TheTisch: Rabbi Menachem Creditor's Blog

This is an articulation of a healthy, reclaimed Zionism.

2012-01-27T08:13:00.001-08:00

This is an articulation of a healthy, reclaimed Zionism. Sign on to this beautifully-written statement of Religious Ethical Zionism, co-authored by Rabbi Jack Moline, Agudas Achim Congregation (Conservative), Alexandria, and Rabbi Daniel Daniel G. Zemel, Temple Micah (Reform), Washington, DC. -- https://sites.google.com/site/religiousethicalzionism. (The Language is below, but click here to sign on!) - Rabbi Creditor
__________________________________________________________

Tragically, with increasing frequency, we have been witnessing crimes committed by individuals who profess the most extreme expressions of orthodox Judaism. Anti-Zionist Haredim and Ultra-Zionist residents of settlements have:

burned mosques
segregated women on public buses
defaced public property
refused to send Ashkenazi children to schools where they will mix with Sephardi children
spit on and otherwise assaulted children, Christian clergy and women
attacked IDF soldiers to prevent them from carrying out legitimate orders

Shamefully, they justify these crimes in the name of Judaism.

We reject that claim entirely and denounce the profanation of God and our tradition that they represent. They denigrate the very Jewish teachings that they claim to uphold.

We stand in solidarity with the victims of these crimes, believing that those who perpetrate them cross the line that separates righteousness from immorality. We condemn these acts as desecrations of human beings and of our sacred tradition. We call upon Israeli government and legal authorities to bring these criminals to justice.

We call upon the leaders of all branches and forms of Judaism to denounce these crimes for what they are: a denigration of the essential Jewish teaching that honors the divine image in which every human being is created.

"Love your neighbor as yourself…Love the stranger as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. I am Adonai your God."

(Leviticus 19:18, 34)

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within" on itunes!

Professor Shaul Magid: "An Open Letter to Rabbi Dov Linzer on Modesty and Jewish Law"

2012-01-26T22:22:00.001-08:00

- OPINION
- January 26, 2012
An Open Letter to Rabbi Dov Linzer on Modesty and Jewish Law
If the Talmud really says it's up to men to control their desires, why not dismantle those traditions that put the burden on women?
By SHAUL MAGID
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/atheologies/5613/an_open_letter_to_rabbi_dov_linzer_on_modesty_and_jewish_law
- - COMMENT NOW
  - EMAIL
  - PRINT
  - SHARE

Physical separation: for whose benefit?
Shaul Magid

Shaul Magid is the Jay and Jeannie Schottenstein Professor of Jewish Studies and Professor of Religious Studies at Indiana University. His next book,Jews and Judaism in Post-Ethnic America: Becoming an American Religion, will be published by the Indiana U. Press.
Dear Rabbi Linzer,
I read with great interest your op-ed "Lechery, Modesty, and the Talmud" in theNew York Times last week. I commend you for taking such a strong stand on this important issue, especially in the wake ofcontinued violence against women in Jerusalem's ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods. However, I think there is a structural flaw at the core of your argument that I would like you to address.

It is, of course, easy to come out against the ultra-Orthodox in Beit Shemesh whose behavior crosses all lines of civility. The problem, however, does not lie solely in their egregious behavior or even with their rigid interpretation of Jewish law. In fact, the problem is embedded in the traditional interpretation of Jewish law based on the Talmud, the same corpus you suggest invalidates their position. You know better than most that the Talmud says many things and thus, in most cases, what anyone claims as the position of the Talmud is false by definition. I understand that your approach is heuristic, that you want to lay claim to a Talmudic position and not the Talmudic position.

While the Talmud, as you correctly assert, puts the responsibility of male desire toward women squarely on the shoulders of the males, it simultaneously constructs a legal and devotional framework that in many ways undermines that very assertion.

An example: the rabbis dictate that public prayer requires a physical separation between men and women (amehitza). One might suggest the mehitza is simply to allow both men and women the private space to pray outside the gaze of the other. But that is not the case. Jewish law permits a mehitza that would enable the women to see the men—just not the other way around. The reason: to prevent the men from being distracted by women during prayer. The fact that today some Modern Orthodox synagogues have a mehitza where both men and women can see one another arguably subverts the reason for the barrier in the first place. At that point the barrier might be seen as symbolic, an empty marker distinguishing communal affiliation.

Traditional Jewish law mandates married women cover their hair, all women not sing in public, and not recite Kaddish in the presence of men—although some modern jurists have been lenient in the latter two. Part of the reason is surely modesty. Regarding hair covering, it is also mandated in order for men not to become attracted to married women and to desire a sexual encounter that would be a grievous transgression, much more so than a sexual encounter with an unmarried woman.

While the Talmud dictates that both men and women dress modestly, the legal tradition that follows in its wake makes dress requirements for women much more rigid. While examples of common practice may not always affirm, or question, a Talmudic claim, accepted custom does speak to the ways in which the ethos of Talmudic legislation filters down into lived religious communities. Thus, the fact that in many Orthodox summer camps, or kibbutzim, one can readily find young Orthodox men in shorts and T-shirts while young girls wear skirts and longer sleeves is not inconsequential.

And how often are religious boys told, "Don't wear that, it's not tznius (modest)!"? Not very often. While it is true that modesty is a significant spiritual goal for both men and women in Judaism, both in law and custom, the Talmudic sages and their spiritual progeny are stricter regarding women's modesty as a way to minimize unleashing male desire. The reverse is simply not the case. Thus it is women who must sacrifice comfort for that desire—even though the Talmud argues, as you say, that male control of their desire rests on their shoulders.

One legitimate argument against the ultra-Orthodox in Beit Shemesh that categorically distinguishes them from the Modern Orthodox is that while Modern Orthodoxy may live according to a legal worldview structurally similar to ultra-Orthodoxy (in principle but often not in practice), Modern Orthodoxy does not mandate others to follow suit. But that is not the argument you made. You suggested that the ultra-Orthodox are fundamentally misunderstanding rabbinic teaching when you write that "controlling men's licentious thoughts about women [is] squarely on the men." I think there are many legal dictates legislated by the Talmudic sages that contradict that statement. I have mentioned only a few of them above.

Given those caveats, I applaud the courage of your conviction and hope that if you truly believe what you wrote about the Talmud, and I assume you do, you would work to take down the mehitza, abolish mandatory hair covering for married women and make it a normative legal principle that casual non-sexual physical contact between men and women is permitted, saying to the men, "The Talmud says: It's your problem, Sir; not theirs."

To instantiate your reading of the Talmud would require you to act decisively to abolish all the legal mandates that objectify women's bodies and put the onus on the men to take full control of their libido and desire.

The ultra-Orthodox in Beit Shemesh surely require severe reprimand. But they are not the only problem. You know, of course, that they support their position by reading closely and deeply the same Talmud and legal codes that you do. Their community embodies an extreme yet also consistent rendering of Judaism founded on the Talmud and the legal tradition it generated. It is true that their egregious behavior steps beyond any acceptable norm. But their more general interpretation of Jewish law does not.

Shouldn't recent incidents serve to show that your anti-misogynist Orthodoxy, which I applaud as a non-Orthodox Jew, is actually in conflict with key authoritative texts of the tradition? Given your role as a leading voice in Modern Orthodoxy, I hope you take the initiative not only to point out the distorted religiosity and false piety of ultra-Orthodox behavior but to initiate a new form of traditional Jewish life that incorporates your vision by dismantling the very legal structures that serve as the foundation of the problem you seek to resolve.

With Blessings,
Shaul Magid
Jay and Jeannie Schottenstein Professor of Modern Judaism
Indiana University/Bloomington
Rabbi, Fire Island Synagogue
Sea View, New York

---
Rabbi Menachem Creditor
Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within" on itunes!

jpost.com: "First mixed prayer service in Knesset"

2012-01-25T10:15:00.001-08:00

By JEREMY SHARON
25/01/2012
http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=255117

A historic prayer service was conducted in the Knesset on Wednesday by a leadership mission of the Masorti-Conservative movement from North America who held the first ever mixed men and women service in the Knesset.

The group, including male and female rabbis and communal leaders from the US and Canada, met with several MKs to discuss the issue of religion and state, including Ministers Dan Meridor and Uzi Landau, as well as Yohanan Plesner and Orit Zuaretz.

The meetings focused for the most part on the issue of religious radicalization in Israel and its influence on the country's image abroad, particularly in America.

As has been the norm for the group during the visit, they went to say the afternoon mincha prayers when their schedule of political engagements was over, and, as is the custom in the conservative streams of Judaism, men and women sat together without a partition.

The service was led by Rabbi Jen Gorman in the Knesset synagogue in what the group described as an historical first.

"It was an inspiring service and we were extremely happy to be praying in the beautiful synagogue of the parliament of the Jewish State," said Rabbi Dr. Alan Silverstein, president of the Masorti foundation in the US. "Each Shabbat we pray in communities of Conservative Judaism worldwide, for the well-being of the State of Israel, and here we had the opportunity got to do this great mitzvah in the synagogue of the Israeli Knesset of Israel, one of the most important symbols of Jewish sovereignty."

The group also raised the controversial issue of rights for non-Orthodox streams of Judaism, referring to the lack of recognition the state grants the Conservative movement's rabbis and ceremonies.

"All of us love Israel and support Israel and members of our communities are part of the central leadership of AIPAC, Hadassah and the Jewish Federations," said David Lisi, the director of the Masorti Fund in the US. "But the State of Israel degrades us time and again when it says that we are second-class Jews," he continued mentioning conservative marriages and converts in particular. "The discrimination against non-Orthodox movements in Israel does massive damage to the image of Israel as a state for all Jews," Lisi asserted.

The director of the ITIM religious rights group and orthodox rabbi, Seth Farber, told The Jerusalem Post that the state of Israel finds itself at a cross roads in this regard and that as the relationship with the Diaspora matures "some very difficult decisions lie ahead."

"A lot of work still needs to be done to make Jews of all denominations feel comfortable in Israel," he said.

"There isn't enough strategic thinking going on to think about how Israel can be a homeland for all Jews. The state wasn't founded to be insular and indifferent to Jewish people and so there needs to begin a sincere dialogue with Diaspora communities to tackle these issues."

January 25, 2012 Wednesday 1 Shevat 5772 10:14 IST

this Sunday! "The Case for Commandedness: Religious Language for the non-Conformist"

2012-01-24T11:44:00.001-08:00

"The Case for Commandedness: Religious Language for the non-Conformist"

with Rabbi Menachem Creditor

minyan 9:30am; talk and light breakfast 10:30am

Congregation Netivot Shalom (netivotshalom.org)

For some, the source of religious authority is a God whose words and Will are known. For others, religious authority is irrelevant to their lives, based on many factors. But Jewish tradition offers, through so much of its texture, the possibility of an intensified experience of the world. Imagine a relationship of obligation that frees you and those you love as it guides, and jump into this exciting exploration and discussion!

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within" on itunes!

Rabbi Andrew Sacks on Jpost: "Haagen Dazs - The Great Kashrut Controversy"

2012-01-23T13:38:00.001-08:00

http://blogs.jpost.com/content/we-all-scream-ice-cream

Rabbi Andrew Sacks is the Director of the Masorti [Conservative] Movement's Rabbinical Assembly in Israel (the organization of Masorti/Conservative rabbis) and the Masorti Movement's Bureau of Religious Affairs. The views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Masorti organizations.

Monday Jan 23, 2012

We all scream for ice cream

Haagen-Dazs is NOT Kosher. Ouch! The Chief Rabbinate of Israel, who under Israeli law has sole authority for matters relating to Kashrut in Israel (despite the plethora of Badazim) has ordered the product removed from the store shelves. They have gone so far as to say that "those refusing to comply risk losing their Kashrut certification." This abderian behavior, sad or funny though it may be, is becoming a trend.

Did someone discover lard in the ice cream? Is General Mills (the owner of Hagen-Dazs) spiking the product with pigs milk? The answers are no and no. The same ice cream that has been deemed Kosher until now has suddenly become suspect.

The problem, according to the spokesperson for the Rabbinate, is that Haagen-Dazs uses real milk rather than milk powder. If the milk is produced by non-Jews (Halav Akum), then they fear that it may become contaminated with a mix of milk from non-Kosher animals. For various reasons that defy logic this suspicion does not apply to powdered milk.

So the OU certification (the largest corporate Kashrut certification in the world) is good enough for North America but it falls short of the demands of Israel's zealously pious Orthodox Chief Rabbinate.

Well, one might simply say "different strokes for different folks." I have a friend who is an Orthodox rabbi here in Israel. His family keeps a vegetarian home. Yet, his brother-in-law won't eat in his home because he allows the use of dairy products that are under the supervision of this same Rabbinate that bars Haagen-Dazs. Maybe all dairy products should be pulled from store shelves?

Sound like the Chief Rabbinate has gone over the top? Sound silly? Well it is not. This is part of an ugly effort by Israel's Chief Rabbinate to become the equivalent of a papacy by setting religious standards for all communities, both in Israel and abroad.
It was just a few years back that this same righteous Chief Rabbinate decided that they would no longer recognize as Jewish those who convert via the rabbis who are members of the RCA (Rabbinic Council of America). They limited to a very small number the rabbis and rabbinical courts they would accept. The RCA and the OU are part of the same movement structure. The conversions performed by Orthodox rabbinic graduates of Chovevei Torah have been rejected almost outright.

