quote:Originally posted by Ela: Highland Park, NJ.
Bingo!
I thought so.
Someone want to calculate the odds that three of the . . . . um, however many frum Yidden we have on Hatrack all live/lived in (or in my case, just adjacent to) Highland Park, NJ?
Slightly freaky, neh?
Actually, it's more than three, if you include my two kids.
And mine! (and let's keep quoting the quotes. I like the way it in- and out-dents.)
You is weird.
Who's your kid, Esther? (And actually, I am dying to know how long you have lived in HP and whether you know the same people we know, but maybe we should take it to email. )
Posts: 5771 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ela: Highland Park, NJ.
Bingo!
I thought so.
Someone want to calculate the odds that three of the . . . . um, however many frum Yidden we have on Hatrack all live/lived in (or in my case, just adjacent to) Highland Park, NJ?
Slightly freaky, neh?
Actually, it's more than three, if you include my two kids.
And mine! (and let's keep quoting the quotes. I like the way it in- and out-dents.)
quote:Originally posted by Ela: Highland Park, NJ.
Bingo!
I thought so.
Someone want to calculate the odds that three of the . . . . um, however many frum Yidden we have on Hatrack all live/lived in (or in my case, just adjacent to) Highland Park, NJ?
Slightly freaky, neh?
Actually, it's more than three, if you include my two kids.
And mine! (and let's keep quoting the quotes. I like the way it in- and out-dents.)
You is weird.
Who's your kid, Esther?
Son of Shvester, of course! I've lived in Highland Park for about 6 years, and before that, in Edison for maybe 12-13 years. And I grew up in New City, NY, and if any Hatracker is from there I'll plotz in disbelief.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keep this up, and we won't need to start a new thread when Hanukkah comes around again in December.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will provide the balance by using no quotes.
Ela, I didn't remember if your kids were born in (or before you moved to) NJ or after. I have enough trouble keeping track of my own timeline. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I moved to Edison from Atlanta in 1987! And South Edison is practically Highland Park, anyway. We overlapped! My son was born in February 1991. Do you overlap with him, too?
I'll catch you up on the news:
Dan sold Dan's, to Dougie, who changed the name to Glatt 27, and then sold it to a family from Brooklyn, who commute from Brooklyn to Highland Park to run the store. But people still call it "Dan's". Dougie ran a contest to choose the new name. The winner got a Roast Chicken. The joke around town was that the runner-up got two Roast Chickens.
Berkeley Bakery gave up their supervision, but a new kosher bakery, Lachmeynu, had moved into town prior, so we never had to face a shortage of fresh baked challah and rye bread.
Pino's moved around the corner to the Bingo hall, and a bike shop moved into Pino's. So there is no more Bingo. No one misses it.
Drug Fair morphed into Rite Aid, but they still sell more wine and liquor than most liquor stores.
A new Orthodox shul (Agudath Israel) opened in town. Because, I guess, you can never have too many!
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hello again friends! You know I have a lot of schoolwork to do if I decided to procrastinate and come back to Hatrack. This thread did wonders for keeping me away from my responsibilities. Thanks!
A few very important comments:
quote:Originally posted by Ela: Who's your kid, Esther? (And actually, I am dying to know how long you have lived in HP and whether you know the same people we know, but maybe we should take it to email. )
Heh. I probably knew your kids. So, don't forget me when talking about frum yidden from exit 9. I belong to the grew-up-almost-adjacent-to-highland-park crowd. Though, I took a bus to a Jewish day school on the border of Edison and Highland Park from K-8 (asking you to guess where I grew up and went to school would be just too easy). And some of that overlapped with Ela and Esther's years there.
As for some of the topics under discussion:
1) I know many Jews who call themselves Conservative but are more frum than a number of Orthodox Jews I know. I define frum as being strict and observant in practice (both in commandments applying between G-d and man and those between people). Ideology is theoretically important, but when a Rabbi is attempting to determine whether or not a conversion is kosher that Rabbi will not look into the ideology of the Rabbi that performed the conversion but will instead check if the Rabbi was shomer Shabbat (and perhaps shomer taharat ha'mishpacha though determining this last is decidedly more difficult).
Even so, I have friends who call themselves Conservative but keep kosher, observe Shabbat, and are genuinely good ethical people. Some even believe that G-d gave both the oral and written Torah in full at Sinai. Why do they call themselves conservative, then? Because they pray in a Conservative synagogue. They believe that there should be no barrier between men and women during services. They believe that a man can fulfill his obligation by listening to a woman lead the Birkat (grace after meals).
