Women's Prayer Groups: R. Hershel Schachter's Position II

I post the following in response to Comments by Ben to this post. Angry White Male, whoever he is, wrote generally in the same vein as I am. Ben: In order to evaluate his arguments, you need to ask if he applies them boardly, or only in this case.Evaluate his arguments for what purpose? To understand what he says or to determine whether you would rule likewise? If the latter, and you are of sufficient stature to disagree with him, then you are correct. I doubt that. If you wish to understand then you might want to reread my "Prefatory Comments" about why R. Schachter might rule more strictly in this matter than in others. Ben: For example, in I and IV he is concerned that women are giving up on the various benefits of shul davening to go to the WPG. Is he similarly insistent that all women...

Read the rest of this entry »

On Interfaith Dialogue

There is an excellent discussion in the "comments" section of The House of Hock regarding interfaith dialogue. The question revolves around Rav Soloveitchik's claim, in his famous essay "Confrontation", that religious experience is very personal and cannot be communicated through dialogue. While this would rule out interfaith dialogue, it also seems to rule out intrafaith dialogue, a seemingly ludicrous proposition. The following is Dr. David Berger's resolution of this dilemma, one that I believe to be entirely correct. Great thinkers do not write transparent nonsense. They do sometimes engage in rhetorical hyperbole, and the more obvious it is that the literal understanding of a hyperbolic assertion cannot be intended, the more an author has the right to rely on the reader to understand...

Read the rest of this entry »

Women's Prayer Groups: R. Hershel Schachter's Position

Prefatory Comments When a question is posed before a posek, there are a whole host of considerations for him to take into account. This is particularly true when the underlying issues are subject to dispute and can go either way. The posek, then, has the right to rule according to whichever opinions he believes to be appropriate. If a posek believes that the contemporary context requires stringency then he may certainly rule strictly on any questionable matter. Furthermore, if he believes that there is a general laxity in an area of practice he may even prohibit something that is techincally permissible. For example, the Amora Rav found that people were insufficiently careful regarding forbidden mixtures of meat and milk so he went even further and prohibited the consumption of an animal's...

Read the rest of this entry »

Women's Prayer Groups: Coming Soon

This is just to notify readers that my current plans include initiating a discussion of Women's Prayer Groups. The plan is to post four separate summaries of the positions of the following rabbis (in this order): R. Hershel Schachter, R. Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, R. Yehuda Henkin, R. Eliezer Berkovits & others. Interlaced in my summary will be my own comments and critiques, from which my readers will be easily able to discern my views. This will hopefully lead to some lively and insightful inter-blog discussions. However, I will be offline for most of Pesah so this will have to be a longer-term proje...

Read the rest of this entry »

Cardinals in the Beis Midrash II

In further to the discussion about the officially sanctioned visit of cardinals to Yeshiva University's beis midrash, I thought the following analysis of R. Yosef Dov Soloveitchik's position by Prof. Lawrence Kaplan is worthy of note. This is taken from Prof. Kaplan's article in Judaism 48:3 (1999), provocatively titled "Revisionism and the Rav; the Struggle for the Soul of Modern Orthodoxy". (My citation of Prof. Kaplan's views should not be taken as my agreement with his analysis) First excerpt: Because R. Meiselman misunderstands the Rav's position regarding universalism and singularism, he also misunderstands and misrepresents the Rav's stance on interfaith dialogue. R. Meiselman, referring to the Rav's essay "Confrontation," claims that "When Pope John XXIII opened dialogue with the...

Read the rest of this entry »

Judging Favorably

Over Shabbos, I was discussing with my wife the recent stories in the news about prominent members of the frum community whose sins (particularly sex-related) have been recently publicly revealed. My wife wisely said that it is incumbent upon us to believe that, if these allegations are true, these people are the rare exceptions and certainly nowhere near the norm in our community. If we believe that adhering to basic standards is unusual then we will be more complacent with our own spiritual standing. For selfish reasons, if for no other, we must judge our community favorably. My wife is not learned enough to have sources for this idea but her pious intuition served her well. This can be found in R. Yitzhak of Corbille’s Semak, mitzvah 225: Included in this [mitzvah] is to judge one’s...

Read the rest of this entry »

Homosexuality in Halakhah IV

R. Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb in this week's The Jewish Week: The position of traditional Judaism on homosexual behavior is clear and unambiguous, terse and absolute. Homosexual behavior between males or between females is absolutely forbidden by Jewish law, beginning with the biblical imperative, alluded to numerous times in the Talmud and codified in the Shulchan Aruch... Nevertheless, while the sources irrevocably forbid homosexual relationships and overt homosexual behavior, there are other issues that are more nuanced and must be clarified. One has to do with the attitude toward homosexual individuals prescribed by Jewish tradition. Here it is critical to adopt the distinction, already implicit in numerous rabbinical texts, between the sin and the sinner; that is, between the person and...