Local rabbinic courts have always been autonomous. They must take into account local circumstances. Indeed, it is the oppressively strict standards used by the Chief Rabbinate of today (this was not so when Ben Zion Uziel or Ovadya Yosef served as Chief Rabbis) that has contributed to a strong public distaste for the religious establishment in Israel.

The Pope may set the standard for all priests in the Catholic faith tradition but we do not have a Pope. Even the concept of a Chief Rabbis does not come from within the Jewish tradition. It was established by the British based on the Millet system of the Ottomans.
This power grab by the rabbinate is little more than a veiled attempt at obtaining greater power. They have made this effort with regard to conversion, Aliyah, family status matters, military issues, and now ICE CREAM.

I don't know how other observant Israelis will take this but I, for one, will continue to enjoy my White Chocolate Raspberry Truffle Hagen Dazs.
You scream, I scream, let's all scream for our ice cream.

Who Is Saul Alinsky And Why Does Newt Gingrich Fear Him?

2012-01-23T08:59:00.001-08:00

Who Is Saul Alinsky And Why Does Newt Gingrich Fear Him?

January 22, 2012

By Stephen D. Foster Jr.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/01/22/who-is-saul-alinsky-and-why-does-newt-gingrich-fear-him/

During his victory speech on Saturday night in South Carolina and his appearance on Meet The Press on Sunday morning, Newt Gingrich mentioned Saul Alinsky and how evil, dangerous, and un-American his influence is on America and American politics. He also tried to associate President Obama with him. But, who IS Saul Alinsky and why is Newt Gingrich so frightened of him?

Well, it's pretty simple: Saul Alinsky was a writer and community organizer who empowered the poor no matter their race. He strove to give a voice to the voiceless by organizing them into a body capable of massive protests, believing that the poor and disenfranchised would have more power to make their voices heard if they would come together and speak as one. In other words, he added the voices of the poor to our democracy.

Saul Alinsky grew up in a Jewish household and always identified himself as a Jew when asked about his religious views. His political views are harder to pin down, since he refused to join any party or subscribe to any ideology. I suspect Newt thinks that Alinsky is a communist but he would be wrong. Alinsky was appalled by political extremes. He hated the Nazis on the right and the Communists on the left. When asked if he would join the Communist Party, Alinsky replied,

"I could never accept any rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism… The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide."

Alinsky believed people could make their lives better if they became more politically active and joined together for that purpose. In the last years of his life, during the Nixon Presidency, Alinsky saw the coming extreme conservative movement and planned to organize white middle class citizens to fight for their futures. Alinsky feared the middle class would be driven to a right-wing viewpoint, "making them ripe for the plucking by some guy on horseback promising a return to the vanished verities of yesterday." That guy on horseback sounds like Newt Gingrich and every other Republican who wants to take America back to a time when corporations and the wealthy had all the power, when regulations that protect consumers and workers didn't exist, when racial minorities were second class citizens, when women were confined to the home, and when there were no protections for the disabled and the elderly.

It makes sense that Newt Gingrich fears Saul Alinsky. Alinsky helped give the poor and downtrodden a voice in this country. In fact, if Saul Alinsky were still alive, he'd be proud of the Occupy movement and would more than likely be helping to organize it. Newt Gingrich once mentioned Alinsky's book, Rules For Radicals, and how bad for America it is. But the book just details how to organize and push for an idea and pressure the government to listen to the will of the people. In the first paragraph of the book Alinsky wrote, "What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."

I wrote earlier that Alinsky's political views are hard to pin down. I believe he was just left of center like President Obama is. And that's another reason why Newt Gingrich tries to tie the two together. Barack Obama was a fantastic community organizer in Chicago, where Alinsky began his own organizing efforts. Alinsky was so effective that he drew criticism from those who feared the wrath of the masses, but he also drew praise from progressives like Adlai Stevenson who said Alinsky's efforts "most faithfully reflect our ideals of brotherhood, tolerance, charity and dignity of the individual." Even conservative William F. Buckley said he was "very close to being an organizational genius." That being said, if Newt Gingrich says President Obama is like Saul Alinsky, Obama should wear that comparison like a badge of honor.

Newt Gingrich fears a Jewish, politically independent community organizer who helped the poor, improved democracy, helped both blacks and whites, and hated Nazis and Communists. Can we then assume that Gingrich is an ultra-conservative Christian extremist and white supremacist who wants to bring corporate and religious fascism down upon America? Because that's the only reason why Newt Gingrich would be so frightened of Saul Alinsky.

Alinsky changed American democracy by adding the voices of the previously ignored and unheard, which only makes our democracy stronger and more inclusive. This is what makes our system the envy of the world. This is why people come here to build themselves a better life and to be included, counted, and heard. Apparently, Newt Gingrich hates the fact that the poor have a voice in America. If Gingrich or any other Republican candidate were to become President, the poor would once again be quashed under the boot heel of a conservative corporate coalition whose only goals are to fleece the American people and dismantle the Constitution. The people have the right to organize and protest. That right is protected by the Constitution as written by the Founding Fathers, whom conservatives claim to revere. So why do they hate poor people so much when they protest? Why do they seek to limit democracy to only the white, wealthy few? Conservatives have no clue what real democracy is. They only want power and greed and that means they have to attack the masses and strip them of their voice and their vote. That's why we, as Americans, must rise up and make our voices heard. That's why we, as Americans, must vote. So I believe I speak for a majority of Americans, including the poor, when I say, in the words of Saul Alinsky, we "love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back."

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within" on itunes!

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Steps Down from Congress

2012-01-22T14:42:00.001-08:00

May the heroism of Gabrielle Giffords be a model for others, to demonstrate gratitude and tenacity - and hope.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/Nguu0TkCTd4

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom
|| menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall
|| Bay Area Masorti
|| ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within" on itunes!

From Masorti AmLat: Intl. Holocaust Remembrance Day

2012-01-22T10:02:00.001-08:00

Tablet Magazine: Alana Newhouse: "On Andrew Adler’s idiocy, readers’ complicity, and Gawker’s irresponsibility"

2012-01-21T20:46:00.001-08:00

The Evil of Banality

On Andrew Adler's idiocy, readers' complicity, and Gawker's irresponsibility

By Alana Newhouse|January 21, 2012 10:54 PM|0Leave a comment

Print Email

Within hours of Gawker writer John Cook reporting that an Atlanta Jewish Times op-ed seemed to lay out a scenario by which the Israeli government could assassinate the president of the United States, a host of people took to the Internet to assert their distance from, and furious outrage at, the author, owner/publisher Andrew Adler. Adler's piece was indeed gasp-inducingly idiotic, the sort of thing that makes you wish certain people weren't allowed to own computers. But as the subsequent exchange Adler had with Cook instantly reveals, the idea that this yokel represents any broad group is obviously absurd:

A nervous Adler told me over the phone that he wasn't advocating Obama's assassination by Mossad agents. "Of course not," he said.
But do you think Israel should consider it an option? "No."
But do you believe that Israel is in fact considering the option in its most inner circles? "No. Actually, no. I was hoping to make clear that it's unspeakable—god forbid this would ever happen. I take it you're quoting me?"

Yes. "Oh, boy."

This man can barely speak for himself, let alone anyone else. And now Adler, who to judge from that interview never expected a spotlight outside of his small paper, is being hounded online—and presumably offline too—by angry hordes. I suppose it's appropriate, in a dotting the "i" way, for the Secret Service to be involved, but the folks who really need to have their motives investigated are the readers, including all of those righteous tweeters sharing their livid reactions to the tossed-off comment of a patently simple man. These people, one presumes, want to be spoken for by more responsible, thoughtful journalists, and yet not enough of them have been interested in actually paying for this expertise. Barely a year goes by without news of yet another Jewish newspaper folding—the most recent of which, in Portland, actually died as the community itself grew. How loudly can I scream this from a rooftop? Journalism is hard and expensive, and communities that don't pony up adequate resources for this privilege have only themselves to blame when they find unskilled men and women making un-thought-through comments ostensibly in their name.

But Gawker is a different story. Cook—who knows his way around trenchant, often excellent reporting and criticism—had the chance, on a site dedicated to covering the media, to make an important point about the desiccation of communal journalism. Adler is clearly no great thinker and no skilled journalist. Once Cook realized this, he might have dug for a teensy bit more backing before presenting Adler as any sort of communal voice, and indeed, in the tradition of worthwhile media criticism, might have made many of the points I made in the previous paragraph. Instead, Cook wrote a post that may not have been meant as a dog whistle for anti-Semites, but which certainly had that effect. ("Why the American tax payer has to pay billions each year to maintain peace for Israel comes down to one thing," asserted an average commenter: "Israel's lobby in the USA and the willingness of many American Jews to put another country's interests over the one they were born in.") If some random Muslim writer from a local giveaway in Dearborn called for jihad against the United States, would Cook have highlighted it in this same manner? I'd hope not. That's the kind of tactic for which far-right lunatics like Pamela Geller are regularly, legitimately denounced. So why is it acceptable to treat the Jewish community in this shoddy way? To tacitly present Adler as representative of anyone—particularly the day after Barack Obama effortlessly raked in a half a million dollars at a Jewish fundraiser—is so facile that it's hard not to view it as purposefully malicious.

I have to imagine that isn't the case. This is, at least in part, because Cook is married to Allison Benedikt, who last year caused a firestorm with an essay about her disillusionment with Israel. Whatever your feelings about that piece—and, by the way, most of the published reactions to it were either moronic or reprehensible—there is no debating that Benedikt was honestly grappling with an important personal and communal conflict. In doing so, she subjected herself to the harsh limelight of an increasingly vicious conversation about the relationship between American Jews and Israel, but because she is a real journalist, she did so with actual knowledge, insight, and measured awareness of the consequences of her argument. With her as one of the best examples, I'd argue that any media writer, and particularly one with the privilege of sharing Benedikt's breakfast-table, should be able to discern what a genuine journalist is, and what one isn't—and, given the differences, make the requisite responsible decisions about his or her coverage of this landscape.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within" on itunes!

Rabbi Dov Linzer in the NYtimes: "Ultra-Orthodox Jews and the Modesty Fight"

2012-01-20T09:34:00.001-08:00

NYtimes.com: "Ultra-Orthodox Jews and the Modesty Fight"

Rabbi Dov Linzer

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/opinion/ultra-orthodox-jews-and-the-modesty-fight.html?_r=1

Lechery, Immodesty and the Talmud

By RABBI DOV LINZER

Published: January 19, 2012

REPRINTS
SHARE

IS it possible for a religious demand for modesty to be about anything other than men controlling women's bodies? From recent events in Israel, it would certainly seem that it is not.

Enlarge This Image

Jennifer Uman

Related News

Israelis Facing a Seismic Rift Over Role of Women (January 15, 2012)
Israeli Girl, 8, at Center of Tension Over Religious Extremism (December 28, 2011)

Last month, an innocent, modestly dressed 8-year-old girl, Naama Margolese, living in Beit Shemesh, described being spat on and vilified by religious extremists — all men — who believed that she did not dress modestly enough while walking past them to the religious school she attends. And more and more, public buses in Israel are enforcing gender segregation imposed by ultra-Orthodox riders in and near their neighborhoods. Woe to the girl or woman who refuses to move to the back of the bus.

This is part of a larger battle being waged in Israel between the ultra-Orthodox and the rest of Israeli society over women's place in society, over their very right to have a visible presence and to participate in the public sphere.

What is behind these deeply disturbing events? We are told that they arise from a religious concern about modesty, that women must be covered and sequestered so that men do not have improper sexual thoughts. It seems, then, that a religious tenet that begins with men's sexual thoughts ends with men controlling women's bodies.

This is not a problem unique to Judaism. But the Talmud, the basis for Jewish law, offers a perhaps surprising answer: It places the responsibility for controlling men's licentious thoughts about women squarely on the men.

Put more plainly, the Talmud says: It's your problem, sir; not hers.

The ultra-Orthodox men in Israel who are exerting control over women claim that they are honoring women. In effect they are saying: We do not treat women as sex objects as you in Western society do. Our women are about more than their bodies, and that is why their bodies must be fully covered.

In fact, though, their actions objectify and hyper-sexualize women. Think about it: By saying that all women must hide their bodies, they are saying that every woman is an object who can stir a man's sexual thoughts. Thus, every woman who passes their field of vision is sized up on the basis of how much of her body is covered. She is not seen as a complete person, only as a potential inducement to sin.

Of course, once you judge a female human being only through a man's sexualized imagination, you can turn even a modest 8-year-old girl into a seductress and a prostitute.

At heart, we are talking about a blame-the-victim mentality. It shifts the responsibility of managing a man's sexual urges from himself to every woman he may or may not encounter. It is a cousin to the mentality behind the claim, "She was asking for it."

So the responsibility is now on the women. To protect men from their sexual thoughts, women must remove their femininity from their public presence, ridding themselves of even the smallest evidence of their own sexuality.

All of this is done in the name of the Torah and Jewish law.

