DOCSLIB.ORG

CCAR RESPONSA Solicitation of Synagogue Members by Other Jewish Organizations She'elah Teshuvah

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CCAR RESPONSA Solicitation of Synagogue Members by Other Jewish Organizations She'elah Teshuvah CCAR RESPONSA 5763.1 Solicitation of Synagogue Members by Other Jewish Organizations She'elah In many communities, organizations such as Chabad, Aish HaTorah and others either directly or indirectly solicit members of existing congregations for programs, activities, worship and financial support. Are these practices ethical according to Jewish tradition? Does such solicitation or even ministering to members of existing congregations transgress the prohibition of hasagat gevul? (Rabbi Ned Soltz, Fullerton, CA) Teshuvah Our canons of professional practice, as embodied in the CCAR’s Code of Ethics for Rabbis, expressly forbid us from rendering “pastoral attentions to members of other congregations, havurot, and other religious institutions” if such attentions would harm collegial or institutional relationships. A rabbi, moreover, “should neither solicit nor sanction efforts to solicit members of another congregation.”[1] It is clear, therefore, that by our own takanah, or authoritative legislative enactment, it would be wrong for rabbis and synagogues to engage in the practices described in our she’elah. The problem, of course, is that the Code of Ethics is binding only upon members of the CCAR; it does not apply to other rabbis or to organizations such as Chabad and Aish HaTorah. Hence, our sho’el asks whether such solicitation is prohibited by traditional Jewish law and ethics, that is, by standards that are independent of our own rabbinical community and that other religious Jews would find persuasive and compelling. In particular, our she’elah points to the principle of hasagat gevul, a term drawn from the Torah’s prohibition against removing the boundary markers that separate one’s property from that of one’s neighbor (Deuteronomy 19:14 and 27:17). Although the Biblical sources do not apply this concept to matters outside the realm of property law, it does receive such an interpretation in the classical Midrash and the Geonic literature.[2] By the late medieval period, halakhic authorities use the phrase hasagat gevul to describe unauthorized economic competition, that is, transgression against individual’s legally valid claim to the control of a particular office or market.[3] Might we utilize this principle in our case? When another Jewish organization asks our members for financial support or seeks their participation in its programs or activities, does it “violate the boundaries” that define and protect our synagogue community? To answer this question requires that we make two judgments, one quantitative and one qualitative. On the quantitative side, we should keep in mind that the prohibition of hasagat gevul, when applied to issues like those raised in our she’elah, is an economic concept; its purpose is to protect the livelihood of individuals and businesses against ruinous competition. Under certain conditions, Jewish law allows an existing business to restrain the entry into its market of a potential competitor, on the grounds that the competitor would destroy the livelihood (mekape’ach et parnasato) of the existing business. If the level of competition is not “ruinous” – that is, if the entry of the competitor would not necessarily drive the existing merchant or artisan out of business – this restriction does not apply.[4] As a qualitative matter, restrictions against competition are generally not invoked against those, like melamdim (teachers of Torah to children) and communal rabbis, whose business involves mitzvot.[5]The Talmud justifies this free competition on the principle kin’at sofrim marbah chokhmah, literally, “jealousy among scribes increases wisdom,”[6] essentially, “free intellectual competition is good for Jewish life.” There are, of course, exceptions to this rule.[7] The rabbinate, for example, has become a salaried profession, and rabbis can qualify for the same protections accorded to other professionals.