Talmudic Questionings

Rav Rosensweig, Yevamos and me

2011-09-04T10:50:00.003+02:00

To be honest I was not excited when I realized that this year at YU they are studying Yevamos, which is the tractate on the topic of yibum, in which the brother of a man who died without children has an obligation to marry the widow.

It is one of the tractates that during the daf yomi cycle I studied a bit and in some ways to me exemplifies the seemingly trivial and overly complex nature of Talmud study.

At first I had decided that I would not try to follow along with Rav Rosensweig, but after listening to his introduction, I am re-energized. As always he did an amazing job in beginning to explain the overall importance of yevamos.

History of the Torah She'be'al Peh (Oral Torah)

2011-09-04T10:34:00.003+02:00

Just finished this 7-part series History of the Torah She'be'al Peh by Rabbi Hershel Schachter. He did a great job in exploring the history, while also explaining most of the Hebrew terms as we went through.

He also helped me want to dig into the book, The Path of Torah, by the Netziv, which I did not realize was the Netziv's discussion of Torah She'be'al Peh.

The whole Oral Torah tradition makes me appreciation the creativity of Judaism and the immense honor and respect the tradition gives to the study and explication of Torah.

Great Hans Urs von Balthasar resource

2011-08-27T11:01:00.002+02:00

I believe I have seen this page before, but it has definitely improved.

Lots of wonderful Hans Urs von Balthasar articles and resources.

http://hansursvonbalthasar.blogspot.com/

Rav Kook on universalism

2011-08-26T18:34:00.002+02:00

Now one might receive the mistaken impression that the Torah endorses this attitude [that nations compete against one another] whereby we should assign a greater value to our own people’s good than to the welfare of others. After all, the Torah commands the Children of Israel to conquer the land from the indigenous nations. But this is clearly unacceptable! How could God, Whose mercy extends to all His creations, oppress His own handiwork?! How could the Most High command that we remove from our hearts the well being of the entire human race for our own selfish good?! Therefore, at the time the covenant was first established with our ancestor Abraham, a divine protest was lodged: The very thought of nationalism is despicable to God, for He equates all mankind. The goal is to seek the true success of all God’s creations. True justice means that one views with equal concern the advancement of the entire human race.

Where then does the the notion of the “Chosen People” enter? The Jews were elected to work at uplifting the entire human race; to bring humanity to the goal the Almighty expects of it. Israel were set aside as a “kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” A kingdom of priests ministers to the other nations in order to morally perfect them. So the separation from the nations is itself the greatest unification, in order to benefit the human race. However, if Israel will desert the good, which is the holy Torah, then its nationhood and its territorialism are an abomination before God. It is inconceivable that for the sake of a people’s natural self-love, other nations should be displaced. All are God’s handiwork. Israel must know that no permission was granted to displace a nation for the sake of national self-aggrandizement. There is one form of justice, whether it be on the individual or collective level.Therefore, several times over, the Torah links the giving of the land to the observance of Torah. Without the raison d’etre of Torah, the setting apart of one nation, would be considered an injustice.

(From the book 'In the Desert – A Vision') Parashat Vayishlah
www.orot.com/universalism.html

Rav Amital on the Fear of God

2011-08-25T21:58:00.006+02:00

Rav Amital:

The basic level of the fear of God is a similar feeling. We nullify ourselves in the face of His great exaltedness as our Creator and as our Father, because of whose abundant love we are called His sons, and upon whose loving-kindness we rely in every step that we take. Thus, there arises within us a feeling of absolute commitment to God, to obey Him and accept His commands as self-evident, and to do whatever finds favor in His eyes.

Obviously, this feeling requires constant nurturing, and it is our obligation to take steps to intensify this feeling of commitment. It must be emphasized, however, that we are not dealing here merely with a decision to accept commitment, for our goal is that this sense of commitment be transformed into a natural feeling that is constantly with us, this being the fear of God. The more deeply we experience this feeling, the closer we will come to loving and fearing Him.

The Alter of Slobodka:

The Torah is not describing life that is restricted or petty, a life of crude and cheap desires that run about in man's heart and confine him in narrow and suffocating straits. A Torah life is illuminated by God's light; it opens up wide expanses before man, broadening his heart and soul. His eyes will see all the worlds, and his thoughts will encompass eternity. A life of Torah is so pure and pleasant that it does not contain even the slightest unpleasantness – spiritual or material.

From JEWISH VALUES IN A CHANGING WORLD
http://www.vbm-torah.org/values.html

By Harav Yehuda Amital

LECTURE #1b: The Fear of God in Our Time Part 2 of 2

The Vibrancy of the Conversation

2011-08-25T09:39:00.006+02:00

I can't believe that it has been almost exactly ONE year since I have posted anything to this blog.

Over the last year my explorations have taken me deep into Lutheran theology and I have gotten a profound sense of the trust and faith that the Lutheran tradition has in God's "promise" of the forgiveness of sins and justification. It is that sense of trust and faith as well as the humorous and down-to-earth nature of the professors who I have loved to listen from Concordia Seminary on iTunes. Their overall sense of humor and joy is truly infectious.

I have also turned to the John Paul II Institute for Marriage and the Family in DC, which offers graduate classes that often refer to one of my true spiritual guides: Hans Urs von Balthasar. Sadly, the Institute does not provide any MP3s of their classes, so instead I have read a number of works from their professors. Most recently, I have been reading Being Holy in the World, a collection of essays on the work of David L Schindler. What I find inspiring is Schindler's commitment to the ontological reality of love and relation as exemplified by the triune relation of love between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and how they in fact affect all of reality: physical, mental and spiritual.

And then there is Torah! As I am sure I have commented many times within this blog, since I am not Jewish and certainly not Orthodox, I always wonder what brings me back to sites like:

The simple answer is the Vibrancy of the Conversation!

I am someone who loves study and loves God, and at times can get bored with one approach or one direction. The thousands and thousands of shiurim that are available on Gemara, Chumash, Jewish Thought, Halachah, etc. provide a partner to learn from and even argue with.

As the new school year begins at Yeshiva University, I look forward to engaging with many of the new shiurim and joining the conversation.

Thoughts from the road . . .

2010-08-29T15:09:00.002+02:00

My wife and I went to visit some friends in Geneva this weekend and while she drove (she is a much better driver than I), I wrote down these thought on my Blackberry:

Recently I have been reading and listening to a lot of Lutheran theology from the Missouri Synod and the Australian Lutheran Church. Both of which are conservative interpretations of the tradition.

At the heart of what I have been studying is the notion of "inaugurated eschatology" or "proleptic eschatology". This is a wonderful notion that the Kingdom of God was actually begun or inaugurated by Jesus. And while the full eschaton or end times will be far more wonderful, the change has already begun, though as Dr Voelz says, "not without remainder."

Therefore, the world has not been totally transformed, but in some way the transformation has already happened. This thought challenges me to see myself, others and all of creation as fully loved, fully one and fully whole with Christ; justified as the Lutherans would say.

It is a wonderful way of understanding how our prayer and meditation is not dependent on us and our "getting it right", but instead it is a matter of "receiving" what is always flowing toward us, due to union with Christ and the Holy Spirit that came to us at baptism. I am attracted to this notion of the very everydayness of our dialogue and union with God, since I have always struggled with meditation and prayer.

It is with this view and understanding that traditional Lutherans read the Scriptures, both the Jewish and Christian. This perspective also enables one to interpret the people, incidents and institutions within the Jewish scriptures as "types" that point to Jesus and the New Testament. Lutheran interpreters do this (at least in the Concordia Commentary series) with much love and respect for the texts themselves, as well as for the God, who lives and speaks throughout the texts.

Then today I have been reading the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, which as the subtitle says is "The Code of Jewish Law". The sections I have been reading are about Shabbat. And as anyone who knows anything about Jewish law can imagine, the discussions on what one can and cannot do on Shabbat are incredibly involved and complex, even about "simple" things like asking a non-Jew to fix the wick of a candle to improve the light, and on and on.

Of course, I do not have to live these rules and from outside it feels like one could become easily paralyzed trying to decide what is the right thing to do.

However, I LOVE the profound attempt to understand and live in a way that fulfills God's wishes. In fact, many of the laws are actually not in the Bible, but were defined by Rabbinic decree to put a "fence" around the Biblical laws to protect folks from even getting close to breaking a commandment.

As I was reading about the rules for Shabbat today, I couldn't help compare this Orthodox Jewish approach to living a religious or spiritual life with the Lutheran conception of how Christ came to set right what had gone wrong and the Lutheran challenge to us to understand and live in a way that recognizes our justification and has eyes to see the foretaste of the Resurrection of all of creation that Christ inaugurated.

Could they be more different?

And while I am not ready to accept the "yoke of the Torah", I must admit I find the concern for and love of Hashem's Torah awe inspiring, even if the reality is that there seems like there is often much conflict and bitterness between different groups of Torah-observant Jews.

The Lutheran message is also wonderful in its challenge to us to see with new eyes, but it also feels too easy to allow it to be a nice slogan without it actually affecting our lives (of course this is a gross generalization). While the Torah tradition seems so in your face that one cannot live without it affecting one's life, though perhaps one could go through the motions without it affecting one's heart.

Both are profound traditions that ask much of their members, not like some of New Age or "prosperity" spiritualities that are popular today. In fact, as Rav Rosensweig often discusses, the Torah asks for a "maximal" response or commitment. Today, many might equate a maximal commitment with some type of fanaticism, but instead I find it a call to love God with one's whole heart, soul and strength . . . what a beautiful ideal to live up to!

And if we accept the idea that if for one moment Hashem/God would withhold his presence and love from creation then everything would immediately cease to exist and that we God's beloved creatures made in God's image, is a maximal commitment and response of gratitude and obedience too much to expect? We are given so much (in fact everything), can we not give much in return?

Today, I began to listen to Rav Rosensweig's begin shiur on the second chapter of the Pesachim tractate and immediately realized how little I could follow even though I have been listening to him off and on for years. What that made me think is that perhaps the Lutheran message of all being given and the need to "merely" respond and receive that I hear in the book by John Kleinig in his book Grace Upon Grace is the most empowering and truly "maximal" message, because it puts the maximal power and effort into God's hands -- challenging our maximal response to be one of openness and receptivity. The radical simplicity of this message is perhaps too easy to dismiss and ignore as I search for something to do other than receive the "grace upon grace" that God is giving.

These words from Kleinig's book summarizes much of what I have written:

"The teaching of Jesus on meditation does not concentrate on what we do but on what He does as we meditate on His Word; the emphasis is on what we receive from Him and His heavenly Father as we let Him and His Word occupy our hearts. By meditating on His Word we receive what He has to give us through it."

What needs to be made clear is that for Rev Kleinig "His Word" does not simply mean the words of Jesus or just those of the New Testament, but the also encompass the Hebrew scriptures as well, which is made clear by Rev Kleinig's commentary on Leviticus that he wrote for the Concordia Commentary series. Both scriptures are the Word that point to the triune God who loves us beyond our imagination.

Another passage from Rev Kleinig that speaks to me:

"I assume that I don't know how to pray or what to pray for; instead, I look for guidance from God's Word and the Holy Spirit. Praying, then, comes as a gift rather than a demand."

A "rule" that I found

2010-06-20T10:57:00.002+02:00

A few years ago I was very interested in monastic rules (Carmelite, Benedictine, etc.). Today as I was moving a whole variety of texts onto my iTouch to read I found this. I know I have not lived up to it, but I can try.

A Wild Rule – The Vows

To be open life’s mystery
To experience life with awe and wonder
To dwell in the paradox of understanding and uncertainty
To bless all that life brings
To feel the presence in the present of the gift of God
To experience holiness everywhere and at all times
To recognize that life is simply full of meaning
To experience each moment as a miracle
To know that everything and every moment is a teacher
To dwell in emptiness
To strive to be my mission
To welcome messengers/angels
To repair the world
To continually yearn for God
To hunger for Spirit
To love
To recognize the importance of humility
To surrender to the need to surrender
To be open and ready for change
To continually transform
To bear the Cross
To speak meaningfully
To protect life
To speak supportively
To rejoice in others’ success
To love God with all my heart, with all my soul and all my strength
To study, contemplate and reflect
To pursue the beloved everywhere
To be fully truthful
To stop all negative thoughts
To be aware of the inevitability of death
To pray constantly
To practice the art of giving and taking

Current explorations

2010-05-24T09:54:00.003+02:00

I have not posted anything for months. One reason may be that I have been very busy at my work (probably working harder than I ever have). But I have also not had a clear focus in my study. This blog has always contained my Talmudic/Jewish reflections, but recently I have also been drifting toward John Russell Brown's writings on Shakespeare here, here and here, a book on Everyday Aesthetics, even the Concordia Bible Commentary, but never with much focus or passion.

In fact, I haven't even been listening to many shiurim; instead I have been listening to audiobooks from http://www.audible.com/.

A couple blogs that I have been following (which couldn't be more different) are:

Dr. Alan Brill's The Book of Doctrines and Opinions: notes on Jewish theology and spirituality. Rabbi Brill taught at Yeshiva University (you can still download a few of his classes from there. He is amazingly well read and has a profound interest in meditation and Jewish theology and has recently published: Judaism and Other Religions: Models of Understanding. His blog is a wide ranging reflection on the contemporary religion scene with some focus on the divergences and similarities between Evangelical Christianity and Orthodox Judaism.

The other is Gil Baille's: Reflections on Faith and Culture. Bailie is the author of Violence Unveiled: Humanity at the Crossroads, a profound reflection on the work of Rene Girard. Gil's blog, as the title states, looks at today's society and finds many issues to raise. While I find him too conservative at times for me, I respect his concern and his appreciation of one of my favorite thinkers, Hans Urs von Balthasar.

