The Rise of the One Minute Workout

NY Times   In an article under his byline for Sports Illustrated in December 1960, “The Soft American,” President-elect John F. Kennedy lamented the state of the nation’s fitness. As president he exhorted citizens to plunge into activities like 50-mile hikes.

As anyone sitting quietly and reading this article probably knows, that message did not resonate with most Americans. And these days, a majority get no planned exercise at all.

So at the recent annual meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine, one of the hottest topics was not how much exercise Americans should be completing, but how little.[...]

In the past, formal recommendations have called for a substantial amount of regular exercise. For example, published guidelines from the Health and Human Services Department in 2008 suggested 150 minutes of moderate exercise per week — the equivalent of five 30-minute walks. The guidelines added that 75 minutes of vigorous exercise a week, like jogging, could be substituted.[...]

This approach to exercise started to take off in 2006, when Martin Gibala, a physiologist at McMaster University in Ontario, and his colleagues published a study showing that a three-minute sequence on an electronic stationary bicycle — 30 seconds of punishing, all-out pedaling followed by a brief rest, repeated five or six times — led to the same muscle-cell adaptations as 90 to 120 minutes of prolonged bike riding. [...]

Researchers haven’t established a definitive period of time for an interval to provide maximum health benefits, Dr. Gibala said — although in his research and experience, a minute of hard effort followed by a minute of gentle recovery is effective.

Complete 10 such intervals three times a week for a total of 30 minutes of strenuous effort, he said, and “our data would indicate you’ll be in pretty good shape.”

Excellent summary of the Draft & Curriculum issues in Israel

Cross-Currents   The situation in Israel resembles a playing field upon which multiple teams descend at the same time, each one playing by different rules. What spectators in the stands observe is utter chaos, frustrating in its incomprehensibility. Consider this a half-time look back.

What do we know about what is really in store for our brethren in the charedi camp in Israel? Very little, since none of the opposing forces speak the language of the other. We can safely say that, whatever one’s feelings are about the coalition agreement on the charedi draft and the imposition of the core curriculum in charedi schools, our charedi cousins are living through a time of great angst and uncertainty. They deserve our solicitude and tefilos. It is part of our mesorah to treat pain with sympathy, regardless of the source or cause. 

The handful of postings on Cross-Currents have evoked much passion from our readers, and occasionally some real illumination. I will try here to summarize some of what emerges from pooling all that has been said here and published in other places, combining it with off-the-record conversations with unnamed Israeli government officials. I will make no judgments about the issues themselves, other than to reformat material about them that strikes me as plausible enough to be worthy of consideration. 

From what we can tell, the charedi community in Israel has split into two camps. One camp sees the proposed legislation as a gezeras shmad. It demonizes everyone connected with the effort, and refuses to talk of any compromise. They call it a war – and you can’t negotiate effectively while the bullets are flying around your head. Within this camp of absolute resisters is R. Shmuel Auerbach shlit”a, the Briskers, and many, many more. The press associated with this camp speaks in martial terms.

A second camp tacitly recognizes that things are going to change, and has expected the change for quite some time. People in this camp understood that one day, Israeli society would no longer wish to substantially foot the bill for a large group of people who had turned long-term full-time learning into the norm. Those in this camp, however – reportedly including Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman shlit”a – feel that a system that was regnant for so long and set in motion by Torah giants cannot be undone by lesser individual of a later generation. It will not resist as strongly as the first camp, but neither will they preside over the dismantling of a Torah-only society. So far, they have refused to meet with architects of the coalition agreement who wished to start a dialogue. The decision of the Peri committee to add criminal sanctions to non-compliance with a charedi draft shifted many people away from this group convinced great numbers of people that the first camp was correct, that charedim were targeted for a full-scale assault on their way of life.

