Saturday, weather permitting, to shoot some hoops. I don’t know what Stan’s daughters told their parents when they came home from school, but I do know that one day he told me that his games-playing behavior on Shabbat sent an inconsistent message to his children—whom he wanted to take their Jewish studies seriously. Stan stopped the basketball on Shabbat. And no more shopping then, too. Soon, there was a higher level of kashrut in the family’s apartment. And Stan started going to Shabbat services each week.
Not familiar with tefillin (he had learned about them at his bar mitzvah but had not diligently put them on since then), he had me show him the procedure. I used a pair I kept in my desk.
In time, Stan retired from his job at my office, and the family made aliyah, settling in Jerusalem. Now, Stan attends a daily Torah study session every day. And his daughters are committed, Orthodox Jews—because their parents didn’t want to send mixed messages about the importance of modeling at home the lessons about Judaism that the daughters were learning in school.
Steve Lipman
Forest Hills, New York
Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet’s Teaching Career
In Rabbi Ron Yitzchok Eisenman’s review of Rakafot Aharon: Timeless Halakhah and Contemporary History (spring 2025), the reviewer states that Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff started teaching “when Richard Nixon was president.” I was in his last pre-aliyah shiur at Yeshiva University’s High School for Boys (MTA) which began in September, 1968, when Lyndon B. Johnson was the president. In fact, when Rabbi Rakeffet began teaching at MTA, John F. Kennedy was president. But, in the interest of completeness, when “Arnie Rothkoff” was teaching Torah to public school kids in the Bronx, Dwight D. Eisenhower was still president. In short, his teaching career has spanned thirteen administrations (fourteen, if you count Donald Trump twice). Very impressive indeed.
David Gleicher
Jerusalem, Israel
[Ed. Note: The statement about Richard Nixon was an editorial error and did not originate with the writer.]
Debating the Rav’s Position
As a longtime admirer of both Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff and Rabbi Ron Yitzchok Eisenman, I found the review of the former’s book, Rakafot Aharon: Timeless Halakhah and Contemporary History, especially enjoyable. Rabbi Eisenman writes regarding the Rav’s opinion on the Langer case: “Rabbi Rakeffet quotes a ‘confidant’ of Rabbi Soloveitchik who maintains that the Rav supported Rabbi Goren privately, but the fact is that the Rav did not say anything publicly on the subject.”
I believe that the Rav did address the subject publicly, and he was clear in his opposition to Rabbi Goren’s heter. In his well-publicized speech in 1975 decrying the potential annulment of kiddushin, the Rav noted that certain halachic problems are unsolvable. (Audio of this portion of the speech is available on YUTorah.org, titled “Gerus & Mesorah—Part 1,” at approximately thirty-nine minutes.)
What can we do? This is Toras Moshe . . . . This is kabbalat ol malchut Shamayim. We surrender.
The Rav said, “However, if you think that the solution lies in the reformist philosophy, or in an extraneous interpretation of the halachah, you are badly mistaken. It is self-evident; many problems are insoluble, you can’t help it. For instance, there was the problem of these two mamzerim in Eretz Yisrael—you can’t help it. All we have is the institution of mamzer. No one can abandon it—neither the Rav HaRoshi, nor the Rosh HaGolah. It cannot be abandoned. It is a pasuk in Chumash: ‘Lo yavo mamzer bekehal Hashem.’ It’s very tragic; the Midrash already spoke about it, ‘vehineh dimat ha’ashukim’ [and behold, the tears of the oppressed], but it’s a religious reality. If we say to our opponents or to the dissident Jews, ‘That is our stand’—they will dislike us, they will say we are inflexible, we are ruthless, we are cruel, but they will respect us. But however, if you try to cooperate with them, or even if certain halachic schemes are introduced from within, I don’t know; you would not command love, you would not get their love, but you will certainly lose their respect. It’s exactly what happened in Eretz Yisrael. What can we do? This is Toras Moshe, and this is surrender. This is kabbalat ol malchut Shamayim. We surrender.”
The Rav is clearly referring to the Langer case, an example of something “unsolvable” and that “you can’t help it,” not even the Rav HaRoshi. He seems to be using Rav Goren’s heter as an example of a “halachic scheme introduced from within.”