Read the rest of this entry »

Zebu Controversy II

Another online article that discusses the issues involved in the Zebu controversy: Buffalo, Giraffe, and the Babirusa ("Kosher Pig"): The Halakhic and Scientific Factors in Determining their Kashrut Status by R. Dr. Ari Z. Zivotofsky, originally published in the Bar Ilan journal BDD, 20...

Read the rest of this entry »

Homosexuality in Halakhah III

As further to this ongoing discussion, and in response to my friend Sholem's recent post on his blog, I continue the dialogue. Let me start out by saying that the burden of proof is on those who wish to limit - for all intents and purposes, set aside - a biblical prohibition. This is a very serious suggestion, one over which the proposer should tremble from the weight of the responsibility. Yet, as many have shown, the arguments in favor of this proposal are at best tenuous and at worst simply untenable. Exhibit A Can God address relationships that did not exist at the time of the Torah? To the extent that such a thing can be directly predicated of God, I say, "Sure, why not?" The only problem is showing that God does address, via the prohibition in Leviticus, these currently existing relationships....

Read the rest of this entry »

The Camel, The Hare, And The Hyrax II

I got my copy of R. Nosson Slifkin's The Camel, The Hare, And The Hyrax. As is the author's usual style, the book is beautifully done, with many pictures and a colorful cover. Unlike his other books, this one does not have enormous margins. This book is legitimately 200+ pages (albeit with a large font, but I attribute that to concern for readability). The book has three letters of approbation - one in Hebrew from R. Yisroel Belsky of Torah Vodaas and the OU (although his letterhead does not mention any position); one from R. Chaim Malinowitz, the general editor of the Artscroll Gemara series; and one from R. Mordechai Kornfeld, rosh kollel of Kollel Iyun Hadaf. The last two are in English but the first, which I find the most interesting, is in Hebrew. Below is my woefully inadequate translation...

Read the rest of this entry »

Cardinals in the Beis Midrash: A Rundown of Positions

On Monday, January 19th, a delegation of Roman Catholic cardinals, along with some Yeshiva University (YU) roshei yeshiva, entered YU's main beis midrash (study hall) and proceeded to look around and talk with some of the men who were studying in the packed beis midrash at the time. Yeshiva College's undergraduate newspaper, The Commentator, reported the following from an interview with YU Chancellor R. Dr. Norman Lamm: "In addition, Dr. Lamm sees no further role for Yeshiva in ongoing discussions. 'We acted as hosts at the request of the World Jewish Congress,' he said. 'We're not involved in further dialogue and we don't intend to get involved.'" The newspaper further reported from an interview with a mashgi'ah ruhani in YU, R. Yosef Blau: "Rabbi Blau added that the cardinals asked to see...

Read the rest of this entry »

The Bialystoker Controversy II

The following is an excerpt from a letter that R. Zvi Romm, rabbi of the Bialystoker Synagogue, sent to The Jewish Press in response to R. J. Simcha Cohen's column about carrying children in the Lower East Side. Let me just add that R. Romm is a jolly, gentle person - basically, Rabbi Smurf - and he does not have a bone of malice in his body. The Jewish Press Feb. 13, 2004 A Community And Its Poskim     We in the Bialystoker Synagogue enjoyed a pleasant Shabbat Bereishit when Rabbi J. Simcha Cohen regaled us with a sparkling lecture, delivered with wit and aplomb. Apparently the experience made an impression on him as well, because Rabbi Cohen's most recent column ("Carrying a Child on the Sabbath," Jewish Press, February 6) makes reference to an incident he witnessed...

Read the rest of this entry »

Zebu Controversy

The Zoo Rabbi, R. Nosson Slifkin, has posted a write-up on the Zebu controversy going on in Israel. To those of us in America, who eat turkey and whose rabbinical supervisory agencies approve of serving bison, there is no issue at all and Zebu is a kosher anim...

Read the rest of this entry »

The Bialystoker Controversy

The following column was in The Jewish Press over a month ago and started quite a controversy. I will reproduce portions of the column, with my comments interpersed. The Jewish Press Friday, February 6, 2004 Halachic Questions Rabbi J. Simcha Cohen Carrying A Child On The Sabbath        Question: What is one to do on the Sabbath, in an area not covered by an eruv, when a child who is already in a thoroughfare simply refuses to walk?        Response: Not too long ago I was on the Lower East Side on Shabbat in order to deliver the opening monthly Friday evening lecture at the Bialystoker Synagogue. As I was walking home the next morning after prayer services, I witnessed the following scene.        A young child was sitting...