The non-charedi world seems to have found its uniting slogan in shivyon hanetel, or the equal assumption of responsibility by all members of the State. (Almost equal. In good Orwellian form, all Israelis are expected to be equal, but some are more equal than others. The Arabs are left out of it. No one wants them for the military because of the security risk.) The Haaretz crowd cannot disguise its disdain for charedim, but it is not at all clear that the average Israeli wants anything more out of the entire effort than a bit of justice and a bit of financial relief. The hysteria whipped up by the Haaretz yefai nefesh is matched by the hysteria whipped up by the charedi press (in the US as well) in creating a public mind-set in which every bigoted, over-the-top remark by some secular leftist is lovingly embellished and sent on to the public as representative of the majority of secular Israeli society. This is simply unwarranted, and likely not true. There is a reason why everything is coming to a head just now, and it still seems to be economics. At least it was when it got started. Any apologia for charedim which does not address the present and future projected burden of an underemployed community on the national economy is inadequate.[...]

Chief Rabbi Metzger arrested - Who cares?

Times of Israel    Rabbi Shmuel Pappenheim of the haredi Orthodox organization Eda Haharedit shares little common ground with Reform Rabbi Uri Regev, a religious pluralism activist. But when news broke last week that Israel’s Ashkenazi chief rabbi, Yona Metzger, was arrested on suspicion of fraud and money laundering, Pappenheim and Regev had the same reaction: Who cares? 

For Pappenheim, the chief rabbi is a political figure who has scant influence as a religious leader. And to Regev, he represents a coercive religious authority whose actions have little meaning for Israel’s secular majority.

Both regard the chief rabbi’s legal troubles as both unsurprising and largely irrelevant.

“Whom does the chief rabbi serve?” asked Regev, who heads Hiddush, a religious pluralism nonprofit. “The secular sector has no connection to the rabbinate. It doesn’t have any expectations of the chief rabbinate.” [....]

3 year review declares Jesse Friedman properly convicted of sex abuse

NYTimes   Jesse Friedman, the Great Neck, N.Y., teenager whose role in a sexual abuse case a quarter-century ago was portrayed in the Oscar-nominated documentary “Capturing the Friedmans,” and came to symbolize an era of sensational, often-suspect accusations of child molestation, was properly convicted and should not have his status as a sexual predator overturned, according to a three-year review that was released on Monday. 

In a 155-page report written with very little ambiguity, the Nassau County district attorney, Kathleen M. Rice, concluded that none of four issues raised in a strongly worded 2010 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit were substantiated by the evidence. 

Instead, it concluded, “By any impartial analysis, the reinvestigation process prompted by Jesse Friedman, his advocates and the Second Circuit, has only increased confidence in the integrity of Jesse Friedman’s guilty plea and adjudication as a sex offender.” 

The review concludes another chapter in a case that came to national attention after the 2003 release of the film, which portrayed both the breakup of a deeply troubled family and what was characterized as a flawed, biased police investigation and judicial process. The case led to guilty pleas in 1988 by Jesse Friedman, then 18, and his father, Arnold Friedman, who ran a popular computer class at his house on Piccadilly Road in the affluent Long Island community of Great Neck. 

The report’s conclusion was not entirely unexpected, even by Mr. Friedman and his advocates, given the explosive nature of the charges, the impossibility of a definitive finding on many of the allegations more than 25 years in the past and the high bar for prosecutors to overturn convictions, especially those based on confessions. 

Still, Mr. Friedman; his lawyer, Ron Kuby; and the film’s director, Andrew Jarecki, reacted with disappointment and anger, saying the report was a biased whitewash by the office that originally botched the case.[...]

The Mitzvah of Chesed – An Overview by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

5tjt  Thankfully, we live in a community that is blessed with people who perform remarkable, remarkable acts of Chessed.  The efforts of Yeshiva students and others in the wake of Hurricane Sandy were remarkably inspiring.  Very recently, we were witness to local Yeshiva students from Yeshiva of Far Rockaway who danced vigorously to bring joy to a groom, local high school girls (TAG) working the kitchen and waitressing a wedding, local elementary boys (Siach Yitzchok) waitering for another Simcha.  Mothers of the high school girls joined their daughters in this Mitzvah as well, fathers happily provided transportation and other support.  Girls returning from seminary joined up too.  So impressive is the extent of the chessed in our community, that the daughter of a very famous Rosh Yeshiva in Brooklyn who came to one of these Smeichot remarked, “I have never seen this level of Chessed before. This should be a model for all of Klal Yisroel.”

The truth is that this is just a drop in the bucket of the extensive chessed that goes on around us.  In light of this remarkable activity, an overview of the general Mitzvah of Chessed is presented below.