[8] Still, Jewish tradition in general frowns upon actions that artificially restrict competition and free market entry in matters related to Torah and mitzvot, particularly when this competition is not “ruinous.” How do we apply these judgments to cases such as the one described in our she’elah? Are these other Jewish organizations, when they enter our “market,” guilty of hasagat gevul? True, they “compete” with us for funding from the community and for participation by our members in their programs and activities. In the vast majority of cases, however, this competition is far from “ruinous”; the financial stability of our synagogue is not called into question. Moreover, precisely because these organizations perform mitzvot, we want our members to be involved in their programming. The goal of our own activity, after all, is to help produce good and caring Jews, and such people should be involved with other Jewish organizations that fulfill needed and vital tasks. Obviously, we do not want their involvement to lessen the amount of support they give to our synagogue, but on this point, we think, we have little to fear. A Jew who becomes active to the fullest extent in the life of the community will likely be more rather than less conscientious in contributing to the life of our congregation. At any rate, we suffer when we assume a narrow perspective on Jewish community life. When we actively discourage the participation of our own members in the work of other Jewish organizations (and, indeed, in the work of agencies in the general community that feed the hungry and care for the needy), we declare that our congregation is somehow isolated from the concerns that those groups address. A good synagogue, one that is truly committed to the cause of Torah, mitzvot, gemilut chasadim, and tikun ha`olam would not send such a message to its own members and to the community at large. Does this approach change when our “competitors” are Chabad, Aish HaTorah, or other Orthodox groups?[9] Such organizations might be construed as “inimical to Reform Judaism,” thereby forfeiting any claim to our active support.[10] We need not, however, directly oppose their activity on grounds of hasagat gevul. First of all, Jewish tradition does not absolutely forbid a group of individuals within the community from leaving a congregation to form their own synagogue, especially when the new congregation follows a different liturgical ritual (nusach) from the old one, which would certainly be the case here.[11] Moreover, the competition these groups pose to us is hardly “ruinous”; it is highly doubtful that their activity will drive our congregations into insolvency. Nor do we fear exposing our members to their point of view. On the contrary: as liberal Jews, committed to the concept of Jewish religious pluralism, we welcome the vigorous discourse and debate that these groups might introduce into our community. If this should awaken the intellectual curiosity of our members and make them question long-held assumptions about their Judaism, then mah tov; so much the better. Our knowledge of and confidence in our own approach to Jewish belief and practice can only benefit and be strengthened by such encounters. As Reform Jews, open to the intellectual currents of modernity and ready to wrestle with the challenges they present to us, we therefore embrace that ancient dictum: kin’at sofrim marbah chokhmah. Good argument is good for the Jews. Conclusion. Although we Reform rabbis have resolved not to solicit members from other congregations, the traditional principle of hasagat gevul would not prevent other Jewish organizations from soliciting our members to participate in their programs. We should meet these organizations, even if we consider them “competitors,” in a spirit of friendly discussion and argument, with confidence that our own position is right for us. On the other hand, we are under no obligation to provide any assistance to organizations we deem to be “inimical to Reform Judaism.” NOTES 1. Central Conference of American Rabbis, Code of Ethics for Rabbis, Adopted in convention assembled, June, 1991, and as amended in 1993, 1998, 2001, 2003 and 2004, sec. II. C. 3-4, available at 2. In Sifrei Deuteronomy (to 19:14) the prohibition is applied to “one who exchanges the rulings of R. Eliezer with those of R. Yehoshua”; i.e., one who cites the ruling of one sage in the name of the other. Rav Sherira Gaon learns from the verse that “one should not transgress against accepted communal custom (minhag)”, the “boundaries” drawn up by “previous generations” (the responsum is collected in Resp. Sha`arei Tzedek, no. 20 and cited in Tur, Choshen Mishpat 368). The same interpretation is applied to the very similar verse in Proverbs 22:28; see Midrash Mishle, ed. Buber,22:28, and Rashi to the verse. 3. For example, R. Shelomo Luria (16th-century Poland) rules that when an individual has contracted with the local ruler to collect taxes, one who supplants that individual (by offering a higher sum to the ruler) violates the rule of hasagat gevul. Luria concedes that the prohibition in Deut. 19:14 applies strictly to violations of real property rights; nonetheless, the repetition of the prohibition in Deut. 27:17 extends its terms to other aspects of commerce and economic life. See Resp. Maharshal, no. 89. Luria’s contemporary, R. Meir Katznelbogen, applies the rule to competition among merchants; Resp. Maharam Padua, no. 41. 