Tumgik
#halachah
anonymousdandelion · 2 years
Text
Judaism, Loopholes, and Wrestling of Love
I was part of a conversation earlier about practices on Pesach. Specifically, the conversation touched on the tendency in Judaism, when it comes to the intricacies of halachah, to come up with loopholes that, while technically within the letter of the law, are... creative.
And then I got to musing. (Because really, what else is there to do when you need something to distract from panicking over erev Pesach?)
Loopholes are something of a Jewish specialty, after all. Selling our chametz items to a non-Jew for the duration of Pesach, only for the purchaser to (surprise!) withdraw from the purchase as soon as the holiday is over. Erecting an eruv, a bunch of wires making an entire community technically count as one “private" property. There are plenty of other examples. Some of them are baked into the law from the beginning, others got established at a later point in time. 
We’re good at loopholes. And you know, we joke about it among ourselves, and that’s all well and good and fun... but it is also something for which Jews and Judaism are often mocked by outsiders. Sometimes light mockery, sometimes something much more vicious. Sometimes it’s an intentional attack upon our values and ways of life, sometimes it’s just genuine confusion. (I certainly can’t blame anyone for the latter!)
To some, finding and utilizing loopholes comes across as disrespectful. How can we be sincere in our beliefs and practice, they may wonder, if we’re seemingly doing everything we can to get out of following the very laws we claim to live by? Do we really think we’re fooling G-d by claiming the food in the cellar belongs to a neighbor for a week? (Spoiler: No.)
And... I get it. If you look at it from the outside, it likely does come across that way. Hypocritical. Devious. (Very common antisemitic tropes, incidentally. But I digress.) Malicious compliance, etc.
But I'm thinking about it, and it occurs to me that perhaps this is part of what makes Jewish culture, religion, beliefs, and values different from other theological approaches.
This kind of theme is nothing new for us. Jews are, have always been, the questioners. The G-d-wrestlers. It’s in our very name for ourselves, in our texts and our traditions, in our past and in our present.
But the thing is, questioning isn’t about rejecting. Wrestling isn’t about hating. Quite the contrary: It’s a key, fundamental part of who we are, how we express our love for and commitment to the very laws, customs, and G-d that we grapple with. We wouldn’t wrestle so hard if we didn’t care so much.
I think loopholes are part of that.
Look, if what we wanted was to avoid following the rules, there would be a much simpler way of doing so: we could just not follow the rules! Nobody’s forcing us to go through all these complicated practices and procedures. Especially living in the diaspora, what could be easier than to just... not bother? I don’t know about you, but my life would certainly be less stressful this time of year.
But we don’t say, "I’m going to keep my chametz despite what Jewish law dictates, because I want to.” We say, “I’m going to sell my chametz, because Jewish law dictates that I do so.“
And then we say, “Okay, what’s the best way of making this work?”
Of course we don’t think we’re fooling G-d. But that’s okay; we’re not trying to. Loopholes aren’t a way to avoid upholding halachah, they’re a way to support doing so.
It isn’t about undermining the law, it’s about working with it. It’s about knowing the law, studying the law, learning the ins and outs and twists and turns... and engaging with it, partnering with it, making the law work in the community so the community can work in the law. 
It isn’t about malicious compliance. If anything, it’s about the reverse: loving compliance, in ways that can help ensure that compliance is and remains a positive.
(Of course, it’s also about not having to permanently dispose of perfectly good chametz. Because let’s be real, that would be a real bummer. Especially if you run a bakery. Jews are practical people.)
...And now, back to cleaning, and cooking, and finishing up the last of the bread in the garage that we won’t be either selling or burning tomorrow. Chag sameach.
290 notes · View notes
mental-mona · 2 years
Text
This is the most in-depth treatment of the nuances of Orthodox Jewish law regarding abortion that I've seen floating around the internet thus far. It goes behind a paywall after 4 free articles from the site, so I excerpted most of it below:
***
This essay, then, is a plea to take halakhah at its full complexity and an attempt to at least outline the contours and nuances of the issue. It will take the format of a series of cases—all difficult, sensitive, heartbreaking cases, starting from the Torah and early rabbinic works, and concluding with cases that were the subject of much discussion in recent times. There will be many links and shorthand references to rabbinic works and a brief bibliography at the end. It is, of course, impossible to encompass this subject with anything less than a book-length treatment, but I hope to delineate the significant differences of opinion among halakhists, show how halakhah cannot be shoehorned into the “pro-life” position or the “pro-choice” position, offer some insight into the way that major halakhists handled an issue of such sensitivity and import, and offer a starting point for interested readers to learn and study more about it.
Case #1: Collateral Damage
This case appears in the Torah itself:
When men fight, and one of them pushes a pregnant woman and a miscarriage results, but no other damage ensues, the one responsible shall be fined according as the woman’s husband may exact from him, the payment to be based on reckoning. But if other damage ensues, the penalty shall be life for life. [(Exodus 21:22-23)](Exodus 21:22-23 “(Exodus 21:22-23)”)
If in the course of a fight between two people, a fetus is killed, then the penalty is monetary. If the mother is killed, then the killer’s penalty is death. In other words, the destruction of a fetus is classified as a tort, not a capital crime. And why not? According to the earliest halakhic midrashim, feticide is not considered homicide because a fetus is not considered “nefesh adam,” human life. This understanding is implied in the [Mishnah (Ohalot 7:6)](Ohalot 7:6 “Mishnah (Ohalot 7:6)”) and Talmud, Sanhedrin 72b, and made explicit by the classic medieval commentators: Rashi and Yad Ramah; Nachmanides, Ran, Rashba, and Ritva on Niddah 44a-b; and Me’iri on Shabbat 107b. This approach is likewise taken by later commentators: Maharal on Exodus 21:22; Tosafot Yom Tov and Tiferet Yisrael-Yakhin on Ohalot 7:6; Sema and Arukh Ha-shulhan on Hoshen Mishpat 425; and numerous others.
In contrast, Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrahi argues that feticide is homicide, but that the killer of a fetus is exempt from punishment on technical grounds.
Even according to the majority view, that a fetus is not considered human life, killing a fetus would not be permitted. It is just not homicide.
Case #2: Saving a Mother’s Life
The classic case of abortion in _halakhah is when the fetus must be destroyed to save the mother:
A woman who was having trouble giving birth, they cut up the fetus inside her and take it out limb by limb, because her life comes before its life (“hayav”). If most of it had come out already they do not touch it because we do not push off one human life (“nefesh”) for another. [(Mishnah Ohalot 7:6)](Mishnah Ohalot 7:6 “(Mishnah Ohalot 7:6)”)
The most common understanding of this text is that a fetus becomes a person only when its head emerges. Prior to that, it can be destroyed to save the mother; afterward, mother and child have equal claims to life.
The great Maimonides has a different explanation of this mishnah, one that seems to contradict the straightforward meaning of the Talmud. He explains that the unborn fetus may be killed because it is “like a pursuer”; it is analogous to a case where one person is pursuing another with the intent of murder or rape. In such a case, a bystander may stop the pursuer by any means necessary, even killing.
By comparing the fetus to a pursuer, Maimonides seems to be saying that without that justification, feticide is akin to murder. This is how the great twentieth-century halakhist Rabbi Moshe Feinstein understands Maimonides.
Likewise, Rabbi Hayim Soloveichik of Brisk and Rabbi Isser Yehudah Unterman understand Maimonides to be saying that abortion is akin to murder.
At the same time, there are over a dozen other explanations for Maimonides’s curious wording. Rabbi Hayim Ozer Grodzinski, the leading Lithuanian halakhist of the early twentieth century, notes that in our case, the birthing process had already begun, so the fetus has already attained a degree of personhood. Before that, however, even Maimonides would agree that “the fetus is a limb of its mother,” and its destruction is not murder.
Other latter-day commentators (Rabbi Nahum Rabinovich, Yad Peshutah ad loc.; Rabbi Shneur Zalman Fradkin; and Rabbi Isser Zalman Meltzer show that Maimonides uses similar wording, “like a pursuer,” to describe why it is permissible to jettisoned cargo from a sinking ship. The two cases are analogous: just as non-human cargo may be cast overboard to save human beings, so too a non-human fetus may be destroyed to save human life.
