Easier Reading of Article Here
"Heysh'ke" Dubravsky speaks for most parents when he bemoans the fact that Lubavitcher Chinuch institutions charge as much as a blue-ribbon MO school that offers all the amenities you can think of without even coming close to that. There's also the fact that you'll be hard-pressed to find a family of Lubavitcher size in Mod Ortho circles, so that the expense is even less for the MO!
13 comments:
But, of course, he's preaching to the choir... will anything change? How?
The fact remains that the money needed to run a school has to come from SOMEWHERE.
Easier reading of this article can be found here:
http://www.algemeiner.com/generic.asp?id=3906
anon - the public school system spends around $13,500 per student. Lets remember their enormous infrastructure, teacher salary levels, pensions, computer labs, science labs, and perhaps most importantly, the need to cover every student with every disability, learning problem, handicap, and/or language deficit.
Yeshiva teachers are getting significantly lower salaries, no gyms, computer labs, football fields, pensions, and they don't take the children that have serious special needs (those are the students that cost the public system 2-5 times the average student).
3 years ago I saw the books of a major yeshiva (accidentally left in the open). Their cost per student was $4,700. Their average tuition received was $4,200. BUT the price demanded was $7,000. WHY???
Well, the administration seemed all to be related (funny that), the suppliers related (funny that), so efficiency was low. Then, the staff gets free or major reduced cost tuition (makes up for that low salary, in theory). So, who covers that (and gets that average up to $4,200 per student)? Everyone who gets beat up about tuition.
Regardless, even at $5,000 per student, if you're blessed with a family of say, 6, that's $30,000 per year. Not payable by almost anyone. Of course, for some reason high school cost more!
So the parents simply don't have enough. Period. The community needs to refocus some resources or children are simply going to be left out. And I know some of those children who are left out. You can safely assume it's devistating and effectively pushes them out of the community.
he's not preaching to the choir, he's preaching to the administrators of the Mosdos. They read the Algemeiner.
First of all, Heysh'ke owes the algemanier readership an apology for last week’s article. The dopy two line apology from the newspaper is not enough. I wonder if he read the Sefer before wrongfully slandering its author.
About this week’s article,
The core issue is that people don’t donate. And perhaps for a good reason, In LUBAVITCH, everyone felt a personal connection to the Yeshvah. It belonged to Chabad and represented the movement and its Chassidus.
However nowadays, Yeshiva’s are run and controlled by private families, so most don’t care to donate.
sorry, but which sefer are you talking about? is it something he reviewed?
http://www.algemeiner.com/generic.asp?id=3904
תיקון טעות
אין דעם אַלגעמיינעם זשורנאַל אויגוסט 10, 2007 איז געדרוקט געוואָרן אַן אַרטיקל וועגן דעם ספר "כמוצא שלל רב". אין דעם אַרטיקל איז בטעות געשריבן געוואָרן אַז אין די ספרים כמוצא שלל רב ווערן לגמרי נישט ציטירט די צדיקים לבית חב"ד.
מיר דריקן אויס אַנטשולדיקונג אויף דעם טעות, ווי עס איז קלאָר צו לייענער פון די "מפתחות" אויף די ספרים.
די רעדאַקציע
He reviewed a sefer called 'kemotzei sholol rov'
He did a real hatchet job on it not bothering apparently to read the hakdomo and shaar blat before he did so.
It's sefer on the parsha that has been very well accepted.It's claim to fame is the extraction of a vort on the parsha from very 'unlikely' places, such as sifrei shaalos uteshuvos, not a place where you will find a vort and you would have to literally scour hundreds of seforim which are not Chumash based.
The authors 'offense' according to Dubrovsky:Despite including vertlach from all rabbonim, sai Chasidish Litvish and sefardim, no mention of Lubavitch.
Dubrovsky's mistake:Actually Chabad Rebbes are mentioned a couple of times,but, that's not the deal:He has taynos why nothing from Lekutei Tora is mentioned,not even realizing that this is not a likut on the parshiyos, rather discovering vertlach hidden away in seforim which deal with other issues!(hence its name:Sholol)Someone who wants to learn likutei torah on the parsha does just that!Someone who wants a vort 'hidden' in shu't nodo beyehuda opens this sefer.
All in all a very silly article with an unbelievable viciousness and some really nasty things on a sefer he basically had not read the hadoma too
As regards the book review the writer r. Dubrovski owes a public apology and request for Mechilla from the mechaber and the readers. And this the month of Ellul.R. Dubrovski criticizes the mechaber for using the words shallal in representing Divre Tore in a word for spoils of war. Lets not debate that, but to use the word "selectize "for this subject is another example of gross misuse of Holocaust terminology in talking about everyday things. Whatever the tuition crisis is , it has no bearing on "selektzie" which is a word denoting the destruction of European Jewry. Rabbi . Dubrowski ought to watch the language he uses.
Sach hakol Reb Yosef Yitzchak should spend more time doing what his title requires --- editing the paper !!
Shneour
I was shocked at how Jacobson let the article thru! A)it was so nasty and just plain wrong on the facts and B)Its partisan style turned the Algemeiner into an
'official' Lubavitcher organ.The Algemeiner and Gershon Ber never hid their Lubavitch connection but neber turned the newspaper into an official partisan newspaper.Me and most of the readrship are not Lubavitch,I'm looking for a 'newspaper' not a partisan affilate that is drawing a party line .
Papa Jacobsen was defending freedom of speech all his adult life and every kofer used the Oped pages for exposing their POV,so why should Yossi censure the chasidishe Yid Horav Dubrovsky that poured his heart out on a painful subject to censure the Rebbes Torah in every field, Rashi al hatorah , Rambam etc..he is 100 % to the point.
Heysh'ke Dubravsky is a very Eydeler Yid who's been hurt for decades by the fact that his Rebbe was blacklisted by a bunch of unqualified nobodies who hijacked Yiddishkeit. If he gets a little "paranoid" after 50 years who can blame him?
Even a fine Chassidishe Yid sometimes makes a mistake. And if he does I can not recollect a shtell that says he is patur from asking Mechilla from a eidel ben torah in Jerusalem who is trying to sell his book.
Of course Dubrovski has a general point, but to criticize a book for these ills that does not fit the pattern is a case of poor judgement and in the public forum should probably require some form of apology and nothing more.
Post a Comment