Friends from the past

2010-05-24T09:46:00.003+02:00

My old classmates from grade school (1973) have found each other through Facebook. It has been fun to reconnect. Quite a group and perhaps since I grew up in Los Angeles, it is not surprising there are actors and producers and Disney and Universal execs in the group, even a winemaker (how cool is that), as well as folks like myself doing work we enjoy, but certainly wouldn't call a vocation.

And the kids! Everyone seems to be more fertile than barren me. It does make me sad in some ways, for all I have missed; but I also know that I appreciate the life I live and the experiences it provides.

Sadly two of our classmates have passed away, and one of them Steve Bolla was a good friend. I guess after 37 years, it is not surprising, but it doesn't make it any less of a reminder to appreciate the time we are given.

There is a reunion planned for August that I will be missing, but I am sure it will be a blast.

A wonderful phone call

2010-02-26T11:03:00.002+01:00

As anyone who has read this blog knows, I am big fan of www.yutorah.org – it has tens of thousands of shiurim/lectures online and downloadable for free. One site that the YU site has led me to is www.naaleh.com – another resource of Jewish learning, which you have to register at to download MP3s for free.

Well, last night at around 9:00 PM our phone rang and I thought it had to be someone from the States. I answered and heard someone introduce themselves and say they were from www.naaleh.com calling from Montreal – at first I didn’t really understand and then I thought that they are just looking for money and probably be put off that I am not Jewish.

Well, 30 minutes later after a really fun and engaging conversation, we concluded and agreed to stay in touch. I think we were both surprised by each other. He seemed inspired and grateful for my knowledge and respect for traditional Judaism and learning. And I loved his enthusiasm and openness to me. While we hope to keep in touch, he said he is quite busy since he has 11 children!

A lovely call.

Disarming ourselves

2009-12-20T18:52:00.003+01:00

I read this the other day and loved it. It comes from a favorite book of mine: Testimony of Hope by Cardinal Francis Xavier Nguyen Van Thuan. It is a quote from the Great Patriarch Athenagoras:

We need to succeed in disarming ourselves.
I have fought this war. For years and years.
It was terrible. But now I’ve disarmed.
I am no longer afraid of anything,
because “love drives out fear.”
I am disarmed of the will to overcome,
to justify myself at the expense of others.
I am no longer on the alert,
jealously grasping my riches.
I welcome and I share.
I am not attached to my opinions, to my plans.
If other better proposals come to me,
I accept them willingly.
Or rather, not better, but good.
You know, I have given up comparisons. . . .
That which is good, true, real, wherever it is,
it is the best for me.
Therefore, I am no longer afraid.
When you no longer possess anything,
you no longer have fear.
“Who can separate us from the love of Christ?”
But if we disarm ourselves,
if we divest ourselves,
if we open ourselves to the God-man
who makes all things new,
then it is he who cancels our evil past
and gives back to us a new time
where everything is possible.

The Centrality of Mitzvat Shofar even on Shabbat Rosh Hashanah

2009-09-21T18:40:00.002+02:00

Rav Michael Rosensweig's most recent shiur published on www.torahweb.org is Yom Teruah and Zikhron Teruah: The Centrality of Mitzvat Shofar even on Shabbat Rosh Hashanah

In it he discusses why even when the shofar is not blown (when Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbat) that it still holds a foundational place for the day and in fact helps define and set up the approach to the rest of the year.

In this shiur he writes:

Finally, the piercing sound of the shofar is a catalyst for introspection and renewed halachic commitment. The Rambam eloquently captures this theme in Hilchot Teshuvah (3:4) with his stirring depiction of the shofar’s message of “uru yesheinim mi-shinatchem” (awaken from your spiritual slumber) galvanizing man to combat and overcome insidious spiritual complacency. When Klal Yisrael’s zichronot are imparted by the shofar, they provide an ambitious framework for halachic renewal and maximalism

What always strikes me about Rav Rosensweig's shiur is how often he can bring back a topic to the notion of a maximalist halachic lifestyle. I have written about it before here. I love this sense that we are all challenged to live such a life -- a life of maximal care and affection for our neighbor, for God and the world around us.

Yet, I never hear in his words of encouragement any sense of ridicule or blame for those who may slip up and do not live up to the challenge. Instead, what I hear is a constant and regular drum beat of reminders and words of persuasion.

In fact, if you want to listen Rav Rosensweig present his ideas on this same topic you have two opportunities:

Rosh Hashana 5770 - Given at: Young Israel of Jamaica Estates on Monday September 14, 2009
Gizeirah Dirabah and its Impact on Shofar - given at: RIETS on Thursday September 17, 2009

If you listen to both, as I did, you may notice that Rav Rosensweig perhaps was able to tighten his message over the week. It is interesting to note that the first shiur is 1:15 while the second is 52 minutes (this of course also had to do with the time slot he was working in). What I did notice once I read the Torahweb shiur is that in the shiur at RIETS, Rav Rosensweig seemed to be able to more clearly and effectively emphasize the connection between the blast of the shofar/Rosh Hashanah and how it is a tone setter for the entire year. As he says, "I like to say that Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are the most unusual days of the year, particularly Yom Kippur. But also the most relevant days of the year." And as he closed that shiur he encourages his listeners to use these days to recommit to a wholistic halachic life.

Clearly, I know I need to be constantly awakened from my spiritual slumber and I am glad Rav Rosensweig is here to help.

Teshuva as a response to 9/11

2009-09-06T12:33:00.004+02:00

As both the anniversary of 9/11 and the beginning of Rosh Hoshanah are approaching, I thought I would highlight a talk by Rav Rosensweig that he gave on September 11, 2002. It is entitled, "The Teshuvas of Aseres Yemei Teshuva and Yom Kippur; Teshuva As a Response to 9/11"

In it, particularly the last 1o minutes, he makes a strong case for the need for teshuva -- "repentance - literally return" as a response to suffering, whether it is ours or the world's.

I find these words and this message to "return" to God, to return to Hashem, to repent for all we haven't done, to look within, as a powerful approach to changing the world within and without.

He says,

The Rambam is telling us that we have to act as if we are responsible because while we cannot always control what takes place in the world, we can always have input into the way in which we respond. And if we can refashion ourselves spiritually, reexamine our priorities, try to assess what is significant and meaningful about life, from our point of view the life of Torah and mitzvos. When we feel vulnerable and challenged to remember what it is that we live for, what are our objectives. If we can do that, then a) perhaps we will deserve better protection, b) perhaps we will uncover flaws that may contribute, but more important than all of that c) whether or not any of this specifically was responsible for our plight, we will have used tragedy as a catalyst for self-improvement. And while that does not necessarily lessen the pain, it is a positive and constructive response.

Yom Kippur is coming. It is time to reassess our priorities, to make sure they are in line. It is time to refashion ourselves. ... It is time of taking stock. It is time for self-improvement. It has nothing to do with only or it is not limited by only trying to figure out why it happened. More important to take the constructive step to make the tragedy a catalyst for spiritual growth.

Excerpts from John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, ' 28-34; 84-94

2009-08-29T18:56:00.002+02:00

Here are some excerpts from the first reading and a few of my reflections:

28. ... the essential elements of revelation in the Old and New Testament with regard to moral action. These are: the subordination of man and his activity to God, the One who "alone is good"; the relationship between the moral good of human acts and eternal life; Christian discipleship, which opens up before man the perspective of perfect love; and finally the gift of the Holy Spirit, source and means of the moral life of the "new creation" (cf. 2 Cor 5:17).

Our subordination is in return for God's gift, our gift of self for the gift of being, of love, of life . . .

Questions that need to be asked and answered:

What is man? What is the meaning and purpose of our life? What is good and what is sin? What origin and purpose do sufferings have? What is the way to attaining true happiness? What are death, judgment and retribution after death? Lastly, what is that final, unutterable mystery which embraces our lives and from which we take our origin and towards which we tend?[50] These and other questions, such as: what is freedom and what is its relationship to the truth contained in God's law? What is the role of conscience in man's moral development? How do we determine, in accordance with the truth about the good, the specific rights and duties of the human person?

Yes, these are questions I am constantly asking and why I am excited about exploring the answers from Benedict & Balthasar.

Summed up in the fundamental question which the young man in the Gospel put to Jesus: "Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?"

Eternal life -- here and now and after death...

Once the idea of a universal truth about the good, knowable by human reason, is lost, inevitably the notion of conscience also changes... Such an outlook is quite congenial to an individualist ethic, wherein each individual is faced with his own truth, different from the truth of others. Taken to its extreme consequences, this individualism leads to a denial of the very idea of human nature.

Yes, following one's conscience can easily become a path to narcissism.

The question of morality, to which Christ provides the answer, cannot prescind from the issue of freedom. Indeed, it considers that issue central, for there can be no morality without freedom: "It is only in freedom that man can turn to what is good".[56] But what sort of freedom?... "Genuine freedom is an outstanding manifestation of the divine image in man. For God willed to leave man 'in the power of his own counsel' (cf. Sir 15:14), so that he would seek his Creator of his own accord and would freely arrive at full and blessed perfection by cleaving to God".[57] ... "Conscience has rights because it has duties".[59]

Yes, we do need freedom to make choices and only with choice is there morality.

"Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect" (Rom 12:2).

I do not really know my Paul -- this is a lovely line.

In a particular way, it is in the Crucified Christ that the Church finds the answer to the question troubling so many people today: how can obedience to universal and unchanging moral norms respect the uniqueness and individuality of the person, and not represent a threat to his freedom and dignity? ... The Crucified Christ reveals the authentic meaning of freedom, he lives it fully, in the total gift of himself and calls his disciples to share in his freedom.

Yes, this is the challenge for today -- holding both together. A gift of self, what else can we, must we give.

... Charity should make you a servant, just as truth has made you free... you are at once both a servant and free: a servant, because you have become such; free, because you are loved by God your Creator; indeed, you have also been enabled to love your Creator...

Surrender and freedom -- those are the poles I strive to hold on to and embody.

Rather, faith is a lived knowledge of Christ, a living remembrance of his commandments, and a truth to be lived out. A word, in any event, is not truly received until it passes into action, until it is put into practice. Faith is a decision involving one's whole existence. It is an encounter, a dialogue, a communion of love and of life between the believer and Jesus Christ, the Way, and the Truth, and the Life (cf. Jn 14:6). It entails an act of trusting abandonment to Christ, which enables us to live as he lived (cf. Gal 2:20), in profound love of God and of our brothers and sisters.

Yes -- communion, encounter, trusting abandonment -- words to put into action.

In this witness to the absoluteness of the moral good Christians are not alone: they are supported by the moral sense present in peoples and by the great religious and sapiential traditions of East and West, from which the interior and mysterious workings of God's Spirit are not absent. The words of the Latin poet Juvenal apply to all: "Consider it the greatest of crimes to prefer survival to honour and, out of love of physical life, to lose the very reason for living".[147]

Definitely not alone and so essential to keep in mind the very reason for living - our gift of self to others and God.

Classes Begin: Yeshiva University & John Paul II Institute

2009-08-29T15:40:00.004+02:00

In some ways these two institutions of higher learning: Yeshiva University & John Paul II Institute couldn't be more different. An Orthodox Jewish university and an institute dedicated to the study and evangelization of the ideas and writings of Pope John Paul II. The institute describes it this way:

A longtime philosopher-friend of Karol Wojtyla once said that Wojtyla had always been occupied with understanding the human person in terms of love. The mission of the Pontifical John Paul II Institute, in a profound sense, begins here, in this abiding conviction of the Holy Father that love reveals the meaning of the person and, through the person, of all 'flesh'—the whole of creation.

However, they are two organizations that I am interested in and whose classes I often feel I would enjoy taking.

On Thursday, August 27 Rav Michael Rosensweig's Talmud shiur for this school year began. It will be covering the third chapter of Bava Basra, which primarily covers what is called, chazakah. This term covers the issue of disputed ownership regarding both articles or land. As I began listening to this first shiur this morning I was really excited because, as anyone who has read this blog knows, I greatly admire Rav Rosensweig. And beginning something new is always a great joy.

What is interesting is that I also received some information about a class at the John Paul II Institute in which I was interested. It is called "Truth & Freedom in Benedict and Balthasar" -- that is of course: Pope Benedict XVI and Hans Urs von Balthasar. I had seen the book list for the class and since I owned most of the works and they were works that I would love to dive into more deeply, I am very happy to receive the syllabus. It describes the course this way:

This course begins with an exploration of the root presuppositions and theological implications of contemporary "currents of thought which end by detaching human freedom from its essential and constitutive relationship to truth" (Veritatis Splendor, 4). Drawing on the writings of Joseph Ratzinger and Hans Urs von Balthasar, this course will argue that an adequate response to the "crisis in the history of freedom" requires (i.) a renewed understanding of the ontological roots of freedom in light of the transcendental properties of being, (ii.) an account of the unity of theology and anthropology within the Person of Jesus Christ; and (iii.) a reflection on the unity of truth and freedom within the Trinity.

So, I have a dilemma. Which class do I try to follow and keep up with? I can't honestly do both. The Rav Rosensweig shiur is at least 4.5 hours of MP3s (3 x 1.5 hours) of very involved, Hebrew-rich lectures every week covering vast parts of the Talmud. While the Benedict & Balthasar class covers a number of quite complex writings of both men, though sadly no MP3s.

As I was saying to my wife this afternoon, though I love to listen to Rav Rosensweig, I often am just letting the words flow over me, since I cannot understand very much of the Hebrew AND of course, no matter how much I admire the tradition, I am not Jewish and have no plans on converting.

