Morethodoxy: Exploring the Breadth, Depth and Passion of Orthodox Judaism

I.

The first time I heard Rabbi David Hartman speak was in the summer following my “shannah aleph” year in Israel between high school and college. After spending a year in the yeshiva one of my teachers invited me to accompany him to a panel discussion taking place one evening at the Machon – the Shalom Hartman Institute – in Jerusalem’s German Colony. I barely remember what was said that evening by any of the panelists – including Rabbi Hartman. But I do remember the thrill of encountering a vibrant Jewish intellectual conversation that was taking place outside the walls of my Orthodox beit-midrash.  Hearing about his death this week, at the age of 81 (an age that does not seem old when considering a scholar with so many insights left unsaid), has caused me to reflect on his legacy within my own life and work.There are two ideas that have become central to my own worldview and teaching that I learned from Rabbi Hartman.  Additionally, his place within (and outside of) contemporary Orthodoxy has an additional message for the future.

II.

The quest by Jews, in the aftermath of the Enlightenment, to translate the message of Judaism into something with universal significance was, to Rabbi Hartman, a mistake. The Torah is not a universal book with universal significance to all people. Rather, the Torah should be understood as a particular book about the relationship between the Jewish people and God. One therefore cannot turn to the Torah for guidance about other nations, other religions, and their place in God’s universe. That just is not what the Torah is about. Read the rest of this entry »

News of the suspension from school of Ophir Ben-Shetreet, for performing on the Israeli hit show, “The Voice” in violation of her school’s policy of Kol Isha (the ban of women singing in public) is now well known.

The school’s decision to suspend Ophir is theirs alone. It is also true that schools have the right to discipline students for breaking the rules. No one should fault the school for implementing a standing policy.

Having said that, this story does offer an opportunity to discuss an issue that is present when rendering Halachik rulings.

This particular ruling on Kol Isha is an example of a ruling that, given the current social reality, may very well result in people feeling alienated from Halacha. On this concern I quote Rav David Bigman, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Ma’ale Gilboa from a full treatment of Kol Isha: “The assertion of the Maharshal, (accepted as practical halakha) that psychological and spiritual need is considered an important concern that justifies reliance upon a lone or minority halakhic opinion. And according to reliable accounts, there are women in certain communities who are so offended by the ruling forbidding them to sing in public that they turn away from the Torah and commandments due to it.”

Writing about Kol Isha (Techumin Vol. 32), Rav Moshe Lichtenstein noted this point and rightly points out that as far as many in the public are concerned, a strict ruling on Kol Isha, is a rule that sheds light on the entire system of halacha, i.e. a system that discriminates against women by restricting their self expression.

There are legitimate and well-substantiated alternative views regarding the nature of the Kol Isha prohibition.

Rav Bigman notes that according to some authorities, the prohibition of Kol Isha only applies in the context of the recitation of the Shema.: “Important Rishonim held that the main prohibition of listening to a woman’s voice is only during the recitation of the Shema and other core parts of the prayer service, in accordance with the intuitive context of Shemuel’s statement “the voice of a woman is erva.”

Rabbi Avraham Shammah wonders why the stricture against Kol Isha is upheld with such vigor while other prohibitions meant to limit contact with women and possible transgression are not. For example, he notes that Shulchan Aruch rules as follows: “ A [male] person has to distance himself from women, very very much” and then asks: “Do all of those who arise to forbid hearing the voices of women uphold everything that is written in this halahka? Do they distance themselves from women very, very much? The answer is “absolutely not!”; certainly not [according to] the intent of our teacher [R. Yosef Karo]. It should be expressed in clear language: in our day, society is mixed (men and woman). And even in the most stringent haredi groups, there is a mixed society at various levels. Work places are mixed, even in the haredi sector, and married men and married women meet there on a daily basis for the course of hours. The grocery stores in this sector are completely mixed, at banks married men and married women work and meet; likewise, in the markets, the streets, and every locale. We find, then, that this halakha has been dismissed and ignored, until it is no longer regarded strictly. Go out and see what people do in the market.”

