Pesach 2001 by Federation of Synagogues

J H G 0 f) 0 V N l

can study in Hendon for a Full Time University of London Honours Degree; may be able with sufficient Yeshiva or Sem Learning to complete in only 2 years; can in parallel enjoy a day or evening Men’s or Women’s Learning Programme; can still start in September 2001.

The Single Answer: Phone our Director, Dr Ian Rabinowitz, on 8203-6427 for an informal discussion on the BA in Jewish Studies and the BA in Jewish Studies with Jewish

Education or email ‘director@lsjs.ac.uk’ for literature.

Be the Wise Child, make the contact, and have a Happy Pesach! Schaller House, Albert Road, Hendon, London NW4 2SJ Enquiries 020 8203 6427 or e-mail enquiries@lsjs.ac.uk

/■'

f •.

•

Founded 1962 ISSN 0966-0291

Vol. 34 No. 2 Pesach 5761 -2001

CONTENTS Twenty Five years on for Dayan and Rebbetzin Lopian .............................4 Yeshurun News ................................................................................................. 5 Halachic Aspects of Cloning Chickens........................................................... 6 Can Ethics be Taught? ......................................................................................8 Shaare Zedek - The Hospital at the Centre of Jerusalem .......................... 9 The Federation: The Facts Conference 2001 ............................................. 10 Opening Remarks...........................................................................10 The Beis D in ....................................................................................10 Human Dilemmas...........................................................................11 Kashrus Department......................................................................13 Burial Society.................................................................................. 14 Student Chaplaincy........................................................................ 15 Schools J-Link.................................................................................16 The Present Structure of the Federation.....................................17 The Future role of the Federation................................................18 Open Forum.................................................................................... 19 Closing Remarks............................................................................. 19 Leyning at Bevis M arks.................................................................................. 20 Sale of Chometz (Form ).................................................................................. 22 Personal............................................................................................................. 23

EDITOR REQUIRED Please contact Mr Gordon Coleman at head office on 020 8202 2263

Published by the Federation of Synagogues, 65 Watford Way, London, NW4 3AQ. Advertising: Roberta Rubinstein COVER: The Federation: The Facts Conference 2001

i I

^rA

Twenty Five Years on Dayan and Rebbetzin Lopian yeshurun M arks 2 5 Years of D ayan and Rebbetzin Lopian habbos, Parshas Zochor, (3 March 2001) saw Dayan and Mrs Gershon Lopian’s 25th Anniversary with Yeshurun. A special shabbos for members was topped off with tributes, a kiddush and presentation to the Dayan. Dayan Y Y Lichtenstein, Rosh Beis Din of the Federation of Synagogues commented in his sermon how the Dayan was appreciated throughout the Toroh world for his expertise, and was sure he was similarly appreciated in his congregation. He noted how the Dayan's Rebbe, Rav Moshe Feinstein (obm) himself thought highly of his pupil - a sign of the Dayan’s nascent eminence. Dayan Lopian himself thanked the community for the “privilege” offered to him o f serving Yeshurun for the last 25 years and felt humbled at the number of people who had attended for this special Shabbos service. Yeshurun Life President, Chover Leon Topol, also rem inisced on the D ayan’s achievements reminding people how much work he had done behind the scenes (see block). He presented the Dayan with a set of books written by Rav Moshe Feinstein. There was a kiddush after the service to commemorate the occasion. Twenty Five Years..... On 24 September 1975, Rabbi and Mrs Lopian were invited to meet members of the Yeshurun Board of Management and representatives o f various shul committees. Reported in the minutes from 2 October 75, the Chairman stated that the selection committee and Board of Management had voted unanimously to appoint Rabbi Lopian Rov of the Kehilloh. The m atter was put to an extraordinary general meeting and the community endorsed the appointment. And on Shabbos Parshas Zochor, 13 March 76, Rabbi Lopian preached his

V .'

ftfX v v

- G frrn u flL .

•

v.. >£r * :• Sjfcrf

y. v& ■ Ar’ o *- & • k

. .y X

Dayan Lopian first sermon as Rov of the Kehilloh. Dayan Lopian was born into an aristocratic family in the Toroh world. Having studied in various Yeshivos and Kollelim in various parts of the world and learned at the feet of the late Goan Rabbi Moshe Feinstein ztl , the Rov is blessed with a great and brilliant mind and phenomenal knowledge of Shas and Halochoh (Jewish Law). His advice is sought from all parts of the globe, including for his clarity. Those who have worked closely with the Rov know only too well the work he does behind the scenes without fanfare. In good times and in bad, he has always been ready to support the community. Some of us will especially remember his commitment to Russian Jewry; during the

darker days he did as much as humanly possible to relieve them from their plight. During one trip to Russia, he married a young couple in a small room and never passed the chance to give Shiurim to an eager audience. The important Mitzvos which the Dayan especially adheres to are Koved Habriyos (respect for one’s fellow man); Hakoras Hatov (recognition for kindness); Koved Hatoroh (respect for Toroh authority) and Emunas Chachomim (faith and trust in Toroh sages). There is a vort (explanation) by the Rov’s Zeide (grandfather), Hagoan Reb Elya Lopian on the words of the Shema prayer: “You should teach them diligently”, Reb Elya quotes from the Gemoroh Kiddushin page 30b. “Let the words of the Toroh be ready in your mouth, so that if asked, one is obliged to learn 99 deeply with understanding.’ It can be said this way of the Rov, in the way he prepares his Shiurim with great care, getting to the core o f his subject following his Zeide’s dictum. This is borne out by the numbers who attend his weekly Shiurim; but above all, those who go to his W ednesday night Kollel (advanced lessons) come from far and wide, regardless of the weather. The Dayan’s success over the past twenty five years is due in no small measure to his Rebbetzin. Judy Lopian is literally Ezer Kenegdo, a helpmate. She is modest and entirely devoted to her husband, children and the community, quietly helping the Rov. Their home has an open door and their hospitality has no bounds. We wish them both many years of good health and naches from their children and grandchildren. May the future years be as happy as the past twenty five. Chover Leon Topol

t .

, ■{ t i£r;\

Other Yes hum n News from Russell Grossman BA’s HARRY GUNN HITS EDGWARE AGAIN! nei Akiva’s Edgware “Shabbat Ha’irgun” 2001 was as usual a great success. On Friday night, in a packed Yeshurun shul hall, 194 loud and screaming Edgware BA’nicks and friends came together for a Shabbos meal. As the food flowed so did the Ruach (religious spirit), and despite the immense heat a great time was had by all. After this came Onegs where visiting BA Bogrim (students) entertained the children of Edgware with loads of Shabbos games, all carrying a special Shabbos message. Weary oneggers made their way home in the dark late hours, walked home by the various Madrichim. Bnei Akiva reconvened the next day for a BA-style davenning session. BA would like to thank on behalf of the Yeshurun Congregation all those who davenned and layaned for making Shabbos morning a very special and inspirational service. Yeshurun Rov, Dayan Gershon Lopian, used his sermon to praise the Toroh atmosphere which BA madrichim were providing, as well as commenting on the “home grown tomatoes” who led the synagogue service.

After shul, Poroshas Hashovuoh (explanation of the weekly Toroh portion) and Kiddush were a great way to lead up to yet another, if slightly youngerattended Shabbos meal. This too was great fun, and for all of those who have never been to BA camp before, it gave them a small taste of what camp meals are like every day. Shabbos afternoon saw some outstanding meetings, where games and discussions took place around the weekly theme ofTu Bishvat (it having just been the New Year for Trees the previous Thursday). This was a chance for everyone to play all their favourite games from throughout the year, whilst also learning a bit. The “tochniot” (activities) on Motzei Shabbos and Sunday were a chance for all the chanichim (members) to let their hair down, and were also a great cause of enjoyment. Bnei Akivah meets most Shabbos afternoons between 3.30pm and 5.30pm for school years 2 - 9 . Check Yeshurun’s website (www.yeshurun.org) for any latest changes.

v y*>

* jr z

Y es Iiurun P eo p I e at H o LoCAUST SERViCE eshurun wardens Simon Lewis and Graham Davies, together with Dr W ilfred Littlestone, represented Yeshurun at Harrow Council’s Holocaust Memorial Service held on Motzei Shabbos, 27th January. Dr Littlestone was a medical officer in Belsen for over two years after liberation and experienced the aftermath first hand. Over three hundred people attended the service in Harrow’s council chamber where a plaque containing a quotation from Anne Frank was unveiled by Mayor, Anne Turgel. The two Harrow MPs, Gareth Thomas and Tony McNulty, also spoke.

Yeshurun Melaveh Malkoh - a great success ver a hundred people attended Y eshurun’s annual Melaveh Malkoh on February 17th. Guest speaker was Rabbi Shmuel Miller of the Jewish Educational Trust. Rev Michael Simon sang, accompanied by Kinneret, and Mrs Helen Olivestone distributed raffle prizes. Special mention should go to erstwhile President, Steven Brown, who stepped in to make presentations to Rabbi Miller and Rev Simon. Nearly £400 was raised for charitable funds.

• *

▼^

jam t ,

W Wmm **. n B

* 0

‘

Mishnayos Learning Starts Again lollowing the success of previous years, a number o f men in the whole Edgware community are again joining forces to learn Mishnayos (part of the Oral Law). The learning will culminate in a Siyyum (festive meal to celebrate completion of the learning) in May. As previously, the project is a joint one between all the orthodox synagogues in Edgware. Any men not yet learning but who would like to do so, should please contact Philip Baigel (8958 7111).

Halachic A spects of Cloning Chickens by Dayan Y Y Lichtenstein, R osh B eth D in ecent advances in transgenic technology specifically in avian (birds) have made headlines worldwide with various ethical and moral issues being hotly debated. Much work has been done on the cloning of chickens with research aimed primarily to produce protein drugs to fight cancer. Ostensibly, the goal is to create a chicken which will produce eggs containing new drugs. But in a policy statement by one of the world’s leading research laboratories in genetically m odified chickens “Avigenics" of Athens, Georgia USA another goal has been mentioned which can result in halachic considerations for the kosher consumer. In a statement entitled “Technical Overview" Avigenics describes itself as a bio-technology company focused on applying avian transgenics for the improvement of agronomic traits in com m ercial poultry. The enhanced agronomic traits would improve muscle development and increase resistance to certain poultry diseases. As the technology involved is based on combining DNA from other species, a halachic question arises. Is the new bird considered the same species? Is it still kosher? Or is the fact that DNA of another species has been introduced change the kosher status of the chicken? I have been reliably informed by Dr Helen Sang of the Roslin Institute, one of the world’s leading experts in avian transgenic technology, (and incidentally the creator of the famous “Dolly”) that at this point in time no new transgenic chickens have been introduced on the commercial market. But is there any need to keep a vigil? Let us examine the halachic problems that may arise. The Torah discusses the species of permitted and forbidden birds in two places - Vayikra Ch.l 1, posuk 1 3 - 2 0 and in Devarim Ch.14, posuk 11. With regard to animals, the Torah tells us which animals are kosher, ie. those have a cloven hoof and chew the cud. But no identifying characteristic is mentioned to distinguish which bird is kosher. The Torah just says

in Devarim 14.11, every tohor (fit bird) you may eat. It then enumerates 24 species which are not kosher. The inference is that every bird which is not one of the 24 is kosher. The Mishnah in Masechet Chulin, p.59 sums this up and says that the distinguishing kosher characteristics o f an anim al are mentioned in the Torah while those of birds are not. However, our Sages taught us that every predatory bird is tamay (non-kosher) while every bird that has an extra finger (toe), a crop and whose claw peels easily is kosher. The Mishnah continues, Reb Elazar ben Zadok adds that every bird that splits its claws (while sitting on a string, ie. two fingers in front and two at the back) is non-kosher. (This is considered an identifying characteristic for a predatory bird because that is how they grasp their prey). The Gemarah concludes on page 62b “Amemar said that the halachah is that any bird that has any single o f the three identifying characteristics is kosher providing that we know that it is not predatory”. In another place in Chulin, p.63b. Rabbi Yitzchak says “if there is a tradition that a particular bird was considered kosher, it may be eaten". The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh D o ’eh Ch.82 rules that if there is a tradition that a bird has always been considered as a kosher bird, it may be eaten even if the bird does not possess any o f the above m entioned distinguishing characteristics. The reasoning behind this is simply as we are not completely sure which are the 24 birds the Torah considers non-kosher, as long as there is a tradition that this particular bird is kosher, that is sufficient. The Rema com m ents on the above statement of the Shulchan Aruch that today we rely only on tradition and unless there is an unbroken tradition that a certain species of bird is kosher, we may not eat it. Thus, normative halachah and specifically Ashkenazic communities who follow the Rema, birds cannot be eaten unless we have an unbroken tradition of its suitability. Halachic literature is replete with responsa over the

