Different Kiruv Approaches

carrot ↓

Wed, Aug 17 2005, 8:22 pm

I thought that one of aish's goals IS for their people to be frum, just that their way of doing it is first through the brain first with action coming later. in other words the opposite order of naaseh v'nishma - but still eventually arriving at the naaseh and in the end "producing" a committed, well-rounded frum jew. while lubavitch is more likely to start right off with action, because lubavitch sees value to the mitzva itself, even if there is no followup. (also that doing the mitzva will affect the person.) but this article makes aish sound like they couldn't care less if people are do mitzvos at all, just as long as they don't intermarry.

I wonder whether many aish people would agree with the way this article portrays them?

↑ Motek ↓

Wed, Aug 17 2005, 9:43 pm

Quote:

I wonder whether many aish people would agree with the way this article portrays them?

as far as I know, the Aish people interviewed for the article, Rabbi Schiff and the others, did not complain that they were misquoted

roza ↓

Wed, Aug 17 2005, 9:54 pm

this is PR, they might want one image for PR while their true intentions are not for press, that's all.

↑ Motek ↓

Wed, Aug 17 2005, 9:57 pm

so you're saying that for their public image they want to promote "feel good about being Jewish" and to downplay Torah and mitzvos - interesting PR approach

but then, what actually happens at, let's say a Discovery event - are opportunities for mitzvos provided? are any actual mitzvos discussed? promoted? are any other intentions made known, and if so, what are they?

↑ roza ↓

Wed, Aug 17 2005, 10:53 pm

Motek wrote:

all depends on the crowd.
PR in general is used to make ppl to feel good and drop by.
later comes shabbos, shul and all the mitzvos connected with it.
this is a very common approach. used by chabad as well.

↑ Motek ↓

Wed, Aug 17 2005, 11:21 pm

roza wrote:

this is a very common approach. used by chabad as well.

the article shows how Aish differs from Chabad

Quote:

In a clear critique of Lubavitch’s brand of kiruv, outreach, he adds: “If you put tefilin on people, you are not doing anything. If I had 10 minutes, I would talk to them about why it is important to be a Jew.”

↑ carrot ↓

Wed, Aug 17 2005, 11:27 pm

motek, that is what he's saying to make himself sound "better" (of course it's a matter of opinion)

but that doesn't mean there aren't similarities that he's not mentioning.

advertising chassidus classes as kabala is an example of pr.

Mommy912

Wed, Aug 17 2005, 11:27 pm

From a non-Lubavitcher:
I was always curious: as you posted Motek, I have seen many times Lubavitcher chassidim asking men to put on tefillin. Is there an approach to be mekarev girls/women? What is it? I have sometimes seen tables with candles for shabbos, but that is obviously only for Thursday/Friday.
Thanks.

↑ roza ↓

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 2:10 am

Motek wrote:

roza wrote:

this is a very common approach. used by chabad as well.

the article shows how Aish differs from Chabad

Quote:

it's a PR method to promote yourself by putting others down. again, it's done by many (including chabad) . did you see this old joke?

http://www.ounetwork.org/ncsy/ncsy202.wmv

from http://www.ou.org/ncsy/advisors.htm

why to take such articles seriously, Motek? What

sarahd ↓

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 2:52 am

Roza, that clip is a riot!!!

technic

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 4:15 am

roza I loved it LOL

Pearl

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 5:25 am

loved that video!!!!

I went to arahim/aish seminars and loved their appproach, very respectful and intellectual.

different ppl need/want different approaches - what's important is that an approach works! so for one, it's chabad, for the other it's aish.

↑ Motek ↓

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 10:18 am

hey! I posted that video months ago in a thread:

http://imamother.com/forum/vie.....60d41

I thought it was hysterical but if you read the thread, apparently not everybody realized it was meant to be humorous and some BT posters were quite unhappy with it

and roza, I have no idea what you mean by, "why to take such articles seriously"

do you think it's meant to be funny, like the video? Scratching Head

↑ chavamom ↓

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 12:19 pm

I think it is quite possible that the reporter asked the question 'How does your approach differ from other outreach organizations, like Chabad?" It was an *interview*, not a monologue. There is much more to say on this topic, but don't have the time at the moment.