4. B. Bava Batra 21b-22a; Yad, Shekhenim 6:8ff.; Shulchan Arukh Choshen Mishpat 156:5ff. The rules concerning “ruinous competition” (hayored le’omanut chaveiro) are exceedingly complex, and this area of the law is filled with machloket, points of dispute. This is because the halakhah wishes to strike a careful if complicated balance between two important interests. It wishes to protect the livelihood of merchants and artisans; at the same time, it does not oppose free competition, and it recognizes the value of such competition to the economy and to consumers. 5. B. Bava Batra 21b; Yad, Talmud Torah 2:7; Shulchan Arukh Yoreh De`ah 245:22.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jewish Subcultures Online: Outreach, Dating, and Marginalized Communities ______
    JEWISH SUBCULTURES ONLINE: OUTREACH, DATING, AND MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES ____________________________________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Fullerton ____________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in American Studies ____________________________________ By Rachel Sara Schiff Thesis Committee Approval: Professor Leila Zenderland, Chair Professor Terri Snyder, Department of American Studies Professor Carrie Lane, Department of American Studies Spring, 2016 ABSTRACT This thesis explores how Jewish individuals use and create communities online to enrich their Jewish identity. The Internet provides Jews who do not fit within their brick and mortar communities an outlet that gives them voice, power, and sometimes anonymity. They use these websites to balance their Jewish identities and other personal identities that may or may not fit within their local Jewish community. This research was conducted through analyzing a broad range of websites. The first chapter, the introduction, describes the Jewish American population as a whole as well as the history of the Internet. The second chapter, entitled “The Black Hats of the Internet,” discusses how the Orthodox community has used the Internet to create a modern approach to outreach. It focuses in particular on the extensive web materials created by Chabad and Aish Hatorah, which offer surprisingly modern twists on traditional texts. The third chapter is about Jewish online dating. It uses JDate and other secular websites to analyze how Jewish singles are using the Internet. This chapter also suggests that the use of the Internet may have an impact on reducing interfaith marriage. The fourth chapter examines marginalized communities, focusing on the following: Jewrotica; the Jewish LGBT community including those who are “OLGBT” (Orthodox LGBT); Punk Jews; and feminist Jews.
    [Show full text]
  • Was the Chasam Sofer Inconsistent? a Review Essay
    239 Setting the Record Straight: Was the Chasam Sofer Inconsistent? A Review Essay By: NOSSON DOVID RABINOWICH In this essay we will discuss claims made in two recent articles, published by two leading scholars, to the effect that the Chasam Sofer was inconsistent and contradicted himself. I will attempt to show that those supposed “contradictions and inconsistencies” are either simply nonexistent or can be properly explained by careful and deliberate analysis of the actual sources and the issues involved. While my respect for Rabbi Moshe Sofer, the late “Chasam Sofer,” of blessed memory, is not merely that reserved for a great rabbi and outstanding scholar, I have endeavored to maintain a balanced and critical approach throughout. Nevertheless I feel it appropriate to note that from my perspective, Rabbi Sofer was a holy rabbi, a saint if you wish, whose towering scholarship in so many areas of Jewish studies was unmatched by his peers or by any rabbi from any subsequent generation. I do not hesitate to apply to him this popular saying: “From R. Moshe [Ben-Maimon; Maimonidies] until [R.] Moshe [Sofer] there was no one of the stature of R. Moshe [Sofer].”1 1 As the halakhic authority of his generation, he was probably more prolific than any other rabbi going back six hundred years, since the leading halakhic authority of the Golden Age in Spain, Rabbi Shlomo ben Aderet. Of R. Sofer’s peers, only Rabbi Yosef Shaul Nathanson, She-elot Sho’el U’Maishiv, was known to have written more responsa. ______________________________________________________ Nosson Dovid Rabinowich is the Mara d'Asra of Beis Medrash Ahavas Torah, a prolific author, and teacher.
