Category Archives: Jewish

,

The Jewish People are “a family that became a faith while remaining a family”

Kedushat Yisrael, the metaphysical distinctiveness of the children of the patriarchs and matriarchs, is a consequence of ancient Israel standing at Sinai, and after hearing the word of God and experiencing revelation, agreeing to accept the responsibilities of being God’s chosen people. This kedusha is given concrete expression in a lifestyle characterized by observing the mitzvot. Kedusha is ever and always defined in proximity to the Holy One. Kedushat Yisrael is transmitted by mother to child because each mother is a child of someone who is of the sacred family of Abraham and Sarah, and thus possesses kedusha. Yisrael is a family that became a faith while remaining a family.

Yehiel E. Poupko, “Making Jews: Conversion and Mitzvot”, Sh’ma (March 2011), 13.

,

“Judaism cannot just be a commitment to the Jewish people, love of Israel or even just ritual observance…”

Judaism cannot just be a commitment to the Jewish people, love of Israel or even just ritual observance. As important as each is, none will ensure Jewish survival as much as belief — belief in the God of the Torah and in the Torah of God.

Dennis Prager, “No Faith, No Jewish Future”, The Jewish Journal (8-14 November 2013), 7.

,

“As things look now, the American Jewish group of the future will be anchored by the Orthodox and by those among the non-Orthodox willing to identify unambiguously with Judaism”

As things look now, the American Jewish group of the future will be anchored by the Orthodox and by those among the non-Orthodox willing to identify unambiguously with Judaism. Boasting higher fertility rates than other Jews, this population will insure the future viability of the American Jewish community, albeit considerably shrunken in its numbers and infrastructure. On the periphery will be the so-called borderland Jews whose interest in Jewish life will likely focus on one or another aspect of Jewish culture but will be episodic and in competition with other compelling aspects of their identities. Already, some children of intermarriage refer to themselves with sardonic self-consciousness as “Half-Jews” or “mongrel Jews” or “FrankenJews.”

Jack Wertheimer, “Intermarriage: Can Anything Be Done?” Mosaic (September 2013).

“The charedi world, in the main,…has yet to come to grips with the realities of today”

The charedi world, in the main, especially the “Lithuanian” branch (with whom I identify myself as belonging to), has yet to come to grips with the realities of today. It is still fighting the battle of the nineteenth century against secular Zionism, a battle long ago ended and not relevant any longer in today’s Jewish world.

Part of the problem is changing this mindset of complete disconnect with reality. We have grown so comfortable over the past centuries of Jewish life as being the persecuted victim, that we are frightened to shuck off that protective mantle. We see the world in black and white colors only – the good guys and the villains. There is no room for nuance or moderation in such a worldview.

If we are involved in rabbinic scandal, financial misdeeds, abusive physical and sexual behavior, violence against police, corrupt elections (and those elected thereby) and are caught by the authorities for so doing, the immediate knee-jerk reaction is that we are being persecuted because of our religious practices, different dress, traditional lifestyle and distinct societal mores.

Somehow we have forgotten that idleness, poverty and a persecution complex all are, in the long run, self-destructive conditions. These were the conditions that secularized much of Ashkenazic Jewry over the past three centuries. Eventually a system built on declining governmental welfare allotments and unending charity from others – a system decried by Maimonides and other great rabbinic sages and religious leaders throughout the ages – is a Ponzi scheme that inexorably will collapse of its own weight.

And we are ill served by religious political leaders and the handlers of old and revered great Torah scholars who, for purposes I have never really understood, oppose any change of the current miserable status quo. And, there is never any plan advanced to help rescue their adherents from the deepening abyss of poverty and personal despair.

Rabbi Berel Wein, “The Truth of Satire“, Rabbi Wein’s Weekly Blog (4 December 2013).

“You can follow the halakhic system and method of Rambam to disagree with Rambam on a specific issue”

For Maimonides, he acknowledged that the authority that he had to write the Mishneh Torah wasn’t from himself, it was really from the Talmud; in that, according to the language of the Rambam, you follow מי שהדעת נוטה – whomever convinces you the best.

By what does it mean the best? Having the best read of the Talmudic law; such that, if you have a better read of the Gemara than the Rambam, then you can disagree with the Rambam. Or, to put it another way, you can follow the halakhic system and method of Rambam to disagree with Rambam on a specific issue; meaning Rambam can write something is Jewish law – you can go back to the Gemara and say “Excuse me, Mr. Rambam, that’s not what the Gemara says.” or “We have a better text.” And, that way, even if people say, “Oh, aren’t you arguing with the Rambam?”, the answer is yes and no: you’re following the method, which is a lot more important than the details of the person, the individual.

So, Maimonides derived whatever authority he had only based on the Talmud, itself.

Rabbi Josh Yuter, “Halakhic Process 27 – Summary and Conclusions”, Yutopia Podcast #123 (10 November 2013).