Among the classical halakhists who interpreted Maimonides differently are Rabbi Yair Hayim Bacharach, Rabbi Ezekiel Landau, and Rabbi Joseph Teomim. Among twentieth-century authorities: Rabbi Yehiel Yaakov Weinberg (Seridei Esh, Hoshen Mishpat 162:12); Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook (Ezrat Kohen, omissions, pp. 398-9); and Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg.
Thus, while the Mishnah states that a fetus may, or must, be killed even just prior to birth to save the mother’s life, the corollary, that a fetus may only be killed to save the mother’s life, is not true except according to a handful of Maimonides’s interpreters.
Case #3: Saving a Fetus on Shabbat
Almost every prohibition in the Torah is set aside in order to save a life. This, then, would seem to be a good test case for understanding the status of a fetus; if it is permissible to violate Shabbat to save a fetus, it would seem to indicate that it is a “life”. If not, then it would be clear evidence that it is not considered a life. In fact, the overwhelming majority of halakhic opinion permits the violation of Shabbat to save a fetus, which seems to strengthen the connection between abortion and murder. Rabbi Feinstein uses this equation to bolster his view that feticide is a form of homicide.
However, several medieval commentators (on Niddah 44a) invoke another Talmudic principle: “Violate one Sabbath in order to observe multiple Sabbaths.” In other words, even if the fetus is not considered enough of a life to warrant the violation of Shabbat, its potential life, the fetus’s potential to observe a lifetime of Sabbaths in the future, gives license to violate Shabbat to save it in the present. This rationale yields the same practical conclusion—Shabbat is violated to save the fetus—but without determining the fetus to be a full-fledged human life. It is on this basis that Rabbi Shmuel Wosner strongly rejects Rabbi Feinstein’s reasoning, concluding that abortion does not even smack of murder and acknowledging that his line of reasoning yields permissive rulings in certain cases.
Case #4: “Dead Woman Walking”
A Mishnah in Arakhin (1:4) states:
If a woman is about to be executed, they do not wait for her until she gives birth. But if she had already sat on the birth-stool, they wait for her until she gives birth.
A fetus is considered part of the mother, and just as she is executed, so too the fetus is executed. Once the mother has “sat on the birth-stool,” as Rashi explains, the fetus has become a “separate body,” and the execution is delayed until after the mother has given birth.
The Talmud asks: “Isn’t it obvious” that the execution should not be delayed on behalf of the fetus? This very question indicates that the Talmud takes for granted that the fetus is not a separate life. The Talmud then explains that the executioners abort the fetus before executing the woman, so as to spare her the indignity of the fetus continuing to move around in her dead body. Here is an instance in which an abortion is performed for reasons other than to save the mother’s life.
If we can sum up what we have seen so far, the balance of evidence we have seen so far indicates that a fetus has an intermediate status: On one hand, it may not be destroyed wantonly, and one must violate Shabbat in order to save it. On the other hand, it is not yet a nefesh, a human life. Notwithstanding several major dissenting opinions, its termination is not homicide, and there are cases where it is permitted even when it will not save the mother’s life.
Do Non-Jews Have the Same Laws? An Important Caveat
There are “Seven Noahide Commandments” that apply, according to halakhah, to all of mankind. One of these seven commandments is homicide, as God said to Noah after the Flood:
One who sheds the blood of man, through man shall his blood be shed. [(Genesis 9:6)](Genesis 9:6 “(Genesis 9:6)”)
Not only is homicide prohibited, but its penalty is death. The Talmud [(Sanhedrin 57b)](Sanhedrin 57b “(Sanhedrin 57b)”) expands the prohibition of homicide to include feticide. Moreover, several pages later, the Talmud posits: “There is nothing that is permitted to a Jew that is forbidden to a gentile” [(Sanhedrin 59a)](Sanhedrin 59a “(Sanhedrin 59a)”). It follows that if abortion is forbidden for non-Jews, it is forbidden for Jews as well [(Tosafot ad loc., s.v. “leika”)](Tosafot ad loc., s.v. “leika” “(Tosafot ad loc., s.v. “leika”)”). The Tosafists also consider the possibility that the corollary is true as well: in cases where Jews may perform abortions, such as to save a mother’s life, non-Jews may do so as well. A responsum of Rabbi Isaac Schorr from 1755 explains the Tosafists’ thinking:
It is unthinkable that the Torah would not consider a fetus to be human life (nefesh) for us [Jews], but for them a fetus would be considered human life. Such a thing cannot be sustained by reason.
A leading contemporary halakhist, Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, takes the logic of the Tosafists even further, ruling that any instance in which abortion is permitted for Jews, it is, by definition, permitted to non-Jews as well.
This view is innovative and far from consensus. Nevertheless, significant minority views can have major public policy implications for how Jews relate to secular abortion law.
Case #5: Tay-Sachs
The last two sets of cases were first addressed as early as the seventeenth century, but have become a major subject of discussion in our times.
The first pertains to instances in which there is concern that the fetus will be diseased or deformed, or has in fact been positively diagnosed with an illness or defect. The case of a fetus diagnosed in utero with the genetic defect that results in Tay-Sachs Disease was the subject of a major twentieth-century dispute between Rabbi Moshe Feinstein and Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg.
Rabbi Waldenberg (and Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli) went as far as to permit abortion even in cases of indefinite diagnosis, and even when the fetus had the prospect of a very difficult and challenging but long and full life. Rabbi Feinstein prohibited aborting even a Tay-Sachs fetus unless it was “almost certain” that the mother would die of grief otherwise, on the grounds that it is a form of murder.
Others, such as Rabbi Shlomo Goren, Rabbi Yehiel Yaakov Weinberg, Lord Rabbi Immanuel Jakobovitz, and Rabbi Unterman ruled that abortion could be permitted in the interest of the mother’s mental health. In other words, they did not think that a diseased fetus is not worth preserving, but held that it could be permitted to relieve the mother’s suffering in the present.
Several other major recent halakhists, such as Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, and Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein agreed in principle that only a threat to the mother’s life would warrant abortion. However, the practical record shows something more complex. There are credible reports of Rabbis Soloveitchik and Elyashiv permitting certain abortions in order to spare the mother extreme, if not directly life-threatening anguish. Additionally, there are equally credible reports that Rabbis Lichtenstein and Auerbach referred questions to Rabbi Waldenberg, knowing that he would rule permissively in such scenarios.
A lecture on this topic by Rabbi Hershel Schachter (see minute 26 here), a leading contemporary halakhist in the US, gives a similar indication: He tells a story about Rabbi Auerbach referring a questioner to Rabbi Waldenberg, implying that he, too, believes that such an abortion is not permissible but nevertheless refers petitioners to permissive halakhists.
Case #6: Promiscuous Pregnancy
Rabbi Yosef Hayim of Baghdad (1835-1909), known also as “Ben Ish Hai” after his best-known halakhic compendium, also wrote responsa to communities all over the vast British Empire. On one occasion he was asked whether a woman who became pregnant through an adulterous relationship could abort, as the child born of such a union would carry the taint of mamzerut (illegitimacy) and be forbidden to marry within the community.
Ben Ish Hai does not definitively answer the question. He begins his response by writing: “I do not wish to respond to this issue by giving instructions, neither to forbid nor to permit,” and concludes, “I am not revealing my opinion.”
Before looking at the precedents that Ben Ish Hai cites in the body of the responsum, it is worth noting his reluctance to express his opinion. We saw a similar reluctance with respect to the abortion of deformed fetuses.
The sense is that in cases where the mother’s anguish is the potential grounds for abortion, the answer will depend, to a very large degree, on an honest assessment of the risks to her mental and physical health. Moreover, the stakes of such decisions are very high—potential life and an individual’s long-term health are both at risk.
As such, permission is granted or denied on a case-by-case basis. This is “retail” halakhah — not “wholesale.” Statements akin to Ben Ish Hai’s “I do not wish to respond to this issue by giving instructions, neither to forbid nor to permit” are not atypical.
In the body of his responsum, Ben Ish Hai cites three earlier opinions, two from the seventeenth century and one from the eighteenth:
1) Rabbi Joseph di Trani maintains that abortion is a form of self-mutilation, which is generally prohibited but permitted in the interests of overall health, even when there is no risk to life;
2) Rabbi Yair Hayim Bacharach develops a rationale to permit before ultimately prohibiting on public policy grounds: “to safeguard against the breaches of the promiscuous and those who chase after them.”