But it's actually a complete perversion. The Talmud, the foundation of Jewish law, acknowledges that men can be sexually aroused by women and is indeed concerned with sexual thoughts and activity outside of marriage. But it does not tell women that men's sexual urges are their responsibility. Rather, both the Talmud and the later codes of Jewish law make that demand of men.

It is forbidden for a man to gaze sexually at a woman, whether beautiful or ugly, married or unmarried, says the Talmud. Later Talmudic rabbis extended this ban even to "her smallest finger" and "her brightly colored clothing — even if they are drying on the wall."

To make these the woman's responsibility is to demand that Jewish women cover their hands, and that they not dry their clothes in public. No one has ever said this. At least not yet.

The Talmud tells the religious man, in effect: If you have a problem, you deal with it. It is the male gaze — the way men look at women — that needs to be desexualized, not women in public. The power to make sure men don't see women as objects of sexual gratification lies within men's — and only men's — control.

Jewish tradition teaches men and women alike that they should be modest in their dress. But modesty is not defined by, or even primarily about, how much of one's body is covered. It is about comportment and behavior. It is about recognizing that one need not be the center of attention. It is about embodying the prophet Micah's call for modesty: learning "to walk humbly with your God."

Eight-year-old Naama could teach her attackers a thing or two about modesty.

Dov Linzer, an Orthodox rabbi, is the dean of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah Rabbinical Schoolin the Riverdale section of the Bronx.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Andrew Sullivan in "The Daily Beast" -- How Obama's Long Game Will Outsmart His Critics

2012-01-20T08:06:00.001-08:00

Andrew Sullivan: How Obama's Long Game Will Outsmart His Critics

The right calls him a socialist, the left says he sucks up to Wall Street, and independents think he's a wimp. Andrew Sullivan on how the president may just end up outsmarting them all.

by Andrew Sullivan | January 16, 2012 12:00 AM EST | http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/andrew-sullivan-how-obama-s-long-game-will-outsmart-his-critics.html

You hear it everywhere. Democrats are disappointed in the president. Independents have soured even more. Republicans have worked themselves up into an apocalyptic fervor. And, yes, this is not exactly unusual.

A president in the last year of his first term will always get attacked mercilessly by his partisan opponents, and also, often, by the feistier members of his base. And when unemployment is at remarkably high levels, and with the national debt setting records, the criticism will—and should be—even fiercer. But this time, with this president, something different has happened. It's not that I don't understand the critiques of Barack Obamafrom the enraged right and the demoralized left. It's that I don't even recognize their description of Obama's first term in any way. The attacks from both the right and the left on the man and his policies aren't out of bounds. They're simply—empirically—wrong.

A caveat: I write this as an unabashed supporter of Obama from early 2007 on. I did so not as a liberal, but as a conservative-minded independent appalled by the Bushadministration's record of war, debt, spending, and torture. I did not expect, or want, a messiah. I have one already, thank you very much. And there have been many times when I have disagreed with decisions Obama has made—to drop the Bowles-Simpson debt commission, to ignore the war crimes of the recent past, and to launch a war in Libyawithout Congress's sanction, to cite three. But given the enormity of what he inherited, and given what he explicitly promised, it remains simply a fact that Obama has delivered in a way that the unhinged right and purist left have yet to understand or absorb. Their short-term outbursts have missed Obama's long game—and why his reelection remains, in my view, as essential for this country's future as his original election in 2008.

The right's core case is that Obama has governed as a radical leftist attempting a "fundamental transformation" of the American way of life. Mitt Romney accuses the president of making the recession worse, of wanting to turn America into a European welfare state, of not believing in opportunity or free enterprise, of having no understanding of the real economy, and of apologizing for America and appeasing our enemies. According to Romney, Obama is a mortal threat to "the soul" of America and an empty suit who couldn't run a business, let alone a country.

The Case Against Liberal Despair: Michelle Goldberg issues a reality check to those liberal activists who now despair electoral politics, Obama and the squalid compromises of governing.

Leave aside the internal incoherence—how could such an incompetent be a threat to anyone? None of this is even faintly connected to reality—and the record proves it. On the economy, the facts are these. When Obama took office, the United States was losing around 750,000 jobs a month. The last quarter of 2008 saw an annualized drop in growth approaching 9 percent. This was the most serious downturn since the 1930s, there was a real chance of a systemic collapse of the entire global financial system, and unemployment and debt—lagging indicators—were about to soar even further. No fair person can blame Obama for the wreckage of the next 12 months, as the financial crisis cut a swath through employment. Economies take time to shift course.

But Obama did several things at once: he continued the bank bailout begun by George W. Bush, he initiated a bailout of the auto industry, and he worked to pass a huge stimulus package of $787 billion.

All these decisions deserve scrutiny. And in retrospect, they were far more successful than anyone has yet fully given Obama the credit for. The job collapse bottomed out at the beginning of 2010, as the stimulus took effect. Since then, the U.S. has added 2.4 million jobs. That's not enough, but it's far better than what Romney would have you believe, and more than the net jobs created under the entire Bush administration. In 2011 alone, 1.9 million private-sector jobs were created, while a net 280,000 government jobs were lost. Overall government employment has declined 2.6 percent over the past 3 years. (That compares with a drop of 2.2 percent during the early years of the Reagan administration.) To listen to current Republican rhetoric about Obama's big-government socialist ways, you would imagine that the reverse was true. It isn't.

The right claims the stimulus failed because it didn't bring unemployment down to 8 percent in its first year, as predicted by Obama's transition economic team. Instead, it peaked at 10.2 percent. But the 8 percent prediction was made before Obama took office and was wrong solely because it relied on statistics that guessed the economy was only shrinking by around 4 percent, not 9. Remove that statistical miscalculation (made by government and private-sector economists alike) and the stimulus did exactly what it was supposed to do. It put a bottom under the free fall. It is not an exaggeration to say it prevented a spiral downward that could have led to the Second Great Depression.

You'd think, listening to the Republican debates, that Obama has raised taxes. Again, this is not true. Not only did he agree not to sunset the Bush tax cuts for his entire first term, he has aggressively lowered taxes on most Americans. A third of the stimulus was tax cuts, affecting 95 percent of taxpayers; he has cut the payroll tax, and recently had to fight to keep it cut against Republican opposition. His spending record is also far better than his predecessor's. Under Bush, new policies on taxes and spending cost the taxpayer a total of $5.07 trillion. Under Obama's budgets both past and projected, he will have added $1.4 trillion in two terms. Under Bush and the GOP, nondefense discretionary spending grew by twice as much as under Obama. Again: imagine Bush had been a Democrat and Obama a Republican. You could easily make the case that Obama has been far more fiscally conservative than his predecessor—except, of course, that Obama has had to govern under the worst recession since the 1930s, and Bush, after the 2001 downturn, governed in a period of moderate growth. It takes work to increase the debt in times of growth, as Bush did. It takes much more work to constrain the debt in the deep recession Bush bequeathed Obama.

The great conservative bugaboo, Obamacare, is also far more moderate than its critics have claimed. The Congressional Budget Office has projected it will reduce the deficit, not increase it dramatically, as Bush's unfunded Medicare Prescription Drug benefit did. It is based on the individual mandate, an idea pioneered by the archconservative Heritage Foundation, Newt Gingrich, and, of course, Mitt Romney, in the past. It does not have a public option; it gives a huge new client base to the drug and insurance companies; its health-insurance exchanges were also pioneered by the right. It's to the right of the Clintons' monstrosity in 1993, and remarkably similar to Nixon's 1974 proposal. Its passage did not preempt recovery efforts; it followed them. It needs improvement in many ways, but the administration is open to further reform and has agreed to allow states to experiment in different ways to achieve the same result. It is not, as Romney insists, a one-model, top-down prescription. Like Obama's Race to the Top education initiative, it sets standards, grants incentives, and then allows individual states to experiment. Embedded in it are also a slew of cost-reduction pilot schemes to slow health-care spending. Yes, it crosses the Rubicon of universal access to private health care. But since federal law mandates that hospitals accept all emergency-room cases requiring treatment anyway, we already obey that socialist principle—but in the most inefficient way possible. Making 44 million current free-riders pay into the system is not fiscally reckless; it is fiscally prudent. It is, dare I say it, conservative.

On foreign policy, the right-wing critiques have been the most unhinged. Romney accuses the president of apologizing for America, and others all but accuse him of treason and appeasement. Instead, Obama reversed Bush's policy of ignoring Osama bin Laden, immediately setting a course that eventually led to his capture and death. And when the moment for decision came, the president overruled both his secretary of state and vice president in ordering the riskiest—but most ambitious—plan on the table. He even personally ordered the extra helicopters that saved the mission. It was a triumph, not only in killing America's primary global enemy, but in getting a massive trove of intelligence to undermine al Qaeda even further. If George Bush had taken out bin Laden, wiped out al Qaeda's leadership, and gathered a treasure trove of real intelligence by a daring raid, he'd be on Mount Rushmore by now. But where Bush talked tough and acted counterproductively, Obama has simply, quietly, relentlessly decimated our real enemies, while winning the broader propaganda war. Since he took office, al Qaeda's popularity in the Muslim world has plummeted.

Obama's foreign policy, like Dwight Eisenhower's or George H.W. Bush's, eschews short-term political hits for long-term strategic advantage. It is forged by someone interested in advancing American interests—not asserting an ideology and enforcing it regardless of the consequences by force of arms. By hanging back a little, by "leading from behind" in Libya and elsewhere, Obama has made other countries actively seek America's help and reappreciate our role. As an antidote to the bad feelings of the Iraq War, it has worked close to perfectly.

But the right isn't alone in getting Obama wrong. While the left is less unhinged in its critique, it is just as likely to miss the screen for the pixels. From the start, liberals projected onto Obama absurd notions of what a president can actually do in a polarized country, where anything requires 60 Senate votes even to stand a chance of making it into law. They have described him as a hapless tool of Wall Street, a continuation of Bush in civil liberties, a cloistered elitist unable to grasp the populist moment that is his historic opportunity. They rail against his attempts to reach a Grand Bargain on entitlement reform. They decry his too-small stimulus, his too-weak financial reform, and his too-cautious approach to gay civil rights. They despair that he reacts to rabid Republican assaults with lofty appeals to unity and compromise.

They miss, it seems to me, two vital things. The first is the simple scale of what has been accomplished on issues liberals say they care about. A depression was averted. The bail-out of the auto industry was—amazingly—successful. Even the bank bailouts have been repaid to a great extent by a recovering banking sector. The Iraq War—the issue that made Obama the nominee—has been ended on time and, vitally, with no troops left behind. Defense is being cut steadily, even as Obama has moved his own party away from a Pelosi-style reflexive defense of all federal entitlements. Under Obama, support for marriage equality and marijuana legalization has crested to record levels. Under Obama, a crucial state, New York, made marriage equality for gays an irreversible fact of American life. Gays now openly serve in the military, and the Defense of Marriage Act is dying in the courts, undefended by the Obama Justice Department. Vast government money has been poured into noncarbon energy investments, via the stimulus. Fuel-emission standards have been drastically increased. Torture was ended. Two moderately liberal women replaced men on the Supreme Court. Oh, yes, and the liberal holy grail that eluded Johnson and Carter and Clinton, nearly universal health care, has been set into law. Politifact recently noted that of 508 specific promises, a third had been fulfilled and only two have not had some action taken on them. To have done all this while simultaneously battling an economic hurricane makes Obama about as honest a follow-through artist as anyone can expect from a politician.

What liberals have never understood about Obama is that he practices a show-don't-tell, long-game form of domestic politics. What matters to him is what he can get done, not what he can immediately take credit for. And so I railed against him for the better part of two years for dragging his feet on gay issues. But what he was doing was getting his Republican defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to move before he did. The man who made the case for repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" was, in the end, Adm. Mike Mullen. This took time—as did his painstaking change in the rule barring HIV-positive immigrants and tourists—but the slow and deliberate and unprovocative manner in which it was accomplished made the changes more durable. Not for the first time, I realized that to understand Obama, you have to take the long view. Because he does.

Or take the issue of the banks. Liberals have derided him as a captive of Wall Street, of being railroaded by Larry Summers and Tim Geithner into a too-passive response to the recklessness of the major U.S. banks. But it's worth recalling that at the start of 2009, any responsible president's priority would have been stabilization of the financial system, not the exacting of revenge. Obama was not elected, despite liberal fantasies, to be a left-wing crusader. He was elected as a pragmatic, unifying reformist who would be more responsible than Bush.

And what have we seen? A recurring pattern. To use the terms Obama first employed in his inaugural address: the president begins by extending a hand to his opponents; when they respond by raising a fist, he demonstrates that they are the source of the problem; then, finally, he moves to his preferred position of moderate liberalism and fights for it without being effectively tarred as an ideologue or a divider. This kind of strategy takes time. And it means there are long stretches when Obama seems incapable of defending himself, or willing to let others to define him, or simply weak. I remember those stretches during the campaign against Hillary Clinton. I also remember whose strategy won out in the end.