On the other hand, there is the Benedict & Balthasar course. Over the years I have read 4 out of the 7 books already (though not necessarily understanding or integrating everything I read) and it is ALL IN ENGLISH, and it is the tradition I have been raised in. While I certainly have some conflicts with certain teachings of the Church (I do as well of course with Orthodox Judaism), I am feeling like it is a moment in my life (50 years old with much time on my hands), that taking the time to "surrender" to the depths of my tradition and to two thinkers whose work I greatly admire (I remember when I first read Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's work, who at my rather liberal graduate school and church where I worked was seen as the Enforcer, etc., how much I enjoyed and respected his style and message).

Therefore, as I write this post, it is clear to me that I will commit myself to the Benedict & Balthasar course and see where such a commitment leads.

I will keep you posted.

Importance of Time

2009-08-23T20:45:00.000+02:00

Another recent shiur from Rav Michael Rosensweig entitled, "The Importance of Time," looks at Mishna 4 and 5 in chapter two of the Pirke Avos:

4.He used to say: Make His will like your will, so that He will make your will like His will. Negate your will before His will, so that He should negate the will of others before your will.

5.Hillel said: Do not separate yourself from the community. Do not believe in yourself until the day of your death. Do not judge your another until you are in his place. Do not say something that is cannot be understood, assuming that in the end it will be understood. Do not say "When I have free time I will learn," for perhaps you will never have free time. (translation from Rav Lau on Pirkei Avos)

These lines, of course, begin with the one of the most fundamental and demanding religious challenges, "Make His will like your will," and then ends with a statement about the importance of using our time well, using our time to learn, to study, which of course, represents within the tradition the highest level of honoring and loving Hashem.

In the shiur Rav Rosensweig talks about the risk and wastefulness of procrastination, which I had to smile about, because my wife, Eve, is someone who truly cannot procrastinate and just doesn't understand putting something off. This drive to get things done sometimes drives me a bit crazy, but Rav Rosensweig's words have helped me appreciate how Eve is trulz honoring time by her actions.

What I also get from Rav Rosensweig within this shiur and in his general approach to talmid Torah that sees learning, "as constituting the vehicle for dialogue and encounter with devar haShem—an intrinsically significant spiritual process and religious experience," [1] is that he helps me appreciate the time I have to study and to see it as something profoundly valuable and meaningful.

We live a world, a time, that seems to only value activity and movement. In which, if one isn't busy with work or a hobby or a sport, then one is not using one's time well. This view of accomplishment would not judge my listening and studying of the Talmud very highly. In fact, at times I struggle with its "usefulness" as well. But when I listen to a shiur like this, I am reminded of the intrinsic value of Torah lishmah (studying Torah for its own sake) and challenge myself to truly embrace this reality.

[1] ELU VA-ELU DIVRE ELOKIM HAYYIM: HALAKHIC PLURALISM AND THEORIES OF CONTROVERSY

In memory of my Mom -- the importance of positive words

2009-04-13T12:55:00.002+02:00

Tomorrow, April 14, 2009 marks the one year anniversary of my mother's death. She was a wonderful woman who loved her children unquestionably and unconditionally. She always had a positive word to say to me in whatever I strived to do.

She also loved to share a positive thought or word to strangers. At times I was even embarrassed at how she loved to speak to nearly anyone and compliment people on their service at a restaurant or the beauty of their baby, whenever and wherever she could.

The importance of positive words cannot be overestimated and it is what I believe is at the heart of the Jewish tradition of avoiding "Lashon hora" -- the evil talk.

Of course all traditions recognize the problem of inappropriate speech, for example in the Rule of Benedict in Chapter 4, "What Are the Instruments of Good Works" Benedict includes these three points:

(52) To guard one’s tongue against bad and wicked speech.
(53) Not to love much speaking.
(54) Not to speak useless words and such as provoke laughter.

But it seems to me that within Judaism the principle of lashon hora is looked at in such detail that one can learn much from it. I have written about lashon hora once before in this post.

On www.yutorah.org I found a number of talks on lashon hora by using the advanced search tool. One talk in particular that I liked was by Rabbi Hanan Balik entitled, "The Gossip Phenomenon and How to Combat It".

He starts it by saying that it is one shiur that can truly change your life. And I believe that, it is amazing to me how we are surrounded by this type of talk and how easy it is to fall into. Truly, these two lines from the Hebrew Scriptures could not be more true and important:

“One who guards his mouth and tongue, guards his soul from tribulations”
(Mishlei (Proverbs) 21:23).

“Which man desires life, who loves days of seeing good? Guard your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking deceit...”
(Tehillim (Psalms) 34:13-14).

A friend reflects on the Easter Holy Days

2009-04-12T10:06:00.002+02:00

I good friend has been writing a beautiful series of reflections on the Easter Holy Days this week. Here is the link to the first on Maundy Thursday. Here is a link to the blog itself: http://gsk-afterall.blogspot.com/

His reflection on Holy Saturday ends with, "The the "right" way to vigil this day is to let the dreams en-tombed in out heads rise from those tombs -- and to work on Visioning how we will tomorrow (and the day after) own & live our status as...Risen."

Please check them out.

Torah Lishmah -- New Course by VBM

2009-01-27T21:42:00.002+01:00

I have written about "Torah Lishmah" (Torah study for its own sake) in other posts. It is a concept that I really love.

Starting today, the Virtual Beit Midrash is offering a class entitled, "Torah Lishmah - A New Horizon" by Rav Elyakim Krumbein -- http://vbm-torah.org/archive/lishmah/01lishmah.htm

I really look forward to it and cannot recommend it enough. In the course Rav Krumbein will be dealing with one of my favorite Orthodox works of commentary -- Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm’s work, Torah Lishmah: Torah for Torah’s Sake in the Works of Rabbi Hayyim of Volozhin and his Contemporaries.

In the opening shiur Rav Krumbein quotes Rav Shagar z”l, "One who is not prepared to be part of that tradition and thinks he can begin the Torah by himself, one who is not prepared to reach that intimacy with the world of Torah and with Judaism, one who wants to be an individualist and remain alienated, and study like a 'maskil' – he will never be a ben Torah."

In the footnote to this quote, Rav Krumbein writes, "These words were written by a man who is regarded as a most original thinker and lamdan, despite the tension that he faced between creativity and fealty to tradition, as mentioned in that book." This description makes me want to learn more about Rav Shagar.

What I find interesting is that in David Brooks' Op-Ed column in the New York Times today, entitled, "What Life Asks of Us" he wrote, "In this way of living [living within institutions], to borrow an old phrase, we are not defined by what we ask of life. We are defined by what life asks of us." He goes on to describe how the push toward individualism has degraded and devalued this approach.

For me the words from Rav Shagar and David Brooks resonate together and challenge me to listen.

"Postmodern" Chagigah 3b?

2008-12-31T20:31:00.009+01:00

Chagigah 3b

THE WORDS OF THE WISE ARE LIKE GOADS, AND LIKE NAILS WELL PLANTED [ARE THE SAYINGS] OF THE MASTERS OF ASSEMBLIES, GIVEN FROM ONE SHEPHERD [Ecclesiastes 12:11]. WHY ARE THE WORDS OF TORAH LIKENED TO A GOAD? TO TEACH YOU that JUST AS THIS GOAD DIRECTS THE COW ALONG ITS FURROWS IN ORDER TO BRING FORTH LIFE TO THE WORLD, SO TOO, THE WORDS OF TORAH DIRECT THEIR STUDENTS FROM THE PATHS OF DEATH TO THE PATHS OF LIFE. IF the words of Torah are likened to a goad, one might think that JUST AS THIS GOAD IS MOVABLE, SO TOO, THE WORDS OF TORAH ARE MOVABLE. To teach otherwise SCRIPTURE STATES: like NAILS. But IF the words of Torah are likened to nails, one might think that JUST AS THIS NAIL DIMINISHES AND DOES NOT INCREASE the object or wall into which it is driven, SO TOO, THE WORDS OF TORAH DIMINISH AND DO NOT INCREASE those who observe them. To teach otherwise SCRIPTURE STATES: WELL PLANTED. That is, JUST AS THIS PLANT IS FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLIES, SO TOO, THE WORDS OF TORAH cause one to be FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY.

R'Elazar ben Azaryah continues to expound upon the verse Ecclesiastes, which now speaks metaphorically: THE MASTERS OF ASSEMBLIES -- THESE ARE THE WISE SCHOLARS WHO SIT IN VARIOUS GROUPS AND OCCUPY themselves WITH the study of TORAH. There are THOSE scholars who DECLARE a thing ritually CONTAMINATED AND there are THOSE who PRONOUNCE it CLEAN; THOSE who PROHIBIT AND THOSE who PERMIT; THOSE who DISQUALIFY AND THOSE who DECLARE FIT. PERHAPS A MAN WILL SAY: HOW CAN I EVER LEARN TORAH and understand it precisely, when every issue is subject to debate and disagreement? To allay this concern, SCRIPTURE STATES that ALL the various Rabbinic opinions are GIVEN FROM ONE SHEPHERD. ONE GOD GAVE THEM; ONE LEADER PROCLAIMED THEM FROM THE MOUTH OF THE MASTER OF ALL MATTERS, BLESSED IS HE, AS IS WRITTEN, AND GOD SPOKE ALL THESE WORDS. Hence, YOU TOO MAKE YOUR EAR LIKE A MILL-HOPPER, AND ACQUIRE FOR YOURSELF A DISCERNING HEART TO HEAR intelligently THE WORDS OF THOSE WHO DECLARE a thing IMPURE AND THE WORDS OF THOSE WHO PRONOUNCE it PURE; THE WORDS OF THOSE WHO PROHIBIT AND THE WORDS OF THOSE WHO PERMIT; AND THE WORDS OF THOSE WHO DISQUALIFY AND THE WORDS OF THOSE WHO DECLARE FIT.

Just a few lines later is this wonderful question from R' Eliezer:

WHAT NOVEL TEACHING [HIDDUSH] WAS expounded IN THE STUDY HALL TODAY?

These fabulous words from Chagigah 3b are seemingly 1400 years ahead of their time as they seemingly present a postmodern view of multiple meanings. But I belive that the Talmud is able to walk this fine line far better than the postmodern philosophies that emerged in the 20th century. Most of these philosophies have left of with a seemingly meaningless world, while the Talmud intends and succeeds to leave us with an infinitely meaningful world.

Rav Michael Rosensweig in his essay, Personal Initiative and Creativity in 'Avodat Hashem, discusses this passage from Chagigah and the Maharal's discussion of this issue and he writes:

In essence then, what emerges from the Maharal once again, is the doctrine of multiple truths, significant especially outside the area of pesak, and related to individual intellect and the capacity of each individual to discern the complexity and subtlety which exists in every aspect of life.

Still, how is it possible for there to be multiple truths, but only one pesak? The Maharal argues that while there may be multiple truths, all truths are not equal. Life is complex and everything created does obtain of more than one combination of different components. So, for example, it is possible for an object to possess a sense of tum'ah, but its sense of taharah overwhelms the tum'ah.

Happy New Year -- May your 2009 be filled with peace, love and joy and many new discoveries and hiddushim.

The Benefit of the Doubt . . . Madoff

2008-12-24T09:10:00.002+01:00

Here is a comment that I added to the Hirhurim blog discussion regarding the NYT article on the Madoff scandal:

I am hoping that at some point we understand why he did it. I recall reading in the Chofetz Chaim about the importance of giving the benefit of the doubt.

It seems clear that Madoff created the Ponzi scheme, but I wonder why. Did he start out with a legitimate fund with which he wanted to support important causes, etc. and then get into trouble? And was then unable to admit his mistakes, which created the need for the scheme. If this were the case, it would be more pride than greed. Perhaps we will never know, but it might be helpful to ask the question.

I know there is a famous story about Rabbi Akiva, who went to great lengths to believe his employer, Rabbi Eliezer ben Hurkanos -- http://www.thejewisheye.com/gosh.html.

I find great lessons from this ability to see the best in others.

Love, Revelation, Christ . . . . Torah?

2008-12-16T12:14:00.003+01:00

As may be clear if one wanders around this blog, I have a variety of interests. In fact, my changing interests often drive me crazy, as I move from topic to topic, tradition to tradition. Just yesterday I found an article by professor Antonio Lopez from the John Paul II Institute. I have been interested in his classes and also over the summer purchased his book entitled, Spirit's Gift: The Metaphysical Insight of Claude Bruaire.

The article was entitled ETERNAL HAPPENING: GOD AS AN EVENT OF LOVE. I was very excited to read it, because it was focused on the work of Hans Urs von Balthasar, one of my favorite authors, while also mentioning Martin Heidegger (another favorite).

Here is the opening paragraph from Father Lopez's article:

In order to ponder anew the mystery of love, without which man’s “life remains senseless” and “incomprehensible,” I would like to appeal in this essay to Balthasar’s understanding of God as an “eternal happening.” This insight attempts to bring together what the Triune God reveals of himself in Jesus Christ: he reveals himself as love (1 Jn 4:16), and as a love that is both an eternal being (esse) and an eternal event (Ereignis, Geschehen). In Christ, man has come to learn that love is not a transient emotion, but rather the mystery that encompasses all of being: from the moment when there was nothing but God (Gn 1:1) to the present instant in which man lives out his existence (2 Cor 5:14–15). The essence of being is love. Everything and everyone finds its proper place within this eternal mystery. At the same time, the Incarnate Word has disclosed that the mystery of love that constitutes us (Jn 1:3; Col 1:15–20) is pure gift of himself. Divine love is an ever-new gift of himself to himself (Hingabe) and an undeserved gift of himself to us (Eph 2:4; Rom 8:32). God is an event of love.

