Baruch Dayan HaEmet: A Sad Day in Williamsburg

Jacob Neuman, a 5 year old Satmar boy was killed yesterday when an elevator he was riding became stuck between floors. He…

…tried to jump to the nearest floor but lost his footing and fell 10 floors down the shaft to his death.

The building is part of New York City's public housing and has a history of elevator problems:

…"Every other day the elevator is broken," one of the boy's neighbors in the building, Pessie Gelb, said. "We keep telling people that it's broken and that older and injured people need it. We've requested many times that they fix it. But they don't."

Another resident of the building, Chaya Mandel, said: "This happens to me at the elevator — I open the door and there's no elevator."

The Teamsters Local 237 is responsible for the maintenance of the elevators, its president, Gregory Floyd, said. Mr. Floyd said a lack of federal funding had made work on the elevators difficult. "The Teamsters work with what they are given," he said. "And they are not given enough."

Records on the Web site of the New York City Department of Buildings show that eight complaints have been lodged with the department about the elevator since 1999, the most recent of which was received on January 21, under the category "defective/inoperative." Three other complaints that fell under the same category were lodged in 2007.…

When told by The New York Sun of the concerns residents had about the elevator, Mr. [Howard] Marder [a spokesman for the New York City Housing Authority] said: "I am not going to deal with anecdotal stories."

My guess is Howard Marder will be dealing with those "anecdotal stories" for many days to come – unless the mayor fires him this morning.

Coverage:

VIN.
New York Times.
New York Sun.

Comments

[NYTaxpayer]

Why did this kid's mother let him ride this elevator alone knowing the city had not addressed issues regarding its safety? A small child pays for the stupidity of its parents once more. Parents who live relatively tax free while other people fork it out because they choose to have reasonably sized families they can support. This tiny child fell to his death because of the ignorance and irresponsibility of his parents.

[zach]

This tiny child fell to his death because of the ignorance and irresponsibility of his parents.

What a stupid and insensitive comment. Was it your intention just to trash large families (they had only 5 kids, if you read any of the articles)? Or Satmar? And how the hell do you know about the taxes that they pay? This was a tragedy and you are an idiot.

[endingSuperstition]

baruch dayan... means 'bless the judge of truth'

its sick to invoke this superstition that a child died as a result of some supernatural intervention as part of some 'bigger plan' (plan being of course the stupid crap about tikkun olam to undo the shevirat ha keleem).

[Rachel Batya]

Comments on VINS reflect that the child's mother had always taken her children down in the elevator and waited for the bus with them. The morning of the tragedy, she had an appointment and could not be there. The child who died was with his eight-year-old brother and was apparently frightened by the fact that the elevator was stuck.

Life is full of risk, and you can't blame a mother who I'm sure would gladly take her son's place right now. Better to send a few prayers to HaShem for the well-being of the child's family, especially his brother. When people in the building came to see what had happened, he was screaming, "I tried to grab my brother, I tried to grab my brother."

[steve]

"I am not going to deal with anecdotal stories."

He must be a talmid of Avi Shafran who dismisses the plethora of child sexual abuse cases in our community as "anecdotal evidence".

[WoolSIlkCotton]

This is not the time to be slamming this family or the Satmars. A terrible tragedy occurred, and it could have happened to anyone who lives in a public housing project. To be discussing the size, religious beliefs, or tax status of the family is disgraceful.
The phrase used in the title of this piece is a traditional expression. The specifics of religious faith and how they apply to the death of any innocent child doesn't need to be revisited right now.

[David Bar-Magen]

What a terrible tragedy. My heart goes out to the family. Unfortunately, I'm not too surprised that nothing was done for years. Bureaucracy has a way of grinding really slowly until someone lights a fire under someone else. In my neighborhood, they refused to install a stop sign and a crosswalk on a certain, traditionally busy street. For years we asked them to, and for years they refused, hemmed, hawed, made excuses, etc. etc. Then a sweet little girl-- who I regularly used to see playing and laughing with her friends right outside my house--was struck and killed because the driver didn't see her.

Sometimes it takes a death.

[Al]

To "EndingSuperstition". Thank you for posting your sentiments. I was on my way to do the same when I saw you beat me to it :)

"Baruch Dayan HaEmet" ? Shmarya.. I am shocked that YOU would post such a title. When my father died a fairly slow and painful death, I could not believe the mindless fools who made such a statement to me during the shiva. I was offended and furious, not only for my father's memory, but also for the fact that a thinking man could view god this way. I know (or at least I think I do), that you do not really believe this. What righteous god could possibly see their way to killing a 5 yr old this way ? Imagine the fear during the fall ? Imagine the few seconds of pain, the boy might have felt. My god is a god of compassion (in our prayer books he is too). Yet somehow, our superstitious past has allowed us to simultaneously see god as a cruel, vindictive, jealous god. Attributes I can not associate with any god.

And to those out there whom would choose to see me and people of like thinking as cynics... shame on you - open your eyes, you are the cynics who sees the lord, your god as one nasty dude ! go ahead, aspire to me more godly (your view of godly) in your behaviors... and kill some young innocents !