This is where the left is truly deluded. By misunderstanding Obama's strategy and temperament and persistence, by grandstanding on one issue after another, by projecting unrealistic fantasies onto a candidate who never pledged a liberal revolution, they have failed to notice that from the very beginning, Obama was playing a long game. He did this with his own party over health-care reform. He has done it with the Republicans over the debt. He has done it with the Israeli government over stopping the settlements on the West Bank—and with the Iranian regime, by not playing into their hands during the Green Revolution, even as they gunned innocents down in the streets. Nothing in his first term—including the complicated multiyear rollout of universal health care—can be understood if you do not realize that Obama was always planning for eight years, not four. And if he is reelected, he will have won a battle more important than 2008: for it will be a mandate for an eight-year shift away from the excesses of inequality, overreach abroad, and reckless deficit spending of the last three decades. It will recapitalize him to entrench what he has done already and make it irreversible.

Yes, Obama has waged a war based on a reading of executive power that many civil libertarians, including myself, oppose. And he has signed into law the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without trial (even as he pledged never to invoke this tyrannical power himself). But he has done the most important thing of all: excising the cancer of torture from military detention and military justice. If he is not reelected, that cancer may well return. Indeed, many on the right appear eager for it to return.

Sure, Obama cannot regain the extraordinary promise of 2008. We've already elected the nation's first black president and replaced a tongue-tied dauphin with a man of peerless eloquence. And he has certainly failed to end Washington's brutal ideological polarization, as he pledged to do. But most Americans in polls rightly see him as less culpable for this impasse than the GOP. Obama has steadfastly refrained from waging the culture war, while the right has accused him of a "war against religion." He has offered to cut entitlements (and has already cut Medicare), while the Republicans have refused to raise a single dollar of net revenue from anyone. Even the most austerity-driven government in Europe, the British Tories, are to the left of that. And it is this Republican intransigence—from the 2009 declaration by Rush Limbaugh that he wants Obama "to fail" to the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's admission that his primary objective is denying Obama a second term—that has been truly responsible for the deadlock. And the only way out of that deadlock is an electoral rout of the GOP, since the language of victory and defeat seems to be the only thing it understands.

If I sound biased, that's because I am. Biased toward the actual record, not the spin; biased toward a president who has conducted himself with grace and calm under incredible pressure, who has had to manage crises not seen since the Second World War and the Depression, and who as yet has not had a single significant scandal to his name. "To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle," George Orwell once wrote. What I see in front of my nose is a president whose character, record, and promise remain as grotesquely underappreciated now as they were absurdly hyped in 2008. And I feel confident that sooner rather than later, the American people will come to see his first term from the same calm, sane perspective. And decide to finish what they started.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Chancellor Eisen on RTI: "Rabbinic Training Institute 2012"

2012-01-19T10:45:00.001-08:00

Chancellor Eisen on RTI: "Rabbinic Training Institute 2012"

"I left RTI saying: this Conservative Movement of ours is going to be fine and more than fine. Its future is promising because its achievement continues to be remarkable. One major achievement sat all around me last week. To attract men and women of this caliber to the Conservative rabbinate and keep them there is reason for confidence that good things are in store for the communities they guide and serve." -- Read more here: http://blog.jtsa.edu/chancellor-eisen/2012/01/19/rabbinic-training-institute-2012/

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

this Shabbat's after Kiddush Learning! "A Glimpse into Gershom Scholem's Essay "Religious Authority and Mysticism""

2012-01-18T00:16:00.001-08:00

A Glimpse into Gershom Scholem's Essay "Religious Authority and Mysticism"

with Rabbi Creditor
after Kiddush Shabbat Morning at CNS, Jan 21

Gershom Scholem, the founder of the Modern study of Kabbalah and Jewish Mysticism, was a German-born Israeli scholar whose vision of authority and tradition illustrates the tension between individual yearning and communal tradition. Come share some of Scholem's words, and continue the conversation he began over 40 years ago!

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Found myself quoted in an anti-Israel project...

2012-01-16T18:14:00.001-08:00

Found myself quoted in an anti-Israel project. I am labeled as an anti-Palestinian Berkeley-based blogger, "proof" being a post I wrote some time ago (http://tinyurl.com/23b9zxv). The scary part of this is that they could have but didn't quote what I actually said, which would have demonstrated that being pro-Israel need not be equated with being anti-Palestinian. I wrote: "It's the volatile encounters on campus that make most clear what the "Pro-Israel" groups on campus need to do – acknowledge mistakes Israel has made/makes, and find ways to express a Zionism resonant to those exposed to the partially-correct and emotionally-overwhelming social justice claims of groups like Veritas." I believe in 2 States for 2 Peoples. Does this make someone anti-Palestinian? Here's the link to the post that "quotes" me. --http://www.australiansforpalestine.net/57001#more-57001

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Rabbinical Assembly: "A Prayer in Honor of Martin Luther King Day"

2012-01-16T08:46:00.001-08:00

Rabbinical Assembly: "A Prayer in Honor of Martin Luther King Day"
By Rabbi Lilly Kaufman
http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/story/prayer-honor-martin-luther-king-day#comment-388

Dr. King would have faced hard facts today.
He would know the number of children
going hungry in America this very minute.
He would know the number of our war dead,
and those wounded in new ways.
He would know the astounding costs
of financial corruption.
He would have seen beyond the numbers,
to the faces of our people,
and he would still have faith in them,
and in what is right.

He would be preaching now
a determined, measured, poetic, prophetic outrage.
He would be teaching by example
our civic duty of compassion,
and decrying the grave civic danger of cynicism.

He would challenge the strange new ideas
that money equals speech
and corporations are people
in a democracy.
When he gave his life for peoplesʼ rights
of speech, and assembly, and the vote,
it was for people
who had no money to pay for speech.
They knew speech as an unalienable right,
and their wealth of spirit sufficed.

Dr. King had faith in a few great things:
one was our essential American dream.
Not a middle-class American dream,
or an upper-class, a working-poor,
or an impoverished-class American dream.
But the defining American dream
which lifts up those bowed down.
The abiding American dream
of liberty and justice for all.

Dr. King asked of God in 1964:

... grant that we will always reach out
for that which is high,
realizing that we are made for the stars,
created for the everlasting,
born for eternity.

May we learn again to reach out for that which is high.

For further reading on Civil Rights from Conservative Judaism Journal, click here: http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/story/cj-classics-civil-rights?tp=319

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

A Short Teaching of a New Zionism

2012-01-15T09:46:00.001-08:00

A teaching of my teacher and friend, Chancellor Arnold Eisen of the JewishTheological Seminary, has stirred something within me: for every (legitimate) "no" with which we respond to something in Israel, we must remember to shout 5 "yes's" from the rooftops. Yes, Charedim rioting against justice or democracy demand attention. So too does the Israeli delegation of surgeons restoring eyesight to over 2,000 people in developing countries.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Rabbi Gary Creditor: "Bonnie’s Law"

2012-01-12T12:36:00.001-08:00

Bonnie's Law

January 13^th, 2012

Rabbi Gary S. Creditor

Within two weeks, national data, not local, of severely contradictory nature has been published that has painfully intersected with our personal and congregational experience. At the end of December the Times-Dispatch published an article that indicated the immense number of inquiries concerning the number of people buying guns at Christmas time. It is equally clear without publication that the number of guns purchased illegally severely compounds the number of guns sold legally. Yesterday's paper published an article that homicides – by any manner - are no longer among the top fifteen causes of death in the United States. And yet, virtually every day that I open our newspaper there is another death, or at least severe injury, that is caused by handguns. I must imagine, I cannot consider otherwise, that our experience is not duplicated over and over again throughout this country. It does not matter in what segment of our population this is occurring. It does not matter in what part of town it is happening. Each and every one is a tragedy that compounds grief with grief, misery with misery, loneliness, pain and anguish to their family and friends. Society as a whole is mutually wounded by each death. We in our congregation know firsthand of what I speak, in the murder a year and a half ago of Bonnie Marrow's son Robby, and on December 20^th the past, her murder. I confess that when I have seen the title of an article of such a crime, not knowing the participants, I am quick to avert my glance to something else. No more. The particulars do not matter. We are members of one human family. The death of any, diminishes us all.

In the brevity of this d'var Torah, it my intention to just establish the basis of my appeal to our civil authorities to enact a law, I call it "Bonnie's Law," to address this plague, this disease, that of illegal hand guns in our population and to end the scourge of death that they inflict. How many deaths of sweet, good, honest, loving people will it take? How much pain must we collectively suffer? When will segments of our populace stop saying, "It doesn't occur in my backyard?"

Our Judaism is certainly not pacifistic. The Torah and the rest of the Tanakh is filled with military exploits. Their weapons were no less lethal. Abraham will save Lot with an armed militia that will overthrow numerous kings. In tomorrow's Torah portion Moses will kill the Egyptian beating a Hebrew. Joshua conquers the land of Israel by force. David and Solomon will also use deadly force in uniting and maintaining the kingdom. Israel fights the Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans, long before the twentieth century, those who fought to build the State of Israel and those who fought in the sewers and bunkers of the Warsaw Ghetto and other such places during the Holocaust. We are not a bunch of patsies. Judaism is not a pacifistic religion. I don't propose that society should roll over and play dead.

Our Judaism does not make anyone's blood redder than another's. As there is One God, One Creator of the Universe, then all men and women are brothers and sisters, all children are cousins, all are grandparents, and all are children. Judaism does not draw lines and say, "over there, for them, we don't care." God asks Cain: "Where is your Abel your brother?" Cain denies, refuses to accept any connection to Abel with the spiteful, pitiful words that echo through the centuries: "Am I my brother's keeper/guardian/protector?" In its literary structure God in the Torah thunders: "Of course you are!" That is the essence of our human condition! Judaism demands that we care whether the murdered is a member of our congregation or not, whether they are Jewish or not, of any color, of any faith, of any race.

Most of us in this room are old enough to recall instantaneously our emotions when, in an era before the speed of our current electronic gadgetry, we heard that JFK was murdered. First shot, then dead, and then the funeral. Of all the pictures that I carry in my mind and heart it is that of his son standing and saluting his father's casket. It is the child in all of us who did not yet realize what he had lost. We are all that child. And not so many years later was the murder of MLK, commemorated this weekend. Is it not possible to dream that we can all die in our beds of the natural causes of old age and even disease? But not from guns? Is it not possible to dream that we can go to work, go to school, go to the mall, and not be afraid? Are we so forgetful that shortly after MLK was murdered RFK was murdered too? Has that shock to our moral compass passed out of our consciousness and out of our conscience? Not mine. While all those initials might just seem like an alphabet soup to others, I carry them right next to my heart. How dare we do otherwise? In the course of human events, the next generation will only learn it from the media, Kindles and Nooks if not from books. I have the drying pages of the newspapers. But my memory doesn't fade.

Through the precepts of Kashrut, our Judaism rejects hunting animals of any sort because it brings them pain and rejects killing animals except for food. But lest supporters of the NRA surmise that I have gone over to the Dark Side, let me say, that I don't care about game hunters, duck shooters and the sort. When I was a child I had my cap guns and air rifle. In the changing of the times, our children did not. I am unsettled by the presence of guns of any sort. They are not a sport. They are lethal and instruments of lethal force. But I am not appealing to restrict legitimate citizens who follow the laws from owning guns. My personal view is that they don't make us safer. When I was a kid if you wanted to fight you said: "Put up your dukes" or something of the sort. Today they pull out a gun and shoot you dead. Which would you prefer? My heroes are the Lone Ranger, Roy Rodgers, Gene Autry and Hopalong Cassidy. While they all carried guns, they never shot them dead. It was only in defense, self defense and in the cause of justice. Today the images are gruesome, ghastly and horrific. Which society should we be?

In "Bonnie's Law" I call upon all our authorities, local, state and federal to close all the loopholes that allow for illegitimate and illegal obtaining of guns of any sort. I call upon the manufacturers of guns in cooperation with civil authorities to create a comprehensive system of documenting and registering every single gun and rifle they make. You mean to tell me that I have to go through so many rules and regulations to register, inspect, insure, tag, decal and pay tax on my car with a myriad of different numbers – Go forbid you mess up, and I can buy a gun with impunity at a gun show? That all the pieces of my car have VIN numbers hiding someplace and when I sell it I have to go through more hoops to make sure that the authorities know who owns it or what has happened to it, but not for a gun? Are we so insane?

In"Bonnie's Law" I want stiff penalties, not a slap on the wrist, for those who violate these laws, who smuggle in guns, who sell them under the counter, who remove numbers, and those who use them to murder and maim. Enough is enough.

I will circulate these remarks and my eulogy for Bonnie to our authorities at every level.

I want "Bonnie's Law" as a measure of justice not only for Bonnie Marrow but for all the Bonnie's of the world and for all the children of the world, and for the child that must reside inside the human heart, the pure, innocent, the just, the righteous child who does not know right or wrong; who only knows love.

Only then will we all rest in peace. In life and in death.

Shabbat Shalom.

--
Posted By Rabbi Gary Creditor to Rabbi Gary Creditor's Blog at 1/12/2012 12:35:00 PM

Rabbi Reuven Hammer in Jpost: "Removing stumbling blocks to Jewish identity"

2012-01-12T08:05:00.001-08:00

Rabbi Reuven Hammer in Jpost: "Removing stumbling blocks to Jewish identity"

01/12/2012 16:15 By Rabbi Reuven Hammer

Photo by: Ruth Eglash

There is an old yiddish expression that "if one asks a question, the answer is 'treif' – i.e. 'forbidden.'" That is all too often the case with regard to the way the rabbinical courts in Israel deal with questions of Jewish identity and conversion.