His answer is insightful: “From a logical point of view, this [inconsistency] is intolerable, especially because those same people who rule stringently are not generally known for deficiencies in [halakhic] judgment. It seems to me, and this should be said as a generalization, that what is being considered is not really a matter of [women’s] modesty. Rather, halakha is being used as a religious marker. That is to say, in a situation where it is quite impossible to be stringent, such as distancing oneself from women very, very much, people aren’t careful. But it is very easy to be stringent in forbidding hearing a woman’s voice, while – in the best case – the added value of an internal sense of religiosity is great. In a less positive light, it is a minute effort for a huge return of being able to externally demonstrate one’s religiosity. This phenomenon, that generally is quite widespread, is worthy of penetrating criticism, and the words of the prophets are brimming with such [criticism].”

Rav Shammah makes another interesting point about how Halacha considers subjective reality. “Centuries ago, the Ritv”a relied on this principle, [and wrote] at the end of Kiddushin: “ … and so is the law that everything is according to what a person knows about himself, if it is appropriate for him to maintain a distance [from women] because of his sexual urges, he should do so, and [for him] even to look at women’s colored clothing is forbidden … while if he knows that his sexual urges submit to him and are under his control … he is permitted to look and to speak with a woman who is forbidden to him and to ask the well-being of another man’s wife, and that was the situation with Rabbi Yohanan who sat near the gates of the mikve and was not concerned about his evil inclination, and [with] Rabbi Ammi,

in front of whom the king’s maidservants went out [to sing and praise him], and [with] several of the Sages who conversed with those ladies, and [with] Rav Ada bar Ahava of whom it is said in K’tubot that he lifted a bride on his shoulders and danced with her and did not concern himself with [unseemly] thoughts- [all these behaved as such] for the reason that we stated …”.

In addition, in spite of all the complexity and difficulty with the matter, one should not easily dismiss the [concept] of the public becoming accustomed [to mixing with women], or that [the public] does not perceive a woman’s voice as [provoking] lewdness. This [aspect] of being accustomed [to mixing with women] has significant weight in general reasoning, and the poskim have relied on it, each according to his method.”

Others have limited the prohibition to circumstances when one intends to enjoy forbidden pleasure (Sdei Chemed citing Rabbi Aharon De Toledo. This is also the opinion of Rambam according to Rabbi Yechiel Yakov Weinberg) or only to women whom the listener knows personally.

The Orthodox establishment should consider these views as L’Chatchilla rulings in the service of the overarching goal of making Halachik living accessible and tolerable to as many people as possible.

I will close with a quote form Rav Chaim of Volohzin reminding us of the difference between theoretical Halacha and the very real people affected by Psak Halacha.

“I see that regarding most things we are headed in the same direction. It is just that you incline toward stringency, since the matter is not cast upon you. Just like you, I too did not turn to the allowances that emerge from study before the burden of decision-making was placed upon my shoulders. Now, however, as a result of our many sins, our environs have been orphaned of its sages, and the yoke of ruling for the entire area was placed on my shoulders … And I calculated with my Maker, and I saw it a personal obligation to gather all my strength in order to persevere in finding a remedy for the agunot.  (Responsa Chut Ha-meshulash I:8) (see here  -  Halakha and Morality Part 2)

How Ophir will react to a very strict interpretation that ostracizes her by marginalizing other, equally valid, interpretations, in anyone’s guess. What is so disappointing here is that Halacha is being used to drive people away from observance instead of being used to bring them closer.  

Recently comments made by Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein on the topic of Homosexuality and the way that the Orthodox community approaches this issue have been posted on the internet. Follow the links below.

There have been others who have made a similar pooint. Maybe now that a Gadol HaDor has spoken, a new approach will take root.

First Link

Second Link

Follow this link for a statement of principles on the place those in the Orthodox community who have a homosexual orientation.

Recently I was involved in two great Modern Orthodox events.

Two weeks ago the American Jewish Committee honored the four senior Rabbi Emeritus of the Houston Jewish community, Rabbi Joseph Radinsky (Orthodox ), Rabbi Roy Walter (Reform), Rabbi Jack Segal (Conservative) and Rabbi  Samuel Karff (Reform).

I had the privilege to pay tribute to Rabbi Radinsky as the current Rabbi of each synagogue was asked to speak in honor of their emeritus.

These four Rabbis were honored by the Houston Jewish community for their decades of service.

People often talk about how well the synagogues of the various denomination work with each other and how all of the denominational rabbis respect each other and work well together in Houston. It is true and the reason is it is true is because the four honorees worked very hard on it. They all respected each other and valued what each was doing for the sake of the Jewish community.

I have been to many community dinners, but this one was the most meaningful of them all. The large turnout, the outpouring of love and the deep respect expressed at the dinner was overwhelming.