While I was excited about this opening, I later felt that Fr. Lopez makes the same move that von Balthasar often does in the sense that after beautifully describing God as love and discussing many of the philosophical issues surrounding it (with far more expertise than I ever could), he then states that the only way we can know this about God is through Jesus Christ (God's speaking about God's self).

Here is a paragraph in which he does that:

To be able to say something about God’s eventful nature without claiming first to hollow out its mystery and then to explain it away, all by the sole means of the fragile tool of human logic, it is necessary to approach the divine mystery by way of the access the divine mystery itself grants: that is, by way of the only mediator between God and humankind, Jesus Christ (1 Tm 2:5–6). There can be no speech about God apart from what the person of Christ reveals of God. What theology manages to express about the godhead, then, will be adequate only if it is rooted in his self-manifestation and not in conceptual logic.

While I understand the distinction with Eastern traditons, such as Buddhism that does not have a belief in a revelatory Creator God and with atheistic systems like Marxism or even purely negative theologies, I am not sure how Father Lopez and my beloved von Balthasar can make this leap to say that Christ is the only revelatory communication from God. What about Judaism and Islam (which I know very little about)?

Isn't the Torah (and all that that word includes: Written Torah - Torah she-bi-khtav and Oral Torah - Torah she-be-`al peh) the revelation of God's love for us? I think the leap to Jesus is fine for one who is already a believer, but as one who struggles with his faith, and one who finds much wisdom within Judaism and philosophy itself, this leap to Jesus seems too fast and too easy. Thereby, undermining the arguments.

I would love to hear others' thoughts.

Halakhah believes that there is only one world

2008-12-14T21:09:00.003+01:00

From Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik's Lonely Man of Faith

The Halakhah believes that there is only one world—not divisible into secular and hallowed sectors—which can either plunge into ugliness and hatefulness, or be roused to meaningful, redeeming activity, gathering up all latent powers into a state of holiness. Accordingly, the task of the covenantal man is to be engaged not in dialectical surging forward and retreating, but in uniting the two communities into one community where man is both the creative, free agent, and the obedient servant of God.

Talmud as love letter

2008-12-14T21:02:00.003+01:00

Some more early thoughts about the Talmud:

A story about Rav Soloveitchik says that he said he learned the most important thing in life from his mother – “to feel the presence of the Almighty and the gentle pressure of God’s resting upon my frail shoulders.”

Thoughts of the day during my reading of the Talmud: 1) I am amazed at the enormous effort that is spent to try to understand and live out the rules set down by God. This is about what happens when someone enters a house that is afflicted with impurity, which can make one tamei – impure.

But if HE WAS WEARING HIS GARMENTS AND HIS SHOES WERE ON HIS FEET AND HIS RINGS WERE ON HIS FINGER – then HE BECOMES TAMEI [impure] IMMEDIATELY. – BUT THEY [his garments, shoes and rings] REMAIN TAHOR [pure] UNTIL HE LINGERS in the house THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT TAKES TO EAT A HALF-LOAF – of WHEAT BREAD RATHER THAN BARLEY BREAD – eaten while he is RECLINING AND EATING, the bread together WITH a RELISH.

Rashi’s commentary then says, “The ‘half-loaf’ is the amount of bread a person normally eats at one meal, for the reference is to a standard two-meal loaf . . . Wheat bread is eaten more quickly
than barley bread, and that which is eaten in a reclining position is eaten quickly, since the person concentrates fully on the food and does not divert his attention to other things. Similarly, eating the bread together with a relish hastens its consumption.”

When I view these efforts, often torturous efforts, to understand and “follow” the rules “correctly,” I sometimes think how could a loving God want people to struggle so much to understand and in so many cases “fear” God and God’s commandments?

Yet, what struck me today, was that I could also see these struggles as the attempt of a lover to decipher and understand and cherish a love letter. If one sees the Torah (Written and Oral) as this love letter from God, which is not simple and not perfectly clear because of the human agents necessary to create it [and I now would add -- because of the importance that Hashem placed on creativity] – then these struggles to interpret, to understand, to live out – are expressions of profound love and faithfulness.

Then when we study in this way and strive to hang onto every word, every nuance, every clue – these are the efforts of the lover striving to please and love his/her beloved.

It seems to me additional profundity comes when one can also see all of creation and each moment as another Torah, another opportunity to understand and respond to the actions and messages of our beloved.

Early notes about my first volume of the Talmud

2008-12-14T20:15:00.002+01:00

A number of years ago I was keeping a fairly regular journal and tonight when I was looking for some quotes about the Talmud, found this that made me smile. So I thought I would share it:

I just got my first volume of the Talmud in the mail yesterday -- and this tractate is about kosher and non-kosher animals at a truly "talmudic" level -- the first page of the tractate I have is about whether an animal is okay to eat if it has been born during the kosher slaughtering process. Why do I care, not being Jewish or keeping kosher? What fasicinates me is sitting with Rebbes as they discuss and struggle to understand God's intentions. Their striving and struggling is so determined, so serious, so multi-sided that it is a marvel to dwell within this atmosphere of debate and dialogue.

For them God is truly present and interested in every element and moment of life.

Rav Michael Rosensweig on Abraham

2008-12-12T18:25:00.004+01:00

Rav Michael Rosensweig has been presenting a series of shiurim on Abraham:

In these talks he moves from Avraham's emunah (faith) to yireh (fear) and ahavah (love) and how each is individual and yet intertwined, particularly fear and love. In each presentation, he makes clear the uniqueness and importance of Abraham to the Jewish people and all people.

Hopefully, Rav Rosensweig will continue this exploration.

"Pray continually" with the help of my iPod and Rav Rosensweig

2008-11-26T12:44:00.004+01:00

It has been a long time since I have posted anything, which hopefully I will comment on later. I just had the idea this morning about the concept of "praying continually," which comes from Paul's 1 Thessalonians 5:17, but resonates with most religious traditions I believe.

For example, I believe the Zen tradition encourages a being present in the moment, whether one is walking or driving or doing the dishes, which has a sense of "praying continually."

But I want to talk about how listening to Rav Michael Rosensweig can help me accomplish this -- at least striving to be present to devar Hashem at many moments (even if not "continually"). I often begin listening to the Gittin class first thing in the morning and then on the way to work and back home again, and any time I go for a walk or do various chores around the house. While I should certainly give the shiurim more focused and concentrated time, I find having Rav Rosensweig's analysis and creativity with me so much is quite rewarding.

I have tried to find other sources of this type of constant inspiration or exploration, but have found works like the Catholic Divine Office, which contains prayer, song and reading, as something that just doesn't connect with me. I have also listened to many other talks from the Buddhist tradition, but for me they lack the passion and creativity of the Rav Rosensweig's shiurim. I have even tried philosophy lectures on iTunes U or poetry from Pennsound, but they don't give me that constant, non-stop drive.

While there are obviously, many, many other shiurim on http://www.yutorah.org/, I must declare that Rav Rosensweig is my Rebbe. And like te tradition states, I can learn much from simply being around the rebbe (of course for me, "being around" is been 5,000 miles away and listening on my iPod). Simply listening to the energy and the non-stop exploration, creativity and the commitment to a maximalist spirituality, I learn much and am inspired much.

Rav Rosensweig is back and learning Gittin

2008-08-29T17:32:00.004+02:00

Well the summer must be over, because YU is back in session. While I have had a nice summer, I realize that I have been looking forward to Rav Michael Rosensweig beginning his shiur. Even though there are still hours and hours and hours of his shiurim online, there is something about following along "live."

As Rav Rosensweig began to discuss Gittin, he asked a fundamental question -- why is Geirushin (divorce) even permitted? As we all know Judaism does not shy away from defining strict regulations for behavior, as the 613 mitzvas make clear. And in fact, Rav Rosensweig often talks about how one should strive for a maximalist approach to halachah and in the conduct of our lives.

So, why divorce? As you all probably know the Catholic Church does not permit divorce, but instead may "annul" a marriage (basically treat it like it never happened) in some situations. I should know, having been married in the Church over 30 years ago, but divorced a few years later. Therefore, officially not permitted to receive the sacraments. I also wonder if I tried to really get in full graces with the Church through an annullment now, if it would be possible, since I am no longer in touch in anyway with my former wife. To me this is a system that simply doesn't work, which is why Rav Rosensweig's question intrigues me.

So, if we wanted to really be maximalist . . . why not forbid divorce?

While there are a number of answers that Rav Rosensweig discusses, in his own approach he describes how he sees the institution of geirushin as something that in reality helps retain the sanctity and sacredness of marriage, by allowing an out for people, if needed (certainly not encouraged). This "safety value" or "exit clause" helps preserve the choice, the union and the kedusha of the marriage, it does not destroy it.

This line of reasoning, reminded me of some of the Kiddushin shiurim I have listened to from Rav Rosensweig, in which he describes how erusin and nesuin (the two steps of a Jewish marriage that in former times were often separated by about a year of time, but now take place on the wedding day) where introduced by Moses to bring more sanctity to the institution of marriage as compared to those societies around the Jews.

What is clear to me is the importance of marriage for Rav Rosensweig and the tradition as a whole and what a wonderful insight to our human reality, that divorce used responsibily can truly enhance the bonds and faithfulness of marriage and not simply tear it apart.

I am glad he is back . . .

The Humility Of The Journey

2008-08-06T20:34:00.002+02:00

I just downloaded this lovely article "The Humility Of The Journey" about one Orthodox rabbi's decision to a Rabbinical Association fellowship that included Reform and Conservative rabbis. In this short piece he writes:

The Torah commands us not to make an idol. An idol, explains the Mei haShiloach, is something which is carved in stone or cast in iron. It has very exact dimensions and clear boundaries; it is solid and unchanging. Don’t make your understanding of Torah into an idol, warns the Mei haShiloach. Don’t reduce Torah to a clear, static and unequivocal package that you can carry around on your shoulder. Never think that your present understanding of Torah is the full and final authorized version.

And why not? Because, according to Rav Mordechai Yosef of Izbich, the author of the Mei haShiloach, God gave us only a partial glimpse of his truth when he revealed the Torah at Sinai, in order that we spend our lives in an eternal search for additional pieces of the puzzle. God wants us to be on a quest, to be involved in a process. We must never rest on our laurels, must never let the Torah become static. The Torah that we know, Torat Haim, the Torah of life, is to always be alive, to always be dynamic, growing and developing. When we think we know it all and there is nothing more to learn, we have reduced our Torah to an idol, a mere graven image. Paradoxically, when we think we have it all, that is when we have lost it all.

I find these words capture very beautifully one the most attractive things I experience in the Talmud.

Infinite and wonderful life

2008-07-15T18:54:00.004+02:00

In his editorial entitled, "The Luxurious Growth" from July 15, 2008, New York Times columnist, David Brooks writes:

[S]cience finds itself enmeshed with social science and the humanities in what researchers call the Gloomy Prospect, the ineffable mystery of why people do what they do.

The prospect may be gloomy for those who seek to understand human behavior, but the flip side is the reminder that each of us is a Luxurious Growth. Our lives are not determined by uniform processes. Instead, human behavior is complex, nonlinear and unpredictable. The Brave New World is far away. Novels and history can still produce insights into human behavior that science can’t match.

...

This age of tremendous scientific achievement has underlined an ancient philosophic truth — that there are severe limits to what we know and can know; that the best political actions are incremental, respectful toward accumulated practice and more attuned to particular circumstances than universal laws.

In reading these lines this morning, I could not help but think of the seemingly infinite openness that is the basis of Talmud study as I have slowly learned--an openness that does not allow an "anything goes" type of interpretation or implementation, but one that encourages and nurtures creativity and personal initiative.

Within our finite limits and the infinite possibilities that our imaginations and creativity can produce, we are challenged with the task to strive to build and develop an in-depth, heartfelt relationship with Hashem, with Hakadosh Barukh Hu, with God. We are challenged to find the truth of our lives. It is also my profound belief that that play of poetry, at its best, can also help forge and develop this relationship and help develop this truth.

The philosopher David Michael Levin, who I quote it my essay on the poet Charles Olson, compares this more open sense of truth (in contrast to truth as correctness) that only can emerge is the space of this type of openness:

In poetizing discourse, both sound and sense require a theory of truth which understands and appreciates their ‘ecstatic’ play within an open field. In the phonological dimension, there must be a field for the play of sounds: echoes, resonances, overtones and undertones, onomatopeia, polyphony, emotionally evocative sounds. Similarly, in its semantic dimension, the dimension of signifiers, there must be a field for the play of meanings: ambiguities, allusions, metaphors, shades of meaning, adumbrations of what is to come. Truth as correctness, truth represented in the discourse of statements, assertions, propositions, cannot do justice to the interactive processes essential to poetizing discourse. Truth as aletheia can, because it is hermeneutical: it lets sound and sense play in the interplay of presence and absence, identity and difference. To the poetizing process, the process of bringing experience as it takes shape into words that further shape it, aletheia gives a multi-dimensional field in which to unfold. (437)

Aletheia is the Greek word for truth that Heidegger defined as "unconcealing" and which in some way to my mind expresses the work of Talmud Torah and the creativity that underlies it.

More on multivalence . . . the heart of lomdus

2008-07-08T18:38:00.003+02:00

In a recent comment to a post, a good friend wrote:

"Multi-valent" is a good, strong word, though I prefer "particulate", in the sense Blake meant when he referred to 'reality' as made up of "Minute Particulars" . . . Particulars can be collected -- and we don't pick flowers-in-general, we pick these daisies in front of us here and now.