According to the Rav, the more appropriate response would have been to surrender to halachah; the attempted heter was a futile attempt to coax love out of dissident Jews.
Jacob Sasson
Passaic, New Jersey
Rabbi Rakeffet Responds
Regarding shiurim I gave about a half century ago on the “brother and sister controversy,” I can tell you that my knowledge of the Rav’s position was the result of conversations with two distinguished colleagues and friends, namely, Rabbis Aharon Lichtenstein and Emanuel Holzer. They both explained to me the Rav’s halachic position and why he did not go public. Their information both verified and complemented their approaches.
Regarding the Rav’s speech in 1975, I am very well aware of this talk. I actually was the first one to publicize it in Israel, as Rabbi Holzer sent me a recording. I recreated the speech with all the sources at that time. I believe that the Rav is not referring to Rabbi Goren’s pesak per se but rather to the atmosphere created by the public discussion about the halachic status of the children. In the media of that period, endless personalities advocated for the abrogation of the laws of mamzeirut. I lived through that period, and I recall my many public lectures explaining these sacred laws as a bastion of holiness and the basis of the Jewish family. I still recall my pain at the time when I heard some very influential individuals decry “Devar Hashem zu halachah—the word of G-d, this is halachah” (Gittin 60b).
However, one must recall that this lecture was not about the brother and sister. It was rather a refutation of a proposal that was made at that time to establish a Beit Din in New York that would retroactively annul marriages when the husband refused to give a get or made excessive demands upon the woman. I discuss this topic at length in Rakafot Aharon, vol 4.
I gained much more knowledge about this topic over the subsequent generations. I have returned to this topic and lectured on it many times in the Gruss Kollel. Much of it is available on YUTorah.org.
A Plea for Healthier Kosher Options
Having kept a kosher home for nearly thirty years, over time, I have grown increasingly concerned about the ingredients in many kosher products. It is alarming to see how many of these foods are filled with unhealthy, even toxic, additives. Compared to other countries, the United States is experiencing significantly higher levels of morbidity, and I believe this is closely linked to the overwhelming presence of artificial and toxic chemicals in our food supply.
It is no secret that millions of Americans suffer from chronic illnesses, and these have dramatically increased over the decades. Many studies have shown a direct correlation between the rise in these diseases and the widespread use of synthetic chemicals in packaged foods. Notably, the spraying of glyphosate on commercial crops starting in the mid-90s has been linked to many chronic health issues. This is just the tip of the iceberg, as ingredients like artificial dyes and chemicals are still permitted here, despite being banned in other countries. Why is this allowed?
In the small Jewish community where I live, we have limited kosher options, but organic, all-natural whole foods are available in most grocery stores. Yet, when I visit larger Jewish communities with numerous kosher markets, I am dismayed to find that these healthier options are virtually nonexistent. There are countless processed kosher products with artificial, unhealthy ingredients on their shelves. Why?
With the growing focus on public health and wellness, I truly hope the kashrut industry—together with food manufacturers and kosher markets—can become a voice for promoting and providing healthier food options. We need kosher products that are free from harmful, artificial ingredients.
Our spiritual and physical health are interconnected, so it’s baffling that Jews seem to separate this concept when it comes to consuming food. Kashrut is vital to the Jewish people, but keeping kosher should also support our physical wellbeing.
Shoshana Rivkah Lulky
Little Rock, Arkansas
OU Kosher Responds
Thank you for contacting the OU.
The OU is a kosher-certifying agency. Health aspects of food production are beyond our area of expertise.
Halachah is extremely sensitive to matters of health, to the extent that chamira sakanta meisura (life-threatening health concerns generally take precedence over halachic restrictions). Nonetheless, as a kashrus agency, the expertise of the OU is limited to the domain of kosher supervision, and the evaluation of the health status of a facility is beyond the scope of the OU’s mandate. Health inspectors receive extensive training before they are qualified to perform inspections and evaluations, and OU mashgichim are not trained in this area. There are government agencies that are entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring the safety of food items, and the OU certifies products that meet the criteria of public health and safety requirements.
Rabbi Chanoch Sofer
Webbe Rebbe, OU Kosher