[Al]

One more comment: I have to agree with the posts outraged about those who can blame the mother. I am not sure if those of you critics on this point have children, but if/when you do, I can assure you, that you (will) take risks all the time and hopefully you will not pay a price. But.... if you do pay the price someday, I hope people will be less critical of you, than you are of this mother. Every day, we take risks we chosse to ignore... or hide from for the sake of practicality. Not to ignore the risks would dominate every second of your life and probably eliminate all pleasures. I do not know this woman. She may be a great person, or she may not be. But with no knowledge of this person, I think its extream to jump on her back. Let her mourn in piece and please have some pity on her.

[rebitzman]

++its sick to invoke this superstition++

What is actually sick, it to turn words that are very likely providing comfort to this religious family, and trying to turn them into some sort of political playing fields.

You don't like the phrase? Don't use it.

But your rights in this area end at your nose, so where this grief stricken family is concerned - shut the hell up.

[Al]

Rebitzman: I appreciate your friendly words, your obvious anger and your claim that our statements are "political" - although I fail to see a political undertone in our statements – for us this an absolute RELIGIOUS statement. Religion did not stop evolving with the prophets thousands of years ago !

I do not know you or your history, but I can tell you that I have sat shiva, heard these words a few hundred times per day and did not find them to be comforting. I have also witnessed other in time of suffering as they cried out to god asking "why ? what did I do ?". I fail to see how such an idea (a judging god) was comforting for them. Although I must agree, it does seem to comfort others. But how do YOU know who it comforts ? how do you decide when to say it ? I think most people don’t think about what they are saying at all ! Now, if this is your idea of comfort.. then, I wish you comfort if tragedy ever befalls you (and I hope it does not).

My point, was that I was surprised to see such words on this blog. A blog that attempts to expose corruption in orthodoxy and attempts to be progressive or enlightened (yes.. words the probably offend you) exposing ideas that are artificial or simply out of date.

I stick to my claim that these words represent a primitive and superstitious belief system. Let me say that when I sat shiva and objected to this phrase, people like you told me that I had nerve... after all, why else did my father die if the lord did not decide to take him! Let m e ask you, if people like me do not speak up because “our rights end at our nose”, how do you suggest we make our beliefs known ? Are superstitious people the only ones who can express and have respect shown to their beliefs ?

Thankfully, we live in the United States of America and while religious, superstitious people live beside us and choose to sustain beliefs that pre-exist the dark ages, we have every right to speak our minds. So... sorry, we will not "shut the hell up", but if you really want to live in a place that suppresses free, progressive thought, move to Iran or Williamsburg !

[rebitzman]

++My point, was that I was surprised to see such words on this blog. A blog that attempts to expose corruption in orthodoxy and attempts to be progressive or enlightened (yes.. words the probably offend you) exposing ideas that are artificial or simply out of date.++

Why?

A man can't be offended by the corruption - but still provide comfort in a way that the family can relate to? Why are they mutually exclusive?

Perhaps they are out of date to you - and perhaps you should have said something, but I too have sat Shiva, and words were comforting.

And frankly - anyone who chooses words that hurt over words that comfort at a time of pain.

You are entitled to your opinion - you are entitled to express your opinion, but ask yourself why EXACTLY would Scott single out this story - this family and report on it. What is the likelihood that maybe - just maybe he knows them - and maybe, just maybe they might actually read what you wrote.

When they log on - when they read this thread - what do you suppose will cause the greater pain - Baruch Dyan Emet, or your words?

In an attempt to bring you comfort - someone hurt you. That's too bad. But it doesn't not justify, or make it right for you or anyone else to cause pain to this (or any other) family.

[David Bar-Magen]

Hey, Al, I hope you don't mind if I insert my unsolicited two cents here:

As I understand it, "baruch dayan ha-emet" is a tradition that evolved because Jews have always been wary of "cursing" God, an offense considered so severe by the Torah that it euphemistically refers to it as "blessing" God's name. It is quite understandable that the first impulse of someone who has lost a loved one is to question the justice of such a loss and speak negatively of the God who caused it.

If anything, the manner in which the phrase is spoken should underscore its intent. In my experience, people don't wag their finger at a mourner and adjure them to praise the true judge; they say it with a grimace and a sympathatic tone that demonstrates that they share in your pain.

In fact, the phrase "Baruch Dayan Ha-emet" is not spoken at the shiva itself, but only upon hearing the news, when the shock is most visceral and the likelihood of cursing God is at its highest. At the shiva itself, once the sorrow has set in, the phrase spoken is, "May the Lord comfort you amongst the mourners of Zion and Jerusalem." Which is, I think, far kinder a sentiment.

Therefore, I don't believe you're correct about the phrase being some sort of superstitious appeasement. It seems to be a device to avoid blasphemy, and I think that anyone who said it to you during your shiva is a world-class moron.

[David Bar-Magen]

*sympathetic

[schneur]

As a resident of New York, let me add the following comments.
Governmental agencies are notoriously slow and lazy. They do very little. This is due to the union related job secuirty the workers enjoy and the other reasons include a general feeling of laziness on the part of many public employees.
The managers usually play ball with their employees and little is ever accomplished.
If the private sector were run this way, nothing would ever be accomplished.
Elevators are constantly broken in the institution where I work as well. In my residence they always break down as well. Of course there are inspection certificates on the walls. But who knows when the elevator was slast inspected.
What NYC needs is some new form of accountability of its public employees.
There is more to be said about this but a public forum may not be the appropriate place.
I feel bad about the little ingele who was killed. Lets blame the real culprits the city agencies who are too lazy to respond an the dumb unions who need federal money in order to do their jobs...