THE TWO GEMORAHS

The Gemorah (Sotah 14a) discusses the pasuk which says, “Acharei Hashem Elokecha taylechu – you shall walk after Hashem your G-d (Dvarim 13:5).”  The Gemorah poses a question.  It asks, “How is it possible to physically walk after the Divine Presence?”

The Gemorah responds that it means to follow after the Midos, the character traits, kavyachol, of Hashem. Just as He provides for the unclothed, so too must you provide clothing to them.  The Sefer Mitzvos Gedolos states that this verse is part of the related Pasuk of “v’halachta b’drachav – and you shall walk in his ways.”  In other words, the verse of Acharei Hashem Elokecha Taylechu is referencing the verse of v’halachta b’drachav.

The Gemorah in Shabbos (133b) discusses another entirely different pasuk, “Zeh Kaili V’anveihu..” The Gemorah in Shabbos understands it to mean that we must attempt to liken ourselves to Him.  Just as He is kind and merciful, so too must you be kind and merciful. [...]

Arab Brooklyn

Abuse prevention: Friendly Message to Camp Summer Staff

Three Weeks - an Overview by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

5tjt.   Although the Three Weeks and the other two fasts are a period of mourning and introspection, Zechariah the Navi tells us (Zechariah 8:19) that eventually, the four fasts of Klal Yisroel will be a source of joy and gladness – if we but embark upon the goal of loving both truth and shalom.  These two themes are central to Torah life.  Rabbi Chaninah tells us (Shabbos 55a) that Hashem’s seal is truth.  Shalom is also one of the names of Hashem, in addition to being a central theme of our daily Tefilos.  If we learn to love these ideals – the fasts will be turned around.

The four fasts mentioned in Zechariah are:

• The fast of the fourth month. [Tamuz - the 17^th of it]
• The fast of the fifth month.          [Av – the 9^th of it]
• The fast of the seventh month. [Tishrei - the 3^rd of it]
• The fast of the tenth month. [Taives – the 10^th of it]

Clearly, we are counting these four fasts from the month of Nissan.  Why do we start from Nissan?  Because this is the first month that we became who we are –  a nation.

MODIFIED DATES

The exact dates of two of the fasts were not always these dates – they were somewhat modified.  As far as the 17^th of Tamuz, originally, in the time of 1^st Beis HaMikdash we observed it on the 9^th of Tamuz because that is when the city walls were first broken through.  Hundreds of years later, during the time of the 2^nd Bais HaMikdash, on the 17^th of Tamuz, the enemy breached the walls of Yerushalayim once again.  The date of the Tamuz fast was moved from the 9^th to the 17^th.   The fast of Tishrei was to be observed on the 3^rd because the tragedy had occurred on the second day of Rosh haShana itself, one day earlier, and we do not want to fast then.

PURPOSE OF THE FASTS

Why do we fast on these days? [...]

Rav Yisroel Salanter: Why doesn't knowledge stop sin?

Prof Mark Stein ( Torah u-Madda Journal 9  (2000) page 46 ) In the talmudic tradition, action takes precedence over theory (at least in theory!), and the idea of disinterested philosophical reflection is discouraged." In the European-Christian tradition, contemplation is encouraged. In fact, among the philosophers, I can think of only one thinker, Benjamin Franklin, who gives serious consideration to the question of inculcating virtue in the individual, as distinct from the question of exploring the essence of virtue.

R. Israel was concerned with bridging the gap between religious ideals and religious practice, which is a question of therapy, not philosophy. But to construct his form of therapy, R. Israel had to analyze the illness: why do people who espouse values act counter to these values in everyday life? Debate over this question is one of the earliest in recorded philosophy, between Socrates and Aristotle. Socrates (in the Protagoras held that virtue is knowledge. Or to put it as a yeshivah student would: hissaron in practice reflects a hissaron in knowledge. Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics VII, 3) rejected this view as simplistic; his own sug­gestion as to how "weakness of the will" (akrasia) is possible-despite knowledge-will not concern us here."