    [Show full text]
  • Jointorah Education Revolution
    the JOIN TORAH EDUCATION REVOLUTION Afikei Torah • Ahavas Torah • Ahava V'achva • Aish HaTorah of Cleveland • Aish HaTorah of Denver • Aish HaTorah of Detroit • Aish HaTorah of Jerusalem • Aish HaTorah of Mexico • Aish HaTorah of NY • Aish HaTorah of Philadelphia • Aish HaTorah of St Louis • Aish HaTorah of Thornhill • Ateres Yerushalayim • Atlanta Scholars Kollel • AZ Russian Programs • Bais Yaakov of Boston • Bais Yaakov of LA • Bar Ilan University • Batya Girls / Torah Links • Bay Shore Jewish Center Be'er Miriam • Belmont Synagogue • Beth Din • Beth Jacob • Beth Jacob Congregation • Beth Tfiloh Upper School Library • Bnei Shalom Borehamwood & • Elstree Synagogue • Boston's Jewish Community Day School • Brandywine Hills Minyan • Calabasas Shul • Camp Bnos Agudah • Chabad at the Beaches • Chabad Chabad of Montreal • Chai Center of West Bay • Chaye Congregation Ahavat Israel Chabad Impact of Torah Live Congregation Beth Jacob of Irvine • Congregation Light of Israel Congregation Derech (Ohr Samayach) Organizations that have used Etz Chaim Center for Jewish Studies Hampstead Garden Suburb Synagogue • Torah Live materials Jewish Community Day Jewish FED of Greater Atlanta / Congregation Ariel • Jewish 600 Keneseth Beth King David Linksfield Primary and High schools • King 500 Mabat • Mathilda Marks Kennedy Jewish Primary School • Me’or 400 Menorah Shul • Meor Midreshet Rachel v'Chaya 206 MTA • Naima Neve Yerushalayim • 106 Ohab Zedek • Ohr Pninim Seminary • 77 Rabbi Reisman Yarchei Kalla • Rabbi 46 Shapell's College • St. John's Wood Synagogue • The 14 Tiferes High Machon Shlomo 1 Me’or HaTorah Meor • Me'or Midreshet Rachel v'Chaya College • Naima Neve Yerushalayim • Ohab Zedek • Ohr Pninim Seminary • Rabbi Reisman Yarchei Kalla • Rabbi 2011 2014 2016 2010 2015 2013 2012 2008 2009 Shapell's College St.
    [Show full text]
  • T S Form, 990-PF Return of Private Foundation
    t s Form, 990-PF Return of Private Foundation OMB No 1545-0052 or Section 4947(a)(1) Nonexempt Charitable Trust Department of the Treasury Treated as a Private Foundation Internal Revenue service Note. The foundation may be able to use a copy of this return to satisfy state report! 2006 For calendar year 2006, or tax year beginning , and ending G Check all that a Initial return 0 Final return Amended return Name of identification Use the IRS foundation Employer number label. Otherwise , HE DENNIS BERMAN FAMILY FOUNDATION INC 31-1684732 print Number and street (or P O box number if mail is not delivered to street address) Room/suite Telephone number or type . 5410 EDSON LANE 220 301-816-1555 See Specific City or town, and ZIP code C If exemption application is pending , check here l_l Instructions . state, ► OCKVILLE , MD 20852-3195 D 1. Foreign organizations, check here Foreign organizations meeting 2. the 85% test, ► H Check type of organization MX Section 501(c)(3) exempt private foundation check here and attach computation = Section 4947(a)(1) nonexempt chartable trust 0 Other taxable private foundation E If private foundation status was terminated I Fair market value of all assets at end of year J Accounting method 0 Cash Accrual under section 507(b)(1)(A), check here (from Part ll, col (c), line 16) 0 Other (specify) F If the foundation is in a 60-month termination $ 5 010 7 3 9 . (Part 1, column (d) must be on cash basis) under section 507 (b)( 1 ► )( B ) , check here ► ad 1 Analysis of Revenue and Expenses ( a) Revenue and ( b) Net investment (c) Adjusted net ( d) Disbursements (The total of amounts in columns (b), (c), and (d) may not for chartable purposes necessary equal the amounts in column (a)) expenses per books income income (cash basis only) 1 Contributions , gifts, grants , etc , received 850,000 .
