Menachem Mendel

Menachem Mendel RSS Feed
 
 
 
 

Believing with Qualifications

Some Conservative Jews are probably very offended by Rav Ovadiah Yosef’s latest comments.

Those who study in religious schools affiliated with Conservative Judaism do not practice Judaism, Shas spiritual leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef has declared in a recent [pesak halakhah].

Such students “do not follow Jewish religious law”, Yosef wrote, adding that most of them “do not believe in a God-given Torah.”

The Shas spirtual leader concluded that Conservative schools could not as such ordain rabbis, adding further that the “Torah must not be instructed” by students of that stream of Judaism.

The Shas website isn’t very up to date, so I couldn’t read the original source, but here is the radio report that seems to be the source for the Haaretz article. The question seems to come down to how does one balance legitimizing a movement that you may see as heretical and the possibility that a teacher may influence students. I would have hoped that Rav Ovadiah would see the possibility of influencing someone as outweighing possible questions about legitimacy, but I can live with his decision. I also think that he might be surprised by the level of knowledge and halakhic observance among many Conservative rabbis, but so be it.

One statement of his that I think is correct, is that most Conservative rabbis and rabbinical students “do not believe in a God-given Torah.” Leaving aside the interesting use of “most,” it is true that most Conservative rabbis do not understand God and revelation in the way that Rav Ovadiah does and he is legitimately claiming that these opinions are outside of the Orthodox discourse of Judaism. I disagree with him, but much of what Conservative rabbis and Jews believe is often fairly untraditional in the orthodox sense of the term.

Adam Kirsch, in a review of Jewish Theology in Our Time: A New Generation Explores the Foundations and Future of Jewish Belief, a recently published book edited by Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove, wrote (emphasis added)

In Bnei Berak—and, for that matter, in the Brooklyn neighborhoods of Williamsburg and Crown Heights—are thousands upon thousands of Jews who not only know with utter certainty just what Judaism is and what God wants from them, but are willing to defy the powers of the earth to do it. Meanwhile, the contributors to this book—edited by the rabbi of Manhattan’s Park Avenue Synagogue, Elliot Cosgrove—can barely even use words like God and Judaism without a blizzard of explanations and qualifications.

Kirsch continued, in what I think is one of the most perceptive articles about non-orthodox (and some orthodox) theology in some time, and asked,

But say that, like these writers and the majority of human beings, you do have an intuition of divinity in the world. This may be the basis for religion, or perhaps spirituality. But is it a basis for Judaism? To put it more sharply: Do the traditional texts and practices of Judaism have any claim on a Jew, or is she just as free to define her beliefs by drawing on Christian or Buddhist sources, or for that matter secular ones (art, music, literature)?

He concluded and wrote,

In his afterword, Cosgrove expresses a certain degree of surprise at the book he has produced. He notes that certain subjects that might be expected to feature in contemporary Jewish theology—“the Enlightenment, Shoah, or establishment of the State of Israel”—go practically unmentioned here. But that is because these writers do not see it as part of their task even to touch on subjects like providence and theodicy. The existence of evil can present a theological problem only if you believe that God has the power to restrain or permit evil, and the God we see in these pages has no such power. It follows that this God would be extremely hard to pray to in times of need. A useful sequel to Jewish Theology in Our Time, in fact, would be accounts from these rabbis of how their theology works in a pastoral setting. When comforting a mourner, as when organizing a protest, it is probably much easier to be able to say, “God will rule for all eternity”—which doesn’t, of course, make it true.

I doubt that the God and Rav Ovadiah and the God of these authors, whose opinions I identify with more-guilty as charged, has much in common, although I am often known to be wrong.

5 Responses to “Believing with Qualifications”

  1. 1
    Joel Katz:

    הרב יוסף פרסם פסק הלכה שנאמר בו כי יש למנוע את מינויו של אדם למגיד שיעור אם לימד לפני כן סטודנטים קונסרבטיבים. זאת אפילו אם מדובר באדם שומר תורה ומצוות

    What is your conclusion re: this part of the psak halacha?

  2. 2
    Menachem Mendel:

    My guess is that he feels that person has been compromised theologically once they became involved with a Conservative institution. I think that there is some truth to this statement. I find it hard to believe that someone who teaches in a Conservative institution for a number of years either doesn’t agree to some extent with its principles, hasn’t absorbed some of them, even unintentionally, or probably has a wider view of pluralism than is acceptable to Rav Ovadiah.

    It would be interesting to know what role the question of making a living, parnasah, might have played in the answer. I would interpret his pesak as an attempt to deny any legitimacy to non-Orthodox movements, although his opinion is probably a bit more complex. That the person was teaching rabbis probably had a role to play. Would it have been different if someone was teaching in a Tali school?

    See the lecture from 11/29/2006 here for a discussion how Rav Moshe Feinstein dealth with the question. The case of Jose Faur, a true Talmid Hacham, comes to mind. From my viewpoint it is too bad that many Orthodox rabbis hold such beliefs, but it is understandable. Again, I think that the question is one of balancing legitimacy versus possible positive (from their perspective) influence.

  3. 3
    avakesh:

    As I recall, Jose Fauer first claimed that he was merely teaching Hebrew in JTS and he got some initial support from R. Ovadiah Yosef but later it was withdrawn.

  4. 4
    harry Perkal:

    Why should any rational person care what Rav Yosef says. He still believes that the earth ( oh excuse me the universe) is 6,000 years old. THe problem is two fold. The Israeli Government should not be in the business of deciding what is “legitmate” Judaism. Secondly, and even more important, is that modernity has shattered the old religious myths. Once that happens you cannot put hupty dumpty together again in the same way. Sure there are and will continue to be an Orthodox minority living in enclaves, but it cannot be the future. In my opinion all non-Orthodox Judaisms are trying to redfine religion for the modern world. It may not succeed, but if I may say so they are doing God’s work. Harry

  5. 5
    Rob in Madison:

    Gd is, if anything or anyone worth our regard, beyond our conceptions. It is legitimate for R Yusef to kvetsch about non-Orthodox theology and positions vegn halakhah; but any invocations of Gd in the course of that effort is, or should be, unacceptable.

    The (no doubt unintentional) sleight-of-hand involved in defending the uncritical and guided exaltation of Torah makes use of Gd as a trump card. This is presumptuous in the extreme.

Categories

Tags

Archives

Recent Posts

Meta

Sign up for an email subscribtion to this blog.

Michael Pitkowsky

Biblioblogs

Daf Yomi

History

Israel

Jewish Law

Judaica

Law and Legal History

Politics

Religion

Talmud