R. Israel's solution is given, if only by implication, in the first words Iggeret ha-Musar. R. Israel suggests not only a solution to the problem of akrasta, but a deeper one than that of either Plato or Aristotle:

The imagination of Man is free; his reason is bound. His imagination leads him astray ... so that he fears not the certain future ... when he will suffer harsh judgments. No one else will be caught in his stead - he alone will bear the fruit of his sin; he is one, the sinner and the punished ....

R. Israel's explanation for the failure of the good man to live up to his beliefs goes far beyond the mere invocation of the "evil inclination." The question is what the evil inclination is, and how it functions. R. Israel's answer is that the believing sinner becomes alienated from his future self, so that he becomes as indifferent to his own future suffering as most of us are to suffering in a faraway land. It is therefore the task of musar to bring the future to the present, so that the sinner feels the pun­ishment already in his imagination. The philosophical analysis suggests a program of therapy, and this therapy R. Israel calls "learning musar"

But the problem is not just the "remoteness" of the future state. R. Israel's disciples, for example R. Isaac Blaser, reported that their teacher explained that the problem is (or is aggravated by) the great difference between our bodily existence and our eternal one, a difference so great that we find it difficult to identify ourselves altogether in the unimagin­able bodiless state. So we cannot act on our belief in divine punishment after death." R. Israel's view, as attributed to him by disciples, bears a striking resemblance to that of the famous atheist, Hume, who expresses mock horror at...

 the universal carelessness and stupidity of men with regard to a future state .... There is not indeed a more ample matter of wonder to the stu­dious, and of regret to the pious man, than to observe the negligence of the bulk of mankind concerning their approaching condition .... A future state is so far removed from our comprehension, and we have so obscure an idea of the manner, in which we shall exist after the dissolution of the body, that we are never able with slow imaginations to surmount the diffi­culty .... And indeed the want of resemblance in this case so entirely destroys belief, that except those few, who upon cool reflection on the importance of the subject, have taken care by repeated meditation to imprint on their minds the arguments for a future state, there scarce are any, who believe the immortality of the soul with a true and established judgment ....

Though the resemblance to R. Israel's analysis is obvious, R. Israel's is still the deeper. Hume presumes that sinners simply do not believe what they profess, on account of the weakness of the idea humans can have of a future state. Thus, in the end, Hume's diagnosis is a variant of Socrates': a defect in action presupposes a defect in belief. But Hume's diagnosis is based on a superficial account of the nature of belief itself, as constituted by a vivid idea-an account refuted by Thomas Reid in Hume's own lifetime, with the simple objection that we can have the most vivid hallucination without believing in its veracity." R. Israel, on the other hand, locates the problem not in believing in a future state, but in locating ourselves in the future state and relating to our future state as ourselves.

Bar Noar Club - "the proud community" and deviance

Zomet Institute  "Take all of the leaders of the people and hang them before G-d, in front of the sun" [Bamidbar 25:4].

The Discussion Itself gives Legitimacy

In almost twenty years that I have been writing this column (since 5754, that is, 1994) I think that only one time I wrote about "inverted sexual orientation" within the religious community, and I immediately regretted it. One solitary time I agreed to state my position in a television discussion, and I also regretted this afterwards. My reason is very straightforward: Every public discussion on this and similar issues adds to the legitimacy of the subject matter, even if the opinion that is voiced is very critical and sharply and strongly condemns the situation. Some sins are such that any public discussion about them spurs afflicted people to action, and even entices others to emulate them. This, for example, is thought to be true of suicide. Any report accompanied by a discussion – no matter how tragic and sad – is quite likely to encourage others to follow in its footsteps. This is all the more so true with respect to sins of the evil inclination, where every sinner who tells about his sins is interested and even strongly wants to encourage new people to join the "community of sin." Every act of publicity and raising the subject "against the sun" reduces social pressures and enhances the legitimacy, in the eyes of the perpetrators and those who surround them.

But this time I have decided to speak out, in the wake of the solving (?) of the murder in the Bar Noar Club, which has once again turned the spotlight on this dark corner of our lives. My main point is my outrage at the use of the phrase "the proud community" to describe this phenomenon, in this way making it the object of a sophisticated and friendly value judgment. I therefore come to raise my pen in protest at this flawed "community." These two words, prestigious and festive as they are, community and pride, are being used as an envelope of purity for anomalous behavior that is a dramatic perversion of family and social norms. And the entire phenomenon is a prime example of anti-religion (no matter which one) and anti-Judaism. [...]