    [Show full text]
  • Mattos Chassidus on the Massei ~ Mattos Chassidus on the Parsha +
    LIGHTS OF OUR RIGHTEOUS TZADDIKIM בעזרת ה ' יתבר A Tzaddik, or righteous person , makes everyone else appear righteous before Hashem by advocating for them and finding their merits. Kedushas Levi, Parshas Noach (Bereishis 7:1) MATTOS ~ MASSEI _ CHASSIDUS ON THE PARSHA + Dvar Torah – Mattos Keep Your Word The Torah states (30:3), “If a man takes a vow or swears an oath to G -d to establish a prohibition upon himself, he shall not violate his word; he shall fulfill whatever comes out of his mouth.” In relation to this passuk , the Midrash quotes from Tehillim (144:4), “Our days are like a fleeting shadow.” What is the connection? This can be explained, says Rav Levi Yitzchok, according to a Gemara ( Nedarim 10b), which states, “It is forbidden to say, ‘ Lashem korban , for G-d − an offering.’ Instead a person must say, ‘ Korban Lashem , an offering for G -d.’ Why? Because he may die before he says the word korban , and then he will have said the holy Name in vain.” In this light, we can understand the Midrash. The Torah states that a person makes “a vow to G-d.” This i s the exact language that must be used, mentioning the vow first. Why? Because “our days are like a fleeting shadow,” and there is always the possibility that he may die before he finishes his vow and he will have uttered the Name in vain. n Story The wood chopper had come to Ryczywohl from the nearby village in which he lived, hoping to find some kind of employment.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Grants Made to Various Philanthropic Institutions
    2011 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 ANNUAL Schedule of Grants Made to Grants Various Philanthropic Institutions American Folk Art Museum 127,350 American Friends of the College of American Friends of Agudat Shetile Zetim, Inc. 10,401 Management, Inc. 10,000 [ Year ended June 30, 2011 ] American Friends of Aish Hatorah - American Friends of the Hebrew University, Inc. 77,883 Western Region, Inc. 10,500 American Friends of the Israel Free Loan American Friends of Alyn Hospital, Inc. 39,046 Association, Inc. 55,860 ORGANIZATION AMOUNT All 4 Israel, Inc. 16,800 American Friends of Aram Soba 23,932 American Friends of the Israel Museum 1,053,000 13 Plus Chai, Inc. 82,950 Allen-Stevenson School 25,000 American Friends of Ateret Cohanem, Inc. 16,260 American Friends of the Israel Philharmonic 52nd Street Project, Inc. 125,000 Alley Pond Environmental Center, Inc. 50,000 American Friends of Batsheva Dance Company, Inc. 20,000 Orchestra, Inc. 320,850 A.B.C., Inc. of New Canaan 10,650 Alliance for Cancer Gene Therapy, Inc. 44,950 The American Friends of Beit Issie Shapiro, Inc. 70,910 American Friends of the Jordan River A.J. Muste Memorial Institute 15,000 Alliance for Children Foundation, Inc. 11,778 American Friends of Beit Morasha 42,360 Village Foundation 16,000 JEWISH COMMUNAL FUND JEWISH COMMUNAL Aaron Davis Hall, Inc. d/b/a Harlem Stage 125,000 Alliance for School Choice, Inc. 25,000 American Friends of Beit Orot, Inc. 44,920 American Friends of the Old City Cheder in Abingdon Theatre Company 30,000 Alliance for the Arts, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Schreiber QX
    AARON M. SCHREIBER The H. atam Sofer’s Nuanced Attitude Towards Secular Learning, Maskilim, and Reformers Introduction abbi Moshe Sofer (1762-1839), commonly referred to as H. atam RSofer (after the title of his famous halakhic work), served as Rabbi of Pressburg, a major city in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, beginning in 1806. Subsequently, he became one of the principal leaders of the Orthodox Jewish community in Central Europe in the first four decades of the 19th century. R. Sofer was at the forefront of the orthodox strug- gles against the Jewish Reform movement.1 A towering halakhic author- ity whose rulings and opinions were sought by many from near and far, he was also known as a z.addik and as a person of unwavering principles to which he adhered regardless of the personal struggle required.2 He was charismatic and was reputed to be graced with the Divine Spirit, AARON M. SCHREIBER has been a tenured Professor of Law at a number of American law schools, and a founder and Professor of Law at Bar-Ilan University Faculty of Law in Israel. His published books include Jewish Law and Decision Making: A Study Through Time, and Jurisprudence: Understanding and Shaping Law (with W. Michael Reisman of Yale Law School). He has authored numerous articles on law, jurisprudence, and Jewish subjects, and was the Principal Investigator for many years of the computerized Jewish Responsa (She’elot u-Teshuvot) Project at Bar-Ilan University. 123 The Torah u-Madda Journal (11/2002-03) 124 The Torah u-Madda Journal even to receive visions of events in the future and in far away places.3 As a result, he had a profound influence on religious Jewry, particularly in Hungary, Poland, and all of Central Europe, both during and after his lifetime.