The only thing that keeps them from identifying as Orthodox is the stance of the Orthodox community towards female involvement in the synagogue. And when you argue with them about it, some of them will give an explanation sourced in the Talmud and various Orthodox responsa. Others will admit that it is a contradiction in their beliefs and so they struggle all the time with the fact that they are placing some egalitarian notion of equality over G-d's ethics. Contradictions of this sort appear in every single Orthodox Jew as well, though most likely in less public contexts. As Tante, I think, wrote that nobody can keep ALL the commandments.
On the other hand, I have "friends" that call themselves Orthodox but are despicable people. They not only break the Sabbath and eat non-kosher, they act inhumanely. They steal, they cheat, they physically and verbally abuse people they don't like. Yet, when they decide to pray, they will only pray in a place that has a barrier between men and women. And so, they call themselves Orthodox. And when dividing up people in the Jewish community, many take synagogue affiliation to be the primary indicator of one's level of observance.
Take Jack Abramoff for example. Here is a guy that swindled people out of millions of dollars, used a Yeshiva to funnel money without having it taxed, and gloated about it in correspondence. He, like these other "Orthodox" Jews, know full well that what they are doing is wrong, and yet they continue to do so. That is worse than hypocrisy. That is blasphemy. That is most certainly not frum.
Those "Conservative" friends that may have ideologically arrived at their practices in a way different than I have deserve the title frum much more that these "Orthodox" people do. This is why the terms 'Orthodox' and 'Conservative' are problematic. Peopl do exist along a spectrum; a spectrum of ideologies and practices. To pigeonhole people under a title like that makes the title nearly meaningless.
(This next paragraph was written in response to an email conversation about a month ago and I may have missed points irrelevant to this conversation when I went to edit it). I hope that everyone recognizes that all members of any group are still individuals with their own individual opinions. So while we might reference Orthodox, Conservative, and Tibetan Jews as a group, we should not assume that every person who belongs to that group is exactly the same in thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes. Granted, it is perfectly reasonable to mention some organization that represents the group in order to make a claim about what "the group" believes. What this means, however, is that anyone who belongs to that group will need to spend a longer time justifying themselves if they disagree. We can continue to talk about what the Orthodox, for example, believe but we should not presume that each individual who considers him/herself Orthodox believes that. Merely, everyone who considers him/herself Orthodox will work within a similar framework to justify their agreement or disagreement with that belief.
Lastly,
quote: starLisa But back to Rav Henkin. He writes that the halakha is that women can't read from the Torah during services because of kavod ha-tzibbur, or "the honor of the congregation".
This is directly from Tractate Megillah. My chavrusa (study partner) and I learned it a few weeks ago. Upon reading it, we both got very excited because so much of what we were learning seemed entirely irrelevant to much of our daily lives. I'm going to get the story wrong, but it went something like this. We commented about how interesting and odd this reasoning seemed. A Conservative Rabbi, whom we are friendly with, was learning down the table from us looked up and laughed, "Odd? You should be outraged!"
No point, really. It was funny at the time.
Posts: 48 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Heh. I probably knew your kids. So, don't forget me when talking about frum yidden from exit 9. I belong to the grew-up-almost-adjacent-to-highland-park crowd. Though, I took a bus to a Jewish day school on the border of Edison and Highland Park from K-8 (asking you to guess where I grew up and went to school would be just too easy). And some of that overlapped with Ela and Esther's years there.
Hmmm, I bet you went to the Rabbi Pesach Raymon Yeshiva. And you probably grew up in East Brunswick. Posts: 5771 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Though, I took a bus to a Jewish day school on the border of Edison and Highland Park from K-8 (asking you to guess where I grew up and went to school would be just too easy).
It is. East Brunswick and RPRY! So, you must have been a Young Israelite.
Jewish Geography on Hatrack. Will wonders never cease?
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
So I guess I have no excuse. Do you have refreshing chills? Shaking and then sweating that feels like you have all the benefits of a tough workout without having to step foot in the gym? Phlegm of such interesting colors and consistencies, that you feel artistically inspired by your output? An inability to stay off of Hatrack, despite all this?
