A clever person, the proverb says, knows how to get out of trouble that a wise person would not get into. The "Rabbis of Zohar," and Rabbi Ariel Constantine among them, do not even qualify for the first definition, let alone the second.
From their perspective, the way out of their troubles regarding the scandalous fashion show at the Beit El synagogue in Tel Aviv is the claim that "according to the agreement, it is clear beyond any doubt that the rabbi acted innocently and, as we said, did not know that a provocative fashion show would be held there.".
They claim this, while at the same time the agreement presented actually states that the synagogue "is happy to promote a modest fashion show combined with religious content while preserving the sanctity of the place.".
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
Constantine reiterated these things on his Facebook page when he wrote: "I have never agreed to a fashion show that is not modest in the synagogue." That is, the agreement, the rabbi, and the argument of the Zohar rabbis is that indeed, the fashion show should have taken place in the synagogue, but it should have been "modest.".
If this is the way out of their troubles, then they are deep in hell beneath it.
With advocacy like this – who needs categories?
A rabbi in Israel, or one who wishes to bear this title, is supposed to know the basic laws of the Shulchan Aruch. For rabbis who are having difficulty, here is a quote from the first sentence of the "Laws of the Sanctity of the Synagogue" in the Shulchan Aruch (Kana, 1): "Synagogues and seminaries are not to be used in frivolous ways, such as wearing a turban and a turban, and talking in a turban. They are not to eat or drink in them, nor are they to be adorned in them, nor are they to walk in them, nor are they to enter them in the heat because of the heat, or in the rain because of the rain.".
Light-headedness, weariness, the tot, conversation in the street, adornment, a trip. They all came together and came under one definition: "fashion show" - and that, if it was modest.
If there can be a "modest fashion show," when such an event is regularly watched by men, then you have the height of ugliness and the opposite of modesty.
But even if we assume that someone wanted to hold such an event for women only, and even if we assume that it was a fashion show of hijabs and burqas, ones that cover even what should not be covered according to halakhah, it is still a tremendous disgrace to the synagogue, and it is amazing to discover that among the "Rabbis of Zohar" there were those who thought that there was some kind of tzedekic element in this, that they only agreed to a "modest fashion show.".
In their desire for "the words" and "the search for common elements of identity," two definitions from the "Rabbeni Zohar" website, they forgot the first concept by which they claim self-definition: "correctly.".
And so, in his eagerness for a "warm atmosphere of acceptance" (from the website of the 'Beit El' synagogue), Constantine, who signed the agreement that allowed for a "modest fashion show" in the synagogue, also forgot that "mutual respect" - another definition from his website - must first begin with respect for the place he is entrusted with, the honor of the synagogue.
It is the law that determines for us what the dignity of the synagogue is, not some kind of belly button. The consent to this degrading use in a synagogue is the beginning of halakhic folly, which is hard to believe came from someone who holds a rabbi's certificate.
It was very easy to predict in advance that the very concept of a 'fashion show' could get out of hand, to be smart. But in the end, after the apology/defense, it turns out that they are not smart, not even intelligent, and despite the certificates they hold in their hands, it is not clear why they are defined as "rabbis.".
It is hard not to recall that Rabbi Ovadia Yosef zt"l said that the choice of the person who heads this body for the position of Chief Rabbi of Israel would be to "place a statue in the temple." And now, under the leadership and organization of that chairman, we have witnessed the placement of a statue in the temple. It is chilling.