[JewishCynic]

I was surprised by end-super and Al's reaction to "Boruch dayan emes" though Al's last comment sheds some light.

I've interpreted the phrase to mean "Bless the true judge" rather than "Bless the judge of truth".

I see it to mean not that god is acting as a criminal court justice who has judged the victim and deemed him worthy of the terrible punishment, but rather that god is all-knowing and knows what events will lead to the ultimate good even though we cannot understand at the time.
Contemporary orthodox Judaism (and western religion in general) has the concept of a loving, all-knowing god and the concept of an afterlife (heaven/hell).
Given that framework I've wondered why some people have struggled with the "Why bad things happen to good people" question.
Rabbi Harold Kushner's book comes to mind.
Personally I think it's more comforting to feel there is an all powerful god that insures the loved one is in a better place than a limited god that could not prevent what is a true tradgedy.

BTW I don't think it's inappropriate to question "Baruch dayan emes" here on the blog - it's not as if your saying it to the family of the boy.

[rebitzman]

++BTW I don't think it's inappropriate to question "Baruch dayan emes" here on the blog ++

If the context was one of DISCUSSING the phrase - I would concede the point. When the context is one of expressing sentiment (as it is here) it is totally inappropriate.

++- it's not as if your saying it to the family of the boy.++

Read it again - that is exactly what was being done.

[Rachel Batya]

"When they log on - when they read this thread - what do you suppose will cause the greater pain - Baruch Dyan Emet, or your words?"

Perhaps Shmarya knows the family (and perhaps he can enlighten us on that). If that is not the case, I don't find it probable that a family of Satmar Chasidim would be logging on to FM, given Shmarya's less than cordial relationship with the Orthodox world.

I'm also not sure that a family (particularly a religious family) in the midst of a terrible tragedy would be checking out what people are saying about it on the Internet (unless there is a specific memorial page set up for the purpose). I haven't seen much else on the Internet that doesn't go south pretty quickly (as evidenced by the first comment above). It's not a place I'd go in a disaster.

[JewishCynic]

Shmarya will have to confirm/deny this, but I don't see his posting of the story as an indication that he knows the family.
And I'd be surprised if a Satmar family is reading internet blogs - especially when sitting shiva. (a Satmar who reads this blog either totally discounts what is written or has some serious doubts about the Satmar way of life).

I didn't read Bar-Magen's last comment before I posted. I thought it was "Baruch dayan emet" rather than "ha-emet". Different traditions perhaps and it doesn't make a serious difference. The gist of Bar-Magen's comment is in line with what I recall being taught.

I do think "boruch dayan emes" also incorporates a concept rather that just a way of saying "shoot" instead of "sh-t" .

it is not a phase I would say to a mourner and I don't recall hearing it at shiva visits, but then traditions vary and I if a well meaning person said it to me I would not be offended.

[Rachel Batya]

--but ask yourself why EXACTLY would Scott single out this story - this family and report on it.--

I think he singled it out because of this part:

When told by The New York Sun of the concerns residents had about the elevator, Mr. [Howard] Marder [a spokesman for the New York City Housing Authority] said: "I am not going to deal with anecdotal stories."

Shmarya doesn't much like people whose first response is to cover their asses rather than accept responsibility.

[Rachel Batya]

--He must be a talmid of Avi Shafran who dismisses the plethora of child sexual abuse cases in our community as "anecdotal evidence".--

Remember when "anecdote" was a nice word, as in "Papa has some great anecdotes about growing up in turn-of-the century Boston." Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it?

Now it's simply used to dismiss truth.

[Al]

Rebitzman & David:

First to Rebitzman: I do not even know how to respond to your last comment. Again, you choose to see your position as righteous and mine as hurtful, I see it the other way around. I see no attempt in your words to seek reality or the truth – just an attempt to preserve “blind faith” as if blind-faith is something to aspire to or to promote as a means of comfort.

For me, this is a common problem with religion as implemented by our forefathers (jews and non-jews)... it provides a dogma that does not promote an honest attempt to understand the basis of the world, it takes words on paper and words passed down for thousands of generations and treats them like fact. I personally believe that these facts have been exposed as nothing more than Dogma based on a historical and scientific basis. So to say that these words are "out of date to you" (me), is a nice thing, but all indications based on scientific knowledge are that no god judged and decided to let this boy die in this way. This is not a reality for me.. but for all of us. Real is real, truth is truth. For me, the mere act of indoctrinating his parents or young Jewish children Catholics or others to believe such a thing is the real sin. Yes, that is my opinion and I am entitled to state it. I can understand that my statements are hurtful to “believers” who prefer not to have their beliefs challenged, but I do not see those words are as hurtful to the boy’s parents whom on any other basis and I highly doubt that “When they log on - when they read this thread” as you state, my words will cause them pain with regard to their loss. I am arguing that judgment had nothing to do with their loss, you are arguing that such an argument is hurtful. I wish them the best in this hour of true crisis and mourning. Why DO YOU ASSUME those words are comforting to these people ? Don’t guess that Scott knows them and Don’t assume what is comforting to them. This is a blog that welcomes comments and of all people Scott knows that.
David: I appreciate all of your points and to a large extent I agree with your sense of where this came from and why it became a tradition. For me, though, the very idea of cursing god as the cause is absurd. If god is the creator and source of life, if god is beyond our understanding, then why not leave it at that and stop attributing tragedy to god and stop worrying about what we think and how he will react to our thoughts. The all-mighty, and great god (no making fun there) is both… he’s a bog boy and secure enough to understand the emotional rollercoaster that his creations are subject to ! As the universe, god’s creation evolves, so too should man and man’s ideas related to god. I just think its time that the major world religions evolve to.