I do not call for banishment, casting out, or out-and-out rejection from the religious community of the sinners who are aware of their situation and who seek help. They should be welcomed with bonds of love. I do not propose that we use the word from the Torah, an abomination, which can be seen as offensive and can have the effect of pushing a person away forever. A better word is "stiya" – deviation – but this too is considered as a rejection and no longer maintains its original meaning as being different from the norm (such as a deviation from an original plan for a building). But I do call for the religious – and secular – communications media to completely abandon the word combination "proud community." The proper word to use is "choreg" – a deviation from the norm. And this should not be used with any connotation of forgiveness and acceptance, but rather with the meaning of a deviation which can be treated and which deserves to be pitied.

On the other hand, I call for total rejection and for removal beyond the religious and social boundaries of anybody who shows pride about their fault, those who publicly flaunt their "status" or gather together to show "community pride" and who join active social clubs of this type. Every attempt to show off this way of life is to be considered "enticement and seduction," something that is very harmful and should be punished in a harsh way. Making the deviations public is treated in this week's Torah portion, in the verse quoted above: "Hang them in front of the sun." [...]

NBC: Judy Brown (author of Hush) on child abuse in chassidic world

update: replaced dead NBC Link

Expose of Sex Abuse in Australian yeshivos

Australian Age   A senior Australian rabbi who failed to stop an alleged paedophile from sexually abusing boys at a Sydney Jewish school said some of the man's victims may have consented to sexual relations and warned that involving police now would ''open a can of worms''.

Former senior Sydney rabbi Boruch Dov Lesches, who is now one of New York's leading ultra-Orthodox figures, made his remarks in a recent conversation with a person familiar with a series of alleged child rapes and molestation carried out by one man associated with Sydney's Yeshiva community in the 1980s. Rabbi Lesches' comments are likely to increase scrutiny of Australia's senior rabbinical leaders' handling of child sex abuse cases, amid allegations of cover-ups, victim intimidation and the hiding of perpetrators overseas.

In a legally recorded telephone conversation heard by Fairfax Media and provided to NSW detectives investigating the Sydney Yeshiva cases, Rabbi Lesches admitted to counselling the alleged abuser upon learning that he had sexually abused a boy a decade his junior. Rabbi Lesches said he told the man that both he and the boy would be forced to leave the Yeshiva community if he could not control his urges. [...]

Outspoken Melbourne Jewish sexual abuse campaigner and founder of victim support group Tzedek, Manny Waks, said Rabbi Lesches' comments ''unfortunately seem to be consistent with the approach of many senior Orthodox Jewish figures in the community who for decades have been more concerned with silencing victims and protecting perpetrators as well as their institutions, rather than with protecting innocent children''.

Mr Waks said his organisation would provide the royal commission into religious groups' handling of child sex abuse cases with full details of what has been happening for decades in Australian Jewish communities.

The rift between the chareidim and secular in Israel - a summary

Tablet Magazine   There’s an oft-repeated story of David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding prime minister, paying a visit in the 1940s to Avrohom Yeshaya Karelitz, known as the Chazon Ish, a prominent Haredi rabbi living in Bnei Brak. The Chazon Ish, it is said, took off his glasses so he wouldn’t have to properly see the socialist interloper, after which they got down to the business of figuring out what the role of the ultra-Orthodox would be in the new Jewish state.

The Chazon Ish quoted a story from the Talmud to make his point. When two wagons (or camels, in another version of the story) meet on a narrow mountain pass, who shall give way—the “full” wagon laden with goods, or the “empty” wagon? The rabbi’s point couldn’t have been clearer: He expected the “empty” wagon of secular society to defer to the “full” wagon of a religious tradition spanning millennia.

As is well-known, Ben-Gurion granted the small ultra-Orthodox community in Israel an exemption from army service in order to rehabilitate the Haredi “community of scholars” of Eastern Europe wiped out during the Holocaust. Ben-Gurion, it’s believed, predicted that the ultra-Orthodox community would slowly disappear anyway, melding into the assertively modern Zionist project. The opposite, however, has happened. This “community of scholars” numbered 400 in 1949. Today the figure for exemptions among army-age ultra-Orthodox men is estimated at 50,000.