centuries discussing and determining the kosher status of this or that bird and to determine whether there was a tradition or not. Guinea fowl, pheasant, peacocks, quails and even turkey were the subject o f many responsa and in some communities they were not eaten and in some communities they were. However, the domestic chicken (gallus domesticus) has a very long tradition of being kosher and although various strains o f the domestic chicken have developed, they all have been considered as kosher. It is important to note that there is one chicken that the Gemarah refers to as “tarngola d e ’agma" which literally can be translated as “a chicken of the marshland that was considered non-kosher because, as Rashi in Chulin p.62 says, “we have observed that it is a predatory bird. As the particular genus of the species it is important to establish the kosher status of a bird. But a question arises. What is the status o f a hybrid? Specifically, the poskim ask what is the status of a hybrid bird, ie. a bird that has mixed parentage - one kosher and one non-kosher parent? Although generally a kosher and non-kosher animal will not naturally breed together and bear live offspring, where there is “active intervention" and especially in birds, they will breed and lay eggs that will eventually hatch. Where the hen is nonkosher it is readily understood that the egg and chick will be non-kosher. However, is the halachic status of the chicks where the male is non-kosher is not as clear cut. The Avnei Nezer, one of the leading 19th century halachists, has a long responsa confirming the non-kosher status of the progeny of any hybrid. Our question however is, does the insertion of DNA from a non-kosher species into the DNA of a kosher species qualify for the status of a hybrid or is a hybrid only forbidden where it has been done in the normal cross-fertilisation process? Two schools o f thought have developed among current halachists. One lead by the world known halachic authority, Rabbi Moshe Stembuch, shlita.

Ifeshurun examining extension to relieve the crush aving successfully completed last year’s project to re-roof the building and provide a new ceiling for the main prayer hall, Yeshurun has now lodged outline plans with Barnet Council for a side extension. A key benefit from such an extension will be to relieve the unseemly crush which now occurs at the end of the service on nearly every Shabbos and YomTov as people fight to retrieve coats and create a path to the outside. Large Simchos are getting especially difficult. Capital costs will be met from Yeshurun’s own funds. Detailed proposals are contingent on Yeshurun receiving outline planning permission and will almost certainly come to a meeting of the full membership, possibly the May AGM, if the timing is right. Potential benefits from the project are a new dedicated cloakroom for both men and women; an entrance hall more

befitting a prominent place of worship; more congregating area inside, rather than outside the building and more room upstairs. How the upstairs rooms might be arranged is to be decided but is likely to be a focus for plans brought to a general

one of the Dayanim of Eida Hachareidis in Jerusalem, in an unpublished teshuva claims that Chazal gave clear distinguishing characteristics to determine what is a kosher bird and what is not, ie. it must be predatory, it splits its claws in a specific manner, it does not have one of the three kosher signs such as the extra toe. Therefore, concludes Rabbi Stembuch, if a DNA change results in a bird with a non-characteristic of a non-kosher bird then it will become tamay, otherwise it remains the same kosher chicken that it was. To this date none of the laboratories have reported that as a result of their work one of the nonkosher signs have been noticed. Therefore, concludes Rabbi Stembuch, he does not see any halachic problems. (However, a shochet from Rishon Le Zion, Israel, Rabbi Chizkiyohu Cohen, has reported that he has come across chickens that split their claws in the forbidden manner.) The other school of thought headed by Rabbi Y Y Fisher, the Rosh Beth Din of

the Eida Hachareidis of Jerusalem, differs with Rabbi Stembuch. He refers to the reasoning behind the prohibition against hybrids and points to the halachic principle of zeh v ’zeh gorem which means that when two causative factors create a new entity, if one is permissible and one is not as the Ran in Masechet Avodah Zoroh explains, we view it as a classic case of taaruvos - a mixture - no different then when kosher and treif mix together and the issue o f halachic nullification, bitul, is used. Therefore, according to the halachah, zeh v ’zeh gorem is permissible and the rules of halachic nullification apply and we say that the forbidden factor is nullified. Yet, if in the new entity one can distinguish any vestige of the original factor that had made it forbidden, then it is forbidden. As the Sdei Chemed (19th century halachic encyclopaedia) points out that all the rules of nullification do not apply when the part of the original forbidden item is still recognisable. In the case of a hybrid, if there is any identifying

meeting. It could include a proper function hall and refurbished kitchen. No cost figure is yet being put on the project, but the Board of Management is thought to be considering an investment upwards of £60,000.

The Rav, the Honorary Officers and the Board of M anagement of the

YESHURUN SYNAGOGUE EDGWARE

extend their best wishes for a happy and kosher Pesach to the members of the Beth Din and the Honorary Officers, Executive and all the members of the Federation of Synagogues

characteristic of the forbidden “parent” is recognisable, then it becomes forbidden. Not only if it has one of the forbidden distinguishing characteristics such as the claws that split evently, but any characteristic that can identify it as being the result of the forbidden parent is enough to forbid it. Therefore, Rabbi Fisher concludes, in cases of genetic m odification, there is usually some obvious characteristic that points to the forbidden parent, whether it be a specific muscle development, etc. and is obvious that it comes from a non-kosher source. Rabbi Fisher’s conclusion is to forbid the products of genetic modification. It is possible that with all the bad publicity that genetic modification has encountered in the past several years, this issue may not be germane for a while. But progress cannot be halted and in line with this progress, the halachists of today must monitor the results of all this new technology to ensure that the kashrus of our “sim ple” chickens rem ains unharmed.

Can Ethics be Taught? by Z a ra N ew m an

work associate in a prominent position for a large organisation, once casually mentioned to me that he was employing a school leaver. Whilst chatting I asked him how this person would be expected to familiarise himself with the ethics of the corporation, To which he responded: “Oh! He’ll just know. Rather like youngsters know you shouldn’t steal.” But a new survey commissioned by the Jewish Association for Business Ethics (JABE) actually indicates that youngsters

do not know these things. Almost 34,000 students were asked questions aimed at providing an insight into the moral views of our youth. The statistics are quite shocking. For instance, one in thirteen see nothing wrong with shoplifting, one in four would travel without a ticket and almost half have no problem with underage drinking. These attitudes are ample evidence that ethics in general, in particular business ethics, needs to be taught to adequately prepare teenagers for their business life.

Advertising asti Snacks have brought out a “N ew B igger” packet o f ready salted crisps. A lthough the bag is bigger, the consum er is still getting, the sam e amount o f crisps as previously. 1. Is this prom otion accurate? If not does it matter?

An Ethical Perspective "Keep away from anything false" (Exodus 23:7) Guiding Principles •

A nything even approaching falsehood is m orally corrupt.

•

D eception includes language that is m anipulative.

•

Moral behaviour dem ands full disclosure so that rational decisions can be made.

•

Som e ethical frameworks do not recognise the concept o f caveat emptor (i.e. let the buyer beware), preferring to focus on the duties o f the seller (i.e. let the seller beware).

The Jewish Association for Business Ethics hopes that a generation of students studying the “Money & Morals” Curriculum will result in young adults who really know why “honesty is the best policy”. In addition to JABE’s education initiatives, they hold regular seminars for Business and the Professions and product publications promoting ethical awareness. Please contact us to be put on the mailing list Tel: 020 8200 8007 e. mail: info@jabe.org internet: www.jabe.org

Indeed, the survey clearly shows that students with a religious affiliation seem to be more aware of moral dilemmas. It used to be that values were learnt in the home or at school, where principles gleaned from the Torah, the set of values upon which much of western society operates, were promoted. However, in today’s ‘me’ culture, it is necessary to re think and re-define how we communicate moral and spiritual education to teenagers. Parents and teachers are seriously concerned about the moral vacuum in which youngsters today are growing up. Even the Government has declared that there should be “...a cultural, moral and spiritual renaissance”. But, with the burgeoning abilities that teachers need in terms of paper management and national curriculum requirements, any educational resource that can be used by teachers to re-inforce the ethical message to students are very much welcomed. One such initiative is the Jewish Association for Business Ethics’ new “Money & Morals” curriculum, the first business ethics course for students in the UK. This curriculum for mainstream schools was launched at a prestigious reception in the House of Commons at the end of March. The keynote speakers were The Rt Hon. David Blunkett MP, the Secretary of State for Education, and The Chief Rabbi, Professor Jonathan Sacks. It is an exciting and challenging 20 lesson programme that encourages lively debate through case studies. Topics covered include: • Advertising • Bribery • Competition • Social Responsibility • The Truth, The Whole Truth? • The World of Work. The Jewish Association for Business Ethics hopes that a generation of students studying the “Money & M orals" Curriculum will result in young adults who really know why “honesty is the best policy”. Below is a small example from the Advertising Module in the curriculum.

}y {

SHAARE ZEDEK - THE HOSPITAL AT THE CENTRE OF JERUSALEM

haare Zedek’s history dates back to 1873. Jerusalem at the time was a backward, disease-ridden city and its 10,000 residents were mostly old and poor. Christian missionary organisations set up several hospitals, the primary goal of which was to convert Jews who were desperate for medical care. Against this background, a group of German and Dutch Jews living in Jerusalem travelled to Europe in 1873 and established a committee in Frankfurt to raise funds for a Jewish hospital in Jerusalem. The hospital was to be called Shaare Zedek - Gates of Righteousness - and from the very beginning its gates were to be open to all, regardless of race or religion. In 1892 the committee sent Dr. Moshe Wallach to Jerusalem to establish a free outpatient clinic and pharmacy in Jerusalem’s Old City. Two years later, despite many objections from the Turkish administration, the committee purchased land for a hospital on Jaffa Street, two miles (a 20 minute donkey ride) from the Old City. In 1902 residents of Jerusalem celebrated as Shaare Zedek opened the doors of its new building with Dr. Wallach at its head. This event put in place a key element in the infrastructure of the future Jewish state’s capital city. With 60 patient beds, and 20 births a month, the hospital quickly became an important part of Jerusalem life. Indeed, the British accepted Turkish surrender in the gardens of Shaare Zedek, over a cup of tea, of course!

The hospital’s facilities may sound primitive to modem ears - oil lighting in the wards, more expensive gas lighting in the operating theatres, donkey-cart ambulances but they were highly progressive for the time. In fact, the hospital’s emphasis on treating the whole person, not just the disease he or she presents, is a concept finally taking hold in the medical world today. During the War of Independence, Shaare Zedek played a key role as the capital’s only surgical hospital, receiving 60 to 80 casualties a day. The same scene was repeated during the Six-Day War in 1967 as the hospital treated hundreds of wounded, including Jordanian prisoners. Shaare Zedek was so close to the action that it took three direct hits but, miraculously, no one was hurt. Again, in 1973 Shaare Zedek transformed itself into a military hospital, moving furniture in order to increase its bed capacity by 50 per cent. The hospital proudly opened its new 500 bed Mount Herzl facility in 1979 and, since then, has become renowned for its national centres of excellence. The Comprehensive Heart Centre and the Woman and Infant Centre, for example, both of which occupy entire floors of the hospital, are unique in Israel. The departm ent of emergency medicine includes an integral chem ical and decontamination unit and, because of this, Shaare Zedek was the only Jerusalem hospital placed on full alert for the intake of victims of chemical warfare during the 1991 Gulf War.