[maven]

Al-
What an absurd argument. Baruch Dayan Emet is not a religious statement when used in this context, it is a linguistic signifier, much like RIP is in English, indicating that the article will be about someone dying. It would be ridiculous arguing "dead people don't feel anxiety so they don't need blessings of peace" when RIP is used in English. And I'm with rebitzman et al that its really inappropriate in this context. Lecture people on the death of God on the Nietzsche blog.
What is disconcerting is that this tragedy could happen to any family living in neglected housing, and it is tragic for a little boy to die horribly whether black, white, chussid, or litvak. The city needs to be held accountable.

[Al]

Let me respond point by point:

“What an absurd argument. Baruch Dayan Emet is not a religious statement when used in this context, it is a linguistic signifier, much like RIP is in English”

The word absurd attempts to diminish my point. Unfortunately your argument has no substance to back the claim of absurdity up. “Baruch Dayan Emet” is definitely a religious statement. How could you state otherwise ? So is RIP as “Rest in Peace” acknowledges the afterlife and blesses the deceased – instead of recognizing their sins and the righteousness of god – in a sense acknowledging god’s lack of guilt. Am I taking the words to literally ? Am I actually trying to take them seriously ? Is that my failing ? If so, then I apologize, but I really to try to find meaning in my religion.

‘It would be ridiculous arguing "dead people don't feel anxiety so they don't need blessings of peace" when RIP is used in English’

Actually RIP is not stated to the dead person , its stated to the live person and I doubt that my “wishes” are worth anything to the dead person. The statement is said for the benefit of the living and that is the point of my concern. I have known many people who do not want to hear Baruch Dayan Emet upon the death of their loved ones. I have to admit that I have met many people who are offended by any objection as well, so I guess we are all different wrt what comforts us. But again, I was surprised to see such a quote appear on this website as I personally see it as inconsistent with the hashcafa of this site – maybe I am wrong…. Maybe not.

“And I'm with rebitzman et al that its really inappropriate in this context. Lecture people on the death of God on the Nietzsche blog.”

Now this was my favorite point you make… its ok that you are with Rebitzman… I suspect others agree with him too, but I see others who are with me. Who is on who’s side is not really a big deal. The masses are asses.. so the vote count does not do it for me.
As far as “inappropriate” ? what does that mean and who made you an authority ? You are just one guy with an opinion. How is this different than the many entries on this blog regarding Rabbi’s who reject science ? or are not sensitive to people’s needs despite the fact that sensitivity to people is one of the many goals of the torah. . My point is that believing god as the judge actively did this is what’s absurd and to many of us, it is offensive. Your claim that it does not mean what it sounds like it means is a poor argument. . Using words that indicate god did it and was right on any level to do so is absurd and telling me its inappropriate just is not your place.

Go on, say Baruch Dayan Emmet all you want, but I get to hold back on that comment and voice my distaste of it to you or anyone on this blog. I do not think that me holding back on that phrase is an automatic offense to the family. There are other statements such as Hamakom Yinachem which you identoify that are comforting and I can believe in.

“Lecture people on the death of God on the Nietzsche blog.”

Glad you read Philosophy.. I do to.. but no where do I talk about the death of god.. just the attribution of judgment and the end of a life to god. Its not the same and you know that. NOW… would I be good with the death of an image of a vengeful god who actively destroys innocents ? you are damn right I would and I am proud to say it.. Not as a cynic but an optimist. Many traditionalists have denied the bible talks of a vengeful, jealous god.. but read it.. it does.

Finally:
“What is disconcerting is that this tragedy could happen to any family living in neglected housing, and it is tragic for a little boy to die horribly whether black, white, chussid, or litvak. The city needs to be held accountable.”

On this statement maven.. I could not agree more 

[rebitzman]

++I don't find it probable that a family of Satmar Chasidim would be logging on to FM, given Shmarya's less than cordial relationship with the Orthodox world.++

Rachael: The Orthodox world is made up of individuals, a great many of whom are sympathetic to, and agree with Shmarya's words and position.

++Again, you choose to see your position as righteous and mine as hurtful,++

Al: Because yours simply is.

To attack the basis of someone's faith at the hour of the greatest need for that faith SIMPLY because you don't even understand what "Baruch Dyan HaEmet" really means or WHY one actually expresses it is nothing BUT hurtful.

You are simply justifying your hurt - by hurting. Justifying your ignorance - by hurting.

++For me, the mere act of indoctrinating his parents or young Jewish children Catholics or others to believe such a thing is the real sin.++

But it's not your life, your children, or your choice.

