Rabbi Yigal Sklarin, Talmud & Jewish History Teacher, Ramaz:
Using Italian Renaissance Art to Understand Halacha: The Laws of Mezuzah in Renaissance Italy

Why bother at all to review such a book? So far as I know, no scholar who works on Jewish history in the Roman period has deigned to pay it any attention. But such lordly disdain is dangerous. The cover of Sand’s book proclaims it an international bestseller, and it has been widely discussed by journalists and on television and radio both in Israel and France, and now in Britain. For the general public, what catches the attention are the headlines, not the arguments or the evidence, and it is revealing that there is evidently an appetite for such claims among secular Israeli Jews.

…
But, more worryingly, the book has also received praise from historians and others who ought to have known better. These enthusiasts do not presumably know the material about which Sand writes, but they like his conclusions, and they have presumably been taken in by the impression that his book is scholarly history – an impression created by large numbers of footnotes referring to a wide array of scholarship (much of it only in fact half-digested) and an opening chapter which gallops competently enough through standard discussions about the construction of national identities and the notion of ethnicity before the author turns to his highly dubious claims about the Jews.

…
In a self-glorifying preface to this book, Sand describes his role as that of a revealer of inconvenient facts suppressed by a malicious political and academic establishment. Some of those who have expressed approval of his book may believe that, like the Israeli New Historians whose discovery of genuinely new data on the events of 1948 has indeed caused much discomfort to that establishment, Shlomo Sand, too, has faced opposition because he has unearthed something new. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Rabbi Halevy responded and said that every new book in halakhah which he receives he tries to go over, but he admits that he can’t learn every book in depth. He continues that,

Rather, when I am dealing with a certain question and I remember that I had seen it discussed, but I am unable to remember in which book I saw it discussed, and I am not able to look in all of the books of contemporary rabbis which I have.

Rabbi Halevy adds another reason. He says that sometimes he does remember where he saw the question discussed, but if he disagrees with the conclusion he prefers not to bring the opinion since what value is there in bringing an opinion just to say that you disagree with it.

On the very next page, Rabbi Halevy addresses a specific question, listening to music. In a previous responsum on music Rabbi Greenblatt quoted Rabbi Halevy, and in the context of a number of comments which he wrote on Rivevot Efraim, Rabbi Binyamin Zilber criticized what Rabbi Halevy wrote.

Rabbi Halevy responds and says that it is clear from what Rabbi Zilber wrote that he never actually looked in Aseich Lecha Rav to see what was written, therefore missing the context and circumstances of the original responsum. Additionally, Rabbi Halevy relates that he remembers times when Rabbi Ben-Zion Meir Hai Uziel used to listen to music when he wanted to take a break from his studying. Rabbi Uziel said that music calms him down and allows him to study even more.

Their principal objection is based on tznius, modesty, in the understanding of Rabbi Avi Shafran, Agudah’s director of public policy.
…
“Tznius isn’t a mode of dress. It includes the idea that women are demeaned and not honored when they’re put in the public eye and put on a pedestal. The position he [Weiss] has created violated the concept,” Shafran said. Whether the ordination violates a specific halacha (Torah law), is unimportant, he explained.
…
“Putting a woman in front of a group of men and women on a regular or ad-hoc basis is violative of tznius. Halacha accomplishes much more than the letter of the law. There is nothing in the Shulchan Aruch about keeping a cat in the aron kodesh. It’s technically permitted but it’s wrong to do.”

Is Rabbi Shafran saying that technically woman can be rabbis, “but it’s wrong to do”? Also, can someone tell this guy that he should try out his analogies on someone before he uses them in an interview. It’s always convenient to throw around the tznius (modesty), argument. This argument was also used by some in the Conservative movement who opposed the ordination of women rabbis. See the following statement by Rabbi David Feldman in Seymour Siegel ed., Conservative Judaism and Jewish Law, p. 301-302.

The most forbidable problem, from a strict halakhic point of view, is that of sex segregation and the attitudes and practices associated with it. This is illustrated by the incongruous suggestion of Professor Meir Friedmann, written as a Responsum to the President of the Jewish Community of Vienna in 1893. If you want to institute, or re-institute, aliyot for women, he wrote, “it goes without saying” that a special, covered stairway should be set up, leading the women, unseen, from and to the women’s gallery!

I learned the following Gemara today, and I can’t help but thinking about how for some men, things really haven’t changed all too much when it comes to how they think of women.

Trans.:

A Tanna taught: One cup [of wine] is becoming to a woman; two are degrading, [and if she has] three she solicits [sex] publicly. [But if she has] four she solicits even an ass in the street and cares not.

Ketubot 65a

It very well may be that I am being overly critical of some people, and I know that there are even people within Rabbi Weiss’s own congregation who were very opposed to “Rabbah” and are very upset at what has happened, as I imagine that there are also those who are very supportive. Additionally, this source is talking as much about wine and alcohol as it is about women. I am not saying that all people who oppose women’s ordination hold such opinions, but I do think that for some of them, deep down inside, things might not be so different.

Next Sunday, May 14, is the JOFA Conference, and it promises to be an interesting one.

Israel’s new National Library will be constructed between the Knesset and the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, the cabinet decided last week. The decision, made at the same meeting that approved the plan for preserving national heritage sites, is part of a broader project to refurbish the government offices’ compound.

…

Most of the funding for the project – estimated at half a billion shekels – will be provided by the Rothschild Foundation (Yad Hanadiv). The foundation was the primary benefactor of both the Knesset and the Supreme Court buildings in Jerusalem’s Givat Ram neighborhood. Slated to open by 2016, the new library will be built beside the Finance Ministry in a pine forest overlooked by the Knesset. The building will replace the 1960s-era facility on Hebrew University’s Givat Ram campus, which houses the more than 5 million books in the National Library collection.

The Association of Jewish Libraries has posted podcasts of two presentations related to the National Library of Israel. Elhanan Adler spoke on Ten Years of Digitization at the National Library of Israel. Adler gives some background to the numerous digitization projects that have already been undertaken and challenges for the future. Two things from his talk which are worth noting are that an “Israeli branch” of JSTOR will hopefully be available during the next year. Articles from a number of Hebrew journals will be linked to through RAMBI and assumingly, JSTOR itself. The other point is on the lighter side. Apparently the initiative for the digitization of Talmud MSS came from the Department of Talmud itself. It seems that the students were too lazy to make the trip from Mount Scopus to Givat Ram, so this was an appropriate solution. One complaint that I have about the Talmud MSS project is that there is no option for zooming in on the text. Shmuel Har Noy’s talk was on Challenges of the New National Library of Israel.

Core Issues of Jewish Law
Thursdays, 7:30 pm – 9:00 pm (March 4, 11, 18)
Cost: Free
Location: Yeshivat Hadar (within West End Synagogue) -190 Amsterdam Ave @ 69th Street, New York

This three part series will provide an overarching theory of and approach to halakhah. The three lectures will focus on the following themes:

1. History — Our Present Moment: Its genesis and our way forward (March 4). An MP3 of the lecture is available here.
2. Philosophy and Theology — Viewing halakhic norms as representing values worthy of respect rather than arbitrary rules demanding obedience (March 11)
3. Law — Practical examples of language and category shifts that allow us to engage even the most contentious areas of Jewish law (March 18)

RSVPs not required.
Lectures made possible by the David Berg Foundation