    [Show full text]
  • A Note on Historiography, Printing, and the Power of Hearsay in a Position of Rabad
    “It Is Upon Him to Bring the Proof”: A Note on Historiography, Printing, and the Power of Hearsay in a Position of Rabad Yaakov Jaffe and David Shabtai One of the most original but also controversial positions of the twelfth-century Talmudist Rabad (Rabbi Abraham ben David) of Posquières was his ruling that the prohibition that prohibits kohanim from incurring ritual defilement no longer applied.1 Rabad’s ruling has been consistently challenged and called into question on both logical and historical-critical grounds. Historically, the analysis of Rabad’s opinion is a paradigmatic case of the power of hearsay, the role of “luck” in publishing the positions of the rishonim, and the impact of these positions on Jewish law, particularly in light of what the authors believed to be the Rabad’s true opinion on the matter. Rabad’s position is formulated succinctly in his glosses to Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah. Rabad challenges Maimonides’ read- ing of a key Talmudic passage in Nazir 42b and concludes: 1 Rabad uses the words ba-zeman ha-zeh, “in our days,” over the course of his presentation—implying that the law is entirely inapplicable in our day and that even infant kohanim who had never come into contact with impurity could be lenient. Responsa Hatam Sofer no. 340 takes the phrase literally, but still argues that Rabad did not mean to say the prohibition did not categorically apply today. A nonliteral reading seems to be the most accurate, though, when the words are viewed in the context of Rabad’s and the Talmudic discussions, as will be dis- cussed below.
    [Show full text]
  • 9 Sivan 1807.Dwd
    SIVAN Life's splendor forever lies in wait 1 Sivan about each one of us in all its fullness, but veiled from view, deep down, Day Forty-five, making six weeks and three days, of the invisible, far off. It is there, though, Omer not hostile, not reluctant, not deaf. If Rosh Hodesh Sivan Hillula of Bohemian-born Austrian writer Franz Kafka, you summon it by the right word, by its pictured at right. Kafka was an admirer of right name, it will come. –Franz Kafka anarcho-communist theoretician Pyotr Kropotkin. As an elementary and secondary school student, Kafka wore a red carnation in his lapel to show his support for socialism. (1 Sivan 5684, 3 June 1924) Hillula of Polish-born U.S. labor lawyer Jack Zucker. When Senator Joseph McCarthy impugned Zucker’s patriotism, Zucker retorted, “I have more patriotism in my little finger than you have in your entire body!” (1 Sivan 5761, 23 May 2001) Hillula of Samaritan High Priest Levi ben Abisha ben Pinhas ben Yitzhaq, the first Samaritan High Priest to visit the United States (1 Sivan 5761, 23 May 2001) Hillula of U.S. labor leader Gus Tyler, pictured at right. Born Augustus Tilove, he adopted the sur- name Tyler as a way of honoring Wat Tyler, the leader of a 14th-century English peasant rebellion. (1 Sivan 5771, 3 June 2011) Hillula of Annette Dreyfus Benacerraf, niece of 1965 Nobel laureate in Physiology or Medicine Jacques Monod and wife of 1980 Nobel laureate in Physiology or Medicine Baruj Benacerraf (1 Sivan 5771, 3 June 2011) 2 Sivan Day Forty-six, making six weeks and four days, of the Omer Hillula of Rebbe Israel Hager of Vizhnitz, pictured at near right.
    [Show full text]
  • CONTENTS Editor's Introduction to the Kislev 5765 Edition Eugene Korn
    CONTENTS Editor’s Introduction to the Kislev 5765 Edition Eugene Korn ARTICLES Rabbis Joseph B. Soloveitchik and Abraham Joshua Heschel on Jewish-Christian Relations Reuven Kimelman Contemporary Fads and Torah u-Madda: A Response to Alan Brill Yitzchak Blau Response by Alan Brill Women and Writing the Megillah Ross Singer Edah in Israel Saul. J. Berman Moshe Tur-Paz From De’ot The Challenge of Unmarried Women: Does Defining Them as a “Problem” Meet a Social Need? Hagit Bartov REVIEW ESSAYS A Critique of Expanding the Palace of Torah: Orthodoxy and Feminism by Tamar Ross Yoel Finkelman Response by Tamar Ross Tears of the Oppressed by Aviad Hacohen Michael J. Broyde REVIEW What Makes a Book Orthodox? Wrestling With God and Men by Steve Greenberg Reviewed by Asher Lopatin The Edah Journal 4:2 Edah Inc. © 2004 Kislev 5765 The Edah Journal A Forum of Modern Orthodox Discourse Statement of Purpose The Edah Journal is a forum for discussion of Orthodox Judaism’s engagement with modernity. It is Edah’s conviction that such discourse is vital to nurturing the spiritual and religious experiences of Modern Orthodox Jews. Committed to the norms of halakhah and Torah, The Edah Journal is dedicated to free inquiry and will be ever mindful that, “Truth is the seal of the Holy One, Blessed be He.” Editorial Board Eugene Korn - Editor Naftali Harcsztark – Associate Editor Joel Linsider – Text Editor Moshe Halbertal (Israel) Richard Joel Norma Baumel Joseph Simcha Krauss Barry Levy Dov Linzer Tamar Ross (Israel) Directions for Submissions The Edah Journal invites submissions of original scholarly and popular essays, as well as new English translations of Hebrew works.