↑ carrot

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 1:31 pm

chavamom wrote:

I think it is quite possible that the reporter asked the question 'How does your approach differ from other outreach organizations, like Chabad?" It was an *interview*, not a monologue.

that's a really good point. I was once interviewed for a newspaper and it's amazing how different things can sound when they're taken out of the context of the interview - sometimes quite awful and the opposite of what is intended!

↑ Motek ↓

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 4:35 pm

Follow-up article - in Jewish Chronicle:

16-May-2003 Judaism > Alternative Minyan
Where’s the beef?
Rabbi Yitzchak Schochet

Rabbi Yitzchak Schochet argues that the young adults’ organisation Aish has put popularity above substance.

The new rabbi had sat down to write his first sermon, when suddenly the chairman of the shul interrupted him: “Rabbi, what is your theme?”

— “I want to speak about the neglect of Shabbat-observance.”

— “Please, rabbi, that’s a rather delicate subject. We are so happy people show up for services, that it would be wrong to make them feel guilty about driving from shul to their office afterwards. Listen to me, pick another topic.”

— “OK, I will speak about the importance of putting on tefilin daily.”

— “No, rabbi, this will also cause offence. People are under a lot of pressure, with very little time. You can’t interfere with their private lives.”

— “OK, then I will speak about the importance of the dietary laws.”

— “You will still be stepping on toes if you do. Many professionals have barely time to catch a quick snack so they have to visit the nearest fast-food place. You must show empathy with them.”

Exasperated the rabbi asked: “So what do you suggest I should speak about?”

The chairman responded: “That’s simple. Speak about Yiddishkeit!”

This well-known anecdote came to my mind when reading last week’s JC profile of the young adults’ organisation, Aish. I have no intention to knock Orthodox outreach groups like Aish. Heaven knows, there is more than enough work for them and there’s room for more in the field. Nonetheless, some of what I read about the Aish approach disturbed me.

The organisation has dropped “Hatorah” from its name and apparently promotes Judaism more in terms of universalist values than of commandments and halachah — Jewish law. “We just want to share the beauty, wisdom and sense of belonging… The purpose is to make the world a better place... God will judge what is right and wrong, and surely He prefers 50,000 proud Jews than 50 frum Jews... If you put tefilin on people, you are not doing anything. If I had 10 minutes, I would talk to them about why it is important to be a Jew.”

Like the frustrated rabbi in the anecdote, I wonder out loud: what is the basis of this promoted pride in Yiddishkeit? Where do the values of “beauty, wisdom and importance of being Jewish” come from?

To make the world a “better place” is a noble dream, but it is one shared also by non-Jewish religions and secular humanist organisations. Our sages long ago recognised that “wisdom is found among the nations” just as in Judaism. Appreciating beauty and having a sense of belonging are universal aspirations. So why then the separatist parochialism of claiming a distinct Jewish identity?

At what point of time did Jews become exempt from their oath of “Na’aseh venishma,” “We shall do and we shall hear,” which ranks submission to the Torah as the cornerstone of Judaism and the very foundation of our national identity? And whence the omniscience of knowing what the Almighty desires or prefers? Is that part of the revelation of Sinai?

A cavalier, laissez-faire approach which may lead people to think that mitzvot are optional and which suggests that each one may grow in his or her own way is indeed a recipe for popularity. If I were not bound by Torah, I would be the first to sign up to it as well.

But then, Abraham, the founder of our nation and its ethical lifestyle, never cared about popularity but went singlehandedly against the whole world to teach about absolute morality and submission to the will and directives of the Creator of all. And that is the eternal legacy he left to his descendants which should define Judaism and Jewish outreach — not the advice to rabbis, “Don’t mention Shabbat, tefilin or kashrut. Just speak about Yiddishkeit.”

Yitzchak Schochet is rabbi of Mill Hill United Synagogue.