Israel defence force drill at Shaare Zedeks decontamination and chemical warfare unit, which is part o f the Emergency Department

A young patient enjoying the Purim festivities at the Hospital As Jerusalem ’s population has expanded westwards, Shaare Zedek has become the most centrally located hospital in the city. This geographical change, combined with the fact that so many people choose to be treated at Shaare Zedek, means that its emergency room can no longer adequately cope with the 6,000 patients who turn to the hospital for help each month. During the recent period, over and above the usual heavy winter workload, the hospital has also treated many of those wounded in acts of terrorism perpetrated in Jerusalem, most of which do not receive coverage in the British press. Shaare Zedek receives no government funding for new equipment, development or research. Yet, with the help of its ‘family’ around the world, the hospital has now prioritised the expansion and refurbishment of its emergency room. The new department will provide a stateof-the-art emergency response facility for all the citizens of Jerusalem and it is anticipated that work will commence by the end of this year. We all hope and pray that, despite the many wars and acts of terrorism which Shaare Zedek has, by necessity, been associated, the hospital's new ER will only have routine emergencies to deal with in the years ahead. Shaare Zedek’s British Council wishes all members of the Shaare Zedek ‘family’ of supporters and friends a peaceful Chag kasher v’sameach.

THE FEDERATION : THE FACTS CONFERENCE n Sunday 11 February 2001 a very successful conference was held in which a wide crosssection of delegates from both Constituent and Affiliated shuls attended at Head Office. Some 200 people including Rabbonim, Board Members, Secretaries, and Ladies Guild Honorary Officers attended. The audience was addressed by a top quality panel of speakers, drawn from the Be is Din, the Honorary Officers, Head Office, and informal educators. The conference was designed to disseminate knowledge about the Federation, the work of the Beis Din and Head Office Departments, as well as the work of informal educators supported by the Federation. It also dealt with the present structure and future role of the Federation and ended with an open forum. Opening Remarks The conference Chairman, Mr Arnold Cohen, President of the Federation of Synagogues, welcomed the delegates. He said that when the conference was first suggested the Honorary Officers were very enthusiastic, but he suspected that individually they had different ideas, objectives, and goals in terms of what the conference could or should achieve. He said that all the delegates were active and valuable members of their local shuls and were also needed as the nucleus of the Federation. He added that whilst it was true that we have a Council, which meets regularly and on which all shuls are represented, there is a limit to the number of delegates each shul can have and therefore many people do not have the opportunity to learn about the Federation. This conference would provide an opportunity for them to hear and understand the work, the responsibilities, and the activities of the Federation. Mr. Cohen said that “in common with most segments of Anglo-Jewry we have the form, we have the organisation, but we must also have the substance, we must have you, the people”.

200 1

Turning to the Agenda, Mr. Cohen said he did not really have to introduce Dayan Lichtenstein, the Rosh Beis Din of the Federation. He said that each of the Dayanim had his own area of responsibility, but that the Beis Din worked together as a team and Dayan Lichtenstein was the Captain of a premier league Beis Din, which had done much to develop the prestige of the Federation.

The Beis Din Dayan Y Y Lichtenstein Dayan L ichtenstein opened his remarks by saying that it was not only a privilege and honour, but was actually a pleasure to address the conference. Instead of having to reach the Federation public via the Jewish press he would prefer to speak to them in person and tell them firsthand about the activities of the Beis Din. Dayan Lichtenstein began with a D var Torah. He thought it opportune that Mr. Gordon Coleman, who was the father of the conference, had picked that day as the date of the conference. This was because the coming weeks sedra (Yisro) discusses the establishment of the first Beis Din, Moshe Rabbenu’s Beis Din, and the criticism of that Beis Din by Moshe Rabbenu's father-in-law, Yisro, and the corrective measures that Moshe Rabbenu then took. Yisro, came to visit and saw his sonin-law sitting as the Dayan for all of Klal Yisrael who were waiting in a very long queue to be judged by Moshe Rabbenu. Yisro observing this long queue in the desert and was disturbed, not at thejustice that Moshe Rabbenu was dispensing, but by the lack of Derech Eretz for the community in making them all wait for hours in such conditions. Yisro did not mince his words in telling Moshe Rabbenu that it was not right. Moshe Rabbenu accepted this criticism and turned to Yisro to suggest a way forward, who suggested a court system with superior and lower courts. Moshe

Rabbenu ultimately took his father-inlaw’s advice, resulting in justice being adm inistered in a kinder and more respectful manner. Dayan Lichtenstein, examining why Moshe Rabbenu seemingly did not realise this himself, referred to an explanation from R Yerucham Levovitz z t ”l the mashgiach of the Mirrer Yeshiva, in pre war Poland, who said that it showed that Yisro had the power o f “bikoret" (criticism). He said that it takes a certain type of personality, like Yisro, capable of analysis and with the intellectual honesty to speak out when something is wrong. Dayan Lichtenstein said that, in a sense, this is true o f all o f us who sometimes need someone to point out when we are doing something wrong even a Moshe Rabbenu. But, he said, there was a further point. Yisro instructed Moshe Rabbenu “Vehodata La hem Es Haderech ” you shall teach them the way in which they shall walk. The Chofetz Chaim says that he was referring to the Derech of Avraham Avinu who was noted for his Gemilus Chasadim and kind deeds. The Davanim should be involved in taking care of the Chevra Kadisha, the Bikkur Cholim, which are not the usual occupations expected of Dayanim. The instruction that Yisro gave to Moshe Rabbenu was that the Davanim that work on the Beis Din, according to Torah, should adm inister the Halacha with Middos Tovos, good character traits. Dayan Lichtenstein said that, of course, they run their Beis Din according to Halacha without any compromises to the actual Din. But ju st as Y isro’s criticism was welcomed and acted on by Moshe Rabbenu they too have never been averse to criticism. Turning to how the Beis Din works, Dayan Lichtenstein said that normally, say in Israel or America, a Beis Din was primarily involved with adjudicating financial disputes, or arranging Gittin, and little else. However, in this country and other places in Europe, the Botei Din are involved in the complete spectrum of

Jewish law. He found this personally fascinating because it gave him an opportunity to work in all areas of Jewish law, whether it is Shechita or Kashrus, whether it is dealing with halavoas hameis, taharas hameis, and with various types of halochos. He said that they are also involved in dealing with the individual shuls on all matters of halocho. However, there was one point where our Beis Din differs from other Botei Din in that they try to give more independence to the shuls. Whilst, technically speaking, their Beis Din was above the various shuls, their attitude was that each shul should have its own competent Rav. The Rav should be able to paskin a halocho in his own right. However there are complicated dinim , complicated halochos, and if he needed help or needed a source, then he should feel free to contact the Beis Din who would be happy to help, support and advise him. Essentially though they do not seek to control the Rabbonim but to facilitate the Rabbonim to enable them to paskin shailos on their own. The Federation is particular to make sure that their Rabbonim are talmidei chachomim, are scholars and imyetzer Hashem he would like that we continue along this path. They service many balabatim from all other synagogual organisations as well as people from the provinces. They never really ask for shul membership when somebody applies for a Get or a Din Torah. Sometimes in a Din Torah there are times when the Beis Din does have to give an injunction or act as intermediary, but under normal circumstances a Get will take precedence over a Din Torah. In addition they occasionally do conversions which is one of the knottiest problems facing Anglo-Jewry - not Agunos - conversions. The reason is that the standards that the Botei Din require in this country are very high. He was not commenting on whether these standards should be upheld or not. Personally he preferred higher standards, but it is a fact that the standards in England are the most severe in the world. This works both ways. It has the advantage that you have fewer cases of conversions going sour, because we are so particular, but the down side of being so machmir, (severe) on the candidates is that it can occasionally make the whole conversion process appear as a parody. Suffice to say that the situation in this country is not completely satisfactory, as there is still not really a

comprehensive or clear standard how conversions are done. Concurrent with the question of conversion, is also question of family status. Specifically dealing with cases of mamzerus which are a very, very difficult question, there had been a television programme on the previous Monday. The Federation Beis Din has probably done more to help the cause of mamzerim than any other Beis Din in Europe, but the whole question of personal status, not only mamzerus, is a very, very difficult issue in establishing Jewish identity. Additionally, the Federation is involved in marriage authorisations. A high degree of the marriage authorisations that they get come with a shaila attached which has to be taken care of and which places them under tremendous pressure for the young couple who want to get married, and want to get married ‘yesterday’, The Dayanim may seem, in the view of the couple, to be ‘dragging their feet’ and they have no idea of how much work the Dayanim are doing behind the scenes to try and enable them to marry. Very often the Dayanim are unable to talk to them very much, during that process, because on the one hand you do not want to give them false hopes, because you do not know how things will end, but equally you do not want to discourage them. What can happen, very often, is that if they become discouraged they may, run off to a reform wedding when they could have married under orthodox auspices. So many cases come to the Beis Din where children of people, who married in reform, did not have to and then they have to undertake a whole investigation, as to why they married reform. Dayan Lichtenstein said that in terms of Shechita, which has quite a bit of public profile, he was the one who was mostly involved, on a daily basis, on behalf of our Beis Din. He said mostly because the way it works, is that all the Dayanim participate in all the activities of the Beis Din, but each of them has their own focus. The standard today of Kashrus in the Board of Shechita is the highest it has ever been. Lastly, concerning dealings with our shuls and even though, as he had said their goal has always been to try to facilitate the shuls and the Rabbonim to paskin shailos on their own there are, nevertheless, certain shailos that the Beis Din must deal with, because they are

central to the ethos of the Federation. He mentioned the ethos of the Federation, because one of the questions that they would be dealing with that day - a very fundamental question - was what is the purpose of the Federation keeping its own identity as a separate organisation. The Federation stands for strict Orthodoxy without any compromises. Whilst we are very keenly aware that we are living in the 21st century, and realise we have to deal with all social and contemporary issues, we will not compromise halocho. Our Beis Din is not legislative and cannot change the halocho, only administer it. Dayan Lichtenstein said they are not prepared to “re-interpref ’ it, because that is just a code name for changing it, in order to fit in with social mores but they are prepared to administer the halocho in a way that is suitable in the 21st century. One of the issues that has come up occasionally is the question of women’s participation on shul boards, and in the past there has been a difference in procedure between ourselves and others. Elsewhere in order to allow women to serve on Synagogue boards all types of stratagem s were devised to induce women into believing they had power when really they did not. The end result was that women were not happy and kept pushing to obtain one concession after another, to a point where they do not know where they are up to today. Dayan Lichtenstein concluded by saying that they are not prepared to start changing the halocho because of this pressure or that pressure. If they were to do so, eventually we would lose our whole sense of Orthodoxy. Mr Arnold Cohen introduced Dayan Berkovits saying that he certainly has a high profile. He is a world-renowned authority on the subject on which he was about to speak and much respected not only in the world of halocho, but also in English legal circles. Indeed, Dayan Berkovits had been immortalised in the Family Division of the High Court by a case, which bears his name Berkovits -vThe Attorney General. Human Dilemmas Dayan B Berkovits Dayan Berkovits thanked Mr. Cohen for his words of introduction and then gave an outline of the sort of things they Continued overleaf