Read the rest of this entry »

The Limits of Orthodox Theology II

More on this subject. The following is based on someone else's notes of R. Dr. Shnayer Z. Leiman's shiur on Marc Shapiro's new book. 1. It is methodologically unsound to argue that the Rambam did not believe in a literal tehiyas ha-meisim (bodily resurrection of the dead) when the Rambam himself wrote an essay declaring that he did believe in it. 2. No rishon disagreed with all or even most of the Rambam's 13 principles. Some even criticized the Rambam for not including more. Rather, the 13 principles represents the consensus of rishonim - and not just moderns. 3. Dr. Shapiro did not show the proper respect in disagreeing with or simply dismissing important schola...

Read the rest of this entry »

The Shape of the Menorah

The exact shape of the menorah that was used in the Temple is, to a degree, a matter of debate. In particular, the shape of the branches of the menorah was a matter about which the rishonim disagreed. R. Avraham Ibn Ezra, in his long commentary to Shemos 25:32, writes that the branches were half circles. Rashi, ad loc., writes that the branches were diagonal, but that statement is, in my opinion, inconclusive because he could have been implying a diagonal curve rather than a straight line. However, R. Avraham Ben HaRambam writes in his commentary to that verse that the branches were straight and not curved. The archaeological evidence has strongly...

Read the rest of this entry »

More on the Zoo Rabbi

The Torah Tour of the Bronx Zoo Back again by popular demand for the fourth year! One of the largest urban zoos in the world, the Bronx Zoo has a stunning variety of displays. There will be a Torah tour of the Bronx Zoo on March 28, 2004, and possibly also on May 2. The price is $18 for adults and $12 for children (2-12) which does not include admission. The first tour starts at 10 a.m., the second at 1:30 pm. Both tours last around 2 1/2 to 3 hours. Advance reservations are required and places will be limited; please email bronxtour@zootorah.com with the number of adults and children, and a contact phone number (preferably a cellphone) to make a reservation. Please help spread the word! You can download a poster for this tour in PDF format by clicking he...

Read the rest of this entry »

New Book: The Camel, The Hare, And The Hyrax

The Camel, The Hare, And The Hyrax A study of the laws of animals with one kosher sign in light of modern zoology by Rabbi Nosson Slifkin Free sample chapter (pdf): Shafan - The Hy...

Read the rest of this entry »

Homosexuality in Halakhah II

As posted earlier, Zackary Sholem Berger was kind enough to post to his blog my comments on CR. Simchah Roth’s paper on homosexuality. ZS Berger also added his own super-comments onto my comments. The following is my response to ZS Berger: 1. Main Thesis First and foremost, we must understand what S. Roth was trying to do in his paper. On p. 5 n. 26, S. Roth offers the following important statement: Other Conservative respondents have made a case for a re-interpretation or new understanding of the relevant biblical verses. Of these the most important by far is the valiant responsum of Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson, which was not accepted by the CJLS… My hesitation concerning his responsum is not regarding what I find in it but regarding what I do not find in it. My own preference, as I indicated...

Read the rest of this entry »

The Limits of Orthodox Theology

Professor Marc B. Shapiro, of Scranton University, recently published a fascinating book titled The Limits of Orthodox Theology: Maimonides' Thirteen Principles Reappraised which is an expanded version of an article he published 11 years ago in The Torah u-Mada Journal. An excellent article by Steven I. Weiss was published in the Forward newspaper about this book and its controversial nature. The following are some of my comments after carefully reading the book. I have written a more complete critique and submitted it for publication in a scholarly journal. For now, these short comments will have to suffice. 1. Extreme Interpretations Shapiro consistently conveys the most extreme interpretations of sources and, while he notes that there are other possible explanations, assumes that these...

Read the rest of this entry »

Apology

I apologize that the first major post on the Hirhurim* blog is about homosexuality. No, the irony was not lost on me. But this was not intended to shed light on the intended meaning of the blog's name. * Hirhurim is a term that frequently refers to sexual fantas...

Read the rest of this entry »

Homosexuality in Halakhah

In a post titled "Conservosexuality, II", blogger Zackary Sholem Berger linked to a number of halakhic papers from scholars of the Conservative movement regarding Homosexuality and halakhah. Being the industrious and curious person that I am, I printed out two of the papers to read -- one paper by CRabbi Joel Roth titled simply Homosexuality and another by CRabbi Simchah Roth titled "Dear David - Homosexual Relations: A Halakhic Investigation". Mr. ZS Berger evidently found the Simcha Roth paper to be convincing while I did not. Below are my comments that I sent to ZS Berger and asked him to post on his blog. He graciously did so and appended his comments to the post. The following are my uninterrupted comments with minor changes: Dear Sholem, On your blog you raised the issue of halakhah...

Read the rest of this entry »