Yeah? Oh dear, you have it bad, too.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tante Shvester: Jewish Geography on Hatrack. Will wonders never cease?
It gets even better. Rabbi Raymon's granddaughter is our Rebbitzen. And the principal of RPRY used to be the principal of the school my kids went to here.
Posts: 5771 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
So I guess I have no excuse. Do you have refreshing chills? Shaking and then sweating that feels like you have all the benefits of a tough workout without having to step foot in the gym? Phlegm of such interesting colors and consistencies, that you feel artistically inspired by your output? An inability to stay off of Hatrack, despite all this?
Yeah? Oh dear, you have it bad, too.
I seem to have gotten past that stage - when I was in that stage, I was in bed 24-7, except for getting up to eat a little. I haven't been this sick in years.
Posts: 5771 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since I lived in Edison from 1974 to 1980/81 (we spent the 80/81 school year in L.A., then came back that summer just long enough to pack up the house and move everything to L.A.), it sounds like there has been frum Hatrack supervision of the Edison area for about 30 years.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: starLisa But back to Rav Henkin. He writes that the halakha is that women can't read from the Torah during services because of kavod ha-tzibbur, or "the honor of the congregation".
This is directly from Tractate Megillah. My chavrusa (study partner) and I learned it a few weeks ago. Upon reading it, we both got very excited because so much of what we were learning seemed entirely irrelevant to much of our daily lives. I'm going to get the story wrong, but it went something like this. We commented about how interesting and odd this reasoning seemed. A Conservative Rabbi, whom we are friendly with, was learning down the table from us looked up and laughed, "Odd? You should be outraged!"
That's because he probably made the same mistake most Conservative Jews make and thought that "honor of the congregation" meant there's something shameful about women participating. After all, that's what the movement teaches about Orthodoxy.
And while I share your disgust at the faux-frummies out there, and am extremely ashamed of them, it doesn't take away from the basic fact that the Conservative movement denies Torah miSinai. There's something very off about identifying with a movement that denies the very basis of Judaism just because they have personal issues with gender distinctions.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: That's because he probably made the same mistake most Conservative Jews make and thought that "honor of the congregation" meant there's something shameful about women participating. After all, that's what the movement teaches about Orthodoxy.
Except that many Orthodox Jews believe that as well because that is what they are taught. I went through the entire Orthodox Jewish day school system and then went to Yeshiva in Israel. So many of the Orthodox teachers believe that there is something inherently shameful about women participating and so they teach that. They are wrong, certainly.
Rav Moshe Feinstein said that a woman can be the president of a shul (this was qualified in various ways). Rav Soloveichick said that a woman cannot be the president of a shul. This is a disagreement between two great Orthodox Torah minds of recent time. And yet, many Orthodox Jews I know, both men and women, were horrified that I would attribute such an outrageous position to Rav Moshe. They considered it libelous to claim that he supported any role for women in the synagogue.
Our schools do a very poor job of teaching people the reasons behind what they should and should not believe. In fact, there is so little teaching done about women's issues that it isn't surprising to me that people assume women leading something is shameful. I've had to reeducate some of my siblings because they were taught that certain things are the TRUTH and were never given any indication that competent Orthodox Rabbis have given opposite opinions. Of course, no teacher should believe contradictory things. But as a teacher their responsibility is to let students know that while we follow the Rav, Rav Moshe is a also a respectable Halachic authority. You can believe that Rav Moshe was wrong and still teach his opinion.
Too many Jewish day schools don't do that. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and believe that they don't because they don't know better or they genuinely believe that teaching this way is better for Orthodoxy. So, perhaps when we stop believing these things ourselves, the Conservative movement will stop teaching it about us.
Also, I'm Orthodox, but I think that evolution is probably true. Agudath Israel, a very prominent Orthodox organization, has explicitly denied its truth. I associate with the movement for other reasons. So, I would be happy to engage in a debate about how I can associate with a movement I don't 100 percent line up with ideologically. Because frankly, its easier to practice, what I believe I should practice, in an Orthodox community than any other. I suspect my Conservative friends feel the same way.
Posts: 48 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Also, I'm Orthodox, but I think that evolution is probably true. Agudath Israel, a very prominent Orthodox organization, has explicitly denied its truth. I associate with the movement for other reasons. So, I would be happy to engage in a debate about how I can associate with a movement I don't 100 percent line up with ideologically. Because frankly, its easier to practice, what I believe I should practice, in an Orthodox community than any other. I suspect my Conservative friends feel the same way.