In 2010 the Israeli Chief Rabbinate decided to require documents proving the Jewishness of one's mother, grandmother, great-grandmother and greatgreat- grandmother when applying for marriage. Needless to say this is a near impossibility for most people. Is this really Jewish law?

Many immigrants who claim to be Jewish have difficulty proving it to the satisfaction of the chief rabbinate because of the lack of reliable documentation.
Ketubot, or marriage contracts, have been largely non-existent among Russian Jews for over half a century. The result has been that often people who sincerely consider themselves Jews, and may indeed be, cannot prove that fact and are turned away by the official rabbinate when they wish to be married. Similar problems occur for American olim and others in Israel as well.

The well-known journalist Gershom Gorenberg wrote an article on such a case for The New York Times entitled "How Do You Prove You're a Jew?" (New York Times Magazine, March 2, 2008) in which he stated that formerly in Europe, "Trust was the default position."

He also cited the fact that the leading ultra-Orthodox rabbi in Israel in the years before and after the state was established, Avraham Yeshayahu Karlitz (known as the Hazon Ish, the name of his magnum opus on religious law), held the classical position. If someone arrived from another country claiming to be Jewish, he should be allowed to marry another Jew, even if nothing is known of his family.

A brief survey of sources in Jewish law will show that these current strictures were not always the norm. A story told in the Talmud (Pesahim 3b) about a non-Jew who would go to the Temple in Jerusalem to eat the paschal lamb – something forbidden by the Torah – and who was not stopped or questioned until he aroused suspicion by some action, was used by the Sages to prove that no attempt was made to check the Jewish identity of those who ate the Passover meal in the Temple. From this they inferred that one who claimed to be an Israelite was accepted automatically without further investigation. Only when there was reason to doubt the individual's Jewishness was an investigation undertaken. It would seem that indeed "trust was the default position."

Medieval sources also used this story as the basis for halachic rulings. The Maggid Mishne(Vidal of Toloso, 14th-century Spain) to Rambam's Mishne Torah, Sefer Kedusha, Hilchot Isurei Biah 13:10, writes: "We do not investigate any person who says, 'I am an Israelite.'" Tosafot to Yebamot 47a reiterates that one who claims to be a Jew is believed.

Recently the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly adopted a responsum written by this author which stated, "We affirm that trust is the default position in these matters. Therefore unless there is reason to be suspicious we do not question one's Jewishness. If, however, the person or the family is not known to us or if there is reason to suspect that one is not Jewish, further investigation is needed. This can be done through questioning the individual, through testimony of those who know the person or knew the family, or, if available, documents that indicate a Jewish background.

"In many cases, especially concerning those coming from the former Soviet Union, it is understood that documentary evidence will be difficult to produce, and therefore we may rely on the evidence of friends or neighbors and on the impression made by the individual. Questioning is to be done in a sensitive way so as not to violate the honor due to human beings and not to shame the individual. It is incumbent upon the Beit Din or the rabbi to exercise good judgment and common sense on these matters, relying on the halachic principles cited above."

It is time for the Israeli rabbinate to adopt a similar position rather than placing stumbling blocks where Jewish law itself has not placed them.

The writer, former president of the International Rabbinical Assembly, is a twotime winner of the National Book Award. His latest book is The Torah Revolution (Jewish Lights).

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

2012-01-11T14:38:00.001-08:00

Halachic Virtuosity

with thanks to the Jewish Theological Seminary, for loving and supporting rabbis

Everything changes. The incredible suggestions of string-theory, that everything we think of as solid is precisely not, that matter is made up of very, very small moving parts ("strings"), that the "rock" upon which I rely is unstable - these truths point beyond a wished-for constancy toward a dynamic reality. So too with Jewish tradition. Halacha, Jewish Law, has been codified over and over, but what can surprise even the most seasoned student of Halacha are the differences between various halachic codes over time, the sometimes radical shifts in halachic language and norms within tradition, and the rare but present explicit rejection of one Rabbi's ruling by another.

We must remember that Halacha, however solid it may seem, is made up from strands of tradition, vibrating slowly enough to give the semblance of stability. And, given that even fervent advocates of halachic change themselves crave constancy and order, preserving the harmonic togetherness of "halachic strings" matters. It is of vital concern that, before any change would be made to the halachic orchestra, that the individual musician stop to consider the symphony of which she is but one intentional part.

Can this metaphor live when the role of conductor is indefinable? Speaking plainly: since rabbis' notions of God are radically different one from the next, is it possible to see the interplay of local communal norms as essentially interdependent with those of other communities? Or is one community's musical expression sufficient without that of its neighbors?

The basic human need to not be alone is useful here. Yes, I can live alone. But I'd choose not to. After all, life is with people. So too am I convinced that one community's norms does not the fullness of tradition make. The interplay between communities is crucial if one's tradition is to remain connected with Tradition. Self-sufficiency is not a traditional Jewish communal (nor individual) ideal. Jumping back into the musical metaphor, consider the power of a skilled clarinetist playing alone. The grace and resonance may be unquestionable, but when he plays alone, his expression has no counterpoint, no context, no opportunity to be challenged, no chance for "play." Said simply: two horns are better than one.

So, though tradition is made up more of motion (Teshuvot/Rabbinic Responses) than anything else, with moving parts deeply sensitive to ever-changing realities, it is essential for every community - members and leaders - to care about the impact of any decision upon others. Again, re-entering the musical framework, a violinist who cares not for the musical score is also not truly part of the orchestra, and through their disregard for the whole functions as an agent of destruction. But the opposite is also true: the violinist who, steeped in the music, catches the eye of the clarinetist, can spark a process of grounded virtuosity, increasing the excitement and capacity of the other musicians, can thereby more dynamically engage the assemblage of audience members, the collective enthusiastic energy reaching even to the conductor.

This is a demanding model. We must, if we hope to embody a halachic virtuosity that makes people and God sing, master halachic musicianship. But music is not the score. Music is a living, beautiful thing with countless facets. The experience of music is not the same as its complicated theory, and similarly, the experience of Halacha is not its complicated theory. An orchestra exists not to bear testimony to its history but for the purpose of being a living generative power, charged with a specific way of resonating within the world and within the human community, of transmitting the passion and skill of passed masters, and of being the inspiring masters of today's music.

So too, today's rabbis are charged with being engaged and creative leaders, bearers of a specific resonant tradition, of being halachic virtuosos, interconnected with a network of similarly purposeful rabbis and religious communities.

The possibilities of the spiritual symphony ahead are unlimited. Imagine the music!

Jewish Week Op-Ed: "A Positive Backlash"

2012-01-10T20:57:00.001-08:00

Jewish Week Op-Ed: "A Positive Backlash"

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

http://www.thejewishweek.com/editorial_opinion/editorial/positive_backlash

We have little expectation that the preliminary talks being held in Jordan between the Palestinian Authority and Israel will lead to any substantive progress, primarily because neither side seems particularly interested in advancing the process now. Rather, their motives are to please Washington and Amman and not appear to be the party standing in the way of negotiations. Not exactly a formula for dramatic breakthroughs.

But on another front, that of the Israeli domestic scene, there are signs that recent attacks by Jews on other Jews — on soldiers at an IDF army base, and on youngsters attending a school in Beit Shemesh — may have reached a trigger point, shocking citizens and leaders into positive action.

Like the famous Peter Finch character in "Network," the fictional TV anchor Howard Beale, Israelis seem to be saying they're "mad as hell and they're not going to take this anymore."

Just what "this" is, precisely, is hard to define, but there is a sense of societal anger over violent actions against one's own people, and especially the discrimination against women and girls that has crossed the line from religious observance to civil rights, like where one sits on a bus or how one dresses to attend school.

The religious-secular divide in Israel is as old as the state, and resentment by secular Israelis over the power of the Orthodox Chief Rabbinate to determine issues of personal status — like marriage, divorce, conversion and burial — has always been an issue. But with the haredim growing so rapidly in population, having disproportionate clout in the government and driving increasingly stringent religious rulings, the societal backlash is more evident.

The added element of a small, fanatic group of haredim known as Sicarii, who instigated the Beit Shemesh protests, has added fuel to the fire.

An article this week in Tablet, the Jewish online magazine, by Erin Kopelow and her husband, Ariel Beery, a founder of PresenTense, the Israel-based group promoting social entrepreneurial ventures, calls on Jews here and in Israel to fight the "systemic bias in Israel." The couple urged American Jewish organizations and foundations to give the Israeli government an ultimatum — "enact legislation to protect the rights of women and the non-Orthodox" in the next 90 days or lose all funding and lobbying support.

What's noteworthy is that such anger is coming from Beery, an IDF veteran (as a volunteer), Avi Chai Foundation fellow and leader of pro-Israel efforts on campus and beyond.

The sad fact is that large segments of the Israeli population have nothing to do with each other. To bridge the gap, some leaders are stepping up.

Just this week Shimon Peres became the first president of Israel to appear publicly with the Masorti (Conservative) movement, marking 35 years since the movement's founding in Israel. After listening to Shirat Machar, the Masorti co-ed performance troupe, Peres opened his remarks by saying, "I came here this evening to hear women singing," a pointed reference to the growing concern in Israel about gender inequality. (An incident that attracted much attention recently took place when several haredi soldiers walked out of an IDF event where women soldiers were performing.)

The implicit message in the Peres participation at the event, during which he praised the Masorti movement's "commitment to humanism, peace, human rights and the rights of citizens," was that it is time to recognize the religious rights of all Jews in Israel. "Different streams exist in Judaism," Peres said, "which has room for conservative and liberal viewpoints."

Natan Sharansky, the chairman of the Jewish Agency, spoke out for dialogue this week to ease religious tensions, announcing an initiative to encourage "moderate voices from all communities" to participate.

The Beit Shemesh branch of Partnership 2gether, a Jewish Agency-sponsored program to link diaspora and Israeli Jews in an exchange of ideas, is calling for proposals, and will pick the three best by the end of this month. The goal is to go beyond dialogue and create programs that will address communal needs in Beit Shemesh, from repairing buildings to serving at-risk youth.

Let's hope the moderates can seize control of this issue and that the discussions prove more fruitful than the ones taking place in Amman.

2012-01-09T20:24:00.001-08:00

Shmot 2012/5772: "A World Without Children's Voices"
© Rabbi Menachem Creditor

The very beginning of Shmot/Exodus includes the following familiar narrative:

"A certain man of the house of Levi went and married a Levite woman. The woman conceived and bore a son; and when she saw how beautiful he was, she hid him for three months. When she could hide him no longer, she got a wicker basket for him and caulked it with bitumen and pitch. She put the child into it and placed it among the reeds by the bank of the Nile. And his sister stationed herself at a distance, to learn what would befall him. (Ex. 2:1-4)"

The power of Moses' birth is largely lost when read in the context of his rescue by Pharaoh's daughter. Once we realize that his birth immediately follows Pharaoh's declaration that every male child born be thrown into the river (Exodus 1:22), the act of a certain man and woman of Levi gains in significance.

In fact, says the Midrash:

"... when Moses' father Amram learned of Pharaoh's order, he immediately divorced his wife Yocheved (their names, as well as Miriam's, are absent from our text). Miriam said to her father, "Father, your decree is worse than Pharaoh's! Pharaoh only issued a decree that the males should die, while your decree applies to both males and females. Pharaoh decreed that the children's lives be terminated only in this world, and you have decreed that they not live both in this world and the world to come. Pharaoh is wicked, and the likelihood is that his decrees will not be fulfilled. You are righteous, and your decree will certainly be fulfilled!"(Ginzberg, Legends of the Bible, p. 287)"

Miriam's prophetic chutzpah led to her parents' brave decision to bring another child into a threatened world.

Recently, I visited both a mall and a children's museum and considered both their very different environments and the very similar people who frequent them. The noise of each was almost deafening, voices ricocheting off of and being amplified by walls and windows. Both places contained "hands-on" and protected areas. Both were protected from elements beyond their defined boundaries. And both were with omnipresent children and caregivers.

It occurred to me, as I watched young face after young face pass by, that every child's face was also the emerging face of a potential parent. The training provided to these future parents' in each space was vastly different. The mall teaches that acquiring things is exciting. The museum teaches that interacting with the world is fun. The variety of colors and flavors at the mall is actually a barely-hidden mask of material uniformity. Every thing has a label. And a price. But the inability to avoid looking at someone else in the museum while experiencing newness is an explicit statement that learning alone is less than learning together.

Both the museum and the mall serve as gathering places. But the mall leads me to escape the noise. The museum encourages me to listen and learn from the sounds.

Having recently read Cormac McCarthy's novel "The Road" and viewed Alfonso Cuarón's film adaptation of P.D. James' novel "Children of Men", I feel renewed urgency when I hear children. Almost desperation. I am afraid of the observation one of the characters in the film shares: "As the sound of the playgrounds faded, the despair set in. Very odd, what happens in a world without children's voices." It's not my spiritual perspective as a father that prompts these thoughts. Nor is it my fear that either McCarthy's devastated landscape or James' youthless world will actually come to be.