↑ chavamom ↓

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 7:24 pm

With all due respect to Harav Schochet, I think that he would drop his complaint if he had first hand experience with Aish functions. First of all, they *do* try to make people frum. The approach is to not want to scare people off - and let's face it, if hitting people over the head with 'you need to keep shabbos!', 'but torah is GOOD for you' worked for everyone, there would be no need for outreach organizations - everyone would be frum already! There are plenty of people that are doing just that and it works for some people. But the majority of Jewish people are still remote from yiddishkeit.

So a few points: I have heard Rav Noach Weinberg speak on numerous occasions about how he figured out when he was trying to do outreach at John's Hopkins (this was in the 60's before he made aliyah and before Aish HaTorah was a twinkle in anyone's eye) that you can 'win the battle and lose the war'. He was a great debator. His tactic at that time was to engage Jewish students in debate about Torah and Jewish belief. Despite the fact that he could win any debate, he had little success with convincing anyone to be more frum. Why? B/c the next time they would see him they would RUN!

Anyway, over the years he developed an approach where you are basically trying to 1) not frighten people away before they hear what you have to say (and don't think that Rav Noach doesn't ask hard hitting questions. he is most famous for asking people on first meeting 'so, what are you living for?' it does make people squirm). 2) realize that most Jews think that they already 'know' Judasim ("I went to Hebrew school for 6 years!"), so you have to find a way to present Judaism so that they realize perhaps there is still something for them to learn and it is relevant to them and 3) approach people in a manner that they will begin to believe that torah and mitzvos are good for them and they *want* to do it.

The other issue about "Jewish pride, preventing intermarriage" etc is an idea that they are taking a 'triage approach' to Judaism. Yes, they are trying to make people frum. But at the same time they are trying to make small inroads to prevent intermarriage, etc. that will leave open the door to perhaps them becoming frum (or their kids becoming frum) later. If someone intermarries, the odds of them getting involved with anything meaningful about Judaism drops precipitously. Not that it can't happen, but it is much less likely. Same as if someone has little positive Jewish identity, Jewish pride, etc.

I think there is a place for many different approaches to outreach and this is just one of them. I know in the town in which I live, approximately 75% of the Aguda crowd was at one point in the past 25 years 'mekaraiv' through Aish. That was the point of entry. Most of these people now learn daily, are hooked in through the kollel, and have moved on - but they credit Aish with their beginnings.

As Pearl mentioned, the Discovery seminars (which are offered through Aish in all their branches and other places as well) make no bones about the fact that they are trying to convince you of the truth of G-d and Torah. But most people, unless they are already involved in becoming frum through some other avenue, will NOT set foot in a Discovery seminar unless they have had some prior contact with an Aish class or rabbi. They have to have seen that they are 'normal', 'not scary', not going to beat them over the head with judgements, laws, rules and twist their arm to become frum NOW.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

↑ sarahd ↓

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 8:10 pm

I found the second article interesting. I assume that Rabbi Schochet's Chabad affiliation had nothing to do with his reaction to the original article or Aish's approach; otherwise I'd consider his words to be no more than sour grapes.

↑ Motek ↓

Thu, Aug 18 2005, 10:22 pm

chavamom wrote:

With all due respect to Harav Schochet, I think that he would drop his complaint if he had first hand experience with Aish functions.

that could very well be, but he was responding solely to the article

Quote:

I assume that Rabbi Schochet's Chabad affiliation had nothing to do with his reaction to the original article or Aish's approach; otherwise I'd consider his words to be no more than sour grapes.

And you would probably also assume that Rabbi Schiff's jabs at Chabad have nothing to do with Aish's anti-Chabad stand, but for some reason you didn't write that ...

↑ sarahd ↓

Fri, Aug 19 2005, 2:42 am

No I wouldn't, but Rabbi Schiff's affiliation was clearly stated, while Rabbi Schochet's was not. So if you think Aish has anti-Chabad bias, you can attribute Rabbi Schiff's comments to that, whereas you wouldn't have the luxury of applying the same standard to Rabbi Schochet's comment.