3) Rabbi Jacob Emden permits the abortion of a fetus conceived through adultery but prohibits if the mother is unwed or conceived through rape. This is the most idiosyncratic of all views on the general issue of abortion.
Among twentieth-century halakhists, Rabbi Meir Ben-Zion Hai Ouziel (Mishpetei Ouziel, Hoshen Mishpat 4:47), the Sephardic Chief Rabbi at the time of the founding of the State of Israel, rules permissively in the case of a woman who conceived through adultery (but not in the case of an unwed mother). Rabbi Waldenberg also argues for permissiveness to relieve the mother’s anguish.
Those who view abortion as a form of homicide would clearly not permit in such cases. Yet here we return to Rabbi Schachter’s oral presentation. He tells the story of a student in a religious school who became pregnant. The school threatened expulsion. The student was from a non-religious family, and there was concern that expelling her would mean she would fall into a life of non-observance.
Rabbi Schachter implies that an abortion was carried out, though he is coy about whether or not he agrees with the ruling. Like Ben Ish Hai, he intimates that he thinks a lenient ruling is warranted. In this case, the logic of R. Bacharach is inverted: the abortion, paradoxically, was in the interest of preventing the long-term breach of observance. Nevertheless, we once again find a halakhist who is wary of issuing a definitive ruling in cases that are so connected to social and psychological consequences for a particular person in a particular context.
It should go without saying that this treatment did not address all of the relevant halakhic issues. It did not address the key question of whether the stage of pregnancy makes a difference (see, for example, Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef, Yabia Omer, Even Ha-ezer 4:1); differentiate between direct surgical abortion, inducement of early labor, and other methods; or relate to a host of other cases in various gray areas. As noted, a full treatment of this issue would be book-length.
Nonetheless, the complexity of the issue is evident.
We would be wise to take our cues from those halakhists who were reluctant to make definitive pronouncements on the permissibility or wrongfulness of abortion.
Even statements that are true in the vast majority of cases should be avoided out of respect and sensitivity toward that minority of cases that involve some of the most harrowing emotional turmoil that a person can undergo.
The best answer to the question of whether Jewish law permits abortion remains: It depends on the case, so consult with a competent halakhist.
9 notes · View notes
brightgnosis · 6 months
Text
0 notes
bringmemyrocks · 3 months
Text
PSA on synagogue membership
Synagogue membership is not a halachic category the way "Jew" or "Gentile" is. Memberships are a way to fundraise, specifically:
Memberships may be required to have your kid's bar/bat mitzvah there
Memberships may be required to get married there
Membership may be required to send your kid to Hebrew School there
High holiday tickets may be included with membership. (With often-expensive tickets for non-members--High Holidays are huge fundraising opportunities.
It can feel a bit soulless to raise money this way, especially since it can be a method of exclusion (and I wholeheartedly support shuls that don't have paid membership/paid tickets for high holidays), but remember that Jews traditionally don't touch money on the sabbath, so there's no passing of the plate/basket/hat like there is during many church services.
Membership is basically never required to attend shabbat services. Some places may have security where you need to register ahead of time, but it is not necessary to be a member to attend. Similarly, gay people are often denied both synagogue membership and the ability to attend services at orthodox shuls, but the denial of membership and the denial of physical attendance are two separate things.
Some shuls only allow Jews to be members, so converts-in-progress may not be allowed membership until after converting. But if these converts don't have money or kids, they might not purchase membership because they wouldn't get anything out of it.
Back when I was still going to a regular shul with regular (exorbitant) membership, only parents bought membership. It wasn't financially worth it for anyone else. This is very normal in many American Jewish communities.
A lot of synagogues/pop-up minyanim/Hillels don't even have membership and do fundraising in other ways (fundraising through alums, Purim appeals, US end-of-financial-year email spam, etc.)
Let me reiterate: Some synagogues let non-Jews be members if they are part of an interfaith family. Some synagogues let non-Jews be members even if they're not part of an interfaith family because synagogue membership is a financial thing and has nothing to do with halachah. There are no halachic problems with non-Jews holding synagogue membership because synagogue membership is not based in halachah.
8 notes · View notes
moonshinemagpie · 4 months
Text
Thinking about how every morning I feed my cats before I feed myself, because a Jewish loved one once told me that giving food to animals before you have a meal is a halachah written in the Gemara, and it touched me that in ancient times scholars were thinking about their animals with such tenderness.
I'm not Jewish, but so many of the kind thoughts I have about the world—and the real, material, good things I do—are because of what Jewish loved ones taught me about ethics.
To then witness them being collectively accused of inhumanity feels like... I don't know. Like watching arsons accuse firefighters of burning everything down.
8 notes · View notes
vaspider · 7 months
Note
Hey, so I've been Jewish adjacent for nearly ten years now. I decided early on I wouldn't convert because feeling pressured to follow halachah (?) would destroy me because of my anxiety. More recently I learned I have maternal Jewish heritage. I've gone back and forth with my Jewish friends about 'am I Jewish?' for a while now but last night it clicked, nah, I'm Jewish. I'm going through the mikvah after I get my hysterectomy. But I didn't even say the morning prayer today so I'm bad. 1/2
2/2 I'm bad and I don't want to be bad and etc. :( If you respond, can you please make me anonymous? (Sorry I should have led with that)
You're not bad. And as I have posted everywhere, I don't answer things anonymously. Please don't ask me to.
13 notes · View notes
eretzyisrael · 1 year
Text
Parashat - T'tzaveh
by  Meir Anolick 
This week’s Parasha starts out with a description of the special garments to be made for the Kohen Gadol. These garments are of the highest quality and made to be “for honor and glory” (28:2). Ramban goes through each item of the Kohen Gadol’s garments and shows that each one is like that of royalty, thus the Kohen Gadol dresses like a king.However, there is more to the garments than just looking like a king. 
These garments, the Talmud explains, are uncomfortable. The sash is wrapped around many times, and sticks out far enough that the Kohen can easily see it without looking down much. The turban was also thick and heavy, making his head warm and also being constantly noticeable at the top of his vision. The breastplate, filled with gems and gold, was undoubtedly also quite heavy and always noticeable. 
The point of all this is not, God forbid, to cause the Kohen to suffer, rather it is to make him constantly aware of the fact that he is standing before The Holy One Blessed Be He, so that his concentration on the task at hand and the paramount importance of his work is never forgotten.Based on this, we could ask ourselves, do we dress in a way that makes us constantly aware of God’s presence? Hashem tells us we are to be a Memlechet Kohanim, a kingdom of priests, since we are meant to be his representatives in the world.
This brings us to the very first halachah stated in the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 1:1. There the Rama quotes the verse, “שויתי ה‘לנגדי תמיד”, “I have set the Lord before me constantly” (T’hilim 16:8), and explains that this means we should perform all our actions with the intent of serving our creator.
Shabbat Shalom.
7 notes · View notes
mariacallous · 1 year
Text
When Talia Avrahami was asked to resign from a job teaching in an Orthodox Jewish day school after people there found out she was transgender, she was devastated. But she hoped to be able to turn to her synagogue in Washington Heights, where she had found a home for the last year and a half.
The Shenk Shul is housed at Yeshiva University, the Modern Orthodox flagship in New York City that was locked in battle with students over whether they could form an LBGTQ club. Still, Avrahami had found the previous rabbi to be supportive, and the past president was an ally and a personal friend. What’s more, Avrahami had just helped hire a new rabbi who had promised to handle sensitive topics carefully and with concern for all involved.
So Avrahami was shocked when her outreach to the new rabbi led to her exclusion from the synagogue, with the top Jewish legal authority at Yeshiva University personally telling her that she could no longer pray there.
“Not only were we members, we were very active members,” Avrahami told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “We hosted and sponsored kiddushes all the time. We had mazel tovs, [the birth of] our baby [was] posted in the newsletter, we helped run shul events. We were very close with the previous rabbi and rebbetzin and we were close with the current rabbi and rebbetzin.”
Avrahami’s quest to remain a part of the Shenk Shul, which unfolded over the past two months and culminated last week with her successful request for refunded dues, comes at a time of intense tension over the place of LGBTQ people in Modern Orthodox Jewish spaces.
Administrators at Shenk and Y.U. said they are trying to balance Orthodox interpretations of Jewish law, or halacha, and contemporary ideas around inclusion — two values that have sharply collided in Avrahami’s case.