Conference 2001

continued

do in the area of Gittin, agunot, and mamzerut. He said there was a need to consider what constitutes and how one describes a kehila - an organisation. A kehila consists essentially of individuals and people. Dayan Berkovits referred to the comments of Rashi, on the current week’s sedra, in which he said k ’ish echad b lev aehad, which means that although there are thousands o f different individuals, they work together for a common cause. He said that when we are talking about organisations we are talking about individuals, some with problems because there are so many different types of people, with their own personality and own lifestyle. And, of course, we talk about relationships and as soon as we enter the area of relationships we enter an area fraught with possible problems. One of the services that the Federation provides is, of course, Gittin. Dayan Berkovits explained that as the concept of Gittin exists in the Torah, the Torah, therefore, allows for divorce and one of the things that should be bourne in mind, which is not stressed enough when people outside the orthodox community attack the halachic system, is that in a sense, Yiddishkeit halocho is the most “liberal” of all religious systems. Therefore w hilst halocho does not encourage divorce, it is recognised that the reality of human life is such that not all marriages succeed and therefore the Torah allows for divorce and provides for it and, indeed, allows people to re-marry after divorce. He said that they are not trained marriage guidance counsellors and they do not normally get involved in trying to reconcile the parties, unless they feel that there is a reasonable chance of saving the marriage, or unless they feel that the circumstances are very unusual. Normally they aim to provide a service and the service is essentially to enable people to end their marriage alpi halocho - to get a speedy, efficient, and sensitive divorce. The Honorary Officers had always supported the policy of the Beis Din, which is that Gittin are not a money making exercise, and for that reason we charge the minimum. People come to the Federation from the entire spectrum of the com m unity and are generally impressed by the way it is done, the ceremony and the therapeutic value of coming to terms with the end of their

marriage. People from the Chasidic community come to us, we have Reform and Liberal people who come to us, some even sent by the Reform ministry in cases where their members need to have a halachic divorce. Having a Beis Din that provides Gittin enhances the reputation of the Federation, partially as a result of the contacts that are generated throughout the world. They deal with the Botei Din of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Haifa, Beer Sheva, and Eilat and all over America, and sometimes deal with Gittin with the London Beis Din. Dayan Lichtenstein has arranged an emergency Get in Rumania whilst Dayan Elzas takes care of Gittin in Berlin. Dayan Berkovits said he had been appointed to deal with Gittin in Scandinavia and had also recently been to Zurich. Dayan Berkovits said that contrary to what is commonly thought, he would say that about 90% of Gittin go through very smoothly. They can be effected within a matter of a month or less following the application. The average divorce takes about 7 months. It is not true that there are masses of women out there who are being discriminated against, and who are suffering. There are such cases of course, as in any legal system. The Rambam said that although the Torah is a Divine system, by definition it has to have rules. Every legal system has rules and if you have a rule, by definition there are cases, which might fall outside the rule. You cannot constantly change the rules and even if you could you would have problems. Therefore the Rambam says, especially, that the Torah seeks to do the maximum possible, for the maximum number of people, but there are individual cases of hardship. The reason why, to Dayan Berkovits mind, there had been such a negative campaign on the question of Gittin is a combination of reasons. It is actually a winning cause as everyone, of course, feels sorry for the wife who is stuck and cannot re-marry. He works quite closely and is very friendly with the leaders of the agunah campaign. There are also men who are ‘trapped’. Dayan Berkovits analysed how the position arises. He said it arises because in any scenario you can have one of two possible philosophies. You can either say that essentially anybody who wants out from the marriage can get out, which is what western society says, believing in self fulfilment and happiness. That is essentially the model chosen by English

law. Or you can make it a little bit more difficult and you can say that there has to be agreement between the parties. Each model has strengths and weaknesses. The strength of the halachic system is that the parties have to come to grips with the end of their marriage, face up to what has happened and come to terms with it. It is not the case that they usually use financial blackmail. What does happen is that there are negotiations over the finances. It is a fact of life, that when it comes to divorce the cake is usually not big enough to divide into parts. So a lot of the furore over the halachic system is based on a misunderstanding and a misconception. The English model is fine from the point of view of getting your freedom, but has catastrophic consequences in terms of the effect on the other partner and the children. He had often pointed out that if you were to allow the wife her freedom to get a divorce at will and if it was possible to somehow reform or re interpret halocho, then any woman who wants a Get could obtain one. However, that would give the husband the same freedom so he could divorce his wife against her will. Halocho does not accept that premise. One of the questions is at what stage a person can actually be called an agunah. Experience had taught him that in if there is a problem in a Get situation it is usually simply a psychological issue of coming to terms with the end of the marriage. The only way one can really achieve things in Gittin is to understand what is going on a specific basis and put in a lot of effort and boruch Hashem, they had been successful in very many cases by doing that. He wanted to say a few words about the pre nuptial agreement (PNA) in relation to agunah and how the Federation has been involved. Without going into too much detail, the idea of the PNA is that husband and wife enter into a contract when they get married that when the marriage breaks down they will co-operate in giving a Get. Personally, he felt that that piece o f paper was essentially useless because if the couple are reasonable they do not need that piece of paper and if at the time of divorce they are angry and bitter with one another the piece of paper will not help. The PNA was launched in this country for whatever reason and without any consultation with the Federation Beis Din. Essentially the original PNA as drafted

was a catastrophe. The fact that ultimately it was accepted and does have some grounding, in the sense of educating people of the need for a Get, was due entirely to input by our Beis Din, who made suggestions as to how it could be modified so it would be acceptable. He presumed everyone was aware of the famous nidui case, this is the case where they imposed a ban, sanctions against a recalcitrant husband in which Dayan Berkovits was intimately involved from the very beginning. Unfortunately it was badly handled and it did not work in the sense of getting that particular husband to give his wife a Get, essentially because of lack of co operation from certain other communities. However, the nidui had a very powerful impact in terms of showing that there are things, which can be done against a recalcitrant husband by the Beis Din in halocho. As far as Get legislation is concerned, there are certain countries such as South Africa and other countries where legislation has been passed which essentially means that if a marriage breaks down, by law the husband who refuses his wife a Get cannot obtain a civil divorce. The drawing up of such legislation is very difficult because it has to fit in with secular law and also with halachic principles that you cannot coerce the husband to give a Get. The South African Law Commission wrote a detailed memorandum to which he had contributed certain guidelines. There is an attempt in Scotland to do the same thing, and again they have been asked their opinion. There was also a Bill four years ago, the Public Family Law Act and the Get clause of that bill, commonly known as the Jakobovits amendment, was actually drafted by Dayan Berkovits and Lord Meston. It has not yet come into force basically because the Chancellor decided to scrap the law. However, there are moves afoot, at the moment, to have it passed as a separate Bill. This would mean that if it is passed, and it had a second reading recently, that there would be a statute in the laws of England which essentially owes its success to their input which protects the rights of women or attempts to give them an extra tool to obtain their freedom. Dayan Berkovits said that some of the delegates may remember the White House case. He did not want to go into great detail over that case, but again they received adverse publicity. Essentially the

issue was one in which the Federation again, having good relationships with all communities, were in the middle. There the issue was not as portrayed, one of a recalcitrant husband who would not give his wife a Get. In the High Court the judge said this was not a question of agunah at all and there was no question of a wife being denied a Get. The sole issue was one of jurisdiction as to which Beis Din should control the Get. There was a dispute between two other Botei Din - The United Synagogue and the Sephardim and the Judge said, there is a simple solution, let them have an ad hoc Beis Din consisting of some members from the Federation Beis Din, to sit with some people from the Sephardi and United Synagogue. Unfortunately, the issue was again manipulated in the press and we were made to appear as the bad guys, when in essence we were merely attempting to sort out a problem created by others. We have a lot of behind the scenes work, which never gets known and often cannot be known. We had one Get case which one day will be written up, where the wife was a true agunah in the classic sense - the husband having disappeared off the face of the earth. Eventually after much effort Dayan Berkovits was able to trace the husband to an address in America. With the help of a local Beis Din who waited for the husband and obtained his agreement to granting the Get for his wife. Dayan Berkovits mention mamzerut. The way in which one can help people who have the stigma of mamzerut attached to them is by looking for ways in which halocho can free them. That requires a trem endous amount of research. Recently he had been involved in two cases where after a process of about 18 months they managed to find a heter. It was based on establishing circumstances in 1938 or 1940 as to exactly what happened and who was married to whom. Because of the nature of those things, which are very sensitive, and cannot be publicised there is a certain international dimension. This is because when one wishes to free people of their status of mamzerut, almost invariably one likes to get approval by leading authorities. In these cases he wrote out the findings and send a t ’shuva to three top halachic authorities in Israel, all of whom very remarkably took the trouble to write back with their own lengthy

t ’shuvot and agreed to the heter. Dayan Berkovits said that Dinei Torah fall essentially into the area of financial disputes, commercial law, in which our Beis Din plays a leading part. They are approached by way of arbitration and they operate under the Arbitration Act, which means that the English Courts support all their decisions. He said that, again, we won immortality several years ago when a disgruntled litigant refused to pay our costs and fought the system right the way through to the High Court and Court of Appeal. The litigant, who somehow or other managed to get Legal Aid, when he was contesting it in the Court of Appeal, said that this was the first time in Jewish history that a religious body has gone to Court to claim its fees. The Judge said he took that as a tribute to the excellence of the judgements of the Botei Din. We deal with a whole range of possible issues, employment disputes, contractual disputes, partnerships, inheritance, questions of commission agent. On one or two occasions they have had to consider issues of European law, even how to interpret Directives that have not been, as far as he was aware dealt with in the civil courts. Novel halachic concepts such as the status of a trustee in halocho. Very often communal disputes from other towns come to them from M anchester, the provinces or even London because we are outside their community and are impartial. He said that they are the only Beis Din, he thought probably in the world, who issue reasoned decisions in English, which means that when they give a decision, the decision is written up with the history and the argum ents spelt out including the applications of English law which often overlap. Mr Arnold Cohen introduced Dayan Elzas saying that on the whole he is the Dayan who has taken responsibility for kashrus on our behalf. Kashrus Department Dayan M D Elzas The raison d ’etre o f the Kashrus Department, why have a certificate, who issues it, domestic market, international market, some of the problems generally encountered. Dayan Elzas said he would like to discuss kosher certification, whether the Continued overleaf

Conference 2001

continued

Federation should be involved in it and maintain its own kashrus department and w hether kosher food and kosher certification was too expensive. He said that kashrus, these days, is an issue that people have all sorts of funny ideas about. They ask whether the Rabbis have gone crazy, if they suggest that all kinds of things are necessary, or sometimes the other way around, that they do not take adequate care. Dayan Elzas said that Kosher certification has taken off over the last 10 - 20 years; in this country also. Historically, there were actually two types of foods that Jews could eat, either something that was fully supervised, which means that there is a mashgiach (supervisor) there from beginning to end or by way of approved foods. There were lists available, as today, and the lists had foods that were approved. These foods were approved, basically by one system. - a letter being sent to the factory in which they were asked certain questions. It is a cheap and relatively quick system but it is unreliable at trying to find out whether a product is kosher, by just writing a letter to the factory, goes wrong in 99% of the cases. For example, they had correspondence with a factory that was manufacturing hard-boiled sweets. In the subsequent visit and as it is normally very sticky Dayan Elzas asked them what they were using as an anti-stick agent and when they told him he pointed out, from the correspondence, that it was not on the list. They agreed, but said that they had been asked for ingredients and that was not an ingredient and did not go into the product. Dayan Elzas pointed out that he had also asked for processing aids. W ithout visiting the factory, no-one would ever have known. As it happened, it proved to be kosher, but that was not the point. He said that the other problem of a list is that things change very quickly. Ingredients can change which can be to do with price. New technology, new hygiene rules, or environmental issues can cause com panies to change ingredients. Again ju st by correspondence nobody would know about this. So therefore the world has moved on and a better system of kosher certification was put into place, initially in America and then in Europe.