I didn't even know that Orthodox Jews accepted everything pre-Abraham as literal history. I guess Lewis Black was mistaken when he said if you want proof of evolution, ask a Jew.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Also, I'm Orthodox, but I think that evolution is probably true. Agudath Israel, a very prominent Orthodox organization, has explicitly denied its truth. I associate with the movement for other reasons. So, I would be happy to engage in a debate about how I can associate with a movement I don't 100 percent line up with ideologically. Because frankly, its easier to practice, what I believe I should practice, in an Orthodox community than any other. I suspect my Conservative friends feel the same way.
I didn't even know that Orthodox Jews accepted everything pre-Abraham as literal history. I guess Lewis Black was mistaken when he said if you want proof of evolution, ask a Jew.
That's the point. Some do, some don't. Stating that everyone belonging to a particular movement believes everything that the movement professes is not only dishonest, but impossible. Other prominent Orthodox organizations have no comment officially on the matter of evolution, while many prominent Orthodox Rabbis believe that evolution is true, to varying extents.
The first of the 13 Principles of Faith that the Rambam (Maimonides) put together is that Jews must believe that the One G-d, and only G-d, creates and directs all creation. Many Orthodox Rabbis will claim any belief in evolution violates this. Many will claim that it does not.
The Reform movment, in the Pittsburgh Platform, stated that Judaism comes closest to Kantian Ideals. And so, the leaders of Reform Judaism molded their movement in such a way as to make it conform to Kantianism. You'd be hard-pressed to find any strict Kantianists in the Reform movement today. You'd also find that much of the Reform leadership has a very different opinion on what the basis of their movement is. Still, as far as I know the Pittsburgh Platform hasn't been explicitly rejected and denied.
The best way I can think of to change an organization that you wish to belong to, and agree with significantly enough, is to work change from within. It makes perfect sense to me that people who wish to see the Conservative movement's stance on Torah m'Sinai changed, identify as Conservative. If they put themselves outside of that community, how could they change it internally.
Posts: 48 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: I think that evolution is probably true. Agudath Israel, a very prominent Orthodox organization, has explicitly denied its truth.
Can you provide a link? My understanding was that the Agudah was in favor of Intelligent Design (don't even get me started on my opposition to that), not saying that evolution could not have occurred.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: That's because he probably made the same mistake most Conservative Jews make and thought that "honor of the congregation" meant there's something shameful about women participating. After all, that's what the movement teaches about Orthodoxy.
Except that many Orthodox Jews believe that as well because that is what they are taught. I went through the entire Orthodox Jewish day school system and then went to Yeshiva in Israel. So many of the Orthodox teachers believe that there is something inherently shameful about women participating and so they teach that. They are wrong, certainly.
Of course they are. People are people, and they have flaws. I have my own issues with the Orthodox community. But the core remains true to the Torah.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Rav Moshe Feinstein said that a woman can be the president of a shul (this was qualified in various ways).
My aunt was president of her Orthodox shul for many years here in Chicago.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Rav Soloveichick said that a woman cannot be the president of a shul. This is a disagreement between two great Orthodox Torah minds of recent time. And yet, many Orthodox Jews I know, both men and women, were horrified that I would attribute such an outrageous position to Rav Moshe.
They're ignorant. You think I don't realize that there's a serious educational and cultural problem in the frum community? I once pointed out to a woman who'd gone to Stern (of all places) that just because Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan put notes in his translation of the Torah identifying certain Egyptian kings as this or that Pharaoh mentioned in the Torah doesn't mean that we have to accept those identifications. The man was a physicist and a rav; not an Egyptologist. She was horrified. Her husband took my side, but you could see that she just didn't get it.
It's tragic. And while I in no way excuse the community that taught her to think this way (or rather, not to think at all), I'll point out again that the frum community is in a defensive posture as a result of the heterodox movements. And that this too shall pass. Which is not the case with a movement that officially denies the central tenet of Judaism.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Too many Jewish day schools don't do that. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and believe that they don't because they don't know better or they genuinely believe that teaching this way is better for Orthodoxy. So, perhaps when we stop believing these things ourselves, the Conservative movement will stop teaching it about us.