People scream (legitimately) whenever the rabbanim try to shove their values down the collective throats of all Jews (Hell - YOU do in your post). You are just as bad - just as ugly as they are when you take the tragic moment of a child's death to "make a point".

EXPRESS your views - no worries, but timing means something and yours simply was wrong.

[rebitzman]

++The masses are asses++

And the hole has been identified.

[maven]

As Rebitzman did a fine job summarizing why some of us feel uncomfortable with your comments in this particular moment, I'll just add that if you read philosophy, you know that Nietzsche's "God is Dead" thesis has little to do with the life or death of God per se (a rather meaningless assertion), but with the decreased meaningfulness of the concept of God in the life of the individual and society, as you say "stop attributing tragedy to god and stop worrying about what we think and how he will react to our thoughts." (He pointed to the emptiness of organized religion as God's "tombstone").
At any rate, its irrelevant to introduce God to this question where men are clearly to blame, and that is the crime from which we ought not be distracted, with or without harangues related to individual views on theodicy.

[Rachel Batya]

--Rachael: The Orthodox world is made up of individuals, a great many of whom are sympathetic to, and agree with Shmarya's words and position.--

Of course. My point is that it isn't *probable* people in a state of shock and trauma would go anywhere near a blog that might be deeply upsetting to their values. I didn't say it was impossible. My guess is that they are more likely to stay pretty close to home and with people they *know* are safe, familiar, and supportive of how they live and how they think.

[Isa]

If the child was able to open the outer elevator door then the elevator must be at least 60 years old ,if not older. To make elevators this old reliable again then just about every switch and relay needs to be replaced($$$). Except the original parts are no longer available.. yes modern parts can be adapted...if the original parts were 'off the shelf ' items, which they probably were not.
Now it will take installing a completely new elevator with all new controls that will cost $$$
And this happened probably in a rent controlled building.

[rebitzman]

++My point is that it isn't *probable* people in a state of shock and trauma would go anywhere near a blog that might be deeply upsetting to their values.++

I see nothing posted here by Shmarya that would so qualify.

[Rachel Batya]

++My point is that it isn't *probable* people in a state of shock and trauma would go anywhere near a blog that might be deeply upsetting to their values.++

--I see nothing posted here by Shmarya that would so qualify.--

Um, how about the way in which he somewhat, sort of, every now and then, sometimes, very occasionally paints the entire Orthodox world with a rather broad (and not very complimentary) brush? There are O commenters on this blog who object rather forcefully to that (and I am leaving out, for the purposes of this discussion, anyone whose last name is Rubashkin) while agreeing with him on substantive issues. Plus, there are lots and lots of other people who post here who say things that make *me* shudder, and compared to the family who just lost their child, I'm a very happy camper.

Anyway, it's the family's shiva week and as someone has already said, they're probably not looking over our shoulders either shuddering in horror or appreciating our sensitivity. Let's just include them in our healing prayers and move on.

[rebitzman]

++Um, how about the way in which he somewhat, sort of, every now and then, sometimes, very occasionally paints the entire Orthodox world with a rather broad (and not very complimentary) brush?++

I guess I've not seen that side. What I read is generally aimed at an individual or group based on facts or events.

++Let's just include them in our healing prayers and move on.++

Baruch Dyan HaEmet.

[EndingSuperstition]

to Rabbitsman et al:

it ain't just an nice innocent idiomatic expression.

a kid dies a horrible death and you praise what you feel is the supernatural agent responsible for said death.

lets now follow this logic:

you praise an entity who you believe kills children for some mystical purpose.

(right about now is when your cult reflex kicks in and your stomach gets that funny cult feeling).

now in english ...when someone prays to or praises a supernatural being that kills children we call that person a satanist.

and yes any religion that prays to and/or praises a supernatural being is a satanic cult BY DEFINITION.

there is no counterargument.

sorry if this clarity offends you.

[rebitzman]

++lets now follow this logic:++

Your logic - not ours.

If you actually read what was written - you'd know that you are in no way shape or form expressing what anyone has actually said on the issue.

++sorry if this clarity offends you.++

Idiots do not offend me - but please send your mother my sincere condolences.

[rebitzman]

++and yes any religion that prays to and/or praises a supernatural being is a satanic cult BY DEFINITION.++

Please provide the dictionary that so defines it.

You can't?

Didn't think so.

[MockingTheRabbitsman]

thanks for your response as this series of comments now makes a truly great example of bible fundamentialist evil.

and yes feel free to pray to the moloch of your choice...as you proudly say baruch moloch ha emet

anddddd...
since buy this crap
i have put a kabalah style curse on your 2nd neshamah via baal/azazel using derech ha Ruach.

this curse has been applied and you will develop symptoms soon (starts with a mild itch near ur left ear) and ur docs will merely call the symptoms and sequelae idiopathic.

[alternative childcare]

Dear mocking/ending-

Perhaps 15-year-olds shouldn't post to this group without their mommy's supervision.

[rebitzman]

++Perhaps 15-year-olds shouldn't post to this group without their mommy's supervision.++

I was thinking more like 13.