I believe his description of particulars is an important one for each of us to remember in our day-to-day lives as we interact with all the individuals (persons and things) in our lives and strive not to simply generalize or categorize our encounters.

However, for me "multi-valent" has a different meaning. It points to the nearly infinite number of meanings and chiddushim that Rav Rosensweig can seemingly discover within a sugya. It refers to what Shalom Carmy calls "polyphonic diversity" in his essay entitled, "Polyphonic Diversity and Military Music," from Lomdus: The Conceptual Approach to Jewish Learning, edited by Yosef Blau.

Rabbi Carmy opens his essay with these sentences from the Arukh ha-Shulhan, Hoshen Mishpat:

Indeed it is the glory of our holy, pure Torah, for the entire Torah is called a song (shirah) and the glory song is when the voices vary; that is the primary pleasantness. Whoever sets sail in the sea of Talmud will discover varied melodic pleasure in all the varied voices.

A student who is comfortable with the polyphonic world of the Talmud is also comfortable with complexity and ambiguity, and does not seek simple answers, because in the end they do not exist. Rabbi Calmy writes:

Typical of the polyphonic consciousness is the Rav's assertion that when human beings are faced with many crucial dilemmas and orientations of value, Halakhah "tries to help man in such critical moments," but does not provide a formulaic "synthesis, since the latter does not exist."

It is this type of student who appreciates what Rabbi Calmy calls, "the infinite challenge that defines the human endeavor to study Torah."

To help me better understand what lomdus is and how it is lived out, I found this essay on the internet entitled, Humility and Halakah: Placing Derekh Ha-Limud in Perspective, by Rabbi Doniel Schreiber.

At first he describes various types of iyun or lomdus (in-depth gemara study) this way:

One end of the spectrum, reflective of classic iyun found in Ge'onic times, would place the elucidation of texts as its main goal. All questions and analyses, in this approach, aim to arrive at a better understanding of the texts.
On the other end of the spectrum, reflective of more contemporary lomdus, is the attempt to understand concepts by classifying, conceptualizing and defining halakhic matter.
In the middle of the spectrum, one finds a more balanced system embracing both the importance of text and the centrality of concept. The text generates analysis of concepts, while concepts shed light upon new ways of reading text.

He then defines lomdus practiced by Rav Rosensweigh in the following manner;

More recently, mori ve-rabi HaRav Michael Rosensweig shlita, Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshiva University, has catapulted iyun into a new sphere of analysis. It demands, on the one extreme, a microscopic approach. This entails an exhaustive, comprehensive, and often tedious sifting of the most subtle halakhic minutiae and the most seemingly trivial detail. On the other extreme, it requires one to ascend to a macroscopic perspective, in which one, taking into consideration a wealth of sugyot revolving around a broad issue, peers downward upon the sweeping, halakhic landscape. This method, in essence, expands Brisker analysis to the farthest reaches of both ends of the sugya.

These two polar extremes, rigorous scrutiny and panoramic vision, when concomitantly implemented, enable one to integrate and interpret all forms of nuances and detail into the landscape of the sugya in the broadest sense of the term - the meta-sugya.* For example, elements of halakha associated with the process of beit din (courts) may shed light on how to understand the broader concept of din (Jewish civil law); details in the topic of eidim zomemim (false witnesses) could reflect on the larger picture of eidim and eidut (witnesses and testimony); minutiae in the discussion of gittin (bills of divorce), might clarify the wider topic of shtarot (legal documents). The incessant and rigorous investigation of a detail's relationship to the meta-sugya is the hallmark of this system. To some degree, this may represent the pinnacle of lomdus and the Brisker derekh.
*I use the term meta-sugya to refer to mori ve-rabi HaRav Rosensweig's emphasis on analyzing classic sugyot and then treating each of them as a detail within a broader enveloping sugya, which in turn may become a detail in an even broader sugya, and so on.

I am proud to say that I have listened to many of Rav Rosensweig's shiurim in which he has done very similar to the ones described above . . . they truly are quite a ride.

As Rabbi Schreiber continues in the his essay, he also speaks of some of the benefits and reasons for taking such an approach:

When one is involved in conceptual analysis of sugyot, reaching great depths of understanding, one achieves a genuinely rich sense of satisfaction. While this is partially due to the fact that one is involved in the important and basic mitzva to learn Torah, it is largely because one is engaged in something that is the most meaningful and penetrating experience as humanly possible. It is the endeavor, in our never-ending pursuit to draw close to God, to understand Divine intent.

The only real way finite man has to reach God is to be involved in what God has revealed to us. This, to be sure, includes performance of mitzvot, but especially pertains to talmud Torah, because talmud Torah is THE embodiment of the will of God. While thrashing out questions of kinyanei geneiva (theft law) is not as obvious a method of bringing one closer to God as learning the laws of avodat Hashem is, it accomplishes it as effectively.

Although one may be serious about talmud Torah, if one does not relate to this experience, if one is not animated by it, one cannot be passionate about learning Torah. Anyone who is really passionate about his learning, to the extent that he is actually consumed by, and excessive in, his talmud Torah - not just that he derives a certain pleasure from it - has certainly, whether consciously or not, encountered the Shekhina.

As well as these:

Success [in lomdus], inasmuch as there are always new facts, new definitions and new situations, lies in the ability to perceive new concepts in new facts, to penetrate to their meaning as much as possible, and apply them to new situations. This is the pursuit of Divine intent and its inner logic.

and these:

It is important to keep in mind throughout that lomdus is not a formal method which merely requires a series of steps, nor is it an artificial process consisting of stale categories of thought. Rather, lomdus is a response to internal stimuli; one must always endeavor to be creative, open to nuances, formulations, and shifting winds - flexibility is critical. Thus, while these tools are useful, one must not let them dull sensitivity and constrict creativity.

Lomdus, when successfully implemented, allows one to respond to sugyot with intuitive precision and depth of understanding.

and finally these:

A skillful lamdan, thus, transforms the passive absorption of information into an encounter, an engagement with devar Hashem.

To learn more about this approach I came upon this recorded shiurim by Rav Rosensweig, which I intend to listen to shortly: Derekh HaLimud 1 (11/21/05) and Derekh HaLimud 2 (11/28/05).

In a few words, I guess I am drawn to the profound ability and desire to find infinite depths in the finite world around us. While my good friend Gary's words opened this post, about the importance of the particulars around us, which certainly holds much truth, I cannot help but think that a lamdan, might see the same flowers that Gary speaks about and immediately ask him or herself, halakhic questions regarding its permissability to be eaten or planted or uprooted on Shabbat, etc.

To close this too long post, I want to share some quotes from Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik's Halakhic Man:

When a fruit is growing, halakhic man measures the fruit with the standards of growth and ripening that he possesses: budding stage, early stage of ripening, formation of fruits or leaves, and reaching one-third of complete ripeness. He gazes at colors and determines their quality: distinguishes between green and yellow, blue and white, etc., etc., “between blood and blood, between affection and ffection” (Deut 17:8) p21

There is no real phenomenon to which halakhic man does not possess a fixed relationship from the outset and a clear, definitive, a priori orientation. . . . The Halakhah encompasses laws of business, torts, neighbors, plaintiff and defendant, creditor and debtor, partners, agents, workers, artisans, bailees, etc. p22

When his soul yearns for God, he immerses himself in reality, plunges, with his entire being, into the very midst of concrete existence, and petitions God to descend upon the mountain and to dwell within our reality, with all its laws and principles. Homo religiosus ascends to God; God, however, descends to halakhic man. The latter desires not to transform finitude into infinity but rather infinity into finitude. p45
The study of the Torah is not a means to another end, but is the end point of all desires. It is the most fundamental principle of all. p87

Charles Olson, poetry and multivalence

2008-07-07T13:17:00.004+02:00

A number of years ago I wrote an essay for a modern poetry class. The topic was Charles Olson and what I called a "Polis of Attention and Dialogue."

I have been silent on this blog for almost a month now for many reasons, but thinking about what I wanted to say, I returned to this essay, which tried to described the multivalent (many meanings) nature of Olson's poetry and in turn the multivalent nature of our world. And I believe that it is my interest in the viewpoint that drew me to the Talmud's multivalence, and why I have been attracted to it over time.

I thought I would share a number of paragraphs from the essay, the whole piece can be found here.

Charles Olson’s Maximus: A Polis of Attention and Dialogue

Don Byrd in his Charles Olson’s Maximus says this about Olson’s interest in more traditional academic work, “His problem was simple: how does the writer manage to finish a project when every day he discovers information which changes the entire picture?”. This is how I feel about my own work with Charles Olson, every page of Maximus seems to open new angles on Olson, on the world, on reality and on myself.

What draws me to Olson’s work is his ability to hold in tension two apparently opposing messages. The first is that “life is strangled by systems” (Christensen 212) and the second is the importance of “making a mappemunde” that includes his “being” (Olson M II 87). While Olson clearly desires to join with Nietzsche and others in toppling the “whole line of life that makes Delphi that center,” (Butterick 7) he does not simply create a mass of ruins. Rather, he takes those ruins and creates a mythology and cosmology out of them. However, these creations are not a Ptolemaic system of perfect circles. Instead, it is a wild, open, becoming, creative, imaginative, unfinished mythology that asks readers for their attention and participation.

A example in nature of this process of both destruction and creation is a terminal moraine–the geological deposits left at the end of a glacier’s journey. It contains everything that the glacier consumed in its path. This image works on many levels with Maximus. First, on a literal level, the section of Gloucester known as Dogtown is actually a “terminal moraine” as Olson says in “Maximus from Downtown–I.” Second, Maximus, itself, can be seen as a terminal moraine created by the movement of Charles Olson–a glacier of a man, whose interests included:

Hopi language, Mayan statuary, non-Euclidean geometry, Melville’s fiction, the austere thought structures in Whitehead’s philosophy, the fragmentaary remains of the Sumerian and Hittite civilizations, Norse, Greek, and Egyptian mythology, numerology and the Tarot, the history of human migration, naval and economic history, the etymology of common words, pre-Socratic philosophy, the historical origins of the New England colonies, the development of the fishing industry off the coast of Massachusetts, accounts of the conquest of Mexico, the collapse of the Aztec and Mayan civilizations. (Christensen 5-6)

Finally, the image of the terminal moraine also resonates with the view of the mythologist, Joseph Campbell, who used this image as a description of the state of myth in our time. Campbell imagined that individuals in the twentieth century were standing on a terminal moraine containing the fragments of thousands of years of myth. And from this great treasure chest of myth he encouraged individuals to create their own personal mythology by picking and choosing from what lies about them. It is with a similar sentiment that Olson writes Maximus.

. . .

Heidegger’s work is immense and extremely complex, but if one turns to his essay on “The Origin of the Work of Art,” one can find some interesting descriptions of truth and the role of the artist in the revelation of that truth. The essential aspect of truth for Heidegger is “unhiddenness,” which Heidegger uncovers within the traditional Greek term for truth, aletheia. It is this sense of truth that Heidegger refers to when he writes,

The art work opens up in its own way the Being of beings. This opening up, i.e., this deconcealing, i.e., the truth of beings, happens in the work. In the art work, the truth of what is has set itself to work. Art is truth setting itself to work. (390)

For Heidegger, art creates an opening out of which truth is unconcealed. Thus, for Heidegger, much like Olson, truth emerges in the openness of a field created by art, by poetry. In a passage that seemingly could have come from Olson, we hear Heidegger say,

What poetry, as illuminating projection, unfolds of unconcealedness and projects ahead into the design of the figure, is the Open which poetry lets happen, and indeed in such a way that only now, in the midst of beings, the Open brings beings to shine and ring out. (72)

Reality, being, truth only emerge in the Open, not within the confines of a clearly delineated system of classification and identification, which stagnates life. The nature of the Open allows for the freedom of creation necessary to bring art to life–an art not of measure and control, but one of freedom and creativity:

The more poetic a poet is–the freer (that is, the more open and ready for the unforeseen) his saying–the greater is the purity with which he submits what he says to an ever more painstaking listening, and the further what he says is from the mere propositional statement that is dealt with solely in regard to its correctness or incorrectness. (216)

In this passage from “‘. . . Poetically Man Dwells . . .’” Heidegger could have been talking about Maximus, since it certainly requires a “painstaking listening” and cannot be judged on a basis of “correctness or incorrectness.” It also clearly relates to the nature of reality that Olson is striving to give voice to and create a space for–a reality that demands “painstaking listening” and “eyes,” and cannot simply be measured, organized or classified.

. . .

Olson does not simply tell his readers "to find out for yourself." Instead, he forces them to make those discoveries on their own. He does not provide simple answers or solutions. How could he, if he truly believed in the centrality of process and the fluidity of absolutes? By using unorthodox sentence structures, incomplete statements, obscure references, original layout techniques, Olson forces readers to engage the text in an attentive, conversational, dialogical manner in which new meaning is created in the opening of the poem. One cannot assume that the next word will follow from the previous. Each word has to be attended to and given the space to play. Readers must work; they must use their eyes, ears, breath and bodies to engage the text. If they do not pay careful attention to the text and its nuances and participate in a open, transforming dialogue with it, then they will miss its meaning completely, and will fail to create the “polis of the self” (Christensen ix) that it challenges them to create. Eniko Bollobas describes the participatory nature of reading Olson in the following way:

The rich texture of Olson’s poem demands a participatory (creative) reading from the reader rather than “literate” passive listening. Also, it demands from this reader a certain openness and a willingness to resist and ignore prior expectations, preconceptions, prejudices, and routines of apprehension. The multivalent text, the text characterized by free syntactic and semantic valencies, seems a more faithful transcript of the creative moment, and at the same time promises a more active, activating reading experience. (62)

Olson, in fact, gives readers a hint on how to engage his text by how he uses texts within Maximus. Olson makes the texts he reads (e.g. an Algonquin legend in M II, 21) his own by incorporating them into his poem. He may change a word or two, but that is all. However, the new context Olson creates for the story gives it new meanings of which the Algonquins probably never dreamed. Through juxtaposition with other stories and repetition (Olson repeats this legend in M II 142) the meaning of the story is unleashed from its indigenous roots and allowed to float within the readers’ lives where it can possibly plant new roots. In this way Olson demonstrates that reading is not a passive process, but is an active and integrative process in which readers are challenged to unleash Maximus and make it their own in order to give “daily life itself a dignity and a sufficiency” (Christensen ix).