He said that there were actually 3 or 4 stages to kosher certification. There was the initial research where they would ask a company all about their ingredients, the ingredients used on the same production line, any other product used in the factory or manufactured in the factory and ask for a brief description of the production process. The second stage is for the factory to be inspected and the third stage is a contract that we have with the factory. The fourth stage is for inspection visits to take place once the contract has been signed. In the initial factory visit the Rabbi has to try to find if there is anything that has not been disclosed before. 95-98% of factories are trying to be truthful but a lot of people do not know what is going on. So you go into the stock room and see if there is anything there that you have not seen earlier. A contract is then signed which states which products are going to be certified and what the approved ingredients are and that they are not allowed to introduce any new ingredients without notifying us and receiving our permission and that we have the right any time for an inspection visit. Dayan Elzas said that he was afraid to say it does not guarantee anything although it helps a lot. The system of kosher certification is a lot better than just having approved lists. First of all the kashrus authorities, build up expertise which they would never have without it. For example a while ago he spoke to a factory that was using a sorbet, which in those days could only be produced from anim al sources. He received a letter from this company stating that all their ingredients were vegetable based. He queried it and they checked it out and found that it was animal based. They wondered how he knew. He explained that as he was dealing with such things day in, day out, he was meant to know what it is. It also has advantages for local licensees. For example they had recently produced for one of the butchers a spice which is kosher I'Pesach, using the information on their database. It also makes sure that they know what changes are going on. Changes are happening all the time. For example BSE has been the best thing for kashrus. He knew the Shechita Board would not agree with that, but as far as ingredients are concerned, it has done a fantastic job. It has put animal based ingredients in such a bad light that

most people just do not want to use them anymore. But it can also work the other way round. Lecithin, which is a soyabased product generally, has a problem and sometimes now factories change lecithin for glycerine which can be treif whereas lecitin is generally kosher. Sometimes people ask if it’s necessary for the Federation to have a kashrus department and is there any duplication with other authorities. The answer is no. There is exchange of certain information, but no duplication o f work. If we investigate one ingredient, they will investigate another ingredient. Prices are kept down because of competition. If the factory has a choice between two kashrus authorities and one charges less than the other, then they will take the one who charges less. Therefore it is a good thing that there are separate kashrus authorities. Someone asked about Rakusen’s. Dayan Elzas answered that the Federation are producing matzos in Israel which are mehadrin min hamehadrin which are very kosher w ithout any doubt whatsoever and I would advise anyone to buy them. They will shortly be available. Mr Arnold Cohen introduced Mr. Moshe Leib Stuart saying the department within the Federation that has undergone the most changes in recent years was the Burial Society. A Burial Society is an inevitable activity of any kehila and is the department which has to deal with the members at their rawest and at their weakest and unhappiest moments. The department has to have sensitivity of course al pi halocho and a lot of effort has gone into the Burial Society to change it. Mr. Cohen said he was very happy that one of the people who first put effort into the Burial Society, Ralph Joseph, was present. He had been Treasurer when Mr. Cohen became President. Burial Society Mr Moshe Leib Stuart Mr Moshe Leib Stuart detailed the history of the Federation, commencing with its formation in 1887, followed by the establishment of Edmonton Cemetery some three years later. He then gave indications as to the average age of death and numbers of funerals carried out on an annual basis. He named some of the ‘Gedolim ’ who are buried there and detailed the vandalism that had occurred

as well as the programme of refurbishment that was being carried out. Mr. Stuart then referred to Rainham cemetery, which had been acquired by the Federation in the mid 1930s. Work had been carried out recently on replacement windows in the prayer hall and on the office block. In 1998 a site for a new cemetery was acquired off the Uxbridge Road at Northwood. The Honorary Officers felt that this would be more accessible to where many of our members now live. Planning permission is awaited. Mr. Stuart then detailed the general arrangements on the occurrence of a death, office hours, arrangements for stonesettings and staffing. He praised the work of the voluntary members of the Chevra kadisha and Dayan Lichtenstein, Rosh Beis Din, who gives fortnightly ‘shiurim’ to the mens Chevra in Stamford Hill and several times a year to the ladies. Mr Arnold Cohen introduced Rabbi Y Y Rubinstein saying that we run a number of chedorim in London, but apart from that we are involved in other outside institutions and organisations concerned with Jewish education. The first one is the North West England University Chaplaincy and if one asks why we got involved in the North West England Chaplaincy the answer is that the North West has the largest proportion of Jewish students from London. He said he was delighted that the Chaplain, Rabbi Y Y Rubinstein, had come down from Manchester, and thanked him for making the trip. Student Chaplaincy Rabbi Y Y Rubinstein Rabbi Rubinstein said that as they had already heard, it seems a strange paradox that the Federation is supporting the chaplaincy in M anchester. But Manchester or rather the North West of England has the highest Jewish student population in the country, which is between 2,500 and 3,000 Jewish students. 95% are from London and of course a very high percentage are Federation people themselves. So it is a strange paradox that based in Manchester he is effectively another London chaplain. He said that a very high proportion of his work is directed simply towards London projects. He speaks at least twice a year in JFS to approach students, or young people, before they ever get near

university to demonstrate that although a Rabbi he is nevertheless a normal and very approachable person. It is essential that they realise that chaplaincy is available and there to help them. He said that had it not been for the Federation there would be no national chaplaincy, not just his chaplaincy. Indeed it was just a few years ago that the national chaplaincy was in such terrible financial straits that they appealed for other sources of finance. When he appealed to the Federation they immediately realising the important role and stepped in, alleviating the financial burden from the national chaplaincy. He said that all 6,000 Jewish students are in a very real sense are supported by your organisation. Rabbi Rubinstein posed the question “how healthy is Anglo Jewish youth”. He said that before talking of the bad side he would tell the good side. Jewish students, especially young London Jewish people, are just as good, just as high quality as they always have been. It is just that we live in times and in a society where the dynamics can easily take even a special young Jewish person and rob them of their Jewish identity, their feel for being Jewish and indeed take them into avenues or down roads that could easily get them into very hot water indeed. The first one is, of course, drugs. He said that the incident of regular drug use amongst Jewish students at university today is between 85-90%. It was an appalling statistic and it usually started at school, not at university. Some pupils, even at a very young age, find it difficult to withstand the peer pressure to take drugs. People do not appreciate the damage it does and the way in which it impairs and impedes their lives. Interm arriage is another major problem. In this country 50% marry and ‘wave goodbye’ to who and what we are, and of those 50%, 85% are male. The Federation’s view, shared by him is that one Jew lost is a tragedy. If it were the case that in losing every second Jew we were left with a smaller nucleus of more committed Jews; one might find some comfort. But it is not happening. 85% marry out being male, means that what we are left with an imbalance and so you will find Jewish women, being far more loyal to the Jewish people, simply not having Jewish men to marry because they have married out. He said that apathy was a third major problem and the worst. When he

commenced, as a Chaplain in Manchester, which was 12 years ago, if the Jewish Society put on a Holocaust Memorial Commemoration event you would be guaranteed maximum Jewish student participation. Between 400/500 Jews would have participated. Four years ago, the number of people who turned out for that Yom Hashanah event, at Hillel House, were 30. Last year, 22 (22 from 3,000). Even that which is always held as being the cine qua none, the thing that surely unites all Jews, but not any more. The truth of the matter is that if a Jewish student is Jewish by accident, then he or she will stay Jewish by accident. So the question of making sure they know why they are Jewish has to be made enjoyable and fun and one has to try to educate them in any m issing bits. Whether there are missing bits because they had no Jewish education or whether they saw Jewish education as being negative and boring and what they had to do when they were young and, perhaps, forced to go to cheder, you have to bring to life for them. He tries to do that as much as possible. Rabbi Rubinstein said that because of the way some students live and the sort of continental holidays they enjoy one cannot really offer them just luke warm chicken soup and a Hillel House to keep them Jewish. He said that thanks in great part to the support the Federation gives him, in a few weeks time he is taking 50 students for 4 days for £50 each to Spain and Gibraltar. The Easyjet fare is £70 from Liverpool to Malaga so he is subsidising the ticket by £20 and in conjunction with the G ibraltarian community, which he is very friendly with, offering them a 4 day package, for £50, to keep them Jewish. He added that if you take Jewish kids abroad, getting on a plane enables closer friendships to be made. He can attach himself to them and they to him, far more effectively, when he takes them abroad and spends a weekend with them, than if you spend two years just meeting them on a weekly basis in Manchester. It costs a bit of money, it takes more effort, but at the end of the day we are trying to reverse the most awful trend of 85 - 90% drug use and apathy and intermarriage and all the rest. Judaism has to be fun. When they have finished university and they send them back to London he Continued overleaf

l fL

L —%

Conference 2 0 0 1

continued

has got to be able to send them back to organisations that know that, that feel all those values and will want to keep the momentum going. That is why, even if he lost somebody who gets a grant from the Federation and therefore a member of the family, and very proudly so, he would want to come and speak at the conference just in case they did not know this. He said that the role o f the Federation, in his honest opinion, is absolutely crucial to Anglo Jewry. A different perspective, a different way of looking at things and an absolute commitment to that which has kept us a Jewish people alive for the last three and a half thousand years. That is the work in Manchester for your London Jewish kids. I try to make it as successful as possible and I am only able to do so with your help. Thank you very much. Mr Arnold Cohen said that ideally we would like to see all our Jewish children going to Jewish schools. However there are Jewish children in non-Jewish schools. They do come to the chedorim, but the cheder system is by no means perfect, and we cannot leave them out. Those children must be catered for, and for that we have Rabbi Forta of Schools J-Link who would report on his activities. Schools J-Link Rabbi Forta Rabbi Forta said that before he told them what J-Link does, he wanted to tell them why it is. He said there were two things he wanted to tell them about the Jewish community in this country. One it is very small, two it is shrinking. There are something like 42,000 maybe 43,000 Jewish kids of school age across the UK, which is an incredibly small number. Sadly on the most recent figures he had we are losing 11.8 Jews every day. What do you do? How do you stem the haemorrhage of assimilation. With the youth the question is where do you find them? Go to shul, they are not there, go to a youth club they are not there either. Go to an irreligious youth club they are not there either. There is only one place where they are, and that is in the schools. They have to be there and J-Link works in the non-Jewish school system, running an enormous range of activities geared to build and nurture these kids’ Jewish

identity. Now, they are working with kids aged 11 to 18 in London, St Albans, Westcliff, Amersham, Berkhamstead, Brighton and Bristol, meeting something like 6,000 Jewish teenagers in the course of a year, whether once a fortnight, once a week, twice a week, or 3 or 4 times a week. What they are doing with them he would say falls under four broad headings. First of all there are formal activities like school assembly. Assembly, whether it’s a main school assembly or a Jewish assembly, is a very powerful way of communicating a short sharp idea in a short time. You have 10, 15 or 20 minutes at the most and you are up there on the stage and you have to say something which is going to have an impact on those kids. Then there are Jewish assemblies which allow opportunities to talk about a Jewish topic to Jewish kids in a Jewish setting. There are classes too. Every school has religious studies which is mandatory. They are offered speakers who can talk about something authentic. He said that it was amazing the kind of mis-information the kids are being given in school by teachers who are not Jewish, even from textbooks, and with the best of intentions. Rabbi Forta then moved on to informal activities. Informal activities include such activities as Jewish Society meetings and Jewish clubs which they have in certain schools which further the cause of Judaism as being fun. Arguably the most successful and certainly the most popular activity they have in the informal setting is what they call “watch and learn”. At one time he was trying to get shiurim going in the schools. Kids have an hour at lunch-time and asking them to come to a shiur did not work. One might in a school with 400 Jewish boys get four coming to a shiur. The key, they had found, was food. He took a Jewish assembly at a Public school where the parents were paying in excess of £7,000 a year in fees so he was not talking about kids from destitute homes. It was a week or so before Shavuos and he took a box of cheesecake for the boys, who fell on the cheesecake as if there was a famine starting. He said you cannot separate Judaism from food so they instituted “lunch and learn” sessions where they provide a kosher lunch and the kids come and learn. They now have, every week, 150 kids across the schools, sitting and learning, some with a sefer, some having

