trb@masscomp.UUCP (02/28/84)
ihuxq!amigo2 (John Hobson) pegged me pretty well with his note which I will reproduce in entirety, because I don't feel I could paraphrase it better: Andy Tannenbaum seems to be saying that only the Orthodox form of Judaism is authentic, no others need apply. If you want to live by your own interpretation of Torah, and it is not to be found in the Talmud, then what you are doing is all right, but it is not being Jewish. I know that he apologized for casting aspersions on the Reform movement, but that seems to be exactly what he is doing (and, yes, I don't think that playing a French horn along with a shofar is appropriate on Rosh Hoshana either). So tell me, Andy, what about those people who think that the "fence around the Torah" is too high and too enclosing? Are they being authentic Jews? This opens a subject which I'd really like to talk about. On the other hand, we must be careful, let me explain: At the basis of this problem is the question "What is a Jew?" and the discussion about that can quickly degenerate into a quagmire, like the answers to the questions "What is life?" and "What is reality?" I grew up as a yeshiva student through grade school: not what I'd call a complete Jewish education, but certainly a sizable basis. I do not deny Judaism, I don't say that it's bad or wrong. Over the years, due to my family's influences and of course, my decisions, I have chosen to not adhere to some of the Jewish laws. I don't do so saying "I think Judaism should allow us to to eat in Chinatown," I just say that I'm going to do it, and not follow the Jewish law. I don't say that it's acceptable Judaism or that it doesn't matter because those laws are archaic anyway! This is what I despise about the Reform movement! They just hack up Judaism for their own convenience and then grant the resulting mess their stamp of approval. It's disgusting. As Jews, as members of today's American society, primarily, as individuals in a free society, we each have the choice of what path to follow. Where John paraphrases me above about "what you are doing is all right, but it is not being Jewish," I am saying it's alright by me because I'm not your judge, and I don't care to be. There are Jews who worry about the way other Jews practice their religion; a Rabbi who leads his congregation has an obligation to ensure that he guides them to practice properly, his obligation is still as a teacher and not usually as a judge. I make absolutely no claim to be a rabbi, but I hope I can cast some light, and if I make an error while carrying some of the burden of casting the light, I trust that someone in the community who reads this note (a sort of virtual rabbi) will set us all straight. (I figure that I can do the mundane Jewish hacking here, and leave the bug fixes, if needed, to a Judaism guru, ok?) I know many Chasidim (a radically observant sect of Jews) who claim to follow the Torah to the letter. These Chasidim (like any other group) are not all good and beautiful people. I guess what I'm saying here is that following the letter of the Torah is not quite enough. Just eating kosher food is not the same as having a healthy diet. Following the Torah as Chasidim follow it does not necessarily lead to treating all people with proper equality and compassion (for example). Some Chasidim are inconsiderate, wiley creatures, like some members of any group. They tend to be even more eccentric than most groups, as they are a radical group. (Just my saying this would have some Jews gasping, saying "He should talk about Jews like this in front of non-Jews?!" - those are the ones I'm talking about.) Some Jews are in the class that John Hobson talks about when he refers to putting a fence around the Torah. Other Jews are not, they literally take the Torah to the streets. As I discussed in previous notes in this group, I don't accept Judaism-as-it-is-practiced-today, a concept totally separate from "I don't accept Judaism," mind you. What I'd like to see is a respect for the laws of Judaism and the Torah as they are, coupled with a modern and compassionate outlook on being Jews in an integrated world. There are awfully few people who practice this way, I know that I fall short. Some Orthodox Jews, mostly outside of Chasidism from my experience, have done a good job of integrating their Judaism into the modern world, but in most all cases, they tend to be arrogant (even bigoted) with regard to non-Jews and even to less-religious-Jews, and that's something I find disgusting. I am weak in the areas of observance, when it comes to eating kosher and not working on Shabbos, I haven't realized the need