[reader]

Basically Al's and end-superstition's point is that they want Shmaryah to be a jerk in every way, not just report on corruption and newsworthy items in the Orthodox community. Ironically, this is what many of his other readers DON'T want. Many of us would love to see the criticism of corruption without being a heartless jerk in every way about all possible topics. Here is an example of that. And yet for Al and End-Super, the post is only suitable if it includes some ridiculing of the Satmar and Orthodox Jewish practice in addition to the news bite itself.

And these two jerks (Al and super bad) have the gall to accuse everyone ELSE of being fundamentalists...

[reader]

Just to clarify the above, I was not implying any of us enjoy seeing reports about corruption.... On the contrary, obviously.

What I was saying was that this blog would be better serving a purpose (whatever it may be) if it exposed corruption without so much broadstroke slander against all things Jewish/Orthodox... At least in my opinion. Al and Super would like it to be the 5th grade slam book.

[Yisrael Medad]

Tell me they are going to sue, yes?

[Al]

wow.. some of you are an interesting bunch. I made a simple point that I stand behind:

- "baruch Dayan Haemet" was not a comforting statement when made to me upion sitting shiva.
- I know many others who resent the quote.
- I was surprised to see such a quote here as I see it as "superstisious" and attributing an act to god that I and many others (yes, even Jewish folk) would not like attributed to god.

That was my point. The outrage from people like Rebetzman and the anger, namecalling and attempts at being insulting (don't worry, I am not that sensative), is kind of shocking ! I fail to see how objecting to this term is a "broadstroke slander against all things Jewish/Orthodox". That claim is rediculous.

None of my comments were directed at the family of the child who died such a horrible death. No where do I blame those who quote the term for his death and we all knopow that his family is not logged onto this blog. Claiming that my calling an archaic is offensive to them is rediculous. I know many Lubavitch and Satmar who have told me they live the life they live as a lifestyle and that intellectually they are not connected to it. YOU SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW what they beleive and they may be as offended by "Baruch Dayan HaEmet" as I am. Maybe in their minds, I am the defender. YOU KNOW NOTHING about what goes on in the minds of individuals.

Finally, your over-reaction to my statement (targeted at Scott or whomever wrote the title to the story) amazes me. Isn't the positioining of god in an inappropriate manner a kind of corruption ? Isn't is possible that if god does get angry he might be angry at those who would in anyway associate him with the death of a 5 year old ? I fail to see what is so slanderous about such statements. Instead I think that people like Rebitzman who are open to fight one kind of corruption (stealing, cheating, etc..) are not open to fight the corruption of the mind and the shakels put on thought by religion. And.. if any attemopt to get people to actually think about what they beleive is what is so offensive and slanderous.. then so be it. I will deal with the claims.

By the way.. I do like the way all those who claim to be so righteous like to throw the outright-insults (nasty words and the like) around. I guess when you have nothing rationale to say, that's what you fall back upon. Something god must be really proud of !

Let me say it one more time: My comment was to Scott much more than the family. My god, is not the kind of judge who would hurt a 5 yr old (and yes, I insist on attributing such midot to the jewish god - the only god). That should comfort not hurt a family. You do not know how they think. AND I think we all know they are not on this blog.

[Al]

One more for Maven: In your last post you said -

'Nietzsche's "God is Dead" thesis has little to do with the life or death of God per se (a rather meaningless assertion), but with the decreased meaningfulness of the concept of God in the life of the individual and society, as you say "stop attributing tragedy to god and stop worrying about what we think and how he will react to our thoughts." (He pointed to the emptiness of organized religion as God's "tombstone").
At any rate, its irrelevant to introduce God to this question where men are clearly to blame, and that is the crime from which we ought not be distracted, with or without harangues related to individual views on theodicy. '

I fail to see how "it is irrelevant to introduce god to this quesiton". The entire purpose of the opening quote "baruch Dayan..." is an attribution to god. Are you saying that its not ? then its meaningless ! If so, why the insistance that its ok to say ?

Clearly people are to blame.... and that is my point.. stop attributing everything to god... we must take responsibility when its our doing... and unfortunately deal with the reality that sometimes "Shit happens" and my god cries for us when it does.

[JewishCynic]

I disagree with Al's view of god but agree with the gist of his posts given his viewpoint (also includes end-super).

Al sees "baruch dayan" as implying god was responsible for the death of the child. Had it been a human who knowingly caused the childs death he would be condemded for such an evil act. So how can we worship a god (who after all is supposed to be loving and merciful) that would commit such an evil.

As I read it, Al sees god as having limited powers - god was not able to prevent the tragedy. As Al saw it, Shmarya was essentially accusing god of a heinous crime and Al (end super too)was surprised and outraged that Shmarya would do such a thing.

I don't see god that way. I think a person can believe god is all-powerful (and therefore all-responsible) yet still be a good loving god even when we see evil and tragedy.
It comes down to believing that we are not knowlegeble enough to know the reason's behind god's actions.

An analogy: If you see someone cutting open a child's stomach with a blade you might think it's a terrible crime. But if that person is a surgeon removing an inflamed appendix...

No, this is not the discussion to have with someone mourning the loss of a loved one.
Yes, it is an interesting and appropriate topic on this blog.

[Al]

Jewishcynic: thank you for being open to the point I am trying to make. By the way, I do not necessarily view god as limited in power. I just refuse to beleive he was involved an such an act as a judgement. The fact is, none of us really know the ways of the lord !