Finance Minister Yair Lapid and many other Israeli politicians are now intent on reversing Ben-Gurion’s edict, spurred on by a Supreme Court ruling early last year that declared the Haredi draft exemption unconstitutional. Many of Lapid’s campaign slogans, like “Equal Service for Everyone,” squarely targeted Haredi Jews, who comprise 10 percent of the Israeli population, about 800,000 people, and 15 percent of the Israeli Jewish public. In mid-April, in his first speech as finance minister, the charismatic but untried politician entered into a heated exchange from the Knesset podium with the ultra-Orthodox caucus. “You’re pushing yourself into a corner,” Lapid said ^[1]. “No one hates you. The only thing that happened is that you’re not in the [governing] coalition. It’s called democracy. … I don’t receive orders from you anymore, and the state doesn’t take orders from you anymore. We’re done taking orders from you.” [...]

Yet the ultra-Orthodox, for the most part, don’t seem interested in the proposals currently being floated by secular politicians. In mid-May, a demonstration took place in central Jerusalem outside the main army conscription office. An estimated 30,000 ultra-Orthodox men took part, and events quickly spiraled out of control. Rioters threw rocks at security personnel and lit trash cans on fire; nearly a dozen police officers and demonstrators were injured, and several arrests were made. It was seen as the opening gambit in what could be a summer of serious internal unrest.

The most interesting aspect of the demonstration, however, was the fact that it was organized by an extremist, Jerusalem-based faction of the Lithuanian Haredi movement. Rabbi Shteinman and his moderate faction, which greatly outnumbers the extremists, refused to participate. It seemed that, despite the rhetoric, there was still some hope of striking a peaceful compromise.

Israel’s political class is hoping that the difficult socioeconomic conditions of the Haredi community will be the prime motivator for the necessary changes. “The No. 1 daily problem—not talking about the coming of the Messiah—but day-to-day problem for the Haredis, is making a living,” Brig. Gen. (ret.) Meir Elran, one of Israel’s foremost experts on military-social affairs, told me recently. “They need to see that at the end of the process they’ll be able to make a living. It’ll be the only thing that convinces them—they don’t care about the army, or Zionism, or the state. They care about making a living, honorably.”

Anti-Semitism in America: Being hated because you look Jewish

Tablet Magazine   Nine years ago, when I got married, I started to cover my hair. At home I chose comfortable fabric head-coverings. But in public I wore a sheitel, or wig, since wigs were considered de rigueur by most of the women I was becoming friends with in Brooklyn. After only a few years of being Torah observant, I had a sense that a woman’s choice of head-covering was a statement in a language I did not yet speak. So, I stayed bewigged in public with my friends, slipping out of my sheitel and into a headscarf only in the privacy of my own home, much the same way I kicked off my street shoes and slid into slippers.

Because it’s impossible to tell the difference between a good sheitel and real hair, my friends and I didn’t immediately stand out in public as Orthodox women—or even as Jews. But all that changed when I went out with my husband: Standing by his side, I quickly learned that there were risks to looking like a Hasidic Jew.

Taking the subway in New York City with my husband for the first time was like being pushed into a wall of ice. He is a big man—it’s not difficult to see that he once played ice hockey, football, and basketball. He’s also a former trophy-winning martial artist and, though he is really a very gentle, kind-hearted person, his appearance can seem intimidating. And yet, to some subway riders, with his beard, peyos, and yarmulke, he looks like nothing as much as a target.

Because he’d been dressing this way for quite a few years before we got married, he was used to the stares and occasional audible curses. I wasn’t.

“How can you stand this?” I asked.

“Stand what?”

“Some people are staring—no, glaring—at you. With hatred.”

He shrugged. “People are glaring at that other Orthodox Jewish guy over there, too.”

He was right. They were.

But I was never able to get used to the enormous difference between riding solo and incognito on the subway, looking like any other woman (except that every day is a good hair day when you wear a sheitel) when I was alone, versus traveling with my husband as part of a couple whose garb screamed “Hasidic.” [...]