    [Show full text]
  • Vertientes Del Judaismo #3
    CLASES DE JUDAISMO VERTIENTES DEL JUDAISMO #3 Por: Eliyahu BaYonah Director Shalom Haverim Org New York Vertientes del Judaismo • LA ORTODOXIA MODERNA • La Ortodoxia moderna comprende un espectro bastante amplio de movimientos, cada extracción toma varias filosofías aunque relacionados distintamente, que en alguna combinación han proporcionado la base para todas las variaciones del movimiento de hoy en día. • En general, la ortodoxia moderna sostiene que la ley judía es normativa y vinculante, y concede al mismo tiempo un valor positivo para la interacción con la sociedad contemporánea. Vertientes del Judaismo • LA ORTODOXIA MODERNA • En este punto de vista, el judaísmo ortodoxo puede "ser enriquecido" por su intersección con la modernidad. • Además, "la sociedad moderna crea oportunidades para ser ciudadanos productivos que participan en la obra divina de la transformación del mundo en beneficio de la humanidad". • Al mismo tiempo, con el fin de preservar la integridad de la Halajá, cualquier área de “fuerte inconsistencia y conflicto" entre la Torá y la cultura moderna debe ser evitada. La ortodoxia moderna, además, asigna un papel central al "Pueblo de Israel " Vertientes del Judaismo • LA ORTODOXIA MODERNA • La ortodoxia moderna, como una corriente del judaísmo ortodoxo representado por instituciones como el Consejo Nacional para la Juventud Israel, en Estados Unidos, es pro-sionista y por lo tanto da un estatus nacional, así como religioso, de mucha importancia en el Estado de Israel, y sus afiliados que son, por lo general, sionistas en la orientación. • También practica la implicación con Judíos no ortodoxos que se extiende más allá de "extensión (kiruv)" a las relaciones institucionales y la cooperación continua, visto como Torá Umaddá.
    [Show full text]
  • A Taste of Torah
    Parshas Bo January 11, 2019 A Taste of Torah Stories for the Soul G-d in the Details by Rabbi Chaim Yeshia Freeman Scroll Down This week’s parsha discusses the final properly express our gratitude to Baron Shimon Wolf Rothschild, three plagues that Hashem brought Hashem. For instance, when we recite of the famed Rothschild family, upon the Egyptians, culminating in a blessing over bread, we should try to wanted a Torah scroll written for him, as per the commandment in the Exodus from Egypt. This event think about the numerous details of the Torah that a Jew should write plays a major role in our lives, as we the natural world that are necessary his own Torah scroll. He searched are commanded in numerous mitzvos to create a loaf of bread. Rabbi Yisroel for a sofer who would live up to the to remember the Exodus. Typically, Salanter (1809-1883) adds another high standards of piety he wanted we commemorate the general concept dimension with a parable of someone imbued in his Torah scroll. Finally, of the Exodus on a daily basis. Once eating in a high-end restaurant. The he found a sofer who enjoyed an a year, however, on Pesach, we are exorbitant prices are not due only excellent reputation, and hired obligated to retell the complete story to the food, but also include the him to write the Torah scroll. in detail. elegant décor, the relaxed ambiance, After many months, the sofer came When Moshe commands the Jewish the beautiful music playing in the to tell the Baron that the scroll People to remember the Exodus, he background.
    [Show full text]