[maven]

Why do you think God is involved when a child falls out of a defective neglected elevator in public housing? Is this suddenly your trigger, not the death of thousands of children after a typhoon, not the daily murder of innocents in places all around the world, not the death of children every day in cancer centers? That's what seems so inappropriate about your comments. What, you just woke up out of a coma this morning to find that the world is a rough and cruel place?
And all of that centering upon an ilocutionary speech act (you say you "read philosophy" so you must know the work of Austin) whose job is not theological statement (the words involved don't mean that anyway), only to announce that the article will be about an unfortunate death? (ie, you are wrong about what the opening quote does.)
Furthermore, I think what most people are also saying here is that we exactly aren't trying to "fight the corruption of the mind and the shakels put on thought by religion" (sic) but rather we are here, as a faith/ethnic community who wish to put an end to abuses done by people claiming to be of the community but are actually exploiting or hurting the community. It actually has very little to do with God, theodicy, Yggdrasil, reincarnation, etc. If there is a criminal on my block, I want him gone regardless of my (or his...) spiritual inclinations.

[Al]

Maven: I just can not beleive that you do not hear me... I thought I was clear, but I will share the blame and assume that I may not have been clear enough. So will say it again.

I DO NOT THINK GOD IS INVOLVED IN THE DEATH OF THIS CHILD OR ANY OTHER CHILD THAT LIVES IN THIS CRUEL WORLD. THE STATEMENT BARUCH DAYAN HaEmet DOES HOWEVER IMPLY HIS DIRECT INVOLVEMENT. IT IS THE STATEMENT THAT I OBJECT TO !

It always seems to me that some people are unable to hear the point. Re-read my posts. None of them blame god. None of them show any anger at god.. just people whom continue to use a statement that is at a minimum easily misunderstood.

As far as YOUR decision not to fight the shackles of the mind. or not to see it that way... fine... you have that option, but I have an option as well and it seems others here do agree (albeit some do not).

Finally, Look at the tabs on this website.. there is one tab dedicated to the rabbinical denial of science. The guy who runs this site obviously does see fit to have the questions of basic traditional belief up for debate.. that is what he is doing by posting those articles. Is this not equivalent to shackling the mind based on dogma and ancient information that has become obsolete given what mankind has learned over the millennia ? is this website not pointing such rabbinical efforts out ?

[alternative childcare]

He heard you, can't you read:

And all of that centering upon an ilocutionary speech act (you say you "read philosophy" so you must know the work of Austin) whose job is not theological statement (the words involved don't mean that anyway), only to announce that the article will be about an unfortunate death? (ie, you are wrong about what the opening quote does.)

In short, Baruch Dayan Emet is a phrase meant to signal a piece about a death. The translation does not mean that God did anything, only that God is a true judge, suggesting to the believer that at the end of the day perhaps amends will be made, or perhaps that God too is upset by this outcome, etc. I think that's what Maven meant.
Your statement about rabbinical denials would be valid if a rabbi had made a statement that God did this and not the housing authority. Then we'd all be with you jumping up and down as usual around here :)

[Al]

come on Alternate.. don't tell me to read his comment I did and for clarity, here is what Maven said:

"Why do you think God is involved when a child falls out of a defective neglected elevator in public housing? Is this suddenly your trigger, not the death of thousands of children after a typhoon, not the daily murder of innocents in places all around the world, not the death of children every day in cancer centers?"

Now where did I say or imply that god did it and not the negligence of the housing authority. Show me my comment that confused the subject. I was careful in choosing words as I think we should all be in responding to someone's tragedy. that was my entire point. Furtheremore, again, I said that I found the phrase offensive as do many others (some people on this blog confirmed that they could see my point). Given the fact that on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur the siddur repeatedly recognizes god as a JUDGE.... and clearly says that GOD WILL DECIDE (judge) who shall die by fire, flood, etc...(its in davening, you know it is) I fail to see why you guys can't even hear my point. Why the utter insistance on denying what our tradition teaches ?

Are you goig to argue that the siddur is not really talking about judgement ? tat the death of individuals the day after Yom Kippur should not be viewed as god's choice ? his decision, his judgement ?

If this is the case, why is it so unreasonable to accept that us simple people can not perverse the words sufficiciently to come up with a nice spin on it ?

Sorry: If people want to say that god weeps with you as a mourner, let them say that - its clear and much, much nicer...

[rebitzman]

++Al sees "baruch dayan" as implying god was responsible for the death of the child.++

So.....his ignorance justifies his words?

[rebitzman]

++namecalling and attempts at being insulting++

I see - so you calling us "asses" should illicit no response? And if it did - WE are wrong?

Nice theology you got there.

[Al]

Rebitzman.. I did not call you an ass... read the posts, you keep doing what you do so well - misinterpreting or hiding from reality. What I said that numbers alone do not make a case, because "the masses are asses", I am sorry that you see yourself as part of the masses. But at some level I suspect that you do not see the masses as wise men.