I'm not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg. And it's not the Conservative misrepresentation of Orthodoxy that bothers me the most about that movement, as I think I've pointed out.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Also, I'm Orthodox, but I think that evolution is probably true. Agudath Israel, a very prominent Orthodox organization, has explicitly denied its truth. I associate with the movement for other reasons. So, I would be happy to engage in a debate about how I can associate with a movement I don't 100 percent line up with ideologically.
Um. Are you actually comparing that to the Conservative denial of Torah miSinai? Really? Surely you can see the lack of proportion there. Evolution is a scientific theory. Torah miSinai... without that, there is no Judaism.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Can you provide a link? My understanding was that the Agudah was in favor of Intelligent Design (don't even get me started on my opposition to that), not saying that evolution could not have occurred.
I should have checked more carefully. I conflated the banning of Rav Slifkin's books with the Agudah's official position. A few of the Rabbi's may be the same, but I suppose that wasn't an official position.
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Um. Are you actually comparing that to the Conservative denial of Torah miSinai? Really? Surely you can see the lack of proportion there. Evolution is a scientific theory. Torah miSinai... without that, there is no Judaism.
I respond to that in my comment to Stephan just above.
My criticism was not that it isn't a big deal that the Conservative movement officially denies the source of the authority of the Torah. That is really quite important. Rather, I do not think it is fair to make a generalization that all Conservative Jews must believe this or that because they identify with the movement.
You seemed to claim earlier that ideology did not exist along a spectrum, though practice might. (I could very well have misunderstood what you wrote and will look for the post). Ideology, though, does exist along a spectrum. Of course, there is a true ideology and a false ideology. Just as with practices, though, I doubt you could find any two Jews who agree on what that true belief is. (It should be clear, though, that just because we don't agree on what the true, complete, belief set is does not imply that there is no true, complete, belief set).
A Jew could believe everything true, except that the Torah was divinely inspired rather than written by G-d through Moshe's hand. This Jew might have the further belief that this does not diminish the authority of the Torah in any way. A Jew could believe that the oral Torah was entirely the Rabbis expanding upon the written, rather than told by G-d to Moshe. Yet, the person can have the further belief that this does not diminish the authority of the oral Torah because G-d commanded us to follow the Rabbis. I would agree with you that these beliefs are mistaken and untrue. They are possible, though, and they exist along a spectrum from Truth to Falsity.
A movement can be criticized for its official doctrine. Individuals, however, should not be until we've learned enough about that individual to determine what that person actually believes. I suppose, in some ways, it is a semantic distinction between saying, "Orthodox Jews believe thusly" and saying, "The Orthodox Movement believes thusly".
Personally, I'd prefer if we judged people on their actions, and not on their beliefs. I cannot know what any other person truly believe; that is between that person and G-d. If we assume that actions reflect beliefs, there would be no need to criticize a person's thoughts. We should, however, take beliefs into account for purposes of being kind and charitable. Dan l'kaf z'chut. Give people the benefit of the doubt. A person's thoughts, reasons, beliefs, and intentions should be considered in mercy and praise rather than judgement and criticism.
That is not to say we should not debate the merits of one ideology over another. If a person offers up their own beliefs, they offer those beliefs up for judgment. But that judgment should come in the form of a serious debate. Claiming that people who believe some particular idea are not Jewish because of it ends the debate, not start it. Better to open a dialogue on why or why not this particular belief is important to Jewish identity. If one side believes that there is no Jewish identity to defend in the other party, then I can't imagine any serious discussion will take place. That doesn't mean one must relativistically approve of all beliefs so long as they fit some system. It means that people wish to be accepted as themselves when they enter discussion, and we should extend everyone that courtesy. Even if we hope that they will be someone different when that discussion concludes.
Posts: 48 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: I should have checked more carefully. I conflated the banning of Rav Slifkin's books with the Agudah's official position. A few of the Rabbi's may be the same, but I suppose that wasn't an official position.
The Agudah has been quite careful to take no position on l'affaire Slifkin, although a number of the members have opinions (some on each side).
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hang on to your socks, Lisa. My family were members of the Conservative Shul in town. We left there to join the Agudah. Now we are shtark Agudah yids. We are, however, the same folk. And the change from one shul to another had very little to do with ideology, and everything to do with where my family felt accepted and comfortable daavening.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Um. Are you actually comparing that to the Conservative denial of Torah miSinai? Really? Surely you can see the lack of proportion there. Evolution is a scientific theory. Torah miSinai... without that, there is no Judaism.