Emails and text messages obtained by JTA show that many people involved in Avrahami’s situation expressed deep pain over her eventual exclusion. They also show that, despite a range of interpretations of Jewish law on LGBTQ issues present even within Modern Orthodoxy, the conclusions of Yeshiva University’s top Jewish legal authority, Rabbi Hershel Schachter, continue to drive practices within the university’s broader community.
“I completely understand (and am certainly perturbed by) the difficulty of the situation. Nobody wants to, chas v’shalom [God forbid], oust anybody, especially somebody who has been an active part of this community,” the synagogue’s president, Shimon Liebling, wrote in a Nov. 17 text message to his predecessor. But, he continued, “When it came down to it, the halachah stated this outcome. As much as we laud ourselves as a welcoming community, halachah cannot be compromised.”
Liebling went on, using the term for a rabbinic decision and referring to a ruling he said the synagogue rabbi had obtained from Schachter: “A psak is a psak.”
The saga began this fall, several weeks after Avrahami lost her short-lived job as an eighth-grade social studies teacher at Magen David Yeshivah in Brooklyn, which she had obtained after earning a master’s degree at Yeshiva University. She had been outed after a video of her in the classroom taken during parent night began circulating on social media.
Around the High Holidays, when Orthodox Jews spend many days in their synagogues, Avrahami learned that people within the Shenk Shul community were talking about her, some complaining about her presence. As she always had, she had spent the holidays praying in the women’s section of the gender-segregated congregation.
Concerned, Avrahami reached out to the new rabbi, Shai Kaminetzky. He confirmed the complaints and told her he wanted further guidance from a more senior rabbi to deal with the complex legal issue before him: Where is a trans woman’s place in the Orthodox synagogue?
For Avrahami and some others who identify as Modern Orthodox, this question has already been resolved. They heed the rulings of the late Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg, known as the “Tzitz Eliezer,” an Orthodox legal scholar who died in 2006. He ruled that a trans woman who undergoes gender confirmation surgery is a woman according to Jewish law.
But Waldenberg’s determination is not universally held among Orthodox Jews — and one prominent rabbi who does not accept it is Hershel Schachter. In a 2017 Q&A, Schachter derided trans issues, saying about one trans Jew, “Why did he decide that God made a mistake? He looked so much better as a man than as a woman.” He also suggested that a trans person asking whether to sit in the men’s or women’s section should instead consider attending a Conservative or Reform synagogue, where worshippers are not separated by gender.
“We know we’d have no problem if we were at a Reform or Conservative synagogue when it comes to the acceptance issue. The thing is, that’s not the only thing in our life,” Bradley Avrahami told JTA.
The couple became religiously observant after spending time in Israel and the two now identify as Modern Orthodox. They were married by an Orthodox rabbi in 2018, and when they had their baby via surrogate in 2021, it was important to them that the infant go through a Jewish court to formally convert to Judaism. Avrahami seeks to fulfill the Jewish legal and cultural expectations of Orthodox women, wearing a wig and modest skirts. The pair both adhere to strict Shabbat and kashrut observance laws.
“We didn’t want to be the only family that kept kosher at the synagogue, we didn’t want to be the only family that is shomer Shabbat and shomer chag,” Bradley Avrahami added, referring to strict observance of the Sabbath and holiday restrictions. “It kind of becomes isolating.”
Kaminetzky kept both Talia Avrahami and Eitan Novick, the past president, in the loop about his research, in which he consulted with Schachter. It was a natural place for him to turn: He had studied at Yeshiva University’s Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary and learned from Schachter there. And while the Shenk Shul includes members not affiliated with Yeshiva University, it is closely entwined with Y.U., occupying space in a university building and hiring rabbis only from a list of options presented by the university.
After speaking with Schachter, Kaminetzky reached a conclusion, according to messages characterizing it by Liebling, the synagogue president.
“He made an halachic decision that Talia isn’t able to sit in the women’s section for the time being,” Liebling wrote Nov. 17 in a message to his predecessor as president, Eitan Novick. But Liebling left the door open for change, writing, “All in all, the ‘official shul policy’ is still being decided.”
He said Kaminetzky had spoken extensively the previous evening with the Avrahamis and had been determined to share his judgment in a way that was respectful “despite the difficult-to hear halachic conclusion.”
Liebling added a parenthetical: “I honestly can’t imagine how difficult it is for them. If I were told I couldn’t sit in the men’s section, I’d be beyond heartbroken and likewise feel displaced.”
Talia Avrahami did indeed feel heartbroken. She told Kaminetzky and others that she felt like she wanted to die, alarming her friends and prompting some of them to reach out to the rabbi. “The concern about Talia’s well-being is likewise the #1 — and only — factor on my mind right now,” Kaminetzky told one of them that night.
The Avrahamis stopped attending the Shenk Shul, but they held out hope for Kaminetzky to change his mind, or for the synagogue to set a firm policy that would permit her participation. Over the next six weeks, though, they heard nothing — a situation that so disappointed Novick that he and his wife also stopped attending. (Kaminetzky’s third child was born during this time.)
“We really feel like this is a pretty significant deviation from the community that we have been a part of for 11 years, which has always been a very accepting place,” Novick said. “This is just not the community that I feel comfortable being a part of if these are the decisions that are being made. It’s not just about the Avrahamis.”
While Avrahami waited for more information, Yeshiva University and Schachter were already in the process of rolling out what they saw as a compromise in a different conflagration over LGBTQ inclusion at the school. Arguing that homosexuality is incompatible with the school’s religious values, Yeshiva University has been fighting not to have to recognize an LGBTQ student group, the YU Pride Alliance, and has even asked the Supreme Court to weigh in after judges in New York ruled against the university. This fall, the school announced that it would launch a separate club endorsed by Schachter, claiming it would represent LGBTQ students “under traditional Orthodox auspices.” (The YU Pride Alliance called the new club “a desperate stunt” by the university.)
Multiple people encouraged Avrahami to make her case directly to Schachter. When she headed to a meeting with the rabbi on Jan. 1, she hoped that putting a face to her name and explaining her situation, including that she had undergone a full medical transition, might widen his thinking about LGBTQ inclusion in Orthodoxy.
The meeting lasted just 15 minutes. And according to Avrahami, who said Schachter told her she was the first trans person he had ever met, it didn’t go well.
In an email to another rabbi who attended the meeting, Menachem Penner, Avrahami said Schachter had called her “unOrthodox” and accused him of “bullying Rabbi Shai Kaminetzky into accepting bigoted psaks.”
Penner, the dean of Yeshiva’s rabbinical school who is also the founder of a support group for Orthodox family members of people who identify as LGBTQ, characterized the conversation differently.
“Rabbi Schachter rules that it is prohibited to undergo transgender surgery and does not accept the opinion of the Tzitz Eliezer post-facto,” he wrote in an email response that day in which he denied that Kaminetzky had been pressured to follow Schachter’s opinion.
“That’s simply a halachic opinion that many hold,” Penner wrote. “He did not call you ‘unorthodox’ — you come across as very sincere in your Judaism and he wished you hatzlacha [success] — but simply said that the surgery was unorthodox, meaning it was not something that is accepted by what he feels is Orthodox Judaism.”
The meeting so angered Avrahami that she asked Liebling to refund her Shenk Shul dues that day, saying that Kaminetzky had kicked her out of the congregation.
“Of course! I’ll send back the money ASAP!” Liebling responded. “I’m so sorry how things are ending up.”
Yeshiva University and Schachter, through a representative, declined to comment, referring questions directly to the Shenk Shul. Kaminetzky directed requests for comment to a representative for the Shenk Shul.
“We have had several conversations with the Avrahamis and we understand their concerns,” the Shenk Shul said in a statement. “It’s important to emphasize that the Avrahamis were not asked to leave the congregation.”
That response doesn’t sit right with Novick, who said blocking Talia Avrahami from praying on both the men’s and women’s sides of the synagogue was tantamount to ejecting her.
“They seem to be trying to have their cake and eat it, too,” he said of the synagogue’s leadership. “They may not be wrong in saying they didn’t tell Talia she was ‘kicked out’ of Shenk, but they’ve created a rule that makes it impossible for her to be a full participant in our community.”
Bradley Avrahami argued that the rabbis who ruled on his wife’s case were short-sighted, giving too little weight to the fact that Jewish law requires Jews to violate other rules in order to save a life. Referring to that principle and pointing to the fact that transgender people are at increased risk of suicide, he said, “It was pikuach nefesh for the person to have the surgery.” His brother, he noted, survived two suicide attempts after coming out as trans.