Even the incompleteness of Maximus, which was only gathered together in its current form after Olson's death, provides yet another entrance, another challenge for the reader. In some ways Maximus begs for the reader to complete it. Or perhaps more correctly expressed, to continue it. By engaging the text and attempting to continue it, to make it their own, readers become part of an ongoing conversation, a never-ending process of creating a “mappemunde” out of the terminal moraine on which they dwell.

my constant desire

2008-06-15T19:00:00.001+02:00

my constant desire

my constant desire
to know,
to understand,
to experience,
to praise,
to love,
to breathe in
the God that holds
and creates each moment
through self-surrendering love

A great site with Rav Rosensweig shiurim

2008-06-11T19:25:00.002+02:00

Recently, I received a very warm email about a site I did not know existed http://www.yeshivalive.com/mr. It is maintained by Akiva Sacknovitz, who told me about it, and contains six years of Rav Rosensweig's shiurim that he has given at locations such as Adath Yeshurun, Kew Gardens, NY and currently at YI of Jamaica Estates, Jamaica Estates, NY.

As Akiva stated these shiurim are " geared to the working individuals. Since the shiur is only once a week, he does not cover as much as he does in his daily shiur, though all his insights and approaches to the sugyot are still there. He does not assume that those in attendance have seen the sources inside and he does not bring the plethora of proofs that he normally does in his daily class."

The masechtas Rav Rosensweig covers are Kesuvos (2002-2003), Sanhedrin (2003-2004), Shabbos (2004-2005), Kidushin (2005-2006), Bava Kama (2006-2007) and Chulin (2007-2008).

I have downloaded all six years to my iPod and have begun with Kesuvos.

Looking for more than a "measure of sanctity"

2008-05-25T19:49:00.003+02:00

From Rabbi Rosensweig's essay, "The Spiritual Legacy of Noah and Avraham":

These two perspectives [Noah's and Abraham's] are reflected in the contrast between the full complement of halakhic obligation and the Noahide code. The 613 commandments relate to and regulate every dimension of human life, expanding the concept and scope of the sacred and suffusing the mundane with sancitiy. The more limited seven-obligation Noahide code does effectively insure significant social stability, a standard of monotheism, as well as a measure of sanctity in other realms of life, but it does not approximate the pervasive and ambitious program of the halakhah.

In reading these words, I had to ask myself what then does the Jewish tradition claim a ben Noach should do if they want more "measure of sanctity"? Where and how can one find it and strive with Abraham for something more, something like Rabbi Soloveitchik describes in this passage from Out of the Whirlwind (p. 171), which I find as one of the most moving and important passages in all of Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings.

The way of every Jew to God must not differ from the trail along which Abraham moved toward his destiny, which had to be blazed through the wilderness of a brute and nonsensical existence. The experience is attained at the cost of doubts and a restless life, searching and examining, striving and pursuing—and not finding; of frustrating efforts and almost hopeless waiting; of grappling with oneself and everybody else; of exploring a starlit and moonlit sky and watching the majesty of sunsets and sunrises, the beauty of birth and also the ugliness of death and destruction; of trying to penetrate behind the mechanical surface of the cosmic occurrence and failing to discover any intelligible order in this drama; of winning and losing and reaching out again; of being able to put on a repeat performance of something which I had and lost; of asking questions and not finding answers; of ascending the high mount like Moses and falling back into the abyss, shattering everything one has received, and yet pulling oneself out of the depths of misery and trying to climb up the mountain again with two new stone tablets.

Jonathan Williams: a discovery and a loss

2008-05-22T16:13:00.006+02:00

Yesterday as I was reading a blog named Nomadics by the poet Pierre Joris, I happened to come upon a write-up in memorial to the passing of the poet and publisher, Jonathan Williams. In the post, Joris writes:

"The pleasure dome of American poetry," he once called his friend, the poet Robert Kelly – a description that fits Jonathan to a t. He was a student of Charles Olson at Black Mountain, but dedicated his first book to Louis Zukofsky, though he will probably be seen more the spiritual son of William Carlos Williams – no poet of his or any generation since then has had as fine an ear for American speech as JW, nor been able to score that speech on the page with greater accuracy of tone and phrasing. And between writing what must come to about 2000 poems, he managed to found & keep alive for more then half a century one of the greatest poetry presses in this country, Jargon Books, which published over a hundred handsomely printed books.

Being a fan of Olson and William Carlos Williams and poetry that tries to capture the joy and beauty of our lives, as well as a fan of small presses, I was intrigued and went to the Jargon Books site, where I found a wonderful essay called "A Snowflake Orchard & What I Found There," by Jeffery Beam.

The essay did a wonderful job of describing Williams and his small but influential press. Some excerpts:

Whether celebrating backwood visionaries or oddly precious examples of contemporary art, Jargon endures as a mother-lode of the essential. Enduring art not only affirms what is best within us, but also illuminates the dizzying variety of forms, destroying all illusions that what is Other, seemingly alien, is outside us. Jargon aims to show that what is there, is there, and that no amount of fancy word play, paint manipulation, or back-slapping can prove otherwise. The result constantly reminds me that for every artist hailed and recognized for her or his work, another hundred languish unlauded by the force of the current. . . .

At Skywinding [where Williams lived in North Carolina], Art (read Freshness) counts for something. What transpires inside this world reflects the natural world outside. No politics, no backslapping and bribery to muddle the words. No greed or prostitution or pollution to sour the voice. Only the human ache to make something of worth which stands on its own, and which instructs and deepens the quality of Being. Cleansing and lifting up. Elite/Elate.

Reading this led me to Jeffery Beams webpage, where I read a number of his poems, liking in particular, "I Have Never Wanted."

I have also listened to the two readings of Jonathan Williams that are archived on Pennsound, and read this lovely interview of him by Jeffery Beam.

What a lovely journey and what wonderful discoveries. I look forward to ordering Jonathan Williams', Jubilant Thicket: New and Selected Poems, and to continue to read more of Jeffery Beam as well. And in keeping track of Jargon Books as it begins the difficult transition with the passing of its founder and champion.

As the title of this post implies, I am very happy to have discovered the work of Jonathan Williams, but feel that it is a great loss that I did not discover him earlier.

"Universal, philosophical, and vague" . . . "poetry and life are not like that"

2008-05-20T20:26:00.003+02:00

In a much earlier post, I wrote:

And so the Talmud is now for me the truly epic poem that is immensely alive and breathing and creating every day. It is studied, discussed and debated constantly by observant Jews, and so, why can I not walk through its pages discovering what I can find out about myself, God’s will and halakhic observance and in doing so begin or continue charting my own observance, which can only take place in the day-to-day world I live within.

And just the other day I decided to re-read a poem, entitled, "The Art of Poetry" by Kenneth Koch and wanted to share these lines that resonate with me and how my study of the Talmud when I am working at my best can truly be "one of the finest things in existence" and make me "curious to be alive," but is yet, not too "universal, philosophical, and vague," because as Kenneth Koch concludes, "poetry and life are not like that":

Total absorption in poetry is one of the finest things in existence—
It should not make you feel guilty. Everyone is absorbed in something.
The sailor is absorbed in the sea. Poetry is the mediation of life.
The epic is particularly appropriate to our contemporary world.
Because we are so uncertain of everything and also know too much,
A curious and seemingly contradictory condition, which the epic salves
By giving us our knowledge and our grasp, with all our lack of control as well.

* * *
. . . . . . . . . A reader should put your work down puzzled,
Distressed, and illuminated, ready to believe
It is curious to be alive.

* * *
It is true that good poetry is difficult to write.
Poetry is an escape from anxiety and a source of it as well.
On the whole, it seems to me worthwhile. At the end of a poem
One may be tempted to grow too universal, philosophical, and vague
Or to bring in History, or the Sea, but one should not do that
If one can possibly help it, since it makes
Each thing one writes sound like everybody else,
And poetry and life are not like that. Now I have said enough.

Wandering through the Tradition archives -- "The Halakhah's Philosophy of Man" by Norman Lamm

2008-05-20T12:36:00.002+02:00

I finally took some time to wander through the Tradition online archive. It is a resource that they make available for free to subscribers to the periodical and for $25 a year for online access only.

What a resource! It has all Tradition articles from the beginning, which was 1958. I reviewing the Excel list of article titles and authors, the article from the Spring 1962 issue by Norman Lamm entitled, "The Halakhah's Philosophy of Man" caught my eye. While I expected an analysis of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik's work, instead I read an review of the work In His Image, but Rabbi Dr. Samual Belkin, the YU President at the time.

In the article, Rabbi Lamm writes,

He shows how the Halalchah expresses the insights which, together, represent the sanctity of the human personality, a sanctity which derives from God's creation of man "in His image."

and

The belief in God as Creator and Possessor of the world makes it imperative that man fashion for himself a way of life patterned on such a belief. This is the essence and intent of the halakhic life: to translate the abstract principle into simple actions of daily living.

I definitely enjoyed the article, but more importantly, I am glad I began to explore the Tradition archive. I had used the Tradition CD for a few years, but this is much simpler to use.

And if anyone has read Dr. Belkin's In His Image, I would be interested to hear if it still holds up after more than 50 years.

Meditation, action, thought and a maximalist halachic lifestyle

2008-05-18T21:44:00.007+02:00

In a recent comment, Gandalin, wrote:

One breath at a time does sound meditative, but meditation is action.
One breath at a time is one hevel at a time, one moment at a time.
I am trying to suggest that the Halakhic approach does not seek to do everything all at once, but examines life in action in bite-sized pieces. Every moment is important and worthy of consideration.

This comment brings many ideas to my mind.

One is that yes, meditation is action, but it is also concentrated thought (such as Tibetan Buddhist analytical meditations) and this makes me think of talmudic study, which is clearly concentrated thought.

And yes, I couldn't agree more that "Every moment is important and worthy of consideration," which is something the halakhah certainly instills in a way that I think is different from the very popular and perhaps effective motto to "be in the now" or "be in the moment."

While these sayings are certainly worthwhile, I think they lend themselves too easily to simple inwardness and attention, if that. While the halakhah asks one to focus on the moment, by asking one to follow the commandments of Hashem, these I see as very different responses to life.

In some ways, the popular mottos could be seen as a "minimalist" view of life -- be attentive to anything that occurs. Which again is in drastic contrast to Rav Rosensweig's insistance of encouraging a "maximalist man of destiny" from his essay "The Spiritual Legacy of Noah and Avraham" or a "maximalist halachic lifestyle" from his essay "Chanukah as a Holiday of Idealism and Maximalism."

One of the things that attracts me to the Modern Orthodox tradition is this emphasis on a maximalist viewpoint, because I believe that Hashem deserves nothing less.

Teaching Torah to non-Jews . . . a dilemma

2008-05-17T09:53:00.007+02:00

In a recent post on Hirhurim Musings, Rabbi Student kindly referenced my interview in the Commentator. In the comments about the interview, the issue of teaching Torah to non-Jews was raised. You can read the short post here and the comments here. Note that only some of the comments to this post deal with my Commentator interview.

In one of the comments, Professor Lawrence Kaplan makes reference to J. David Bleich writing on this issue. After a quick google search, I found that Rabbi Bleich had written on the issue in Tradition magazine in 1980 (I assume that this is the essay Prof. Kaplan was referencing).

In reading through the article (I have included quotes below), it seems that at least instruction on the seven Noahide laws should not be a problem or concern. What is interesting is that one of the things that I have learned from Rabbi Shlomo Singer's shiurim is that you can't divide up the Talmud. He is fond of saying, it is "one page" -- all sections, all issues are interconnected. While I haven't heard Rabbi Rosensweig say this, certainly in how he moves throughout the entire Talmud in nearly every shiur, he seems to make the same case.

With all this in mind, I must admit I feel justified in continuing my exploration and study, particularly since I do feel it helps me look at everyday life with new eyes, while at the same time helping me come closer to God, by coming closer to the Torah.

Below are some quotes from the opening and closing pages of J. David Bleich's, "Survey of Recent Halakhic Periodical Literature: Teaching Torah to Non-Jews" (Tradition, 18 (2), Summar 1980.