a discussion. Every fortnight there are another 150 kids. In the course of a month from 23 schools they have 480 kids sitting down learning. Some of these kids are among the most alienated and disaffected kids in the country. They have seen amazing things happening with some assimilated children initially making small decisions but nevertheless as part of a major step towards keeping mitzvot. He said that they also have the totally non-formal such as parties and succas. They build succas in the schools we have parties there. Parties on chomishe asar h shvat, parties on Chanukah, parties on Purim. This last year Chanukah was very late, after the school term had ended, but the previous Chanukah we had parties all over London and at 100 parties Jewish kids consumed 2,065 doughnuts. They also run out of school activities where they can get closer to these kids. They run an annual inter-schools London Jewish Quiz where they get about 120 6th form ers every year at the Wingate Football Stadium. However, the most important thing they have started is a Friday Night Experience. They hold them in a private home for some 25 or 30 kids. They provide the food and the plastic cutlery, plates and so on, and have Friday night dinner with zemiros, with divrei Torah and then a discussion. These kids want to discuss the most amazing and contentious things. Rabbi Forta said that what they are into all the time is packaging Judaism. He said that how you package it would make the difference between people coming or not. Last November they ran their first visit to Aushwitz. They took 18 6th formers to Aushwitz. On the way there it was noisy, lively, bubbly. On the way back total silence. He said that before they left some of the boys joined with another group to stand and daven ma 'ariv by the crematoria. The boys told them later that they had a tremendous feeling of deep netzach Tisroel, the eternity of the Jewish community. Here they were standing on this site where sixty years ago if a group of Jews wanted to daven ma 'ariv it could not happen. They were standing there, davened ma 'ariv and then they could walk away from it. That and other experiences had totally re-orientated members of that group. Rabbi Forta said that he had been asked when he came what success they had had. He said Schools J-Link is changing people’s lives. Of the 6,000 or

so kids we are meeting in the course of a school year, there are many for whom we are not going to see an immediate change. They were planting the seeds. What would happen in 5 years or 10 years time they did not know. They were planting seeds, building identity, encouraging these kids to think about their Jewishness in a way perhaps they had not thought of it before. They were encouraging these kids in the importance of being Jewish and in identifying as a Jew later on in marrying a Jewish partner, being part of a community, raising their own children as Jews. There were signs that they were actually and actively moving on. There were some where they had encouraged to change their choice of university. Where they were intending going they would have spent three years and not see a Jewish face, probably ending up in a relationship with a non-Jew. They had managed to get kids to change their choices and go to Manchester or Leeds, where there was a very large Jewish community, there is a Hillel, there is a chaplaincy and there are Jewish things that are happening there. There are some that they encourage to go further such as to a programme in Eretz Yisroel. There are others who we get to take their gap year in Israel in some cases at a yeshiva or seminary. And boruch Hashem, we are getting kids to re-think their choices. Because they are active in all these fields they are aware that some parents choose a Jewish primary school but opt for a nonJewish secondary school because they believe the academic standard is higher. Whether it is or not is irrelevant to the point he was making which is that there are parents who select the secondary school on the basis of where J-Link is active, because they know their kids will get some Jewish input. In conclusion Rabbi Forta extended words of hakoros hatov, of thanks, of gratitude, to the Federation, because they support us. He said that they receive a significant grant from the Federation without which they would not be able to do the things that they do. So a yeshakoach to the Federation for their input, which was giving them the tools to help these kids remain Jewish.

Mr Arnold Cohen thanked Rabbi Forta and said that the Federation was delighted to support his work. He then introduced

the next session, dealing with the present structure of the Federation and inviting his colleague, Vice President, Mr Jonathan Winegarten to address the delegates. The Present Structure of the Federation Chief Master Jonathan Winegarten Mr. Winegarten said that he had been invited to speak about the present structure of the Federation. He said that in our present context we are talking about those one or two people in every kehila who work tirelessly for that kehila. We all know that particularly in smaller communities, but also sometimes in larger ones, much of the credit for the continued well being of a shul is a attributable to the selfless dedication of a very small band of people. He said that on the mercifully rare occasions when a shul has had to close, for lack of viability, the arrangements have been made with the utmost sensitivity and in full partnership with the leaders of the shul in question. More than that, he was proud to say that the present Honorary Officers have always left the decision as to whether a kehila is viable to the local community itself. Head Office may notice, with sadness, that a kehila looks as if it is dwindling but they had always thought it correct to let the kehila itself approach them when the end had come, because they, the people actually involved, knew for sure what the situation was, and whether or not that kehila still has a raison dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;etre. He said that was an important point because if it applies in the microcosm in respect of individual shuls, it applies also in the macrocosm in respect of the continued existence of the Federation itself. Outsiders are not the best people to judge the viability and the suggestion that the Federation merge with another orthodox organisation was a legitimate question but if he was to speak about the present, he must speak about our raison dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;etre, the reason for our being. Dealing with this point he said that at the outset we have and have always had extremely had extremely cordial relations with all orthodox communal bodies. With the non-orthodox, we prefer if possible, to have little contact and certainly none on any religious matters. So far as the Board of Deputies is concerned. Some people think that the Federation is not part of the Board. That is not correct. Most of our shuls send delegates who are active

participants in their deliberations. What is true is that the Head Office has sometimes not sent delegates, not as a matter of principle but simply because of lack of available manpower and lack of time. Some had been delegates in the past and done their stint and it was felt that the Federation is well and more than adequately represented by our local delegates. Referring to the Conjoint Board, which authorises matzos for Pesach, Mr. Winegarten said it was infinitely sad that our Dayanim were put in a position where the only honourable course was for them to withdraw. For years they had sought to put in place procedures to make the matzos not just kosher b 'di eved, but machuda. Why not - itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s an important mitzvah. Why not strive for a higher standard. A standard with which the Dayanim as consumers themselves could be happy. To be asked to put their name to a hechsher which is not to their complete satisfaction is wrong. The question that should be asked is not why the Federation withdrew, but why the standards were not raised. That brought him to a third communal body, the London Board for Shechita. That was a success story. Here the kashrus is under the Botei Din of the United Synagogue, the Federation and the Sephardim. Here the chidurim suggested by the Dayanim are indeed agreed and put into place. With Jews College, now the London School for Jewish Studies, we m aintain good relations, also with the visitation committee, which organises hospital visits and also looks after the needs of Jewish prisoners. Referring to suggestions that perhaps we should have merged for economic reasons he said that he did not believe that economies would result. Head Office staff of a combined body would increase, to relieve the extra burden of adm inistration. Larger Head Office premises would have to be acquired. Each shul would need the same compliment of Rabbis, Chazonim , secretaries and caretakers to serve its members. He said that to merge shuls would not he believe be acceptable because a successful shul has a unique ethos and atmosphere engendered by its Ra\\ Chazan and its m em bership. No shul is quite like another. The attempt to fuse together people who have not in the past found it Continued overleaf

Conference 2 0 0 1

continued

congenial to daven with each other is unlikely to succeed. Such a kehila would soon disband. That is particularly so if the religious ambience of the two shuls is different and here he thought it fair to say that as a broad generalisation, there is a distinction between the different synagogual bodies. This goes back to the roots of the Federation in the East End, at the end of the 19th century. Heimish, in many senses of the word, all of them good. Homely, as in friendly, homely as in traditional, homely as in small, non cathedral and finally, homely as in not overly formal. It would be a shame and in his view, entirely unnecessary to lose all this by a merger of the smaller into the larger and in any event competition is healthy. Mr. Winegarten said that he wished to end by talking just a little bit more about not being overly formal. That was characteristic of the Federation both at local and at Head Office level. He said that the lack of rigid formality is what makes working within this organisation such a pleasant experience. The written constitution of the Federation lays down details of the relationship between local shuls, constituent, affiliate and the Head Office. Briefly all shuls provide delegates to the Council of the Federation. The delegates com prise president and treasurer of each shul and certain additional numbers, depending upon the size of membership of the particular shul. The Council then chooses the Honorary Officers of the Federation, the president, vice presidents, two treasurers and two treasurers of the Burial Society. They agree am ongst them selves what portfolios they take, one being responsible for chedorim, another for property, another for publications and so on. 1 he Honorary Officers are given the task of the day to day policy decisions. They are answerable to Council. The Honorary Officers meet on average once a fortnight and are in touch with each other in between. The Council meets about four times a year. The daily administration is in the hands of the Chief Executive under whose aegis come the various departm ents, the Accounts Department, Burial Society Department, the Kashrus Department. The chedorim are under the supervision of the Director of Education, and of course all religious

aspects of these departments, are the province, of course, of the Beis Din, whose Torah ethos permeates the whole organisation. Mr. Winegarten said that it had often seemed to him that a relaxing rule can be seen at work here in the Federation. Many of our shuls run successfully and happily on this basis, everyone being content to let things progress without the scrupulous adherence to form ality and the dry legalism of a written constitution. This informality also informs the discussions at Council Meetings. He believed this distinguished us from many other organisations and it happened precisely because we are relatively small and get on well with one another. He said that they, the H onorary Officers, appreciate that each local shul has its own concerns and needs and are pleased when the local Honorary Officers bring them to their attention and ask for their help. They will always listen sympathetically and help when they can. For their part, the local shuls know that the Honorary Officers have to have an eye also to the competing needs of different shuls and have to decide how best to allocate resources bearing in mind not only the duties to existing communities but also the desire to create new communities in the future. He had painted a picture of the present structure of the Federation, its relationship with other bodies, its relationship within its various constituent bodies, which is that o f a happy organisation. He had done so not only because it was true, but for another reason also. He wanted to encourage those who are already leaders to work for the good of the community, and continue their work so that they may thrive and urge others to come forward with them as leaders in order that we may all take the Federation into a secure and successful future, I ’shem tiferes Yisroel. Mr Arnold Cohen said that we now come to the future of the Federation, and introduced Mr. Alan Finlay to tell us what the future is and the way to go in the 21st century:The Future Role of the Federation Mr. Alan Finlay Mr Finlay said that for the last session, regretfully, we leave the world of Torah, halocho and Jewish education and plunge into the uncertain concepts of image,

perception, feelings, and Public Relations. He asked “what does the Federation mean to you” and said that it means stories, songs, sweets and a Kiddush to the 50 or so toddlers who come every Shahhos to the Yeshurun to d d ler’s service. To the 60 or so teenagers at the youth service, a degree of autonomy and an opportunity to refine prayer skills. To the ladies guild volunteer cutting pickled cucumbers for Kiddush an opportunity to serve. To all members an opportunity to practice and progress in Yiddishkeit. To those visiting Edmonton and Rainham a Burial Society. That was at synagogual level. The Federation means something very different to a claimant before our Beis Din. To the Ilford women visiting the M ikveh, to the Munich food m anufacturer negotiating a Kashrus licence. To the elderly East End resident visiting regularly by Reverend Gingold. To the non-Federation member who comes every week to hear a brilliant Gemorra shiur. Each has a very different image of the Federation. Unfortunately, whilst this is great in communal terms, it is a problem in marketing terms. Did that matter? By 1997 the Federation was on a stronger financial footing and it was appropriate to ask - what now? To ensure continuity any communal body must attract new members, normally younger members who will then subsidise the older members. Head Office funds which have been built up from the well established shuls are used to fund new communities, which once established are able to replenish the funds for re-use. That is the tried and tested method of building up a synagogual organisation and had worked until then for the Federation. The question was w hether this would still be appropriate in the future. A debate was initiated by the setting up of a Future SubCommittee under his chairmanship, consisting of constituent and affiliated members over a wide age range. This sub committee, in 1997, had examined the then status quo and then produced a paper, having considered various options. They determined that there should be an active policy to attract new members. Whilst there was scope to expand m em bership o f existing synagogues, called organic growth, this was not considered sufficient to ensure the future viability of the Federation. To develop, would mean establishing new