“They really just don’t understand the harm that they caused when they make these decisions and put out these opinions,” Bradley Avrahami said. “A rabbi should not take a position knowing that that position will cause someone to want to harm themselves.”
Bradley Avrahami said he has received several harassing calls to his work number at Yeshiva University’s Azrieli Graduate School, where he is liaison for student enrollment and communications and taught Hebrew in the fall 2022 semester. Talia Avrahami, meanwhile, has struggled to find a job to replace the one she left under pressure in September, although she recently announced that she had landed a temporary position.
For now, they are attending another synagogue in Washington Heights, though Talia says she and her husband would consider returning to Shenk Shul if she were invited back and permitted to participate.
So far, there are no signs of that happening. On Jan. 1, after her meeting with Schachter, Talia sent a WhatsApp message to Kaminetzky.
“We elected you because you said you would stand up for LGBT people, not kick us out of shul,” she wrote.
The message went unanswered.
8 notes · View notes
hellbent-boy · 2 years
Note
Wait wait your tags on the post about shabbat what did u mean?? I'm curious for examples
(Im Jewish but I haven't explored this stuff I've only been told the rules soo???)
Soooo. Okay, I assume you know that there are several sects and denominations of Jews and Judaism, Orthodoxy is one of them. There are further divisions in it, and whatever. I am, no my family is Orthodox. Orthodoxy is intense, it has a lot of cultish characteristics and I personally have experienced some gross shit over the years.
The thing is, I don’t want to offend or generalize, even if I did exactly that in my tags. So don’t take it as universal, because some people enjoy it, and some people find meaning and kindness through it.
For me it’s just a fucking pain. My parents are super… Orthodox, and all the big rules are just following their perception of halachah. So I can’t do a ton of shit I want to on Shabbat, can’t read online, can’t use this webbed site, can’t watch tv or anything. So while I will be honest and say I don’t follow the rules, it’s super stressful and getting caught is LITERALLY a recurring nightmare.
I feel super alienated from the world and I am definitely not relaxed on the Shabbat. So yeah, I don’t know. But I don’t think that orthodoxy is the best or truest version of Judaism for everyone, and definitely not for me
10 notes · View notes
oi-lucy · 1 year
Text
Hehe, I successfully converted a transphobe with Gd!!! Not even like an on the fence type, a full, "trans people are disgusting" type. I love that Christians don't know their own books, cause I can just call my books "the bible" and they'll just go along with it. I described the 7 sexs listed in the halachah and explained the very exclusively Jewish concept of reincarnation and how G-d can place a soul with femaleness in a male body for the purpose of self discovery and how trans people are just following the path laid out by G-d and they just accepted it into their christian world view. I'm very pleased with myself over this, this is the first time I've ever changed a person's mind before.
2 notes · View notes
monsooninn · 4 days
Text
Berakhot 7a:15. "The Boiling Point."
Tumblr media
The actual written down printed pages of the Torah did not become publicly available until 1473, long after Moses and King David, Elijah and Elisha and the rest were gone. We imagine King David kept one on his bookshelf or his desk and read it daily and every night but that is not at all possible.
Up until the publication and distribution of the Torah the shul used handmade/hand illuminated copies of the Torah and Tanakh, or bits and pieces of them and the oral tradition called Halachah "don't forget."
The publication of the volumes in the Tanakh was unknown at the time the Mishnah were written and as the Rab says they were only found in pieces.
The presence of the published Law including all the material on the internet and this Mishnah below means we have reached what is called the Boiling Point, or the Right Time because it means we are all responsible for implementing the Commandments and putting an end to slavery, oppression, corruption, ignorance and foolishness, the causes of God's anger as the Torah describes. There is no way out, no one is exempt this has to be done.
15. And why is it a boiling point? - as it was said: "For a moment in his mouth lives in his will." And no mother came from here: "Hold me a little moment until my anger passes."
The Value in Gematria is 8723, חזבג‎‎ ‎, hazbag, from zbb, "death bringing flies" ba, "that hide" ng, God's brightness."
"The verb נגה (nagah) means to lighten, or to reflect light and occurs a mere two or three times in the Bible: 2 Samuel 22:29, which is reduplicated as Psalm 18:28 ("lighten up the darkness"), and Isaiah 13:10 ("the moon reflects light").
It's probably prudent to note that this root does not actually describe light or being light (which would be done with the root אור, 'or) but rather the traveling of light or else its effect of illuminating."
Whatever is keeping the Light from penetrating the darkness, whatever lie , falsehood, or rationale for it must be overcome.
The sight of Kamala Harris pleading for those Mormons and Marriott and Walmart employees who are trapped in Rafah makes my stomach churn. If the world had the truth, if it was driven by the foundation of civilized life on this planet found in the Torah, all would be well. Now is the right time to do it.
The planet earth depends on four seasons and proper transpiration of heat across its surface and between the surface and space. We have blindly and blandly jeopardized its future and now we have reached the boiling point. We know what to do about this, it just has to be done. Given the circumstances this is the most enviable End of Times scenario one could hope for.
0 notes
mental-mona · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media
I remember learning this in high school, in the original Hebrew, along with the Torah source from centuries before it and halachic responsa from centuries later. In case you were wondering, the Torah (first 5 books of the Old Testament) in the book of Exodus talks about a case where a man hits a pregnant woman. If he caused the woman to miscarry, he would only have to pay a fine; however, if he killed the woman he would have to pay “a life for a life.” I don't know how the Christian bible somehow interpreted that over the years as "save the fetus at all costs," but the passage I copied above is a mere snippet of the MASSIVE amount of Torah interpretation and halachic (Jewish law) discussions surrounding pregnancy and abortion in Jewish sources.
Judaism doesn't do "abortions on demand;" it views fetuses as potential lives, and potential lives matter. BUT when it's a question of mom's life vs. baby's life, until that baby's head has been delivered, mom wins. Period, end of discussion. (IIRC this is for a normal birth, and for a breech birth the standard is everything but the head.) Saving existing human life is Judaism's #1 priority in every area. If the potential issue isn't life-threatening but does threaten the mother's general physical or mental health, that means have a chat with a knowledgeable rabbi, and depending on the exact circumstances there's a good chance an abortion will be permitted. (Permitted circumstances typically include the mental anguish caused by carrying a nonviable fetus.) It isn't as cut-and-dried as Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg would have you believe, at least for Orthodox Jews, but we don't come even close to viewing pregnant women as mere vessels for baby production the way some Christians apparently do.
Oh, and I also remember learning that if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant but isn't halachically allowed to get an actual abortion, she is still allowed to do things that would naturally encourage a miscarriage. I'd need to dig up the source for that, but this is a thing that stuck in my brain from when I learned about abortion in Jewish law.
5 notes · View notes
Text
Book: Living A Jewish Life by Anita Diamant with Howard Cooper.
First, I do appreciate that I was able to get a hold of a revised edition on Libby. (Noticeable due to a 2023 update with some language changes such as b-mitzvah, using 'they', and not exclusively using heteronormative relationship language.) I have nothing against reading conversion 'classics', but sometimes it has been noticeable that I'm reading books older than I am.
The introduction gives a brief summary of how different movements came to be while explaining Liberal Judaism, touches on Hebrew (and a few learning tips if desired), explains mitzvah/mitzvot, and has some encouragement on getting started with "making Jewish choices" as an adult. There are four sections: Home, Life Cycle of the Year, Life Cycle, and Community.
Overall, I would say that this isn't half bad as a basic introduction that notes its American and Ashkenazi focused perspective. I do feel like looking into other introductory resources made some sections feel not as helpful as is probably intended for an absolute beginner, but I can't fault the book for that. Quite frankly, someone could write separate books on the history, movement differences, and different customs of some topics, so this is only aiming for a basic introduction. I did get the impression that lumping Reform, Reconstructionist, and Conservative together into 'Liberal' Judaism was causing some details to be noted with an air of 'oh, yeah, and XYZ too' (not outright dismissive, but with a less 'traditionally' observant lean).
(This has been tagged #reviews for tagging purposes on my personal blog and may not be a satisfying review for others. I have some notes from the first two parts below the read-more.)
Home subsections: Your Little Sanctuary, Shabbat, Good Deeds, What Jews Eat, and Jewish Parenting.