I respond to that in my comment to Stephan just above.
I don't think you really do.
There's a concept in Judaism of there being "70 faces (or facets) to the Torah". That means that there can be more than one legitimate view on a subject. But that 71st facet is crossing a red line.
Even if denial of Torah miSinai wasn't a violation of one of the Rambam's 13 principles, which it is, and even if such denial did not, in principle, make the denier an apostate, which it does (though the whole tinok she'nishba thing spares us from having to relate to individuals who have been miseducated to deny it as halakha would otherwise dictate), and even if these were not the longest run-on sentence I think I've ever managed to concoct (at least I think it is; I've never actually gone through my old e-mails and posts to check), it would still be a complete rejection of the entire raison d'etre of the Jewish people.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: My criticism was not that it isn't a big deal that the Conservative movement officially denies the source of the authority of the Torah. That is really quite important. Rather, I do not think it is fair to make a generalization that all Conservative Jews must believe this or that because they identify with the movement.
That doesn't make any sense. Throughout our history, there have always been Jews who for whatever reason decided not to abide by Jewish law. That's not my issue. Someone in this thread who is certainly a frum Jew acknowledged a violation which takes place every single week. But that person recognizes that it's a violation, and doesn't try to join a group that will declare it perfectly fine.
People aren't perfect. When Jews were streaming into the US in the late 1800s and early 1900s, many of them just couldn't deal with keeping Shabbat, because the culture here was such that they would never have been able to make the kind of living they wanted to. So they stopped keeping Shabbat. Terrible, yes, but they didn't deny that they were violating Shabbat. They found it a terrible necessity.
My issue is with the creation of "movements", which provide a structure and a formal excuse for such things. So that no one has to struggle with it any more. They have "rabbis" who tell them they aren't actually doing anything wrong. It's the religious version of selling snake-oil.
And when someone uses their membership in such a movement as an excuse for the complete denial of Judaism, yes, I criticize that. It's a classic example of aveira goreret aveira.
I know a woman who was raised Orthodox, but married out. She did something wrong. She doesn't go around insisting that people say it's okay, and she does her level best to remain frum and raise her children frum, despite the rather major disconnect. She davens at a Conservative place, not because she approves of it, but because she knows she wouldn't be accepted at a frum shul. She does not consider herself Conservative, because she isn't. Because the Conservative movement is institutionalized kefirah.
If someone tells me that they're Conservative and believe in Torah miSinai, there are a couple of possibilities. One is that when they say they believe in Torah miSinai, it's like the Conservative movement saying it's a halakhic movement. No more than a hijacking of terms. The other is that they just don't get what the Conservative movement is.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: You seemed to claim earlier that ideology did not exist along a spectrum, though practice might. (I could very well have misunderstood what you wrote and will look for the post).
You did, because I didn't say anything of the sort. Conservative Jews are constantly accusing Orthodoxy of being monolithic and seeing no shades of grey. That's what they taught me at Ramah. That's what they taught me in Hebrew school. That's what you can hear Conservative Jews saying all the time. But it's not true. But there are lines which, when crossed, take you out of Judaism altogether. Rejection of Torah miSinai is one of those. It's up there with atheism as something that is utterly incompatible with Judaism.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Ideology, though, does exist along a spectrum. Of course, there is a true ideology and a false ideology. Just as with practices, though, I doubt you could find any two Jews who agree on what that true belief is.
That's a fallacy, Gansura. If one rabbi says that women's davening groups are okay and another says they aren't, that doesn't even begin to imply that either of them would accept pork as kosher.
And a Jew who denies God's existence, or Torah miSinai, or a number of other things that I think you're probably well aware of (since you did mention the 13 principles yourself in another post) has crossed that line.
No amount of sophistry such as "Well, I believe in God, but I don't believe he talks to human beings", or "Well, I believe that the Revelation at Sinai was a very real event -- in the minds and culture and history of the Jewish people" can turn kefirah into anything but what it is.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: (It should be clear, though, that just because we don't agree on what the true, complete, belief set is does not imply that there is no true, complete, belief set).
True. So why mention the fact that there are disputes? We know that. Saying that there may still be a true, complete, belief set ignores the fact that in most areas, that true, complete, belief set is known. It also leaves open the possibility that there isn't one, which is a nice debator's trick.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: A Jew could believe everything true, except that the Torah was divinely inspired rather than written by G-d through Moshe's hand.