Federation communities and the following points became relevant:- Are there new areas into which the Federation could expand where there are at present no religious orthodox Jews. Is it a form of healthy competition or a waste of scarce communal resources to consider opening in areas which would compete with existing orthodox institutions. Do we have a particularly unique identity, which sets us apart from other orthodox institutions and would make it attractive to non-members to join us. It was agreed that the Federation had a distinct identity, which would be lost to Anglo Jewry if we were say to merge with any other organisation. So the SubCommittee examined whether this unique identity could be used for development and be attractive to non-members, discussing what that image might be. In terms of orthodoxy, the Federation had a particular place and it had a strong Beis Din with dynamic Dayanim and took the lead in observance of Kashrus. Also, Federation shuls are relatively small. They are friendly, they are welcoming and people do not feel overawed in a large building. The recommendation of the sub committee was that active steps be taken by the Federation to develop into new areas and there were several proposals made. The Honorary Officers endorsed that view and a report went to Federation Council in March 1998, where it was accepted. Since that date, Machzeki Hadath, Golders Green has joined us as a constituent member, Elstree Beis Hamedrash has been established very successfully, two Chassidic congregations withdrew applications for membership under intense peer group pressure. Negotiations with two other kehilas were unsuccessful and we are currently negotiating with a Sephardi kehila. 28 acres of farmland have been bought in Northwood, and architect’s plans to use 10 of those acres for a cemetery are with planning consultants for advice before a planning application is submitted. One of the recommendations was that if we are going to expand our membership then we should have a burial ground with easy access to North West London. A Federation web site will shortly be launched and promotional materials will be finalised giving information about the Federation. Returning to the original question,

about the unique identity of the Federation, Mr. Finlay said it was a strongly orthodox synagogual body comprising small, welcoming, largely autonomous synagogues, a Beis Din, a Burial Society and Kashrus department. An organisation promoting orthodox religious education at all levels. There are some concurrent problems with this. Being a Federation makes it more difficult to develop a corporate image. What about the suggestion that in a diminishing Anglo Jewish community the imperative is to save scarce communal resources by merging. Experience has shown that the best way of ensuring efficiency and quality of service is by healthy competition. Mr. Finlay said that there are two sorts of PR. Getting ‘feel good’ stories printed is relatively easy - inauguration of a Rabbi, a large charity donation, prestigious function and so on. Mr. Stephen Brown has been asked by the Honorary Officers to assist in this, each shul being asked to nominate a person responsible for. The harder sort of PR is news management following any PR difficulty. Where there have been problems these have been examined, often with professional assistance, to see where we could have done better. The problem is, or the challenge is, that there are some issues where confidentiality is more im portant than PR, or where Rabbinical issues are very complicated and difficult to com m unicate. The Honorary Officers saw the involvement of the chief executive as important. He had built up a good rapport with the relevant journalists and was adept as spotting potential problems early on. We must however realise, that no matter how skilled, and even with limitless resources, organisations do get PR wrong. Mr. Finlay said he was sure that what delegates had heard throughout the day about the work of the Federation made them agree that the Federation does have a unique place in Anglo Jewry, that there is a future for the Federation based upon the image which he had set out earlier and that development and expansion can only be good for klal Yisroel. Open Forum Mr Stephen Brown said he would just like to congratulate the Honorary Officers on the day. It was the first time that there had been an occasion such as this and it has been an education for everyone and

he thought it was a thing that could be build on and we could go forward with in the drive to promote the Federation. Questions were asked and discussions ensued on such diverse subjects as the work and value of the Board of Deputies, taking a strong lead on moral issues, youth development, education, membership age profile, local shuls funding themselves, starting new shuls, funeral contractors and the role of women in the Federation. Closing Remarks by President Mr Arnold Cohen Mr Arnold Cohen concluded the conference by thanking the Dayanim, Rabbi Y Y Rubinstein, Rabbi Forta, Mr. Winegarten, Mr. Finlay and Mr. Stuart. He said that especially credit must be given to our Chief Executive, Gordon Coleman and his staff. The truth is that it was Gordon’s idea initially to have this conference and the Honorary Officers backed him very enthusiastically and left all the work to him. He had to get everything ready. He said that the success of this day is due very much to Gordon Coleman and his staff and that the catering was excellent. He thanked everyone very much for coming and that please G-d we should continue to have good news of the Federation.

4 N

LEYNIN6

BEVI8 MARKS by Rev G ingold

'.SI

v . v. V - .S

•-:afcv •>.

" >.

Jr IP

n Friday evening on February 2nd, a knock at the door revealed my dear friend Mr. Schner Zalman Slonim, requesting me to be his travel companion for Shabbat morning to accompany him to the illustrious, the jew el of Anglo Jewry, the flagship Synagogue of the Spanish and Portuguese kahillah, which G-d w illing on the Shabbat before Rosh Hashanah, will be celebrating the three hundredth anniversary of its founding. On a number of occasions since my arrival in the East End of London as the Federation Minister of the area, I had been privileged to doyen, to become more familiar with the Sephardi nusoach, to enjoy the rendering of the Chazan and choir to be introduced to the many wonderful customs of our dear Sephardi brethren, the magnificent congregational

,, L

participation, the Chazan leading the kahiUah, reciting every word, publicly and clearly with devotion and concentration, drawing the kahillah closer to their Maker. One of my wishes was, to be privileged to layen the Torah in the oldest and most famous Synagogue in Britain. I approached the Chazan, Mr. Halfon Ben Flarroach, who kindly put my request to the M ahmad, which they most generously granted, in a gesture of local co-operation. The sedra I chose was BO, being my dear Father O.H., birthday, who spoke about Bevis Marks, but alas did not have the honour to visit and admire its holiness. The first time in my life, I read the Torah with the Sephardi pronunciation, with the Ashkenazi tune. The decorum of the congregation

during the Reading o f the Law, was second to none, as indeed it was during the whole service, it was a memorable experience which I will treasure all my life. Bevis Marks chairman, Sam Dias is firmly o f the opinion that “The old Ashkenazi-Sephardi division is over. We need each other if we are to survive in the East End.” It has been decided that in the near future we will arrange a meeting of all Orthodox Synagogues in the area, to see how we can work together, helping each other, for the benefit and strengthening of Judaism, so we can go from strength to strength. In the next edition of Hamaor I hope to give you a report of the meeting. Working together, my question is should all areas of London’s Orthodox Synagogues follow this example.

Judge Our Company... The Company Keep! BOSCH

ferns®

De Dietrich

•srsmeg m pv cn -n

;w :

*tsw n: v

fesiss

then remember we guarantee* you the lowest price! - '\ '*/■■+/■•

For Everything Electrical In The Kitchen ■ask m-store for details

a ’' / 4 V

186-192 Brent Street, Hendon, London NW4 Tel: 020 8203 0777 Fax: 020 8202 4377 Email: thaines@berryst.fsnet.co.uk

or 020 8551 4849 9.00am

9.00pm

> IT w ^

FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES 65 W atford W ay, L ondon N W 4 3A Q E-mail: info@ kfkosher.org

Tel: (+44) 020 8202 2263 Fax: (+44) 020 8203 0610 W ebsite: w w w .k fk osh er.org

BETH DIN

This form should be completed and handed over or delivered to the Beth Din before Monday 2nd April 2001 POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR THE SALE OF CHOMETZ I, the undersigned, fully empower and authorise Dayan M D Elzas to act in my place and stead and, on my behalf, to sell any Chometz possessed by me (knowingly or unknowingly) up to and including Friday 6th April 2001 at 11:38 am including any food in respect of which there is a doubt or possibility that it might contain Chometz, and all kinds of Chometz mixtures, and to lease all places wherein the Chometz owned by me is stored and found, especially in the premises specified below, or elsewhere. Dayan M D Elzas has full authority to sell or lease all Chometz and all places wherein the Chometz owned by me is found, by any transaction in any manner which he deems fit and proper, and for such time as he believes necessary, in accordance with the detailed terms and conditions set out in the agreed Contract or Sale which he will draw up. This authorisation is made a part of that Contract. I also give Dayan M D Elzas power and authority to appoint any proxy he deems fit in his place, with full power to sell or lease as provided herein. The above-given powers are to be exercised in conformity with all Torah and Rabbinical regulations and laws, and also in accordance with the laws of the country. And to this I hereby affix my signature on th is ...............day o f ...............................2001 Name ................................ Address

Signature........................................................ W itness................................................... Exact location of Chometz within the above premises................................................................................. Sale price of Chometz (approx)................................................................. Keys available at ............................................................................................................................. TYPES OF CHOMETZ (please delete items that are not applicable) Bread products, biscuits, flour, cereals, beverages, alcoholic spirits, beer, pasta products, semolina, farfel, canned foods, soft drinks, confectionery, all other foods containing Chometz, medicaments, perfumes, cosmetics, aerosols, cleaning materials, any Chometz in or adhering to ovens, food mixers or food processors, and any other Chometz on any other utensils, shares in companies or business producing, trading or owning Chometz.

Mazal Tov wishes are extended to the following people:

B a r M itzvah

Birth s Mazal Tov to the following on the birth o f a child:

Mr. and Mrs. Arnold Cohen on the birth o f two grandsons.

Weddings Mazal Tov to the following:

Ilford A lex Stuart and A lexandra Katzenelenbogen on the occasion o f their marriage.

Mazal Tov to the following: Ilford Sandra and Gary Soraf on their son D anielâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Bar Mitzvah. A lso to Grandfather, Mr. Ronnie Soraf.

Finchley Central

Qualifications

Esther and Willie Ungar on the birth o f a great granddaughter.

Mazal Tov to the following: Ilford Daniel Leader o f Ilford Federation on obtaining Honours Degree in Mathematics from Queen Mary and Westfield C ollege, London University.

Rabbi Darren Muster (formerly) of Ilford Federation on the occasion of his m arriage to Sorah Chaya Leiberman.

Shomrei Hadath Mrs H D Winegarten on the birth o f a great-grandson and a great-granddaughter

Mr and Mrs Jeffrey Greenwood and Mr and Mrs Leo Grahame on the birth o f a granddaughter and greatgranddaughter, respectively.

Shomrei Hadath Miss Anita Stein on the marriage o f her brother.

A liya Weddimg A n n iiversanes Mazal Tov to the following:

Mr and Mrs Herz on the birth o f a daughter.

Ilford Mr and Mrs Leon Newmark on the birth o f a granddaughter.

Mrs Dee Glazer on the birth o f a fourth great-grandchild.

Joanna Finegold on obtaining a BA Honours in History.

Ilford Mr and Mrs A lf Jacobs on their Golden Wedding.

Mr and Mrs A lf Buechler on their Ruby Wedding.

Mazal Tov wishes to: Ilford Mrs Norma Muster and her son Mark on their Aliyah.

l o ng

S ervice

Yeshurun Dayan and Mrs Gershon Lopian on 25 years o f service as Rav and Rebbitzin.

Condolences Mr and Mrs Phil Phillips on their Ruby Wedding.

We offer our condolences to:Mr M ichael M ays o f Shomrei Hadath on the loss o f his Mother.

Please send in all your personal announcements to Hamaor, 65 Watford Way, London NW4 3AQ â&#x20AC;˘ Fax: 020 8203 0610

FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES 65 W atford Way, London, NW4 3AQ. Tel: 020 8202 2263 Fax: 020 8203 0610

HONORARY OFFICERS President: A. J. Cohen Vice-Presidents: J. Gitlin Master J. Winegarten. Treasurers (Federation): A. Finlay & G. Halibard

CHIEF EXECUTIVE G. D. Coleman BURIAL SOCIETY Administrator: M. L. Stuart Sexton: N. Kahler

Treasurers (Burial Society): H. Dony, N. Bruckheimer

Tel: 020 8202 3903. Fax: 020 8203 0610. Out of hours answerphone: 020 8202 3903.

Co-opted: B. Mire

Cemeteries:

BETH DIN

Montague Road, Edmonton, N18. Tel: 020 8807 2268.

Emeritus Rav Rashi: Dayan M. Fisher.

Upminster Road North, Rainham, Essex. Tel: 01708 552825.

Rosh Beth Din: Dayan Y. Y. Lichtenstein. Dayanim: Dayan M. D. Elzas, Dayan B. Berkovits Registrar: Rabbi S. Z. Unsdorfer Tel: 020 8202 2263.

During the winter months both cemeteries are open daily, except Shabbos and Yomtov, from 9.00 am until dusk. During British Summer Time gates are open until 5.00pm and during the month of Ellul until 6.00pm.

CONSTITUENT SYNAGOGUES

AFFILIATED SYNAGOGUES

CLAPTON FEDERATION SYNAGOGUE (Shaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;are Shomayim). (Incorporating Yavneh Synagogue), 47 Lea Bridge Road. E5 9QB. Tel: 020 8806 4369. Secretary: W. Jacobs. Tel: 020 8989 5211.