,

“The Jewish community needs to pivot from the current [synagogue] model to a more authentic one”

The current American form of Judaism developed as a reaction to the mass immigration of Jews into a free society and the headlong drive to acclimate and acculturate to the societal norms of the time. In order to prevent the masses of Jews from abandoning Judaism in the process of adjustment to a new land, a new emphasis was placed on the institution in Judaism. This emphasis reflected the prevailing religious norms of the society, namely those of Christianity, which is church-centered.
…
The practical result was that the synagogue, and membership in these institutions, became the distorted focus of Jewish religious life. It no longer mattered if one lacked in Jewish observance or Torah learning. So long as one was a dues-paying member of the synagogue or temple and attended regularly, or even just occasionally, one fulfilled the obligation necessary to be a good Jew. One could even become a prominent and respected member of the community in this way — particularly, if one contributed generously to the institution he or she belonged to, or contributed to the local federation and Israel.

I believe that it is this synagogue-focused paradigm that young people are rejecting — and I don’t blame them. Though it is true that the accumulated impact of close to a century of this misconception has left its mark, I believe that this is reversible.

The Jewish community needs to pivot from this current prevailing model to a more authentic one that emphasizes the personal observance of mitzvot and engagement in religious life. Whether it is the realm of “between man to man or man to God” they are both ultimately about man’s relationship with God. Without this core, nothing can be sustained for long.

Rabbi Shmuel Kaplan, “A Rabbi Sees Silver Lining In Study’s Finding’s”, The Jewish Week (1 November 2013), 26.

The 15th-16th and 19th-20th centuries were popular times of editing Jewish texts

A fertile boom in editing Jewish texts is seen in the 15th and 16th centuries in various centres of learning, above all Italy. Basically, the nature of such editions is the attempt to offer a vulgata – a common readable text – of some manuscripts, mostly by an eclectic method. Not until the 19th century, and following the major trends of the new academic sciences, did the scholars developing the Wissenschaft des Judentums consider it of utmost importance to reach standards in editing texts of rabbinic and medieval literature. Leopold Zunz, the “founder” of the science of Judaism, critically noted that the “so-called editiones principes, as soon as they accomplish more than a reproduction of manuscripts, (. . .) can rightly make the claim of being preliminary literary studies.” A significant number of editions were completed in this key period and remain an indispensable tool on the desk of every scholar of rabbinic, medieval and early modern literature.

Giuseppe Veltri, “From The Best Text To The Pragmatic Edition: On Editing Rabbinic Texts”, in The New Testament and Rabbinic Literature, eds. Reimund Bieringer, Florentino García Martínez, Didier Pollefeyt, Peter Tomson (Leiden & Boston: Brill, 2010), 63-64.

“We need to spend more time and thought engaging more people in our missions and expanding donor bases with smaller donations”

Too many leaders and too many boards spend too much time cultivating relationships with a payoff, raising big money and not necessarily engaging in community building on every level. We need to spend more time and thought engaging more people in our missions and expanding donor bases with smaller donations. Political campaigns have benefited enormously from micro-giving, helping people feel that they are part of the energy and the community and not merely a pledge card with a pulse.

It is time we asked ourselves what we are doing to make the invisible more visible in our organizations.

Erica Brown, “We Need Jewish Micro-Giving”, The Jewish Week (1 November 2013), 66.

,

“There is no Judaism without mitzvot…”

Judaism is constituted of the acceptance and practice of the mitzvot. Thus, it is inconceivable that a non-Jew could enter the nation of Israel and acquire kedushat Yisrael without acceptance of the yoke of mitzvot. There is no Judaism without mitzvot. However, there have been different halakhic positions over the centuries as to whether or not the acceptance of mitzvot requires the complete and perfect knowledge and practice of the mitzvot at the time of conversion, like circumcision and immersion in the mikvah.

Yehiel E. Poupko, “Making Jews: Conversion and Mitzvot”, Sh’ma (March 2011), 13.

,

“the order in which Hanukkah candles are lit, underwent an evolution over many centuries…”

The lighting of Hanukkah candles is undoubtedly one of the most widespread and certainly the most recognized custom among the Jewish people.

Nevertheless most Jews are unaware that the ritual of the lighting and, more precisely, the order in which Hanukkah candles are lit, underwent an evolution over many centuries and that the order which has been adopted by the overwhelming majority of Jewish people was initially a marginal rite originating in France.

…

The emergence of the French rite was the result of an extraordinary combination of circumstances, including: the importance and prominence of R. Joseph Colon; the adoption of his ruling by R. Joseph Caro in Beit Yoseph and then in Shulhan Arukh; and the adoption of this rite by the Ari and his followers. The successful spread of Hassidism also contributed to the general acceptance of this rite in Eastern Europe, where other traditional rites still prevailed.

Today an overwhelming majority of Jews follow the French rite, while concurrently, the French Siddur, once considered as important as the German Siddur of Rhineland, died out completely and can only be found in rare books and manuscripts.

J. Jean Ajdler, “The Order of Lighting the Hanukkah Candles: The Evolution of a Custom and the Influence of the Publication of the Shulhan Arukh”, Hakirah 7 (Winter 2009), 205.