Every once in a while, someone decides to give a status report on the ties between American Jewry and Israel. I believe all such reports to be highly speculative and generally useless. What concerns me, however, is a particular sentiment that seems to be popular in Israel today: Jews living outside of Israel have no right to tell Israel how to conduct itself. In particular, Israelis resent Jews who express conservative political views, who suggest political steps that are more likely to lead to escalated violence in the region. After all, these Israelis argue, it's we who have to fight the war while you sit in your palaces and say Tehillim. Just because you send us the occasional check does not entitle you to tell us to risk our lives.
At first glance, this seems like a very valid point. But Israel belongs to all Jews, even those who aren't in the immediate line of fire. The Jews living in Israel are caretakers of our inheritance, and we owe them an enormous debt of gratitude for protecting it for us while we are away. Nevertheless, we should not be denied our right to suggest a political course of action we feel to be in Israel's long-term best interests, even if such action would increase short-term instability. It's true that if we were the ones dodging the bullets that we might rethink our fighting spirit. But our physical detachment should not cost us our right to remain emotionally and outspokenly involved.
*The vast majority of students at YU are learning Bava Metzia this year, a tractate devoted to monetary laws, including rights of possession, lost objects, and responsibility of watchmen. Unfortunately, these laws are often ignored around these parts. Outgoing students occasionally neglect to take their seforim with them. Whether or not these students have willingly relinquished ownership of these seforim is open to speculation. My guess is that an overwhelming majority are simply careless, and would like to be reunited with their possessions. This theory is just about invincible when the seforim in question are in good condition, expensive, and contain such identifying factors as the name and contact information of the owners.
Yeshiva University disagrees. These seforim are rounded up and actually sold at firesale prices to other students, who greedily find windfall in their predecessors' misfortune. It's bad enough that no one makes any effort to return the seforim to their rightful owners, but that these seforim should be bought and sold is downright perverse. Perhaps there is some sort of fuzzy psak floating around, fabricated for the convenience of those burdened by an annual collection of lost books. Personally, I think the whole thing stinks.
Halacha is not supposed to be a matter of convenience, and in a yeshiva currently studying the laws of property, I would expect more care would be taken in these matters.
*On a somewhat related note, soon it will be the end of the year, and many students, either through necessity or convenience, will store belongings on campus over the summer. These students will be compelled to sign a release, brought to you by lawyers out to get you, from which I quote: "... I hereby assume all risk of loss or damage to such possessions while stored in any storage room at Yeshiva and I hereby release Yeshiva, its officers, directors, agents, and employees from any claim I may have arising [yada yada yada] whether resulting from the negligence of Yeshiva or otherwise." According to Jewish law, even a free watchman has SOME responsibility. Not according to Yeshiva law. Essentially, if one of those surly registrars decides to get cranky on your refrigerator, you lose. If one of the security guards shoots up your computer, tough luck. If the executive board itself walks into the storage room and walks out with your stuff, you have no claim against them.
Sure, I'm being a little facetious. After all, the executive board would probably have someone pick up your stuff for them. My point, however, is that even if Yeshiva has the legal right to abdicate ALL responsibility, even for their own intentional negligence (I question this), it is certainly wrong for them to do so. Perhaps the storage process could be supervised in some small way to prevent the most common mishaps. This needn't be complicated or expensive. The storage process could be made just a little less hefker, instead of our stuff being made hefker.