The prohibition against teaching Torah to non-Jews is well known to students of Jewish law. Equally well known is the role of Abraham as the "father of the multitude of nations," entrusted with the sacred task of carrying the teaching of monotheism to idolatrous peoples. A person unfamiliar with the extensive rabbinical literature devoted to this topic may perceive a certain tension, and perhaps even contradiction, between a recognized need to disseminate religious truths and an almost xenophobic reluctance to share the greatest repository of such truth—the Torah. Yet even a cursory examination of the relevant sources dispels the notion that while the community of Israel jealously guards its spiritual wealth, it refuses to share these riches with others. On the contrary, it is unique among Western religions in its willingness to share its teachings without seeking to impose its observations. This necessarily involves a vocation of teaching despite the stricture against teaching Torah to non-Jews. The latter, while based on substantive philosophical considerations and of definite halachic import, admits of sufficiently broad exclusions to assure that Israel remains true to its role as a lamp unto the nations. p192
In the medieval period no less a personage than Rambam entirely Christianity from this prohibition, while in the last century Rabbi Israel Salanter, the acclaimed founder of the Mussar movement, actually mounted a campaign for the incorporation of talmudic studies in the curricula of European schools and universities. p193
It seems to this writer that, while there exists no obligation to volunteer information (although it may well be laudable to do so), there is an obligation to respond to a request for information. Jews are commanded to disseminate Torah as widely as possible among their fellow Jews, but there is no obligation to seize the initiative in teaching the seven commandments to Noachides. Nevertheless, when information or advice is solicited there is a definite obligation to respond. When the non-Jew take the initiative in posing a query, the Jew must respond to the best of his ability. p203

Despite the absence of a specific obligation to influence non-Jews to abide by the provisions of the Noachide Code, the attempt to do so is entirely legitimate. Apart from our universal concern, fear lest “the world becomes corrupt,” as Rambam puts it, is also very much a matter of Jewish concern and self-interest. Disintegration of the moral fabric of society affects everyone. Particularly in our age we can not insulate ourselves against the pervasive cultural forces that mold human conduct. Jews have every interest in promoting a positive moral climate.

Accordingly, Jews should certainly not hesitate to make the teachings of Judaism as they bear on contemporary mores more readily accessible to fellow citizens. That is the most direct means available to us for exercising a positive influence in improving the more atmosphere in which we all live. p203

Opening up the Halakhic Man at random this morning

2008-05-15T12:36:00.002+02:00

I often open a book at random and see what I find. Today, I did that with Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik's Halakhic Man, and found these amazingly profound and important words that are a wonderful antidote to other-worldly mysticism and pure this-world attention:

His [halakhic man] goal is not flight to another world that is wholly good, but rather bringing down that eternal world into the midst of our world. Homo religiosus, his glance fixed upon the higher realms, forgets all too frequently the lower realms and becomes ensnared in the sins of ethical inconsistency and hypocrisy. See what many religions have done to this world on account of their yearning to break through the bounds of concrete reality and escape to the sphere of eternity. p41

There is nothing so physically and spiritually destructive as diverting one's attention from this world. And, by contrast, how courageous is halakhic man who does not flee from this world, who does not seek to escape to some pure, supernal realm. Halakhic man craves to bring down the divine presence and holiness into the midst of space and time, in the midst of finite, earthly existence. p41

An unlikely interview in the YU Commentator

2008-05-15T12:09:00.004+02:00

About two weeks ago I got an email from Zev Eleff, the editor of the YU Commentator, the newspaper of Yeshiva College, wanting to know if I would be willing to do an "email" interview, because me and my blog had come up in various conversations on campus.

Needless to say I was excited. Just to know that the blog would get some exposure and more importantly that some folks were finding what I wrote interesting was great. While I am not sure if people are talking about it because of;

what I have been writing,
or that I am interested in Rabbi Rosensweig's shiur or
that I am not Jewish

Any of those reasons, or more are find with me. Clearly a goal of the blog is to feel like I am in dialogue with others (even if there are few comments) and the interview is a great opportunity to extend that dialogue.

The interview, which is entitled, "An Unlikely Shiur Guest" was published on May 12 and I hope captures my respect and enthusiasm for the work of Rabbi Rosensweig and the YUTorah site in general.

Click here to read the interview.

My Talmud set is complete -- returning to the beginning

2008-05-11T20:57:00.006+02:00

I recently picked up the final volumes of the 73-volume Artscroll Schottenstein English Edition Talmud Bavli from my mother's house in the US. Since I live in Switzerland and with the increase in shipping costs from Artscroll's European distributer, I have usually had volumes sent to my Mom and then picked them up during my bi-annual visits.

I had been slowly adding tractates for about three years and am finally finished, which in many ways is clearly both anend and a beginning. Rather mystically, this would have been the last time I could pick books up at my Mom's, since she actually passed away in April at the wonderful age of 88 and having lived what she often called "a wonderful life." So, when I was in town for the funeral I was able to complete my Bavli. I had placed my final order in December, never knowing what would follow.

For me completing this set and finally having the whole sea of the Talmud to swim in gave me the idea to return to one of the earliest posts in this blog. In it I share the 11 points that at the time I wrote about concerning why I was studying the Talmud. I wanted to see what I thought of them now after a little over three years of exploration.

Here is what I wrote:

I find the Talmud:

a work of unimaginable dedication and commitment to God.
a work focused on the particular day-to-day, moment-to-moment elements that make up life (obviously also many moments that don't make up my life -- temple sacrifices, etc.). It truly seems to avoid abstraction and focus on the particular.
a work that accepts discord and multi-valent views of the world.
a work that is basically INFINITE in its scope and depth and diversity.
a work that stimulates intense interest today and has for 1500 years.
a work that connects to the past and holds within it the explanations and explorations of God's will that have continued for over 2000 years.
a work that can help me focus on and recognize the ever-present nature of God.
a work of great creativity and imagination that can help stretch my mind.
a work of which the study is a holy possibility and opportunity.
a work that screams, shouts, contemplates and argues this basic fact -- "We are commanded!" This is something I deeply believe.
a work large enough (a true sea) to welcome even an outsider in, who simply wants to enter and learn out of love

In looking at these points after three years, I think they are all still valid. Though, one additional point that I would add now is the importance and centrality of creativity and chiddushim to Talmud Torah. And it is this encouragement of creativity that I truly find so inspiring and challenging, and which Rabbi Rosensweig writes about in the article, "Personal Initiative In Avodat Hashem," from the Torah u-Madda Journal. I hope to post on this article soon.

Over this time, I have, I must admit, frequently lost the drive and push to continue my study. At times, it seems too irrelevant to me, too caught up in details on issues don't touch my life, too much work, etc.

But I return again and again, I recently began again to listen to the daily Daf Yomi talks from CD Shas and still try to listen to Rav Rosensweig's classes as often as possible.

As the Bavli warns, studying alone is not easy, though I don't feel completely alone since the wonderful YU Torah resource provides so many shiurim.

Universalism must flow from our particularism

2008-05-07T19:30:00.007+02:00

I just recently listened to the recording of event put on by Yeshiva University entitled, Yehudim V'Amim: Destinies Intertwined?, which was about the Jewish responsibility for the global community from a social justice perspective. It was an evening of very interesting talks given by the Richard M. Joel, the president of YU and Rabbis Michael Rosensweig and J.J. Schacter.

While one of the messages of the evening was the need for offering students a balance of opportunities including social justice outreach, as well as training in Torah along with the full range of university curriculum.

During his presentation Rabbi Rosensweig made the point that a Jewish sense of universalism must flow from Judaism's particularism. I find this point very interesting and very important. Clearly, Judaism is known for it particularism in the sense that there is a perception that it has a dominant focus on the family of Jews and not the larger family of the world. And while Christianity may claim to have offered a remedy for that particularism, I think that the more interesting type of Jewish "particularism" is the type of amazing attention to real world details that is at the heart of the Talmud. For instance in Berachos 4b we find:

This is what David said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, am I not devout? For all the other kings of the East and the West sit among their company in their glory, but as for me, my hands are soiled with blood, embryos, and afterbirths which I examine, in order to permit a woman to her husband.

Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, described this passage in Halakhic Man as an example of how the halakhic man gets "his hands soiled by the gritty realia of practical Halakhah."

Another example of this specificity comes from in today's Daf Yomi, Nazir 49B, which describes the amount of a corpse (bones, blood, gel, dust, etc.) needed to make a nazir tameh (ritually impure).

From these "gritty" particulars, the Talmud and its interpreters are able to build an ideal vision of reality, what one might call a universal vision. Again from Halakhic Man:

Halakhah has a fixed a priori relationship to the whole of reality in all of its fine and detailed particulars. Halakhic man orients himself to the entire cosmos and tries to understand it by utilizing an ideal world which he bears in his halakhic consciousness. p23

What I find fascinating is that another direction my attention has taken me recently is to a somewhat similar particularist vision of reality that is described by The Rule of Benedict (RB), St. Benedict's monastic rule that he wrote around 600 CE (the same time that the editing of the Talmud was completed).

Here is the reading for May 6:

Hence the Lord says in the Gospel,
"Whoever listens to these words of Mine and acts upon them,
I will liken to a wise person
who built a house on rock.
The floods came,
the winds blew and beat against that house,
and it did not fall,
because it had been founded on rock" (Matt. 7:24-25).

Having given us these assurances,
the Lord is waiting every day
for us to respond by our deeds to His holy admonitions.
And the days of this life are lengthened
and a truce granted us for this very reason,
that we may amend our evil ways.
As the Apostle says,
"Do you not know that God's patience is inviting you to repent" (Rom. 2:4)?
For the merciful Lord tells us,
"I desire not the death of the sinner,
but that the sinner should be converted and live" (Ezech. 33:11).

Words like "rock" and "deeds" and the entire RB is filled with real world, nitty gritty details about life within a community of monks written 1400 years ago. Yet, it contains an enormous array of details and insights from which one can learn much for living in the everyday world of the 21st century.

And on the other hand, philosophical or theological positions that do not rely on the particular, but are built on abstractions or generalizations often evaporate when challenged or lose their strength over time or simply merge into one, weak message that no longer has the power to move, motivate or inspire.

Somehow, these two visions, the Talmud and the Rule of Benedict, for me contain a way to focus on the particular, but dwell within the eternal and point to the universal.

Creativity . . . the purpose of the universe?

2008-03-23T18:17:00.005+01:00

In other posts (here, here and here), I have written specifically about the importance of creativity. Today, I want to try again. As the title declares, the questions I want to ask are:

Is creativity the purpose of the universe?
Is creativity our purpose?
Is the universe fundamentally creative?
If so, are we?

In this post I will share quotes from two writers, who I believe would have a wonderful time talking and exploring together, even though their they come from very different perspectives. I will share quotes from Dr. Stuart Kauffman and Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik.

Dr. Kauffman is director of the Institute for Biocomplexity and Informatics at the University of Calgary and is a professor in the departments of Biological Sciences and Physics and Astronomy at the university. More can be found out here.

The YU website has a short bio of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik here. The last line simply says, "was the most influential figure associated with the spread of Torah in America, and he was singularly known as “the Rav.”

While I enjoy the holistic view of Dr. Kauffman, I must admit that I find the Rav's view more inviting and a more tangible invitation to create on my own and to turn my day-to-day life into one filled with meaning and creativity.

Stuart Kauffman from Reinventing the Sacred draft (a book to be released in May)

Thus, beyond the new science that glimmers a new world view, we have a new view of God, not as transcendent, not as an agent, but as the very creativity of the universe itself. This God brings with it a sense of oneness, unity, with all of life, and our planet — it expands our consciousness and naturally seems to lead to an enhanced potential global ethic of wonder, awe, responsibility within the bounded limits of our capacity, for all of life and its home, the Earth, and beyond as we explore the Solar System.
The third, rather astonishing theme that is emerging in this new world view is that the biosphere and human culture are ceaselessly creative in ways that are fundamentally unpredictable and presumably non-algorithmic or machine like.
I want God to mean the vast ceaseless creativity of the only universe we know of, ours. What do we gain by using the God word? I suspect a great deal, for the word carries with it awe and reverence. If we can transfer that awe and reverence, not to the transcendental Abrahamic God of my Israelite tribe long ago, but to the stunning reality that confronts us, we will grant permission for a renewed spirituality, and awe, reverence and responsibility for all that lives, for the planet.

Stuart Kauffman -- Investigations

'Forever Creative' -- "In this chapter I have been trying to say, argue, articulate the possibility that a biosphere is profoundly generative--somehow fundamentally always creative. The cornerstone of this dawning new conviction lies in the belief I now hold with some confidence that we cannot finitely prestate the configuration space of a biosphere." 135

Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik -- Halakhic Man

“Only man is capable of creative interpretation (hiddush), something which is beyond the power of angels, for since the Holy One, blessed be He, created them in a state of perfection, they need not and, therefore, cannot develop and progress. But this is not the case with man, for he progresses and his intellect gains ever-increasing strength. . . . The essence of the Torah is intellectual creativity. 82
Halakhic man is a man who longs to create, to bring into being something new, something original. The study of Torah, by definition, means gleaning new, creative insights from the Torah (hiddushei Torah). 99
Man’s task is to “fashion, engrave, attach, and create,” and transform the emptiness in being into a perfect and holy existence, bearing the imprint of the divine name. 101
If a man wishes to attain the rank of holiness, he must become a creator of world. If a man never creates, never brings into being anything new. anything original, then he cannot be holy unto his God. 108
The most fundamental principle of all is that man must create himself. It is this idea that Judaism introduced into the world. 109
And halakhic man, whose voluntaristic nature we have established earlier, is, indeed, a free man. He creates an ideal world, renews his own being and transforms himself into a man of God, dreams about the complete realization of the Halakhah in the very core of the world, and looks forward to the kingdom of God “contracting” itself and appearing in the midst of concrete and empirical reality. 137

If we accept that the universe is this abundant and creative realm -- then doesn't it make simple sense that that type of abundant creativity is key to each of us, to the human universe. Therefore, as one investigates ideas, theories, even religions--this notion of creativity and abundance and its nurturing, advocating, encouraging and teaching is fundamental.

What creates the opportunity for more creativity, more diversity, more abundance, more LIFE? This creativity is not simply poetry (the favorite of many philosophers, e.g Heidegger) or art, but the creativity in all of Life's areas -- creatively exploring new opportunities for growth.