to do those things. To answer John Hobson's question more directly, but not completely so, I think that every Jew is an authentic Jew, every Jew who practices Judaism as he thinks is proper is an authentic Jew. I don't see a fence around the Torah. The Torah belongs to every Jew as much as it belongs to the certain surly introverted Chasidim who seem to want the Torah all to themselves. The Torah cannot be enclosed by a fence, we should not try to restrict it and I disagree with people who seem to try to do so. On the other hand, I don't think that the Torah needs dilution or edition in order to make it usable as a light to live by. I've detailed above some ideas that I think are important about the practice of Judaism. I look forward to hearing ideas from the rest of you. Andy Tannenbaum Masscomp Inc Westford MA (617) 692-6200 x274
smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) (02/28/84)
Andy, I think you're deliberately misusing John's phrase "a fence around the Torah". Surely you know what the rabbis mean by that! (And I assume that John does, since he used quotation marks.) For those who don't know, the phrase refers to the philosphical principle the rabbis followed when compiling the detailed rules of behavior. Their attitude was that it is absolutely essential to prevent any of the explicit commandments in the Torah from being broken; thus, they promulgated rules that went considerably further, to guard against ambiguity, accident, etc. If you followed their rules, you were *safe*. The best example I can give of this is the origin of the prohibition against eating milk with meat. The Biblical verse cited says (approximately) "thou shalt not cook a kid in its mother's milk". Well, OK, clear enough -- but how are you to know? Ah, but if you don't eat *any* milk product with *any* meat product you're sure to avoid an inadvertent violation. Well, what about chicken? No milk to worry about there.... (When I related this to Byron Howes (unc!bch) once, he replied "what about eating eggs with chicken?" I don't have an answer to that one.) Although this was the subject of much debate in Talmudic times, the decision finally reached was that chicken was "too close" to meat, and that permitting chicken to be eaten with milk might confuse people. Given this, the fence might be "too high" (or, more accurately, too far out) if the rabbinic laws are far too strict. According to Orthodox traditions, the "right" interpretation is covered in the Oral Law, which was handed down to Moses at the same time as the Torah, and passed down through the generations. This seems unlikely, especially given the recorded debates on many of these topics presented in the Talmud. Surely Rabbis Hillel and Shammai couldn't have heard *that* different versions of the Oral Law..... (Hillel was what one might call a liberal; Shammai was a strict constructionist.) --Steve Bellovin
ariels@orca.UUCP (02/28/84)
When they told me to make a fence, they implied that it meant to follow not only the mitzvot, but to follow even stricter than the mitzvot. For example, I was taught that treating bird flesh like mammal flesh with respect to Kashrut was initially a "siag" (fence), and since tradition becomes law, so to this became law. With respect to Hebrew... Hebrew is the language of Israel, so you speak it as they speak it in Israel ... like Sephardic. In fact, Ashkenaz Jews in Israel speak modern (Sephardic brand) Hebrew everyday, and pray in Ashkenaz. Ariel Shattan ..!tektronix!orca!ariels
trb@masscomp.UUCP (02/28/84)
Steve Bellovin claims Andy, I think you're deliberately misusing John's phrase "a fence around the Torah". Surely you know what the rabbis mean by that! (And I assume that John does, since he used quotation marks.) Nah, I was just ignorant. The phrase was vaguely familiar, I must have run across it before, but I didn't grasp the implication that you two had in mind. Seem to me that the fence around the Torah here is much like the fence that makes good neighbors. It protects the Torah and therefore Judaism but also makes it somewhat unaccessible, eh? I don't deliberately misuse other's phrases over netnews, with such a large audience, it's far to easy to get caught - I don't go out of my way to look like a fool, I can look like a fool even without straying from what I feel is the right path. I think that we should make our gentle readers aware of the fact that Jews do not just believe in the Torah (the "Old Testament"), they believe in the Torah and a whole body of associated law. Whereas devout Christians seem to spend much of their time studying the Bible, Jews usually study the Gemarah (usually pronounced "Gemorah," hard G, don't forget), which is a commentary on the Mishnah, both of which comprise the Talmud, which is essentially an extension of the Torah. The Torah itself is pretty inscrutable as a source of law (or history for that matter), the Talmud is inscrutable too, but at least it's possible to find the information you need without guessing if you have sufficient training. It is the Talmud which some say forms the "fence around the Torah." One must realize that the laws of the Talmud are usually not open to debate, as far as mainline Judaism is concerned, you don't have a choice about whether or not you can eat a kid even if you're sure it's not cooked in its mother's milk. Likewise, Byron Howes asked Steve "what about eating eggs with chicken" and Steve said he didn't have an answer to that one. I have an answer to that one. The Talmud says it's ok. That's the answer. Again, these laws are not based on common sense. You may, you must use common sense to interpret the laws which exist, but you cannot use your common sense to decide that the laws as they exist are wrong. This concept has analogs when dealing with modern systems - you need common sense to properly program a computer, but if a computer architecture has what you perceive to be flaws in its design, you can't just reason them away, they exist and you must deal with them. Do I think that the fence around the Torah is too protective? Well, I'd be happy if Judaism was based on the practices of Andrew Tannenbaum. That would be akin to shooting an arrow into a wall and then drawing a target around where it lands, no? Let's say we walked up to a tree. You might ask Is this tree acceptable? How could we make it better? I might answer Well, the trunk isn't quite straight, the bark is a bit beaten up, the foliage isn't well formed. On the other hand, if we performed the necessary improvements, I don't think that would make it a better tree. These attributes in Judaism aren't like bugs in a computer program, they don't make Judaism non-functional, they just make it the way it is. That's kinda how I feel about Judaism and the fence around the Torah. I have to say that I like Judaism the way it is. Andy Tannenbaum Masscomp Inc Westford MA (617) 692-6200 x274 just a hymie from old hymietown
gek@ihuxj.UUCP (Glenn Kapetansky) (02/28/84)
I've been following this group, and like the discussions I see.
But lest the group be dominated by a relatively few names, I
thought I'd stick in my oar.
Specifically, I want to add to what Andy Tannenbaum has been saying
about honesty in religious observance (is that a fair summation
of >4 pages of prose, Andy?). It seems to me that Andy is trying
to carefully state a valid point, and doing it well. If a
Jew is so observant he climbs trees after birdnests (that's a
mitzvah on the books with no known rational), that does not make him
a good Jew per se. And if another Jew only goes to services on Yom
Kippur, that does not make him a bad Jew. But a Jew who proudly
ignores kashrut and shabbat (for instance) yet loudly declaims
that he REPRESENTS Judaism, THAT is very bad press!
Y'know, I suspect that some of the more picayune laws on the books
were for Jews whose observance are already on a very high plane;
since normal observance would be force of habit for them, such
Jews need ever stricter rules just to remind them of the Torah.
So I, a low-life, don't follow all the mitzvot in the Shulchan
Aruch (compendium of European Jewish custom and law). But at
least I don't loudly proclaim I observe all the laws which are
somehow "applicable" to me. Here, I'll even admit it:
I DON'T FOLLOW ALL THE RULES, AND MAYBE I SHOULD.
I have no respect for those who change the rules of a game just
to suit themselves. You want to play the game, you play it by
the rules (or at least admit that you're no longer playing the
same game). Now I have a question for all of youse (I'm still
trying to learn the Chicago accent) who by now feel irritated by
my "high-horse attitude". Have you TRIED living by all those "stupid",
"picayune", "outmoded" laws?? Do you even KNOW more than a few??
If not, how can you, a rational member of intelligensia, reject
what you don't know or haven't tried and still face yourself in
the mirror?! (I know, that's more than A question...). This is
not a smug attitude; I asked myself those questions several years
ago, and in all honesty I couldn't answer the last. So I set out
to learn AND TO TRY LIVING Judaism according to the rules, and
y'know what? I still am, and I like it and myself (I dare any
of you to call me a holy roller! I'm still the same wild scumbag I
always was, I'm just more honest now).