BEIS NADVORNA BETH HAMEDRASH. 45 Darenth Road N16. Tel: 020 8806 2030. Rav: Rabbi M Leifer. Treas: Mr S Tessler.

CROYDON & DISTRICT SYNAGOGUE, The Almonds, 5 Shirley Oaks Road, Croydon, Surrey CR0 8YX. Tel: 020 8662 0011. All correspondence to The Secretary: Mrs S. Hanover, 2 Lynden Hyrst, Addiscombe Road, Croydon, CR0 SPD. Tel: 020 8655 4040. EAST LONDON CENTRAL SYNAGOGUE. 30/40 Nelson Street, El 2DE. Tel: 020 7790 9809. Secretary: L. Gayer. Tel: 020 8554 5267. ELSTREE BETH HAMEDRASH. 6 Allum Lane, Elstree, Herts WD6 3PH. Rav: Rabbi D. Tugenhaft. Secretary: Mr M. Slyper. Tel: 020 8953 8444. FINCHLEY CENTRAL SYNAGOGUE, 2 Redboume Avenue, N3 2BS. Tel: 020 8346 1892. Rav: Rabbi Z. Telsner. Secretary: M. Moller. Tel: 020 8203 2822. HENDON BEIS HAMEDRASH 65 Watford Way, Hendon NW4 3AQ. Tel: 020 8202 2263. Rav: Dayan Y.Y. Lichtenstein. Hon Secretary: Z. Shenkin. ILFORD FEDERATION SYNAGOGUE. 14/16 Coventry Road, Ilford, Essex, IG1 4QR. Tel: 020 8554 5289. Rav: Rabbi H. Belovski. MACHZIKEI HADASS SYNAGOGUE. Highfield Road, NW11. Rav: Rabbi C. Pearlman. Hon. Secretary: R. Shaw. Tel: 020 8204 1887. OHEL JACOB SYNAGOGUE (Ilford Beth Hamedrash), (Incorporating the Ilford Rabbinical College) 1st Floor, rear of 476/478 Cranbrook Road, Ilford. Essex IG2 2LE. Rav: Rabbi R. Godlewsky. Secretary: Mrs R. Pressman. Tel: 020 8550 4596. OHEL SHEM SYNAGOGUE. Hon Min: Rev. G. Glausiusz. Tel: 020 8904 5773. Hon Secretary: A. Cohen. Tel: 020 8459 3479. SHOMREI HADATH SYNAGOGUE, 64 Burrard Road, Hampstead, London NW6 1DD. Rav: Rabbi Mordechai Fachler. Secretary: Mrs J. Segal. Tel: 020 7431 0017. SINAI SYNAGOGUE, 54 Woodstock Avenue, NW11 9RJ. Tel: 020 8455 6876. Rav: Rabbi B. Knopfler. Rav: Rabbi M. Fachler. Secretary: Mr E. Cohen. YESHURUN SYNAGOGUE. Fernhurst Gardens, Stonegrove, Edgware, Middlesex HA8 7PH. Tel 020 8952 5167. Rav: Dayan G. Lopian. Secretary: D. Cohen.

CONGREGATION OF JACOB SYNAGOGUE. 351/355 Commercial Road, El. Min: Rev M. Gingold. FIELDGATE STREET GREAT SYNAGOGUE. 41 Fieldgate Street, El. Tel: 020 7247 2644. Secretary: Mrs D Jacobson. FINCHLEY ROAD SYNAGOGUE (Sassover), 4 Helenslea Avenue, NW11. Tel: 020 8455 4305. Rav: Rabbi S. Rubin. LEYTONSTONE & WANSTEAD SYNAGOGUE. 2 Fillebrook Road, E ll. Secretary: S. Pizer. Tel: 020 8924 7505. LOUGHTON, CHIGWELL & DISTRICT SYNAGOGUE. Borders Lane, Loughton, Essex, IG 10 3HT. Tel: 020 8508 0303. Min: Rev. J.D. Lorraine. Secretary: Mrs M. Lewis. Tel: 020 8504 2248. NEW WIMBLEDON & PUTNEY DISTRICT SYNAGOGUE. Secretary: Mrs R. Diamond. Tel 020 8788 6669. NOTTING HILL SYNAGOGUE. 206/208 Kensington Park Road, W11. Secretary: H. Lamb. Tel: 020 8952 4354. SPRINGFIELD SYNAGOGUE, 202 Upper Clapton Road, E5. Tel: 020 8806 2377. Rav. Dayan I. Gukovitski. Secretary: L. Blackman. Tel: 01702 340 762. STAMFORD HILL BETH HAMEDRASH. 50 Clapton Common, E5 9AL. Rav: Dayan D. Grynhaus. Secretary: M. Chontow. Tel: 020 8800 5465. TOTTENHAM HEBREW CONGREGATION. 366a High Road, N17 9HT. Tel: 020 8808 4698. Minister: Rabbi S Lewis. Secretary: Dr S.S. Cohen. Tel: 020 8368 4158. WALTHAM FOREST HEBREW CONGREGATION. (Queens Road) 140 Boundary Road, E l7 Tel: 020 8507 0775. Minister Rabbi M Davis. Secretary: A Wolpert. Tel: 020 8509 0775. WEST END GREAT SYNAGOGUE (Beth Hasepher & Soho), 32 Great Cumberland Place, W1H 7DJ. Tel: 020 7724 8121. Secretary: S.B. Levy. WEST HACKNEY SYNAGOGUE AND MONTAGUE ROAD BETH HAMEDRASH, 233 Amhurst Road, E8 2BS. Chairman: I. Leigh Tel: 020 8550 9543.

^ J \ ^

^ / IV '

FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES KASHRUS BOARD Chairman: M r A. J. Cohen Director o f Kashrus: Dayan M. D. Elzas The following establishments are licensed by the Federation Kashrus Board and are under the Supervision o f the Beth Din o f the Federation o f Synagogues: CA TERERS:

RESTAURANTS:

PARK LANE HOTEL Piccadilly, London W1Y 8BX

AVIV RESTAURANT 87 High Street, Edgware

020 8952 2484

CASSIT, 225 Golders Green Rd.,London, NW11 9PN

020 8455 8195

SOMETHING SPECIAL 9 Woodland Way, London NW7 2JP SILBERHORN 11 Highfield Ave, London NW11

020 7499 6321 Fax: 020 7290 7566 Mob: 079 4115 3575

020 8906 1208

KINNERET 313 Hale Lane, Edgware, Middx HA8 7AX

020 8458 7708

DELICATESSENS AND SHOPS: PELTER STORES 82 Edgware Way, Edgware, Middx.

020 8958 4955 020 8958 2229

SAMI’S, 157 Brent Street, London NW4

020 8203 8088

THE WHITE HOUSE 10 Bell Lane, Hendon NW4

020 8203 2427

020 8958 6910

MANUFACTURERS: HOTELS: GOLDERS GREEN HOTEL 147/149 Golders Green Road, London NW11

El-Al Kosher Catering, J. Moldovan, Quality & Flavour (Fish) The Walnut Tree (with Kosher for Passover Seal)

020 8458 7127

THE FEDERATION HEBREW CLASSES

020 8897 6136 020 8985 5791 020 8959 6626

■ aVILJL aVIBD aV R D '*

Chairman: Mr Jonathan Winegarten

Having a sort out?

Director o f Education: Rabbi Ronen Broder

Well, don't forget ALL ABOARD...

Loughton, Chigwell & District Hebrew Classes, Borders Lane, Loughton Headmaster: Mr M Garfield

Help us raise money for UK registered Jewish charities, by donating saleable clothing, household goods, linens, bric-a-brac, etc.

Ilford Hebrew Classes, 16 Coventry Road, Ilford, Essex, IG1 4QR Headmaster: Mr D Muster

If you are unable to deliver to your local shop, please ask us to collect.

Yeshurun Hebrew Classes, Femhurst Gardens, Edgware, Middlesex, HA8 7PH Headmistress: Vacant 14%&

Kindergartens: Loughton Synagogue, Yeshurun Synagogue.

If you have tw o or three hours free each week, we would greatly welcome your volunteer services. For further information please phone

Head Office: 020 7543 5404 A fter 1st April 020 8951 1101 w w w

a lla b o a r d s h o p s .c o m

f -i

W in n e r o f t h e E x c e l l e n c e in H y g ie n e A w a r d P r esen ted by th e L o ndo n B o r o u g h o f H arro w

Ivor Silverman THE ULTIMATE IN KOSHER BUTCHERY THE NO. I FOR QUALITY A N D HYGIENE

4 C A N O N S CORNER, L O N D O N ROAD, STANM ORE, M ID D X TELEPHONE: 020 8958 8682 OR 020 8958 2692 FAX: 020 8958 1928 358 U XB R ID G E ROAD, H A T C H END, M ID D LESEX TELEPHONE: 020 8428 6564 257 W A T L IN G STREET, RADLETT, HERTS W D 7 7LA TELEPHONE: 01923 853700 W E O NLY S T O C K T H E FIN EST Q U A L IT Y CERTIFIED BEEF, LAMB A N D POULTRY

Wishing all our customers a Happy & Kosher Pesach PLEASE ASK FOR OUR WEEKLY SPECIALS! ALL OF W HICH ARE AT OUR USUAL HIGH STANDARDS LICENSED BY THE LO NDON BOARD FOR SHECHITA AND UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD.

The Dayanim of the Federation Beth Din extend their warmest wishes for a

rnwi i\sa to all members of the Federation of Synagogues their families and all of

, i .

1 <

STOP PRESS . . . . STOP PRESS. . . . f

aftl

..v

•:

*•.

------ ----

J:Vai

» i

7 ■

i• '

rtf

V.,1

ii LW •'

L >

3 ,i. •

? ;

yr;

TTrW fc

1 t • *J •

•

V I*'■r .

•-

*vr

J ->■ a * ■:

: "fSt

* . » »r.

».

. /v'JN i.

BSi

» * ‘; V .

r-'WV’'• lA

j—‘ip1

•** / k» .' "„v XT.

K:’j

H '- r

-> *■

iaa*

•r:‘

•‘nw.

• -_*V-

i‘

\ .. , “ <

r ;''

■H

wag

,.*w

I ll.J .1 ,.w

i'- L .-

r i*

Lef f to RlSht: M r Avraham Swissa, President, Netzach Israel, Dayan Y Y Lichtenstein, Rosh Beis Din, Rabbi D ow n Ahiel, Rav of Netzach Israel, M r Arnold Cohen, President, M r Gordon Coleman, C hief Executive

The Federation of Synagogues and Netzach Israel Form A New Alliance et up a year ago to attract Sephardi Jews from the Hendon and Golders Green area, Beth Midrash Netzach Israel has now formally joined the umbrella of the Federation of Synagogues as a constituent synagogue. The Federation of Synagogues was established at the end of the 19th century, to cater for the needs of refugee and immigrant communities in London providing Kashrus, Burial and Educational facilities for their members. Netzach Israel represents a new type o f immigrant community and therefore a natural partnership with the Federation of Synagogues. Netzach Israel boasts around 30% of its members from Israel and appeals to a colourful diversity of people many originating from Yemen, Persia, Iraq and Morocco, offering a unique Jewish centre in Golders Green. Driven by the dynamic Rabbi Doron Ahiel, 34, this

young community provides daily educational programmes for young people along with a vibrant yeshiva and plans to start a cheder after Pesach. Their recent Purim celebrations attracted more than 300 people. The Federation of Synagogues currently looks after around 15,000 people from its constituent and affiliated synagogues and looks to the future by enlarging its members via more just mergers. Mr Abraham Swissa, chairman of Netzach Israel said: “We hope this partnership will be fruitful and successful. As the first Sephardi community to join the Federation we bring a young and vibrant com m unity to this established authority.” Mr Arnold Cohen, president o f the Federation of Synagogues said: “We welcome the members of Netzach Israel under our umbrella and hope together we will benefit from this alliance.”

Printed in Great Britain by Freedman Brothers (Printers) Ltd. London N W I I 7QB.

Tel: 020 8458 3220

Fax: 020 8455 6860