I consider it a great Modern Orthodox moment as, for me, it served as a vindication of the policy of Modern Orthodox rabbis to work with Rabbis of all denominations and to recognize that non-orthodox institutions are our partners is building and strengthening Jewish life.

The other great Modern Orthodox moment was the show I just returned from. Tonight the Houston Jewish  community was treated to Musicals  and The Bible. Rav Gal Ben Meir, a very talented musician and singer who is doing shlichut in our community as a teacher, is also a lover of Broadway musicals.

Over the last year, Rav Gal, as he is known, has been producing  the show that teacher Jewish themes using some of the best known songs from popular Broadway shows.

Tonights show reviewed 11 key moments in Jewish history through the lens of songs form The Lion King, Wicked, Billy Elliot, Phantom of The Opera, Les Miserables, Oliver and others.

The show was a dream come true for Rav Gal. The narration, done by Rav Gal as well, made it clear that for years Rav Gal suppressed his desire to perform these types of songs, being told that show business, with it’s focus on fame and fortune was diametrically opposed to the inner and contemplative life of a pious Jew.

Tonight, Rav Gal proved that aspects of popular culture could be used to teach important Jewish ideas and bring people a greater appreciation of their faith. It also proved to Rav Gal that he could achieve his dream and reminded al of those present that we should reach for the stars and not let anyone crush our dreams.

Kol Hakavod Rav Gal and thank you!

Follow this link to a blog post I wrote on a fascinating Teshuva written by Rabbi Chaim David Halevi. This Teshuva is a great example of the appropriate use of what has become known as meta-halachik concerns. All the halachik evidence is in favor of the main group, but, nonetheless, Rav HaLevi recognizes that there is a larger issue and is willing to adopt a bi-dieved (non optimal) position (praying with liturgy that is not one’s custom) in favor of maintaing the connection of the the marginally committed.

Occasionally I write another blog called Piskei Darom. It is dedicated to to sharing Piskei Halacha (religious rulings) and to the exchange of ideas about Pikei Halacha.

Please follow this link to my latest post on a fascinating Teshuva (the entire Teshiva is available there) of Rabbi Shlomo Goren comparing conversion in Israel to conversion in the Diaspora. Rabbi Goren argues that the establishment of the State of Israel changes the way conversion should be approached in Israel.

The connection to Morethodoxy is that Rav Goren’s offers a Psak that considers a changed historic reality to be a major factor in the decision – a key feature of Modern Orthodoxy.

Dr. Rachel Levmore should be commended for writing in this article that “ The time has come for Stern College to take a stand as “Stern College” – its rabbonim, teachers, administration – clarifying that each and every student of Stern and her chosson sign a prenup.”  What Dr. Levmore offers is only a partial solution.

It is pulpit rabbis who are on the “front lines” of this issue as they very often perform weddings are are in a position to influence the couple to sign a Halachik Pre Nup. Pulpit rabbis should refuse to perform weddings unless a Pre Nup is signed. So should Roshei Yeshiva. Having a Halachik Pre Nup should be a universal practice and this is the only way to do it.

Years ago the Gerrer Rebee decreed that there should be limits on the number of people invited to weddings as well as limits on the menu and the size of  the band. The Rebee realized people were spending too much on weddings and that the time had come to a stop to it.

After the decree was passed a wealthy Chassid approached the Rebee and explained that while he understood why the Rebee had introduced the new rules, since he was wealthy, the new rules should not apply to him. The Rebee’s answer was simple. “You can follow the rules or find a new Rebee.”

At the fourth annual convention of the International Rabbinic Fellowship that took place this week the following policy was enacted. “ IRF Rabbis may not officiate at a wedding unless the couple has signed a  halachic prenuptial agreement.  IRF Rabbis are further encouraged to participate ritually only in weddings in which the couple has signed a  halachic prenuptial agreement.  Ritual participation includes but is not limited to reading the ketubah, serving as a witness, and making one of sheva berachot.”

Rabbis should educate their congregations as to why signing the Pre Nup is required and make it part of the culture of the shul.

Some Rabbis claim they cannot sign it as there are poskim who are opposed to it. This is approach,  the need for unanimity before a halachik position can be accepted leads to what  what Rabbi Daniel Sperber calls “Paralysis In Halacha.”

The tragedy in the case of Halachik agunot is that there are real human casualties whose lives are literally paralyzed by Rabbinic malpractice.