And he'd be a kofer b'ikkar. As I'm sure you know.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: This Jew might have the further belief that this does not diminish the authority of the Torah in any way.
But that'd be irrelevant. It's a rationalization to help the person feel as if they haven't crossed the boundary they've actually crossed. It's sophistry. I can't say that I believe in elves and qualify it by saying that the water bottle on my desk is what I think of as an elf, and I'm looking at it right now, which is why I know that elves exist. That is no different than what you're describing.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: A Jew could believe that the oral Torah was entirely the Rabbis expanding upon the written, rather than told by G-d to Moshe.
Sure. There was a group called the Karaites who did just that. But it's utterly outside the bounds of Judaism. It's kefirah, and you must know that.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Yet, the person can have the further belief that this does not diminish the authority of the oral Torah because G-d commanded us to follow the Rabbis.
They could believe that, but it wouldn't add up. It might work on a kindergarten level, but no more. Let me give you an example.
The Torah forbids us to add or subtract from it. It's right there in the Written Torah, as well as in the Oral Torah. So we're meticulous about determining whether a law is d'Orayta or d'Rabbanan. Because if you treat a d'Rabbanan as a d'Orayta, you're violating that prohibition (bal tosif). With me so far?
In the beginning of the eighth chapter of Tractate Yoma, all of the non-sacrificial aspects of Yom Kippur begin to be discussed. And, as you may know, we aren't allowed to eat, drink, bathe, anoint ourselves, have sex or wear leather shoes on Yom Kippur. But (unless I'm misremembering), eating and drinking are forbidden d'Orayta. The others are d'Rabbanan. And as I'm sure you know, we go to the lenient side in the case of a doubt over a d'Rabbanan law, and to the stringent side in the case of a doubt over a d'Orayta law. So there are practical implications here.
But can you find me anywhere in the Written Torah where it says you can't eat or drink on Yom Kippur? You can't, because it's not there. Same with mixing meat and dairy. Kosher beheima meat and milk from a kosher beheima cannot be cooked together d'Orayta. You can't even derive benefit from them -- d'Orayta. Chicken parmesan or venison parmesan, though, are forbidden d'Rabbanan.
So your hypothetical person would have to say that the rabbis were violating bal tosif when they declared that a eating a cheeseburger or eating at all on Yom Kippur are d'Orayta violations.
Basically, it turns into a complete rejection of the whole thing. You can avoid that chain of reasoning by the simple act of not learning, but once you learn any Torah, the premise that the Oral Torah wasn't given at Sinai leads inexorably to a rejection of the Oral Torah.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: I would agree with you that these beliefs are mistaken and untrue. They are possible, though, and they exist along a spectrum from Truth to Falsity.
They exist on the other side of a very strongly defined line from Judaism. The spectrum of truth to falsity only matters within that line. Outside, kefirah is kefirah.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: A movement can be criticized for its official doctrine. Individuals, however, should not be until we've learned enough about that individual to determine what that person actually believes.
How far would you be willing to take that sentiment?
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: I suppose, in some ways, it is a semantic distinction between saying, "Orthodox Jews believe thusly" and saying, "The Orthodox Movement believes thusly".
Except that there is no "Orthodox Movement". The only reason a name is even necessary for Orthodoxy is to distinguish it from the movements that broke away.
But the distinction you're making is correct. Orthodox Judaism doesn't see lesbianism, for example, as an abomination, for example. Many, many Orthodox Jews do.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: Personally, I'd prefer if we judged people on their actions, and not on their beliefs.
It's not always that easy. There's no razor line dividing the two.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: I cannot know what any other person truly believe; that is between that person and G-d. If we assume that actions reflect beliefs, there would be no need to criticize a person's thoughts.
I'm not talking about thoughts. I'm talking about statements. I'm no telepath, but if someone denies Torah miSinai to my face (Steve Greenberg, for instance), then I can say he's a kofer, even if he keeps glatt kosher.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: That is not to say we should not debate the merits of one ideology over another. If a person offers up their own beliefs, they offer those beliefs up for judgment. But that judgment should come in the form of a serious debate. Claiming that people who believe some particular idea are not Jewish because of it ends the debate,
So does misrepresentations like the one you just made. No one has ever said that. It's one of the most pernicious libels of the various movements that when we say the movements aren't forms of Judaism, we're actually saying their members aren't Jewish. My parents and siblings are Conservative. They're Jewish. I grew up Conservative, and I certainly didn't go through any conversion ceremony. "A Jew who sins is still a Jew." As mentioned earlier in this thread, you can convert to Catholicism and become a cardinal, and it doesn't make you less Jewish.
quote:Originally posted by Gansura: not start it. Better to open a dialogue on why or why not this particular belief is important to Jewish identity. If one side believes that there is no Jewish identity to defend in the other party, then I can't imagine any serious discussion will take place.