Finally, when you are in shul on Yom kippur, read your prayer book. It is clear. God judges and decides who will live and who wil die. He decides how thjey will die... and you will pray (assuming you do) that Teshuva, teffilah and Tzadaka will over-turn the bad Gazera ! Is that not clear ? Did I mis-interpret ? Your inability to read, you lack of acknowledgment wrt what you pray ever year is simply beyond me. It is not me who is ignorant it is Y

[rebitzman]

++Rebitzman.. I did not call you an ass.++

Actually - you did. You just lumped me with the rest of the "masses".

++I am sorry that you see yourself as part of the masses. ++

As you were discussing those of us in context when you made the statement......

++It is clear. God judges and decides who will live and who wil die.++

The RamBam once said that those who limit themselves to the P'shat are fools.

[rebitzman]

++I am sorry that you see yourself as part of the masses. ++

I note you discovered yourself when I referenced the hole.

This one appears to be a draw.

[Al]

Rebetzman: No sense in continueing this discussion at all since you are intent on:
- Reading messages into my statements with some level artistic license in order to twist my point to suite you messages (common among people making a desperate arguement).
- Sticking to a position that I think is irraitonale and you insist that as per the Rambam who himself makes some interesting statents with regard to his right to define "what all jews must beleive" as if he has the inside track from god.

You, and the Rambam can beleive what you want.... but I still have the nerve and the right to beleive what I beleive -

Sorry but I am sticking to my guns. Official Jewish Theology is clear. Your attmepts and the Rambam's (if you are accuratly quoting him) are nice fuel for your arguement, but the words are clear and for me you are just trying to apply some perverse logic to deny their intent. YOU KNOW WHAT PEOPLE BELEIVE WHEN THEY PRAY THOSE WORDS ON YOM KIPPUR. You know what people are taught. In fac tthe Rambam's 12 article of his 13 articles of Jewish faith is "I believe with perfect faith tha G-d rewards those who keep His commandments, and punishes those who transgress Him."

Deny it all you like, but the Rambam's words are clear/ Oh.. he did not mean it ? anyone who takes him for what he says is a fool ? try that arguement on someone who does not know what the typical person is taught to beleive....But when you read the Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur prayers in a few weeks, inside I suspect you (but certainly others) will see my point.
I simply believe the universe is more complicated and that my god is better than the one described in those prayers. If that makes me a bad jew in your mind or even the Rambam's then that's fine..... as its between me and god. Happily YOU do not represent him.

End of discussion for me.. I have been around long enough to know when some individuals will never hear what's being said and will do everything to deny the fact in an effort to sustain their current path. Enjoy your beleif system and bask in your image of god. I hope it comforts you.

[alternative childcare]

Wow, someone who doesn't believe in divine providence. What a novel concept! You must feel very proud of yourself, to have been the first person to wake up and find themselves alone in a cold uncaring universe. Kind of like, um, Abraham- no wait...
So what do you do for comfort, and what do you bask in, since you are so militant about waking everyone up from their delusional slumber?
Tell us something we haven't already heard.

[Al]

Like I said Alternative ChildCare: There is no getting through to people who can not entertain anything but their blind (yes I know they are not blind) beleifs.

I was not awakening anyone (that's certainly obvios now). And keep stooping in your approach. Make no sensible point on the issue. Try to be insulting, throw your empty stones... that what you who know all, speak for the lord and are entitled to judge do so well. AND.. take your own advice.. Be proud. Your ignorance is your bliss. Keep on creating an entire set of made up stories and interpretation on interpretation, on interpretation that require huge leaps and blind faith to sustain them. And turn to people who continue in a stuggle to understand that began with people like Abraham (and probably before him) and will continue for tens of thousands of years to come. Individually, we may not be the first who thought of it, but at least we continue to strive.

Keep on throwing those stones.. and maybe with luck, you'll run int one of those other righteous people who worship based on a different set of assumptions and never want to quesiton them.... and maybe they will throw the stones at you ! If they do.. I will hold back on the "Baruch Dayan HaEmet !

[rebitzman]

++you insist that as per the Rambam who himself makes some interesting statents with regard to his right to define "what all jews must beleive" as if he has the inside track from god.++

Yeah - God forbid I should invoke Jewish sages in a discussion on religion.

++I have been around long enough to know when some individuals will never hear what's being said and will do everything to deny the fact in an effort to sustain their current path.++

Own a mirror do you?

Shabbat Shalom (unless, of course - you find that offensive as well)

[Al]

No shabbat is a great thing.. but not because god will punish me. I give you credit rebitzman.. you keep baiting me into a reponse.

Still you do not respond to anything by answering the question or resolving the issue, you just deflect it with an obnoxious remark or a joke like "Yeah - God forbid I should invoke Jewish sages in a discussion on religion.". Is that an answer ? you quoted the rambam and did not get a joke from me. You got a real response that demonstrated that your point was not so cut and dry. In fact, I think its good to quote the sages.. Didn't I quote Rambam to counter your quote ? I did not make a joke of him or you. The point is that Rambam re-inforces what I said.. and you have no repsonse other than to say "yeah.. god forbit I should..." that's not an answer, its just a way to avoid acknowledging my point.

Shabbat shalom and for the record, just because a sage said it, does not mean its really true. There are lots of errors in the gamora.. and no reference to so many of the beleifs you hold so dear in the Chumash...

Enjoy living in a state of denial.. and enjoy shabbat.