Your Little Sanctuary
Mezuzah - What they are, blessings, and a hanukat habayit [home dedication] that could be done with friends/family.
Books - Brief explanations of Torah, Talmud, Codes [practical guides to halachah], Midrash, Kabbalah [several texts associated with it], and Siddur.
Shabbat
Some history and explanations of differences over time and between different communities.
Creating Shabbat - Even if it feels like there's a lot of "don't do XYZ" around Shabbat, it's more about creating a particular experience. You get a weekly chance to create familial connection and peace in the household.
Getting Ready - Some practical advice. (The process of 'making this Jewish choice' offers starting with a Friday night dinner.)
Friday Night - An overview of blessings and common activities (giving tzedakah, singing, candle lighting, blessing for spouses, blessing for children, blessing for wine/kiddush, hand washing, challah, meal, blessing for after the meal/birkat hamazon, and sex is allowed on Shabbat). Of note that challah has to do with a step and blessing during making the bread, and it isn't exclusively the braided loaf associated with American Ashkenazi depictions. Attending Friday night service, Kabbalat Shabbat, can be optional, and depending on the time of year [sunset time] and the synagogue, there can be a difference in dinner happening before service or after (sometimes kiddush and a Shabbat meal will happen at the synagogue).
Shabbat Morning - An overview of the order of prayers and actions that are likely across Liberal Judaism, and a general note on children. (I would say this is an area where having a specific synagogue in mind can be more helpful than a generalization, but it probably goes without saying to check about children programs before going.)
Shabbat Afternoon - Lunch, kiddush rabbah, and some tips on what to do if 'rest all afternoon' isn't helpful.
Shabbat Ends - The steps involved in havdalah - light candle, kiddush, blessing over aromatic spices (flowers, fresh herbs, or freshly cut fruit can substitute), blessing over candle flame. Details may vary between communities, but usually some wine is poured into a plate and the candle dipped into it to extinguish it (while singing).
Shabbat Is Fail-Safe - This is definitely advice aimed at people worried about perfection and weekly inconsistency. Shabbat is a practice, and "perfection is not the goal of any practice". Remembering the Sabbath day is half of the goal, even if you're late to candle lighting, are blessing takeout, or have errands on Saturday. "If last week you forgot to make Shabbat, there will be another and another, each one a clean slate and a new beginning."
Good Deeds
"Because the human impulse to do good is not dependable, Jews are commanded to feed, clothe, and provide shelter to those who lack them - and to do the work of justice - by performing mitzvot." [Contrasted to charity from caritas "Xtian love".]
Tzedakah - Righteous giving. [Often monetarily in usage.] "Jewish law requires that even the poorest give to less fortunate than themselves, even if their gift comes directly from someone else's tzedakah." There isn't a specific number to aim for as a minimum or maximum in personal giving, but there typically are communal reminders and communal aspects (like food drives before a holiday) throughout the year.
Acts of Loving-Kindness - Presented as the definition of gemilut hasadim, which are face-to-face encounters. Traditionally "providing clothes for the naked, visiting the sick, comforting mourners, accompanying the dead to the grave, providing for brides, and hospitality to strangers" (but can also extend to in-person volunteering outside of this areas).
Tikkun Olam - Repairing the world. Current manifestations can look like social justice efforts, environmental advocacy, supporting LGBTQ+ rights, and other 'civil' areas of life.
What Jews Eat
"Kashrut, the laws and customs that regulate what Jews eat, can be understood as a way of hallowing the mundane act of eating and making it a way of 'opening out' to God."
Covers: Kosher/Not Kosher, brief explanations for pareve/kosher meat/kosher wine, hechshers, wide range of American relaxed-to-strictly kosher approaches, and a broad overview of historical differences in access to ingredients that have influenced Ashkenazi/Sephardi/Mizrahi cuisine. Overall, there's advice on not being afraid to look for kosher cookbooks/recipes, since many cuisines can still be eaten in a way that follows kashrut.
Jewish Parenting
I will admit that I skimmed this section moreso than hung onto every detail because I'm not terribly interested in the topic of parenting right now. Covers the importance of education, some differences in offering Jewish education to children, sleep-away camps and youth groups for teens, and a little blurb on how the ADA galvanized the families of disabled children to get more accessible Jewish education.
Life Cycle of the Year subsections: Jewish Time, Making Yontif, Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, Sukkot, Simchat Torah, Hanukkah, Tu B'Shvat, Purim, Passover, Lag B'Omer, Yom HaShoah and Yom Ha'atzmaut, Shavuot, Tisha B'Av.
Jewish Time
The basics of the Jewish calendar being lunar based, adding in a leap month [instead of a leap day], and the day starts at sunset.
Making Yontif
'Making a holiday' instead of just 'observing/celebrating'. There's an element of active preparation (hachanah) which can provide routes for more personal significance towards each holiday. Also: setting the stage, food, family time, and community. The Yontif Seder or 'Holiday Order' can include a blessing for candles, wine/kiddush, and bread.
Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur
A brief description of Yamim Noraim, the Days of Awe. Making yontif for the Days of Awe is primarily an introduction to the liturgy of the services (like Kol Nidre for Yom Kippur) and new words, such as machzor (special prayer book) and tashlich (symoblic casting of sin into a body of water).
Sukkot
There's some advice on building a sukkah, but there aren't a ton of details since many Liberal synagogues will have a communal sukkah to fulfill the mitzvah of dwelling inside one. There is a note that American Jews have included land acknowledgements at the end of the traditional blessings/prayers.
Simchat Torah
A basic description of Simchat Torah, but since it's very much at thing that happens inside the synagogue during service, there's not a lot. [There isn't a separate note about Shemini Atzeret, though this doesn't mean 'Liberal' Judaism ignores it entirely. As the end of Sukkot, it's just not often singled out as a separate holiday in some Liberal resources.]
Hanukkah
An explanation of what Hanukkah celebrates, how to light the hanukkiah, how to play dreidel, and an acknowledgement of complicated feelings about Xmas from one Jew to another. (As some readers may be converts with Xtian families or in interfaith families with a Xtian parent, some Jewish children may observe Xmas in other homes or have a blended Hanukkah/Xmas celebration in their home.)
Tu B'Shvat
An explanation of Tu B'Shvat, including how some came to use an adapted seder inspired by Pesach. (Most of the details are on how to start planning out one of your own.)
Purim
Most of Purim doesn't happen in the home whether that's the service in the synagogue or community set Purimshpiels, a costume party, or carnival (with comparisons to Mardi Gras and a mention of a parade in Israel). A seudah or feast is the only home activity, which is why hamentaschen, Purim ravioli, and other food customs are associated with this day.
Passover
Passover is very much a home based holiday, though there's a relaxed-to-strict spectrum of preparation (especially for "getting rid of hametz"). Kosher for Passover can vary a bit among communities [reference to kitniyot differences], but everyone should be aiming for no leavening agents, leavened products, or specific grains that can ferment for a week. The seder is outlined in a haggadah/haggadot, and especially in modern times with access to DIY resources, the exact details can vary a bit from one seder to another (shorter versions for young children, adding an orange to the seder plate, adding XYZ for a more modern cause, etc.). (Some Ashkenazi synagogues have taken inspiration from Mimouna - a Moroccan celebration/feast - to have a communal meal to end Passover.)
Lag B'Omer
A little bit on Lag B'Omer, though I do get the impression that Liberal Judaism doesn't pay much attention to counting the omer. (Jewish day schools may hold a field day, but it seems to mostly be mentioned because of Israeli observance.)
Yom HaShoah and Yom Ha'atzmaut
Yom HaShoah is 27 Nisan [different from International Holocaust Remembrance Day]. It commemorates the Warsaw ghetto uprising and specifically focuses on Jewish dead [instead of 'everyone']. Yom Ha'aztmaut is 5 Iyar; Israel independence day. [Some Liberal synagogues in the diaspora may not do much, but some add a prayer for Israel.]
Shavuot
Shavuot was originally an agricultural holiday, but post-Second Temple, it's a celebration of Torah with a special evening service and - in some communities - a tradition of staying up all night to study Torah and/or Talmud. Due to this, some Liberal Jews might associate certain food items (often dairy based for Ashkenazi) with this day, but others might not personally connect with synagogue or service related specifics.
Tisha B'Av
Tisha B'Av is mostly explained in a historical way with the impression that some Liberal synagogues have focused on Yom HaShoah as a 'communal grief day' instead of this day.