That's like allowing Flat Earthers to participate in a geology conference. There's no way we're going to take the current absurd situation as a starting point. The burden of proof is still on the breakaway movements.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
This thread has made it abundently clear that it is perfectly within the bounds of ehtical behavior on hatrack to deny that a professed member of a religion is actually of that religion.
E.g., I expect to hear zero complaints about innapropriate behavior the next time someone says that mormons aren't christians.
quote:The burden of proof is still on the breakaway movements.
Why?
Because the burden of proof is on anyone who wants to change something. Always. Sometimes that burden is pretty easy to carry. Sometimes it isn't.
If 100 people are marching down the street and one of them decides to turn onto a sidestreet, it's the one person who has to justify what he did. Not the 99.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: [bitterness]
This thread has made it abundently clear that it is perfectly within the bounds of ehtical behavior on hatrack to deny that a professed member of a religion is actually of that religion.
E.g., I expect to hear zero complaints about innapropriate behavior the next time someone says that mormons aren't christians.
[/bitterness]
I don't think Lisa has stated that anyone (myself as a Reform Jew included for that matter) is not Jewish.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And if he says "Because this street will still take me to the capital building, and it might even be faster," and shows you a map, then the burden of proof is on you to show that he's wrong.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I don't think Lisa has stated that anyone (myself as a Reform Jew included for that matter) is not Jewish."
I disagree. She's stated that reform and conservative jews have thrown out the entire basis for judaism, and do not accept the entire basis of judaism.
She's said it... she just hasn't used the exact words.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Paul, I object to your characterization. I have never, ever, ever said, implied or even hinted that a Jew who does things contrary to Jewish law is not a Jew. And I defy you to show me otherwise. If you do, I will most humbly apologize, but you won't be able to.
Or was it the fact that I said you can't convert out of Judaism? That you can convert to Wicca or Catholicism or Hinduism and it doesn't make you less of a Jew than you were before you did so.
Is that what's bothering you? Do you need me to be even more clear than that? Fine.
A Jew who is a member of the Conservative movement is every bit as much a Jew as any Orthodox Jew. A Jew who is a member of the Reform movement is every bit as much a Jew as any Orthodox Jew.
Is that clear enough? Though I'd add that a Jew who is a member of the Democratic Party or the Kiwanis or the Mickey Mouse Club or the Conference of Cardinals is also every bit as much a Jew as any Orthodox Jew.
Claiming that I've denied the Jewishness of other Jews because of their beliefs is offensive. I've gone out of my way to state otherwise.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: This thread has made it abundently clear that it is perfectly within the bounds of ehtical behavior on hatrack to deny that a professed member of a religion is actually of that religion.
Lisa is Lisa, and she speaks for herself. And we all know how outspoken she is. And you have to realize that this thread is NOT about Hatrack saying "Right on, Lisa! You GO, girl!" In fact, I can think of very few 'rackers more provocative and outspoken than Lisa.
So, you want to disagree with her? Jump on board, you've got lots of company! But please don't tar Hatrack with the same broad brush.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Esther, have you seen me say that Conservative Jews are not Jews? Surely you know the difference between saying that the movement isn't a form a Judaism and saying that its adherants have stopped being Jewish.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the appropriate parallel would be someone saying that individual Mormons may be Christians, if they have the appropriate relationship with Christ, but that the Mormon religion is not Christian because it has rejected several beliefs which are central to Christianity.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Esther, have you seen me say that Conservative Jews are not Jews? Surely you know the difference between saying that the movement isn't a form a Judaism and saying that its adherants have stopped being Jewish.
I don't see a significant difference in that statement. In fact, I find it offensive.
Though I don't agree with all the official tenets of some brands of Judaism (for example, Reform), they are still forms of Judaism. For you to say otherwise is offensive.
Posts: 5771 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