I am concerned that we adults all too often miss our obligation and opportunity to see children as emerging parents. When we program for Shabbat morning, do we nurture the caregiver aspect of our children's development? When we pass by a homeless person, do we remember that they too were one of those noise-making children? Do we acknowledge the bravery of today's parents, who struggle so often with infertility, and who have chosen to bring children into an uncertain world, answering every dark headline with the birth of new soul?

Just imagine for a moment what our world would be without our Miriam's. We'd forget how to be parents. This is not the world for which we work.

Our world, our precious fragile world of sacred dreams and unpredictable laughter, will only be realized when we remember to learn from children and publicly celebrate our parennts. Childhood lasts such a short time today, with omnipresent media and commercialism clamoring for attention. Let's not miss it by creating separate space for our children. Let's find ways of dancing together to the noise of their laughter.

Then Miriam's redemptive chutzpah will be fully present again.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson: "Biblical Economic Justice: Supply and Demand Isn't Enough"

2012-01-09T12:27:00.001-08:00

Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson: "Biblical Economic Justice: Supply and Demand Isn't Enough"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-bradley-shavit-artson/supply-demand-isnt-enough_b_1178974.html

As the voters of the United States recommence the process of electing the next President, it is important to recall our core values. Liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans may legitimately differ on how best to implement those values, but clarifying what values remain our bedrock is the first step toward assuring that these policy disputes remain constructive. One of those bedrock values is, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, "providing for the general welfare." In biblical terms it is "loving your neighbor as yourself."

During my second year in college, I decided to take the introductory course in economics. After all, learning how we allocate resources, create products, and encourage creativity and productivity all seemed like important tools for being an informed citizen. The Intro to Economics course was wildly popular, offered not in a classroom but a university theater in order to accommodate the standing-room-only numbers of students who enrolled. This class, clearly, held the keys not only to information, but to influence and power.

At the first lecture, the professor taught us about supply and demand, an economic model for determining the price of a good in the market. Equilibrium (the price charged for a product) rests at the intersection of Supply provided by producers (at a particular price) with the quantity of Demand (at a particular price) by consumers. When those two meet at a single point, their market equilibrium is found. That price marks the most efficient level for the production and distribution of a product.

Note that "demand" here does not equate to human need, but to the ability (and willingness) to pay for a product. No money -- no demand.

"Wait a minute," I objected. "You mean that if someone is starving on the street, penniless, then according to this model they have no demand to measure?" Right, I was told. Demand measures ability and willingness to pay, not need. You can starve to death with no measurable "demand," no impact on the market whatsoever.

At that moment, I realized that market economics measures efficient production and distribution of resources, but nothing more. Like Darwinian evolution, it possesses no moral compass; it simply describes what is, not what ought to be. And -- again like Darwinian evolution -- its mechanism doesn't integrate values such as compassion, minimizing suffering, protecting the weak, expressing a commitment to love or justice. Supply and demand measures efficiency -- an important concern to be sure, but by itself, incomplete. Just as our society makes decisions that integrate values other than Darwinian survival (we are committed to foster the flourishing of the individual, to intervene to heal the sick, to educate and empower the disabled and the underprivileged), so too our economic priorities must integrate but cannot be limited to market efficiency. There are other important values we also must advance. Supply and demand, by itself, does not evaluate when there might be concerns that override efficiency in particular cases -- feeding impoverished school children, for instance, making sure that indigent elderly have shelter, providing inoculations where needed, internalizing the cost of industrial waste dumped into our air and seas.

Such a commitment to human flourishing even at the occasional expense of efficiency is as consensual as our founding fathers and as sacred as Scripture: It was Thomas Jefferson, after all, who reminds us that "we hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." God-given concern for life, liberty and happiness are the proper goals of American democracy. Market efficiency is often a tool that advances those goals, but the goals are more encompassing than efficiency and sometimes require us to modify our commitment to the free market in support of more ultimate goals.

The Bible itself provides ample examples of laws that modify the unbridled rights of property owners: we are commanded to leave the corners of our fields unharvested, and to harvest our crops but once. Any remaining produce becomes the property of the poor, and they are legally entitled to access to that yield. Mandatory funds are established so the poor can sustain themselves, and the rich were obligated to provide food, clothing and sustenance for the widow, the orphan and the poor. Ancient Israel provided community education for all (male) children. One legal standard applied to rich and poor alike, with all contributing their fair share in tax revenue. Fields are to lie fallow every seventh (Sabbatical) and 50th (Jubilee) years to renew their bounty. While the market forces of supply and demand were the baseline for ancient Israel's economic activity, both Bible and Talmud delineate a prohibition of excessive profits, which were held to be sinful and impermissible.

Biblical Israel aspired to attain a vision in which all people were recognized as reflections of God's image -- each person of equal worth and dignity. That theological commitment, as it does in the USA's Declaration of Independence and in the world's Scriptures, mandates concern for the individual that sometimes supersedes the mechanism of market efficiency.

Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals should legitimately dispute which policies best advance that bedrock commitment. Such debates can help the nation better understand the challenges ahead and how most effectively to address them. But the underlying commitment must remain bipartisan supreme.

An economy that ignores supply and demand may find itself lacking the resources to sustain itself. We properly work with market economics as the starting point for our economic activity.

But an extremism that elevates supply and demand to its solitary and highest priority rejects a more encompassing Biblical commitment to care for the widow and the orphan, to provide food and clothing for the poor, to educate and nurture all its children, to live harmoniously with creation. Such a idolatrous dogmatism must be rejected, both in the name of our Founding Fathers and in the name of the world's wisdom traditions.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

2012-01-09T12:16:00.001-08:00

An Old Rabbi

I want to be an old rabbi.

I want to sit and learn

with wise, wrinkled brow,

sweet eyes, strong hands,

and a bald, shiny head.

I want to look back

at a life full of fullness,

of shared stories,

of comforting, doubting,

seeking.

I want to be an old rabbi.

One day.

2012-01-08T08:23:00.001-08:00

Forward.com: "A Place for Gays in Orthodoxy:'Commitment Ceremony' Offers Welcome to Same-Sex Couples"

Commitment to Faith: Rabbi Steve Greenberg presides over an Orthodox 'commitment ceremony' for a gay couple.

By Rabbi Steve Greenberg

http://www.forward.com/articles/149114/?p=all

Not a month goes by without a young person just out of the closet — or sometimes that person's shocked parents — contacting me in search of Orthodox leaders to respond credibly to their questions. It was this reality that was on my mind as I confronted the backlash to a same-sex commitment ceremony I performed last November. In response, 100 rabbis signed a statement censuring me. While these rabbis may prefer to foist this challenge upon me, the truth is that, as rabbis, we are all responsible for the conflict between present halachic norms and the real lives of people. We are all responsible for the gay and lesbian kids who are growing up in Orthodox communities and want a future. And I am not the only Orthodox rabbi who believes so.

Three years ago I interviewed 20 Orthodox rabbis on their pastoral experiences with gay people and their families. Those interviews were taped and transcribed, and many of them are incredibly moving. I wish I could share these and other conversations I have had over the years with Orthodox rabbis whose honesty and decency, whose humility in the face of a difficult question, are not widely known. But the interviews are secret because I promised not to share them. I can quote a few rabbis whose views were written or spoken publicly — though I am still reluctant to use their names.

When asked by a group of students what his views on homosexuality were one illustrious Modern Orthodox rabbi responded that he used to know the answer to that question. He could point to chapter and verse. Now when a gay person comes to him for counsel, his answer is, in his own words: "I don't know. I just don't have enough information to give a clear answer. I have 612 mitzvot that I feel I've got a better handle on. Come to my shul and we'll work on those together." Among the most human and honest responses an Orthodox rabbi has ever given to this dilemma is "I don't know."

Rabbis who actually have an open conversation with gay people discover that no one chooses his or her sexual orientation. Another beloved leader of Modern Orthodoxy, a rabbinic communal leader and a founder of a yeshiva, wrote with deep empathy early in his career: "How can we deny a human being the expression of his physical and psychic being? If there's a problem with the kettle, blame the manufacturer. Is it not cruel to condemn an individual for doing that which his biological and genetic make-up demand that he do?" This Orthodox rabbi is not afraid of articulating the profound theological and moral challenge posed by Halacha as it is presently applied.

Recent rabbinical statements demand life-long celibacy from gay and lesbian Jews. But a number of rabbis have shared with me their doubts about these guidelines for the simple reason that God does not demand the impossible from people. A well-respected Orthodox author, rabbi and educator has said in a public forum: "It is not possible for the Torah to come and ask a person to do something which he is not able to do. Theoretically speaking, it would be better for the homosexual to live a life of celibacy. I just would argue one thing: It's completely impossible. It doesn't work. The human force of sexuality is so big it can't be done."
Given the unreasonable demand of life-long celibacy, it is very tempting for rabbis to believe that therapy can solve the dilemma. Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky has recently joined forces with JONAH, a Jewish "change therapy" organization, to claim that, as a matter of religious principal, since the Torah prohibits homosexual behavior the orientation must be, by necessity, a curable disease. Responding to this dangerous circular argument, another learned Orthodox rabbi and scholar, a man who has written extensively about homosexuality, has publicly said, "I am not under any compulsion to support a failed therapy in order to save myself from a distressing religious conflict."

I trust that brave poskim, those willing to take the logic of empathy to heart and press the halachic system and the community toward greater responsibility, will soon rise up and truly employ the inner creativity of the Halacha to solve this dilemma. Those who believe this to be a fundamentally insolvable problem are, to my mind, lacking faith in both God and Torah and are dangerously risking the credibility of Halacha. Rav Yehuda once said, "We appoint to the Sanhedrin only someone who knows how to purify a reptile". Rav Yohanan added that anyone who does not know how to prove a reptile pure and prove it impure 100 times cannot defend the accused.

The profound halachic questions of our moment (and this is not the only one) surely demand a generous sense of the possible. Rabbis will need to be as fearless as were their forebears to imagine the opposite of their suppositions. Especially when an accused is before the court, when the consequences are dire for a defendant, the most versatile and creative of minds are required to achieve a just verdict.

But even before or without such halachic innovation, communities bear a profound responsibility to gay people and their families. Just imagine that you are a parent and that your child of 16 or 20 or 24 has just come out to you. What is your first thought? What do you say? What you worry about most is whether he or she will be happy. When later that night you talk with your spouse, you begin to imagine what the child must have gone through, perhaps for years — the shame and dread — all without your knowledge. You feel guilt for a suffering that you could not alleviate, perhaps anger for being shut out of her life, and you mourn the loss of the hopes and fantasies of her future that now seem impossible. Perhaps you worry for his safety. You think about what it was like for him, having played out in his mind over and over again how this moment would unfold, not knowing how you would respond, and terrified that he would lose your love.

While this scenario happens often enough, it is perhaps more common in frum, or religious, homes that teens don't come out to family members at all. Many gay kids, when they arrive at puberty, turn sullen and detached and suffer from clinical depression. One out of six contemplates suicide. I was recently told that in a single New York City psychiatric clinic there is a suicide attempt by a gay Orthodox person yearly. Sadly, the healthiest of these young people, having read the tea leaves years earlier, decide that they will have no life in the Orthodox world and are no longer frum by the time their parents find out.

In fact, this sad outcome is not necessary. Frum families often do find their way toward accepting and embracing their gay children. While they typically struggle with their own faith questions, the harder challenge is managing communal expectations. Most are unaware that there are Orthodox communities that are already making room for gay people. Nowadays, to my knowledge, there are four or five such synagogues in the United States where gay frum individuals, couples and families can join and be comfortably integrated.
Frankly, whether for social or formal reasons, I do not expect these rabbis to conduct a same-sex commitment ceremony anytime soon. But full synagogue participation, board service, Sabbath dinner invitations, a Kiddush in honor of a new child and the celebration of bat mitzvah are all present-tense realities in these Orthodox synagogues.

So, if I don't expect any other Orthodox rabbi to conduct a commitment ceremony, why did I do it? Because I am gay. Because I bear a unique responsibility that comes from a personal understanding of the conflict. Because I am now happily partnered in a 12-year relationship with an Orthodox man whom I love dearly, and we are raising the most terrific 1-year old little girl, who is the joy of our lives. I could never have imagined that any of this would be possible 35 years ago, when I was 20 years old.

I conducted this ceremony because I thought that it was time to tell your sons and daughters that are wondering what they can expect from life that they can remain committed to God and to the grand and transformative vision of Torah and mitz; that they can find companionship, create families and become active members of frum communities. And when loneliness gives way to the miraculous discovery of love, maybe they can raise that love to commitment with the hope that their families and friends, in a way different from most but still religiously meaningful, joyous and sweet, can dance with them.

Rabbi Steve Greenberg is a senior teaching fellow at CLAL — the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, and the author of "Wrestling With God & Men: Homosexuality in the Jewish Tradition" (University of Wisconsin Press, 2004).

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Rabbinical Assembly: "A Prayer in Honor of Martin Luther King Day"

2012-01-05T23:35:00.001-08:00

Rabbinical Assembly: "A Prayer in Honor of Martin Luther King Day"
By Rabbi Lilly Kaufman

http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/story/prayer-honor-martin-luther-king-day?tp=205

... grant that we will always reach out

for that which is high,
realizing that we are made for the stars,
created for the everlasting,
born for eternity.