Glenn Kapetansky BTL (...ihnp4!)ihuxj!gek gek@ihuxj.UUCP (Glenn Kapetansky) (02/29/84)
this was sent to me, and i reproduce it in its entirety
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 Feb 84 10:18:06 CST (Wed)
From: ihnp4!linus!mat
To: ihnp4!ihuxj!gek
Subject: doing ALL the laws
This is in response to your article (sorry, I don't have the title
handy). Not to flame it , but to praise it. (A rare thing on Usenet, it
seems). "A Jew," as my rabbi (Conservative by the way) put it, "is a
continual process of becoming." No person is expected to be able to follow
all the laws (excluding those he doesn't qualify for, like laws for a
Cohen, when one is not, laws for a woman when one is male, etc.). One
can merely try. I dare say not even Hillel was a "perfect" observer of
all the laws that he and his cohorts promulgated (extrapolated is probably
a better word). One can merely try to be continually better, so in a sense,
you are right, no matter what you observe, there is still more on a "higher
plane" to follow.
I sort of like your explanation of the existence of all the "picayune"
laws, as mere exerises for the super-pious to remind them of the Torah. The
important thing to remember, as you do, is not to look at the mountain of
laws and say, "I can't scale that!", but to say, "I'll take it one step at
a time, and let's see where it leads me." The former is the approach of
the non-observant.
I do, however, think you are misrepresenting Andy as having proclaimed
his version of Judaism as "the one true way.". He did not claim that he was
observant, merely putting forward his present state of observance.
To paraphrase the quote, "The whole world is like a very narrow bridge,
but the main thing is not to fear" from the Talmud, I say "Jewish Law is like
a very narrow bridge, but the main thing is to KEEP MOVING!"
Sorry, this was longer than I intended. If you feel any or all of
my words are worth printing, posting, or mailing elsewhere, feel free to do so.
--Mordechai (yeah for Purim!) Aharon Ben Shimon Yaakov (MABSH"Y)
(Mike Turniansky, linus!mat)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------trb@masscomp.UUCP (03/01/84)
Ariel's note brought up some interesting little points: With respect to Hebrew... Hebrew is the language of Israel, so you speak it as they speak it in Israel ... like Sephardic. In fact, Ashkenaz Jews in Israel speak modern (Sephardic brand) Hebrew everyday, and pray in Ashkenaz. Usually, Hebrew is called the language of the Torah. The fact that the folks in Israel these days speak Hebrew with a certain set of rules is not (I think) sufficient grounds for her first conclusion. Note that until the recent independance of Israel, Hebrew was a scholarly language, just like Latin. Jews never spoke Hebrew as a household language, always using a local language, or some warped form of it. The modern (last 200 years) languages of the common Jew are Yiddish (Eastern European Ashkenazim) and Ladino (Spanish Sephardim). Through history, Jews have spoken bastardized forms of Greek, Roman, and Aramaic languages, as well as, I'm sure, many others. I'm of Eastern European (Northern NYC) origin, that is, Ashkenazi. My mom is emmigrating to Israel this year, and she knows very little Hebrew, so she is in the process of learning. She is learning the Sephardi method of pronunciation, because that's what she'll use to live. There is no question about "right and wrong," therefore there is no answer. Sephardic Hebrew is considered the modern way, it's sort of akin to the differences in the way Spanish is spoken: the old fashioned way in Spain, and a more modern way in the Americas. Realize that Ashkenazim, Sephardim, and the various sects of Chasidim practice the same Judaism 99 44/100 percent. When Ariel talks about "praying in Ashkenaz," it is true that there are slight differences in the order of the prayer (called the "nusach," should you ever run across the term), but all the important stuff same for all Jews. And the Torah is exactly the same for all Jews. There are no denominational differences as radical as the ones in Christianity. Andy Tannenbaum Masscomp Inc Westford MA (617) 692-6200 x274 For all the people who want to know what part of hymietown I'm from, I grew up in the Bronx: Pelham Parkway and eventually Riverdale (azoy!). Went to Salanter Yeshiva.