Noted so it doesn't feel totally incomplete, but the information is just basic enough that I didn't feel like copying any quotes or more detailed summaries:
The Life Cycle subsections: Birth, B-Mitzvah, Marriage, Conversion and Adoption, Death and Mourning.
Community subsections: Synagogues, Community Groups, The Jewish Community Online, Peoplehood.
0 notes
bringmemyrocks · 12 days
Text
On being "more religious"
This post was inspired interaction with orthodox-leaning conservative Jews who measure everything by the standards of Orthodoxy and by a blog post by CrazyJewishConvert, whose page is currently under construction. Archived link here. Text from Hillel: If not now, When? by Rabbi Joseph Telushkin:
...[I[f two Jews are speaking about a third, and one of them asks if the person being discussed is religious, the answer is invariably based on the person's level of ritual, not ethical, observance. "He keeps kosher, he keeps Shabbat; yes, he is religious," or "She doesn't keep kosher, she doesn't keep Shabbat; no, she's not religious." It is virtually inconceivable that you would overhear the following conversation: 
"Is so-and-so religious?" "Oh, definitely." "How do you know?" "Because he's very careful never to embarrass anyone, particularly in public. And he always judges other people favorably."
Conversations such as this simply don't happen. Religiosity today - and perhaps even during Hillel's time - is assessed on the basis of ritual observance. If a Jew is known not to observe Shabbat or kashrut, that individual is regarded as nonreligious, even if his or her ethical behavior is exemplary and is based on what the ethics of the Torah and Talmud demand of him. In such a case, people might say, "Unfortunately, he is not religious, but he's a wonderful person." On the other hand, if a person keeps Shabbat and kashrut, but violates, for example, Jewish laws on business ethics or, in violation of the Torah, speaks unfairly and inappropriately of others, it wouldn't occur to people to say that such a person is not religious. Rather, they might say, "He's religious, but unfortunately he's not ethical."
I would also add that even among people who are more ritually observant (kashrut, keeping shabbat, TH, etc.) there are still differences, and being machmir (extra observant) looks totally different depending on the community, including within orthodoxy.
Not only can we argue that "more religious" does not have to mean "more observant", but what "more observant" even means starts to break down once you examine the orthodox world more closely.
For example, no Jew would take up all of the following practices because they would be contradictory, as they come from different communities:
Daily mikveh immersion (common among men in some hasidic communities)
Studying hasidic texts or following a particular rebbe in the hasidic tradition (Tanya, Likutei Moharan, etc. depending on the hasidic community)
Keeping cholov yisrael (extremely strict kosher dairy observance that R. Moshe Feinstein, followed by many orthodox Jews, ruled was unnecessary). There's an idea among liberal Jews (and even some conservative ones) that more restrictions = more religious, or at least more restrictions = more observant. That simply isn't the case.
Excluding kitniyot over passover if they're not ashkenazi. No matter how religious this person is, if they are sephardic and live in a sephardic community, giving up kitniyot is not sign of additional observance. More restrictions =/= more religious ("machmir").
Holding by sephardic rules (no eggs, no sugar) when making challah if they're ashkenazi/living in an ashkenazi community.
Minhag (community custom) matters a great deal.
So even if we agree that "more religious" = "more observant" rather than "more religious" = "more ethical", the distinctions only carry you so far. Observance is not an either/or decision, even if you agree that orthodoxy is correct.
You can argue "halachah=/=minhag" when it comes to issues of challah, but especially with issues of cholov yisrael, that distinction is blurred to the point of non-existence.
Because if you decide that orthodoxy is correct and all other forms of Judaism should measure themselves in relation to it, you still have to decide which orthodoxy you're measuring by.
3 notes · View notes
the-hem · 2 months
Text
The Presentation. From Luke 2: 22-40.
Tumblr media
The tendency is to portray Christ as the manifestation of some Old Testament fantasy, but He is not in fact That. That is what is called Mashiach, a global ethical social order that did not take place in Christ's lifetime. Indeed, there is no way it could not happen until our age, facilitated by the internet and mass communications. We all know what is going on and why, there is no hiding it anymore, we know we deserve better and we know the Religion says we have no choice but to award it to ourselves.
So the Presentation was not the fulfillment of prophecy, and niether was the Christ, although it is said He appeared At the Right Time, an essential component of how the God of Israel operates not necessarily when.
When the conditions are right, God always steps in to explain the way out of Egypt, Rome, or America, whoever the slaver is. Each time seems like a miracle but it doesn't last.
We need God to perform such a miracle, but unlike the aformentioned, ours cannot entail an exodus from a place where tyranny holds sway to one that is free. This is because the entire human race needs to be rescued from the entire human race. Every continent and corner is besieged by evil from which none of us can properly escape unless we remain precisely where we are.
Fortunately we have the internet and can use its virtual commune to do what is needed so every enslaved human being can be freed without taking a single step away from home, and those who are homeless will not lose their voices.
The moment humanity decides to speak up is called the Presentation, and it always takes place At The Right Time.
The Presenation of a Jewish boy takes place at age 13. The Torah says "completeness" begins at this time:
"Some explain that, like most other halachic measurements, the fact that the age of maturity is 12 or 13 is simply an oral tradition that G‑d imparted to Moses on Mount Sinai (commonly called Halachah L’Moshe MiSinai).2
Others explain that this is derived from the Torah’s account of the destruction of the city of Shechem by Simeon and Levi in retaliation for the rape of their sister Dinah.
The verse “On the third day . . . Jacob’s two sons, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brothers, each man took his sword and confidently attacked the city . . .”3 The term “man” (ish) is used to refer to both brothers, the younger of whom, Levi, was exactly 13 years old at the time.4 This is the youngest age at which someone is referred to as a “man” in the Torah; thus, we derive that the Torah considers a male of 13 years to be a man.5 6
The First Born of Israelite parents are the ones meant to live in freedom and preserve it without having ever experienced captivitiy personally. Like Moses, Jesus was a Levite, which means He was never a slave. Jesus maintains this assertion His entire life.
The appearance of a widow prophetess is the most important aspect of this section. While Jesus was not the product of a bunch of hokey pokey sorcery, the presence of a widow means an era that took place without the Torah in it was coming to an end.
The Empire of Rome was not disposed towards the Torah in anyway. Rome widowed the Jewish people of the Torah. Then lo and behold this amazing youth showed up at temple one day....
Jesus Presented in the Temple
22 When the time came for the purification rites required by the Law of Moses, Joseph and Mary took him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord 
23 (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “Every firstborn male is to be consecrated to the Lord”[a]), 24 and to offer a sacrifice in keeping with what is said in the Law of the Lord: “a pair of doves or two young pigeons.”[b]
25 Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was on him. 
26 It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Messiah. 
27 Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, 28 Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying:
29 “Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,     you may now dismiss[c] your servant in peace. 30 For my eyes have seen your salvation, 31     which you have prepared in the sight of all nations: 32 a light for revelation to the Gentiles,     and the glory of your people Israel.”
33 The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him. 
34 Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, 
35 so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.”
36 There was also a prophet, Anna, "we beseech thee" the daughter of Penuel "who turns to God", of the tribe of Asher "Happiness." She was very old; she had lived with her husband seven years after her marriage, 
37 and then was a widow until she was eighty-four.[d] She never left the temple but worshiped night and day, fasting and praying. 
38 Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem.
39 When Joseph and Mary had done everything required by the Law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee to their own town of Nazareth. 
40 And the child grew and became strong; he was filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was on him.
After a boy makes the beer, he is taken to the temple to sacrifice two doves. One is for a sin-offering. Sin offerings are made as vows to prevent future transgression, which important especially after a boy gets his wiener. The other is for a wave offering, meaning he waves goodbye to childhood.
These details indicate the fact Jesus was raised by orthodox Jewish parents and went to shul after that. He did not pop out on Christmas day, speak in parables, perform miracles and guess at the rest. Persecution of Jews as if they are different somehow from the Nest is not strange considering the Jesus and His Jewishness are clearly not separable.
The next important detail found in the story of the Presentation is the name Simeon, another term for the Shema, found in the Mishnah, also known as the Talmud. Shema is the heartfelt cry of an oppressed person or people for liberation and refuge.
The verb שמע (shama') means to hear and may also mean to understand or obey. Noun שמע (shema') means sound. Nouns שמע (shoma') and שמועה (shemu'a) mean tidings, report or mentions.