May we learn again to reach out for that which is high.

Amen.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || menachemcreditor.org

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Chancellor Eisen's New Blog Posts: On His "Father's Yortseyt" and "Coming Closer to Israel"

2012-01-05T17:21:00.001-08:00

Dear JTS Community,

This week, I have added two blog posts to On My Mind: Arnie Eisen: "On My Father's Yortseyt" and "Coming Closer to Israel."

In the first, I recall the numerous ways in which I have been shaped by my father, Alan Eisen (z"l)—who loved being a Jew and whose third yortseyt I observe this month. It is personal and filled with significant memories and lessons.

My second post is a response to readers' comments on my last blog of 2011, "Distancing From Israel," and looks further into addressing Israeli/American relations. It takes into consideration other distancing factors—in addition to negative extremist acts and biased media coverage—as suggested by members of the community.

I encourage you to share your thoughts as well at http://blog.jtsa.edu/chancellor-eisen/.

Sincerely,

Arnold M. Eisen
Chancellor
The Jewish Theological Seminary

P.S. You can also follow me on Twitter @ArnoldEisen
(twitter.com/ArnoldEisen).

The Desecration of the memories of the 6 million. They did not die to be used by some Jews intolerant of all Jews.

2012-01-01T18:10:00.000-08:00

2012-01-01T17:54:00.001-08:00

2 Comments on "Charedi Kids, Adults In Holocaust Garb To Protest Exclusion Of Haredim"

http://www.vosizneias.com/97924/2011/12/31/meah-shearim-israel-in-photos-charedi-kids-adults-in-holocaust-garb-to-protest-exclusion-of-haredim#comments

Yitz Jordan (Y-Love myspace.com/ylove): "When you do this, when you cheapen the Holocaust, you render your point of view INVALID. I don't care *what* these people's point of view is anymore. This is tacky and inexcusable."

Ami Hersh (senior JTS Rabbinical Student, assistant director of Camp Ramah Nyack): "The concept and importance of Klal Yisrael has truly been stretched to its limits (and been burst wide open). I feel sick to my stomach seeing these horrific and disgusting images. Shame on these people, shame on them. How could ANYONE think that this behavior is okay. Yuck!"

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || menachemcreditor.org

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

2012-01-01T15:25:00.001-08:00

Calm
(C) Rabbi Menachem Creditor

It is understandable,
this ache for solitude,
its offer of peace.
Calm.

Surrounded by solid brown
and gentle chirps,
I could forget, for a while,
the needs of the world.
Calm.

They'll call soon enough.
But, for now
(just for now)
it's nice to feel
calm.

Let There Be Light - the Masorti response to children in concentration camp uniforms and yellow stars

2012-01-01T12:50:00.001-08:00

From the Rabbinical Assembly: Let There Be Light!

http://addyourlight.tumblr.com/

In response to photos of the protests in Jerusalem where a misguided few dressed their children in concentration camp uniforms and yellow stars, we cannot stay silent. Whatever they meant, they told the world that their Judaism is engulfed in darkness. We live rich Jewish lives every day. Our Judaism adds meaning and purpose. Our Judaism exists to bring light to the world. If you feel the same way, please share a photo! Let's show everyone what Judaism means to us!

http://addyourlight.tumblr.com/

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || menachemcreditor.org

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

2011-12-30T12:39:00.001-08:00

A Comment on "Terror In Beit Shemesh: Wheelchair Bound Orthodox Kids Harassed By Haredim"

http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2011/12/terror-in-beit-shemesh-wheelchair-bound-orthodox-kids-harassed-by-haredim-678.html

This isn't "only" about gender-harassment. It is about a fundamentalism that has pervaded the mindset of a sub-community within Israel that has yet to be truly attended to by the government. The national response cannot be short-lived, because this world-view is deeply rooted and will not be answered within one media-cycle.
-Rabbi Menachem Creditor
Dec. 30, 2011

Forward.com: "Day Schools Stuck in Neutral: Enrollment Numbers Grow, But Only Among Ultra-Orthodox"

2011-12-29T11:18:00.001-08:00

Forward.com: "Day Schools Stuck in Neutral"

Enrollment Numbers Grow, But Only Among Ultra-Orthodox

http://www.forward.com/articles/148762/

GETTY IMAGES

Declining Numbers: Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak visits Jewish day school students. Despite a massive push, enrollment is down at Jewish schools, except for those serving the ultra-Orthodox.

By J.J. Goldberg

Published December 29, 2011, issue of January 06, 2012.

The month of December brought some bad news for Jewish day school advocates. According to the Avi Chai Foundation, which tracks these things, day school enrollment saw a "modest decline" of about 1.4% in the 2011-12 school year, compared with the year before.

The sharpest decline was reported among the Solomon Schechter schools of Conservative Judaism, which experienced a 3.8% drop, from 11,786 students nationwide in 2010 to 11,338 this year. They were followed by so-called Community (non-denominational and/or federation-sponsored) schools, which fell 2.5%, and Modern Orthodox schools, which fell 1.6%. Centrist Orthodox schools, which are similar to Modern Orthodox but segregate classes by gender, actually gained 1.7%.

The numbers offer several useful insights. Perhaps the most useful, though hardly the insight the authors intended, is how easily numbers can mislead. Comparing this year with last, we find a slight drop in day school enrollment, presumably due to the economy. When we dig a little deeper, though, we'll find a significant decline in non-Orthodox enrollment, while overall enrollment soars due to an ongoing Orthodox baby boom.

Looking deeper still, we find some eye-popping details. Most dramatic: the calamitous drop in Schechter school enrollment. In 1998, the year Avi Chai first took attendance, Schechter enrollment totaled 17,563 students in 63 schools nationwide. This year, as noted, enrollment is just 11,338 students in 43 schools. That's a 35% decline.

The main reason, several Schechter officials told me, is an exodus of families and whole schools to a network of non-denominational community schools with fewer religious rules. Community-school enrollment rose from 14,849 in 75 schools in 1998 to 19,417 in 91 schools this year. A smaller number may have left for Hebrew charter schools in New York and South Florida.

We'll also find an explosive growth in ultra-Orthodox or Haredi school enrollment, including both Hasidic and non-Hasidic (that is, misnaged or "yeshivish" black hat) schools, reflecting high birthrates. Modern Orthodox schools, by contrast, are essentially holding their own.

Avi Chai compiles its numbers by a census — literally contacting every day school in America and asking for numbers, grade by grade. It's probably the most accurate source of American Jewish demographic information, though limited in range. However, the full census is only conducted every five years. The last one was in 2008.

The figures released this past December are based on a partial census that's conducted annually between full headcounts. The partial tally includes only the five most modern school groupings: the four mentioned above (two Modern Orthodox, two non-Orthodox) plus the much smaller Reform day schools (total enrollment 4,300). Among those not included are the two Haredi groupings, Hasidic and Yeshivish, which account for more than half of all America's Jewish day school students.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || menachemcreditor.org

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

A Response to "Bishops say rules on gay parents limit freedom of religion"

2011-12-28T15:15:00.001-08:00

The test of a religion is its ability to speak its truth without denying another's. This is a matter of civil rights which are the very foundation of the Catholic Church's place in our democracy. The decision to jettison Catholic Charities' adoption services rather than comply with US nondiscrimination laws is a statement of principle. But I find the decision repugnant.

Bishops say rules on gay parents limit freedom of religion

For Roman Catholic bishops, a fight over adoption rules in Illinois is a prime example of what they see as an escalating campaign by the government to trample on their religious freedom. read more here:

The Forward's Sisterhood Blog: "The 8-Year-Old Girl Who Woke Up Israel"

2011-12-26T08:58:00.001-08:00

The Forward's Sisterhood Blog: "The 8-Year-Old Girl Who Woke Up Israel"

By Allison Kaplan Sommer

http://blogs.forward.com/sisterhood-blog/148571/

Israel has a new and unlikely national heroine. She is a small blond bespectacled Orthodox 8-year-old girl, the daughter of American immigrants who live in Beit Shemesh. Her name is Na'ama Margolese and she was featured in a news broadcast on Israel's Channel 2 about the ongoing Haredi harassment of the girls who attend the Orot Banot School, and about the problem of extreme Haredi control in Beit Shemesh in general.

Naama spoke on camera of her fears while walking the short distance from her home to her school, after numerous occasions when she was cursed at and even once spit on by the Haredi demonstrators. Israeli viewers watched as her mother, Hadassah, holding her hand, tried to convince her to make the short walk as she cried, whined and protested; it's a ritual they go through every school day.

To the residents of Beit Shemesh (and to readers of The Sisterhood) the story of Beit Shemesh and the intimidation of Orot Banot girls is nothing new.

Related

But just as the experiences of one individual young woman who refused to sit in the back of buses, student Tanya Rosenblit, last week galvanized mainstream Israeli public opinion regarding gender segregation on public transportation, the televising of Na'ama's plight woke up the Israeli public. Until now, that public had remained relatively indifferent to the trials the Orot Banot girls and the residents of Beit Shemesh were undergoing. Members of an extremist Haredi group that have settled there over the past several years have been pushing for the creation of gender-segregated bus lines, designating parts of the city where women and men were directed to separate on public streets, and harassing the girls of Orot Banot on the ground that they did not dress modestly enough.

Immediately after the piece was aired on Channel 2, Facebook groups were organized and demonstrations in Beit Shemesh planned by angry citizens who wanted to take action. The power of the press had truly flexed its muscles. (The extremists were clearly aware of the damage done to them by the television coverage, as they demonstrated when they attacked the reporter when he returned to Beit Shemesh on Sunday for a follow-up story.)

Unsurprisingly, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who clearly sensed where the political winds were blowing, went on a public relations push over the weekend to show he was taking action. Ynet reported that he "asked Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch on Saturday to instruct the police to act firmly against violent attacks targeting women in the public sphere." In the aftermath of the Channel 2 story and the reaction, the ultra-Orthodox mayor of Beit Shemesh ordered workers took down street signs that directed women to cross the street and "not linger" in front of a synagogue. As they did so, Haredim threw rocks and called the municipal workers 'Nazis.'

The fact that the government took action only after the media paid attention to Beit Shemesh is infuriating. The girls of Orot Banot have been under siege since school opened in September, as detailed here and here. They deserved firm action and government protection long ago: Na'ama should never have had to be terrified in the first place.

But the Orot Banot parents will take what they can get. One of them wrote on Facebook that the Channel 2 piece their "Hannukah miracle" and Na'ama's mother said in a television interview that the numerous expressions of support that their family received following the broadcast felt like "a massive hug from the entire country." They are joining together with their new supporters on Facebook for a massive Hannukah candlelighting, rally, and march on Tuesday night designed to drive the forces of darkness out of Beit Shemesh, and bring the city closer to the meaning of its name: The House of the Sun.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || menachemcreditor.org

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

We are losing Israel from within. Please watch this video.

2011-12-25T08:32:00.001-08:00

This video makes me cry. Please watch it. It is 15 minutes long, and must be seen and considered. We are losing Israel from within. It's not an anti-Charedi mindset that makes this upsetting. It's my love of my People, my love of my Homeland that makes me hurt watching this.

English subtitled link -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFm1tZkEuxI

Women of the Wall - Rosh Hodesh Tevet!

2011-12-24T22:35:00.001-08:00

	Friend on Facebook
	Follow on Twitter
	Forward to a Friend

Read all about Tamuz srevices!

"Praying and chanting with Women of the Wall continues to teach me about the ways that women can come together to advance not only our standing but also our understanding of Judaism."
- Liz Piper-Goldberg

Join us to celebrate Rosh Hodesh Tevet at the Kotel on Tuesday, December 27, 2011 at 7 AM!
Please bring your own siddur.

If you would like to lead a part of the service or hold our Sefer Torah, please contact us.

To sponsor this month's oneg, please contact us.

הינכן מוזמנות לתפילת ראש חודש טבת ביום שלישי ה-27 בדצמבר בשעה 7:00 בעזרת הנשים של הכותל המערבי, ובהמשך, קריאה בתורה בקשת רובינזון.
אנא הביאו עמכן סידור.
אם את מעוניינת להיות חזנית, לקרוא בתורה או להחזיק בספר התורה, אנא כתבי אלינו

אם ברצונך לקחת חלק במימון הכיבוד שלאחר התפילה, אנא כתבי אלינו

WOW in the news
Donate to WOW
Sign our campaign
See our photo gallery
Read solidarity stories

נשות הכותל בחדשות

תמכו בנו
חתמו על מכתב תמיכה
תמונות


Copyright © 2011 Women of the Wall, All rights reserved. Our mailing address is: Women of the Wall POB 31936 Jerusalem, Israel 91319
unsubscribe from this list \| update subscription preferences \| view email in browser

Chag Sameach, everyone - may all our lights shine a bit brighter this year.