Noun השמעות (hashma'ut) describes that which is caused to be heard. Noun משמע (mishma') means rumor or a thing heard. Noun משמעת (mishma'at) refers to a group or listeners.
As I said, God did not acquiesce to fulfill a specific prophecy, but He did respond to the Shema and Presented Himself at the right time in the Temple.
Simeon tells Mary a sword will pierce her heart. The Sword is always the Question God posed to Adam and Eve and poses to all who want to reside in Eden: "Who am I? Who are you?"
The Sword is the double-sided Covenant the protects the nation and the people from lawlessness and chaos. Knowing our place is how we prevent lawlessness from overtaking what does not belong to us but belongs to the Most High, His Authority over life and death which is the utmost.
So Saint Luke annunciates the Shema around 85 CE but says forthrightly it's just not going to work. Mankind -all of it- not just the Jewish people in Rome- will not accept its terms which state God will provision the earth, we will till it and benefit from it but there are rules.
Humanity decides not to follow the rules, Jesus is crucified and this broke Mary's heart. As it should ours- everyone was starstruck with Teen Jesus, especially after the Empire created a Widow and the Shema was reported when He first appeared. Except we know how the story ends.
Now I'm going to create Seven Years out of the the last seven verses that explain the exact meaning of the Presentation:
v. 33-34: The Value in Gematria is 8474, ח‎ד‎ז‎ד, hazrat, "You're back!" The back is the beginning. In Judaism the future is behind us, like the kid in line behind you not in front. So hazrat means "the future is nigh."
v. 35: The Value in Gematria is 8173, חאזג‎ ‎, hazag, "the pair." We discussed what this means- a vow to stop sinning and a wave goodbye to the root causes of sinning.
v. 36: Anna the one who beseeches humanity for happiness, the 84 year old Widow Prophetess represents the end of an age of immorality and the possible beginning of something better.
She was married for Seven Years, meaning she experienced success at each of the Superior Offices named in the Seven Days during her lifetime, and then was abandoned by mankind.
The Value in Gematria is 9881, טחחא, hahaha, "the henhouse", meaning, after the pair of sacrifices are made, something needs to provide an ideological basis for the new epoch, and this thing, associated with a Rooster is called Mashiach, which is not a person but a system of government. All governments begin with theory as to how it will be constituted, the ways rulers will be chosen, the branches of government etc. The Rooster represents politics and the politician.
The henhouse represents a polity that desires to be free of Babylon or Rome or a shitrack like America and graduate to a government with far more messianic tendencies than exist in the current model.
v. 37: The Value in Gematria is 9799, ט‎טזט‎ , tttttt, or six impressions. These are:
1. Our Exodus From Egypt
2. The Revelation at Sinai
3. Amalek’s Attack on Israel
4. The Golden Calf and Rebelling in the Desert
5. Miriam’s Negative Speech and Punishment
6. The Sabbath
Henhouses that lack Roosters will not be be able to produce eggs and have no future; the Six Impressions represent a population of people that want a future and know to follow the Torah right straight to its doorstep.
v. 38: Redemption in Jerusalem. Jerusalem is the place that teaches peace. Every time we bring someone in to the temple for a Presentation, the world is taught about the peace and inches closer to Mashiach.
The Value in Gematria is 9667, טווז, "a peacock."‎‎‎ Peacocks symbolize the future of the Jewish people. Peacocks show their glory off in the morning, a moment that has yet to come for the heirs of the Kingdom of Israel.
The appearance of Jesus in the temple for His Presentation was a chance for a Jewish Peacock to show off his glories, but alas, we hung Him on a cross instead.
Still, Mary and Joseph and even Jesus Himself tried their best:
v.39: Mary , Jesus, Joseph and the persons in the Temple performed Galilee next, they "returned to the circuit", meaning every year they performed the Passover, the Atonement, all the Festival Feasts, observed Shabbat, etc.
Galilee=
 Note that this word is also identical to the Hebrew version of the name Galilee (Joshua 20:7, 1 Kings 9:11, Isaiah 9:1).
The previous noun made feminine: גלילה (gelila), meaning circuit, boundary or territory (Joshua 4:4, Ezekiel 47:8).
The noun גלול (gillul), meaning idols (Ezekiel 22:3, 1 Kings 15:12). This word occurs only in plural. Scholars can't decide whether this noun came from the idols' shapes (round/curvy?) or whether they were considered "dung-things" or crap, so to speak.
The masculine noun גלגל (galgal), meaning wheel (Isaiah 5:28) or whirlwind (Psalm 77:18).
The masculine noun גלגל (gilgal), meaning wheel (Isaiah 28:28 only).
The feminine noun גלגלת (gulgoleth), meaning skull or head. Note that the noun פנים (panim), meaning face, comes from the verb פנה (pana), meaning to turn.
Nazareth= to preserve the branch. So Jesus of Nazareth means "preserver of the consecrated people."
The Value in Gematria is 10467, יד‎וז‎ , yaduz, "the Hand of God."
v. 40: The Value in Gematria is 6319, וגאט‎, and gat, "the winepress", which as we know means I am right, correct, perfect, absolutely on target by modeling this section of the Gospels using the Seven Days.
The story and detailed analysis of the Presentation leaves us with one urgent thought- there is no time like the present.
As for His Story, from the moment He started creation till He came to Rome, to His appearances in the Quran and throughout our lives, I confess I never lose my fascination with this Superlative Being. He is simply the best, and I lament His Presence in our world not in the least.
Mashiach cements this presence in the lives of all of us not as the result of a prophecy but of a wish. Jesus was the widow Anna's "who beseeched" offspring as much as He belonged to Mary. Humanity therefore should not await the coming of the Messiah at the behest of prophecy but pray, wish and do the work needed to make it happen as soon as possible.
0 notes
ancestorsofjudah · 2 months
Text
2 Kings 20: 8-11. "The Bed."
Tumblr media
Passages in the Tanakh tend to cluster in groups of 7 and 4, consistent with the 7 Days and Four Directions. We just covered how to turn a boil into a fig, by proper acceptance of the rules named in the Torah. Notice I said proper, meaning all efforts must press the wine. This means all that does not work in life is discarded, all that is happy and glorious comes forth. Human beings do not like to do this, but it is a must for one who wants to attain to Ha Shem.
The final stage of such acceptance requires a dividend, which requires proper implementation of the new lifetime that emerges from the press. Hezekiah, the towering example in the Melachim so far asks the prophet what he is to do next after he agrees to accept the yokes of responsibility he learned about in the prior section:
8 Hezekiah had asked Isaiah, “What will be the sign that the Lord will heal me and that I will go up to the temple of the Lord on the third day from now?”
9 Isaiah answered, “This is the Lord’s sign to you that the Lord will do what he has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten steps, or shall it go back ten steps?”
10 “It is a simple matter for the shadow to go forward ten steps,” said Hezekiah. “Rather, have it go back ten steps.”
11 Then the prophet Isaiah called on the Lord, and the Lord made the shadow go back the ten steps it had gone down on the stairway of Ahaz.
The verb אחז (ahaz) means to seize, grasp, take hold of or be (mechanically) attached to. We are to be attached to Ten Stairs of Light and Ten Stairs of Darkness. One might assume this means the Ten Decrees and Ten Plagues, but the answer lay in the Numbers. The former refers to a Shift to the Left or a Shift to the Right. To Shift Right is desirable, to Shift Left is not. Even still God says we must go both ways. :(
v. 8: The Value in Gematria is 8805, חחאֶפֶסה,‎ ‎khafesa, "as a pack."
v. 9: The Value in Gematria is 9694, טוטד‎ ‎, toted, "the tooth."
v. 10: The Value in Gematria is 6169, ואו‎‎ט‎, and ot, "and letter."
v. 11: The Value in Gematria is 6919, ו‎טאט‎, "and tat", "and sub."
We must periodically go into the unknown, the North, the chaotic subtratum of existence in order to understand why man is using his tooth, his brain to consume life in a manner that is not becoming or befitting him. It is the job of the King of Israel to lead the rest in and out, Left to Right and if need be, Right to Left when the Halachah, the history threatens to publish another volume of heat, hate, and tragedy.
How the religion is taught is as much the bed or subfloor of the religion itself. We are caught up in a lethal Left Shift. We are either teaching or are interested in the wrong things.
0 notes