2011-12-22T14:18:00.001-08:00

The value of Gilad Shalit's privacy is so important. He isn't a symbol - he is a person, a young man who will now lead the next chapter of his life. But "pirsumei denisa/publicizing the miracle" is also a value during Channukah. Chag Sameach, everyone - may all our lights shine a bit brighter this year.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || menachemcreditor.org

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

A Comment on Rabbi Hanan Alexander's OpEd on JPost.com: "Postmodernism in masorti education"

2011-12-21T20:04:00.001-08:00

A Comment on Rabbi Hanan Alexander's OpEd on JPost.com: "Postmodernism in masorti education"

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

The problem with my teacher Hanan's eloquent article (pasted below) is that he sees advocates for Jewish gay inclusion as arguing for autonomy. This is a misrepresentation of halachic progressive advocacy, which argues for the organism of Halacha to continue evolving in response to a growing understanding of ethics and science, including human biology. Framing the conversation as post-modernism is not helpful. This continuation of the modern critique of Judaism has been the hallmark of Conservative/Masorti Judaism since its birth in the 19th century.

---

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || menachemcreditor.org

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

Postmodernism in masorti education

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=250444

By HANAN A. ALEXANDER
12/21/2011 22:56

Traditionalists say proponents of homosexual ordination have not made their case based on a rigorous examination of legal precedent.

The Schechter Rabbinical Seminary, which prepares Masorti-Conservative rabbis in Israel, sits at the intersection of at least four overlapping tensions, between disparate roles of higher Jewish education, rival notions of religious pluralism, competing understandings of human sexuality and different approaches to textual reasoning. The departure of three senior administrators from the school in as many years, reported byThe Jerusalem Post on Friday, December 9, is partly related to these tensions.

To address them, the Board of Trustees has appointed a committee to review and make recommendations concerning a number of policies and practices, including those relating to structure, admissions, education, religious standards and relations to its various constituencies. It is the sense of the board that the committee should also address how the question of admitting and ordaining homosexuals should be discussed in the future, in order to chart a way forward for a more productive dialogue on this issue.

As a condition of its accreditation, The Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies was asked to become a non-denominational graduate school, without affiliation to Masorti-Conservative Judaism. Schechter's other three divisions, originally part of one institution, were also divided into independent NGOs. The Tali Education Fund emerged as a freestanding network of pluralistic Jewish education programs within Israel's nonreligious state school system. Midreshet Yerushalim was transformed into an independent institution of continuing education and outreach. Only the Schechter Rabbinical Seminary remains formally tied to Masorti-Conservative Judaism, although the other three organizations continue to promote a pluralistic approach to Jewish learning.

This division has enabled the Schechter Institute to attract hundreds of religious and secular students to its highly regarded MA programs and the Tali Education Fund to reach tens of thousands of youngsters in Israeli public schools. But it has also left some issues that need to be addressed among between the four Schechter NGO's and the Masorti-Conservative movement, both in Israel and abroad. One important task of the board committee will be to facilitate a discussion of these issues.

Another tension stems from the fact that Masorti-Conservative Judaism has typically followed a view of pluralism which holds that religious texts have several legitimate interpretations. Communities, institutions and individuals may choose between equally valid readings of these texts, which can lead to conflicts. In 2006, Masorti-Conservative authorities approved two opposing positions concerning the ordination of homosexuals, for example.

The Schechter Rabbinical Seminary in Jerusalem and the Seminario Rabbinico Latinamericano in Buenos Aires both followed the more traditional ruling which rejects such a move, in contrast to its more liberal sister institutions in the US which have embraced it.

Traditionalists hold that proponents of homosexual ordination have not made their case based on a rigorous examination of legal precedent. Liberals, on the other hand, read rabbinic sources as maintaining that the pursuit of a sexual orientation is a human right, provided that it meets other standards of Jewish sexual ethics. This follows an alternative approach to pluralism which holds that individuals have the right to choose their own life paths. Denying this right is seen by advocates of this approach as morally odious since it undermines personal autonomy.

This conflict is exacerbated by a third tension between modern and postmodern accounts of human sexuality. Traditionalists ground their position in modern sensibilities such as scientific historical scholarship, whereas some more progressive liberals appear to believe that contemporary attitudes about human sexuality have been irrevocably altered by the so-called "postmodern condition."

POSTMODERNISM IS concerned to expose the ways that people exert power over one another. The traditional preference for heterosexual over homosexual relations, for example, has enabled those who favor the former to dominate people who are inclined toward the latter. But our attitudes toward these preferences are socially constructed, according to postmodern theory, even though the preferences themselves may be influenced by a variety of biological factors.

Following this analysis, we should permit several sexual orientations provided they are grounded in love, commitment, mutuality and respect. Postmodernists view this as a revolution in human sentiment no less momentous than the discovery of romantic love or the rise of feminism, to which Jewish law needs to adapt. Yet one might ask whether Jewish tradition should resist or embrace such postmodern insights.

Finally, traditionalists often ground their arguments in legal positivism, which holds that legal decisions should be based on the critical reading of texts alone, independent of moral judgments not found in the law itself. Without rejecting critical exegesis, which seeks to discover the intended meaning of a text in its original context, both moderate and progressive liberals appear to place equal weight on midrashic eisegesis, which looks for innovative readings of a text apart from original intent that are in tune with current moral sensitivities.

The blurring of accepted dichotomies, such as exegesis (reading out) and eisegesis (reading in), is also characteristic of postmodern criticism. This process, which some postmodernists call "deconstruction," is the subject of considerable controversy among intellectuals. One paradox of this approach, for example, is that the concern for overcoming dominant discourses by means of new interpretations can also become a means of domination.

The willingness of the Board of Trustees to facilitate a serious examination of these perplexing dilemmas presents an extraordinary educational opportunity for the Schechter Rabbinical Seminary to demonstrate the value of dialogue on matters of principle in an atmosphere of mutual respect that engages Jewish sources in a careful and critical manner. This is the hallmark of Masorti-Conservative Judaism. As a leading institution of rabbinic education in Israel,we have a sacred obligation to do no less.

The writer is Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Schechter Rabbinical Seminary, Professor of Philosophy of Education at the University of Haifa, and Sr. Research Fellow of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute.

Silence and Air

2011-12-18T18:51:00.001-08:00

Download Rabbi Menachem Creditor's newest album Within - available on iTunes and Amazon.com!

Folk meets Jewish mysticism in this expression of soulful longing, a collection of original interpretations of sacred texts, poetry, and wordless niggunim.

Silence and Air

We sat there, transfixed by the unfolding scene,
the wreaths everywhere made it almost-obscene.
For any tradition would hope that its faithful
would see from within that the point is not spatial.

It's not that we Jews feel erased by the clutter,
(though this time of year makes us feel quite 'the other').
It's rather that somehow amidst all the noise,
a wrongness was touching each girl and each boy,
a message that no-one of faith should support,
for it turns something pure into something of sport.

When symbols of faith are repackaged with glitter,
a person with soulful experience jitters.
What's more, when we Jews see the lights and the sales,
the need to 'keep up' sends strange wind through our sails.
Our windows become cluttered and swell
(since garlands of blue and white work just as well).

But then something is lost, though we each comprehend,
that it's natural - and fun! - to fit in with our friends.
So the problem is shared and pervasive these days
and the wisdom we need seems much further away.

The truth of tradition needs silence and air,
and the noise all around makes it seem nothing's there.

And so Teshuvah, Return, is a lesson worth learning,
by the glow of Menorahs and Yule Logs, separately burning.
Return to your heart. Return to your self.
Let seasonal sales gather dust on the shelf.

Rabbi Menachem Creditor

Congregation Netivot Shalom || Bay Area Masorti || ShefaNetwork

Rabbis for Women of the Wall || menachemcreditor.org

To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Check out my new album, "Within!" - on sale at: ekspublishing, itunes & amazon.com!

TheTisch: Rabbi Menachem Creditor's Blog

This is an articulation of a healthy, reclaimed Zionism.

Tragically, with increasing frequency, we have been witnessing crimes committed by individuals who profess the most extreme expressions of orthodox Judaism. Anti-Zionist Haredim and Ultra-Zionist residents of settlements have:

burned mosques

segregated women on public buses

defaced public property

refused to send Ashkenazi children to schools where they will mix with Sephardi children

spit on and otherwise assaulted children, Christian clergy and women

attacked IDF soldiers to prevent them from carrying out legitimate orders

Shamefully, they justify these crimes in the name of Judaism.

We reject that claim entirely and denounce the profanation of God and our tradition that they represent. They denigrate the very Jewish teachings that they claim to uphold.

We call upon the leaders of all branches and forms of Judaism to denounce these crimes for what they are: a denigration of the essential Jewish teaching that honors the divine image in which every human being is created.

"Love your neighbor as yourself…Love the stranger as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. I am Adonai your God."

(Leviticus 19:18, 34)

Professor Shaul Magid: "An Open Letter to Rabbi Dov Linzer on Modesty and Jewish Law"

jpost.com: "First mixed prayer service in Knesset"

this Sunday! "The Case for Commandedness: Religious Language for the non-Conformist"

Rabbi Andrew Sacks on Jpost: "Haagen Dazs - The Great Kashrut Controversy"

Who Is Saul Alinsky And Why Does Newt Gingrich Fear Him?

Who Is Saul Alinsky And Why Does Newt Gingrich Fear Him?

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Steps Down from Congress

From Masorti AmLat: Intl. Holocaust Remembrance Day

Tablet Magazine: Alana Newhouse: "On Andrew Adler’s idiocy, readers’ complicity, and Gawker’s irresponsibility"

The Evil of Banality

On Andrew Adler's idiocy, readers' complicity, and Gawker's irresponsibility

Rabbi Dov Linzer in the NYtimes: "Ultra-Orthodox Jews and the Modesty Fight"

Lechery, Immodesty and the Talmud

By RABBI DOV LINZER

Published: January 19, 2012

Jennifer Uman

Related News

Israelis Facing a Seismic Rift Over Role of Women (January 15, 2012)

Israeli Girl, 8, at Center of Tension Over Religious Extremism (December 28, 2011)

Andrew Sullivan in "The Daily Beast" -- How Obama's Long Game Will Outsmart His Critics

Andrew Sullivan: How Obama's Long Game Will Outsmart His Critics

The right calls him a socialist, the left says he sucks up to Wall Street, and independents think he's a wimp. Andrew Sullivan on how the president may just end up outsmarting them all.

Chancellor Eisen on RTI: "Rabbinic Training Institute 2012"

this Shabbat's after Kiddush Learning! "A Glimpse into Gershom Scholem's Essay "Religious Authority and Mysticism""

Found myself quoted in an anti-Israel project...

Rabbinical Assembly: "A Prayer in Honor of Martin Luther King Day"

A Short Teaching of a New Zionism

Rabbi Gary Creditor: "Bonnie’s Law"

Rabbi Reuven Hammer in Jpost: "Removing stumbling blocks to Jewish identity"

Rabbi Reuven Hammer in Jpost: "Removing stumbling blocks to Jewish identity"

01/12/2012 16:15 By Rabbi Reuven Hammer

Jewish Week Op-Ed: "A Positive Backlash"

Jewish Week Op-Ed: "A Positive Backlash"

Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson: "Biblical Economic Justice: Supply and Demand Isn't Enough"

Forward.com: "A Place for Gays in Orthodoxy:'Commitment Ceremony' Offers Welcome to Same-Sex Couples"

By Rabbi Steve Greenberg

Rabbinical Assembly: "A Prayer in Honor of Martin Luther King Day"

Chancellor Eisen's New Blog Posts: On His "Father's Yortseyt" and "Coming Closer to Israel"

The Desecration of the memories of the 6 million. They did not die to be used by some Jews intolerant of all Jews.

Let There Be Light - the Masorti response to children in concentration camp uniforms and yellow stars

A Comment on "Terror In Beit Shemesh: Wheelchair Bound Orthodox Kids Harassed By Haredim"

http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2011/12/terror-in-beit-shemesh-wheelchair-bound-orthodox-kids-harassed-by-haredim-678.html

Forward.com: "Day Schools Stuck in Neutral: Enrollment Numbers Grow, But Only Among Ultra-Orthodox"

Forward.com: "Day Schools Stuck in Neutral"

Enrollment Numbers Grow, But Only Among Ultra-Orthodox

By J.J. Goldberg

A Response to "Bishops say rules on gay parents limit freedom of religion"

The Forward's Sisterhood Blog: "The 8-Year-Old Girl Who Woke Up Israel"

The Forward's Sisterhood Blog: "The 8-Year-Old Girl Who Woke Up Israel"

By Allison Kaplan Sommer

We are losing Israel from within. Please watch this video.

Women of the Wall - Rosh Hodesh Tevet!

Join us to celebrate Rosh Hodesh Tevet at the Kotel on Tuesday, December 27, 2011 at 7 AM! Please bring your own siddur.

If you would like to lead a part of the service or hold our Sefer Torah, please contact us.

To sponsor this month's oneg, please contact us.

WOW in the news Donate to WOW Sign our campaign See our photo gallery Read solidarity stories

Chag Sameach, everyone - may all our lights shine a bit brighter this year.

A Comment on Rabbi Hanan Alexander's OpEd on JPost.com: "Postmodernism in masorti education"

Postmodernism in masorti education

Traditionalists say proponents of homosexual ordination have not made their case based on a rigorous examination of legal precedent.

Silence and Air

Join us to celebrate Rosh Hodesh Tevet at the Kotel on Tuesday, December 27, 2011 at 7 AM!
Please bring your own siddur.

WOW in the news
Donate to WOW
Sign our campaign
See our photo gallery
Read solidarity stories