With creativity, diversity, novelty as fundamental goods--freedom is another key -- because without freedom, we would not have the opportunity to explore new possibilities, new opportunities, new horizons.

I think the most important thing to remember is that this is how the universe works -- when we block this creativity, this newness, we run counter to life; we block our own creativity, we block the fundamental direction, urge, push of Life.

What are some of the keys to making this happen? Language -- language helps create new possibility, new ways of thinking and seeing by finding/creating the right word(s). Environment -- a rich (though not chaotic) environment creates new opportunities.

Moment to moment to moment -- looking for creativity, opportunity, possibility, growth.

Notes on nomadics

2008-03-17T19:49:00.003+01:00

Notes on nomadics

focus on the creative
the new
the rhizome not the root

no set path
though all paths can be “raided” for necessities and treasures

constant movement
constant correction
constant rebirth

constantly making connections
new connections for new possibilities
new life

no authorities
no organization

love of the new
the possible of all the connections
that create the world new every moment

humility to the unknown and unknowable
surrender to the creative
embracing of the virtual and the unthinkable next moment

nomad poetics
new chiddushim

Copyright (c) Jeff Wild, 2008

Speak the World -- a poem

2008-03-17T19:45:00.002+01:00

Speak the World

Can I be a voice for the world?
Can I be anything else?

Are we not all
a voice, really the voice
for the world?

I begin writing today,
after months of silence.

After months even years
of searching for other
means of expressing
who I am
and where I fit.

But I don’t fit in . . .

I don’t belong in any group:
Catholic, Buddhist, Jewish, New Age, Integral . . .

Not even Nomadic . . .

So, I can only speak me
and so speak the world.

Copyright (c) Jeff Wild, 2006

Omnibenevolence and Deleuze

2008-03-17T19:39:00.004+01:00

In a former post, I discussed the idea of "omnibenevolence" as a potential for each of us.

There is a philosopher who I admired, named Gilles Deleuze, and while I believe that if Deleuze understood this idea as coming from traditional religion, he would either be very suspicious or simply reject it.

However, I wonder if "omnibenevolence" could be one of the possible "lines of flight," one of the experiments we are encouraged to live by Deleuze. Perhaps it is one of the ways we can be challenged to be more and discover more about ourselves. At the end of Todd May's wonderful book Gilles Deleuze: An Introduction, he writes:

Deleuze's ontology is not a resting place; it is not a zone of comfort; it is not an answer that allows us to abandon our seeking. It is the opposite. An ontology of difference is a challenge. To recognize that there is more than we have been taught, that what is presented to us is only the beginning of what there is, puts before us the greater task of our living. We have not finished with living; we are never finished with living. However we live, there is always more. We do not know of what a body is capable, nor how it can live. The alternatives of contentment (I have arrived) and hopelessness (There is nowhere to go) are two sides of the same misguided thought: that what is presented to us is what there is.
There is more, always more.

Perhaps this notion of "omnibenevolence" is part of the challenge to "recognize that there is more" and that "we are never finished with living" and along that same line of flight -- we are never finished with loving . . .

Mentioned in Rav Rosensweig's class? Okay, but where?

2008-03-12T19:22:00.005+01:00

In a warm and friendly recent comment, I was told, "I happen to know that R' Rosensweig mentioned you to his class. Maybe you can hear it online. Best of luck to you." Sadly, the comment was from Anonymous.

Over the last week I have been listening to Rav Rosensweig's shiurim. I started with the ones from this year and have listened to them all except the most recent one on "Hechsheir Keilim."

But there has been no mention of me or this blog. Of course, I don't find that surprising. But if something was said, it would be fun to know what. If anyone knows what was said and when (and if it recorded), I would appreciate knowing.

Orthodox evangelization (Catholic and Jewish)

2008-03-10T18:15:00.007+01:00

Along with my interest in Orthodox Judaism, I have a strong interest in Catholicism as well. In particular the work of Hans Urs von Bathalsar. One program that has a number of courses based on his work is the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family. It offers some traditional, yet wonderful sounding classes--a few of which I have listed at the bottom of the post. However, very sadly there is nothing to listen to, nothing to download, except the academic catalogue, which describes the classes and the book list, which is interesting.

What I find so curious is that the John Paul II Institute makes a very explicit statement that one of its main points of its mission is evangelization:

"To develop a critical understanding of issues on marriage and family, biotechnology and ethics in light of Western/modern assumptions regarding the human person, as these bear on the nature and dignity of human life and the transcendental meaning of beauty, truth, and goodness, in a way that fosters a unity of theory and practice at the service of the Church’s 'new evangelization'"

Yet, it keeps its classes and its instruction to itself. What would be a better form of evangelization than sharing the insights and ideas from their program?

On the other hand there is is the unbelieveable Yeshiva University resource -- http://www.yutorah.org/, which I have written about before, that has thousands (over 14,000) of downloadable shiurim (lectures).

So if you ask me, YU is doing a far better job at evangelization than the John Paul II Institute.

Some John Paul II Institute classes:

JPI 922 - God, Giver of Life
This seminar examines the category of gift, a crucial concept for the thought of John Paul II. If gift is to be cogently adopted by any theological and anthropological reflection without falling prey to postmodernity’s criticism, an adequate elucidation of God, the giver of life, is required to retrieve the ontological and Trinitarian roots of “gift.”
The seminar pursues its goal, on the one hand, by exploring what it means to state that the Holy Spirit is the Person thanks to whom God himself is Gift (Dominum et Vivificantem, n.10), and, on the other hand, by addressing the issue of the generative potency in God and its difference from and similarity to his creative power on the other. The ontological and theological elucidation of gift is done with the aid of prominent ancient and contemporary theological figures such as Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, von Balthasar, and John Paul II.

JPI 930 - The Trinitarian Meaning of Human Suffering
This course takes as its starting point John Paul II’s encyclicals Redemptor Hominis, Dives in Misericordia, and Dominum et Vivificantem, and the apostolic letter Salvifici Doloris. The course attempts to advance a theological understanding of the meaning of evil and suffering. This reflection is set against the backdrop of the examination in the contemporary situation of the meaning of suffering. Besides the work of John Paul II, the other main authors examined in the course are Plotinus, Aquinas, Hegel, von Balthasar, and E.Mounier.

JPI 941 - The Mysteries of Christ and the Meaning of Time and History
A correct understanding of Gaudium et Spes, 22, is crucial for developing the adequate anthropology John Paul II speaks of in his writings. The contemplation of Jesus Christ, who reveals the mystery of the Father and his love, allows us to see fully a new image of man. In this regard, it is important to notice that this section of the pastoral constitution refers to the whole of the life of Christ, from the Incarnation to the Death and Resurrection of the Lord. Christ “has truly been made one of us, like us in all things except sin,” and that in turn means: He has assumed also human time and a part of human history.

This course focuses on how a consideration of the life of Christ opens a new understanding of human time and history. A theological category will constitute the guideline of our discussion: the concept of “mystery,” deemed by Joseph Ratzinger to be the most fruitful term of twentieth century theology. The course will draw from the understanding of mystery in Scripture and the Fathers of the Church, as well as from the Christology of some modern theologians (such as W. Pannenberg, J. Ratzinger, K. Rahner, and H. U. von Balthasar), in order to see the fruitfulness of a Christology focused on the mysteries of the life of Jesus. The different mysteries of the life of Christ, understood in their interconnection and development as an exodus of love and as the very dynamic of Jesus’ self-giving (cf. Deus Caritas Est 7; 12), will reveal to us the meaning of human history and the sense of time in human existence.

A "Torah plus 'X'" philosophy -- an interview with Rav Rosensweig

2008-03-07T15:38:00.005+01:00

An interview with Rabbi Michael Rosensweig was published in the most recent edition of the YU Commentator, the official newspaper of Yeshiva College. Here is a link to the entire interview.

In it he discusses topics including religion's engagement with the world of secular knowledge, universalism and Jewish particularism, the doctrine of elu ve-elu divrei Elokim Hayyim [these and these are the words of the living God], the historical study of gemara or halakhah and contemporary Biblical criticism.

Below I include some selections from it that I felt described why I find Rav Rosensweig's vision so challenging, but yet attactive and spiritually energizing.

In describing a "Torah plus 'X'" philosophy, Rav Rosensweig states,

By that I mean two things. First, the foundational Torah component needs to take clear priority not only in a quantitative sense but because it is the raison d'etre of the entire enterprise. Torah values must motivate and direct the engagement of other knowledge and serve as the prism through which we assess other possible contributions, whether Madda, Hokhmah, Derekh Eretz, etc. Second, it is crucial that the perspective be one of "Torah plus." We should not merely be seeking permitted engagement that falls within the accepted confines of Torah law and that does not contravene its values. If that were the case then our investment of time and effort would be much more difficult to justify. Instead, we should perceive meaningful engagement through the prism of Torah and for the sake of Torah as stemming from and reflecting a much more ambitious commitment to Torah. We believe that the Torah's agenda is broad, that it addresses and encompasses all dimensions of life, and that with the proper filters and methodologies these interactions can enhance our understanding of both the texts and values of Torah. It is therefore not "Torah and" but an expanded "Torah plus" ideology.

Later in that same answer he declares,

A very chemical and physical view of the world, when overly narrow, creates an orientation that may pose challenges to the world of Torah particularly in terms of the central role of tzelem Elokim [image of God] and all that implies about man's essential spirituality and transcendence.

In regard to the humanities in this same answer, he says,

We may also better understand man's tumultuous nature, his flaws, the compulsions and impulses that are addressed by halakhic rules and principles. The effort to understand man's great spiritual potential along with his struggles and challenges is an endeavor to better comprehend the very concept of tzelem Elokim, namely, man's transcendence, uniqueness and creative capacity.

Regarding universalism and Jewish particularism he answers,

We should advocate a holistic halakhic approach, albeit one that perceives the halakhic agenda as broad and ambitious. Thus, we should view universalism through the prism of halakhic rules, laws and values from which a coherent approach will emerge. This way we will better determine what is demanded of us, and also what can add value to our spiritual lives.

When asked, "Does the doctrine of elu ve-elu divrei Elokim Hayyim open the door to postmodernism or postmodernist relativism?", Rav Rosensweig responded,

It absolutely does not. There is a general misconception with regard to the proper definition of elu ve-elu. It reflects respect for a range of values and perspectives on halakhic and hashkafic issues; however, this range is not unlimited. We are dealing with a broad yet concretely defined group of sources and ideas. The need to relate reverently to the views of opposing halakhic authorities on a given subject is especially crucial, as even apparently subtle or nuanced differences can reflect important differences in approach.
...Moreover, Elu ve-elu does not absolve one from the responsibility to come to halakhic conclusions, nor does it make a single conclusion any weaker. In fact the opposite may be true. The more you believe in multiple truths - if you see them as permutations of the same basic principle - the more you view the halakhic process of coming to a single, best normative conclusion as more authoritative. Decisive halakhic decision-making is designed to discriminate between elu ve-elu viewpoints. Thus elu ve-elu precludes any idea of relativism or a postmodernist perspective.
The Arukh ha-Shulhan describes elu ve-elu as a symphony, as opposed to a cacophony of discordant notes. It is part of a process that produces authoritative conclusions based on a sincere effort to penetrate the real intent of original sources. It certainly does not reflect a sense of arbitrariness, chaos or individual whim. Interpreting original sources is a complex endeavor and requires rigor and intense yir'as shamayim.

Of course he writes about this extensively in the essay "ELU VA-ELU DIVRE ELOKIM HAYYIM: HALAKHIC PLURALISM AND THEORIES OF CONTROVERSY," that I quote from here.

A new way of thinking -- a new way of being

2008-02-29T15:22:00.003+01:00

For years I have read the work of a thinker named Eric Gans. He is a professor at UCLA and has written for years on what he calls “Generative Anthropology” (GA) as well as the origin of language, the human and the divine.

Instead of me trying to poorly describe his thought I will share with you all a few links to his website. His website can be found at: http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/

A link to his introduction to GA is here: http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/gaintro.htm and he has recently published a book entitled Scenic Imagination

Here is a link to his most recent Chronicle (a periodic essay he shares with a email distribution list), http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw355.htm. He describes this essay as, “another of the recent Chronicles that attempt to clarify the basic categories of GA. GA is ‘a new way of thinking’ only because the human is ‘a new mode of being.’” Below is the text of the first three paragraphs from this Chronicle:

Chronicles of Love and Resentment
Eric Gans
A New Mode of Being
No. 355: Saturday, March 1, 2008

Although language and the other forms of human representation are now recognized as unique in the animal kingdom, exploration of the specifically anthropological ontology characteristic of the linguistic sign is a virtual monopoly of generative anthropology, which hypothesizes that the transcendent status of the sign emerges in an originary event through the collective deferral of appetitive behavior. Saussure’s analysis of the sign as consisting of the communally shared relation between signifiant and signifié respects its ontological specificity more clearly than Peirce’s potentially unending chain of interpretants, but neither of these two pioneers of semiology attempted to understand language and its emergence as an anthropological phenomenon.

There is nothing mystical about claiming that the sign has a different ontology from the elements of the real world. A sign is not a thing; it is a complex of things and the relations among them, mediated by the community that exchanges them. Human language and other forms of representation exemplify a new mode of being discontinuous with earlier forms of communication and organization. Were all sign-users to vanish, this ontology would vanish with them, and the sign-traces left behind would become mere worldly objects--although their discovery by a future sign-user could restore them to their particular status.

The apparent similarity of the semiotic type-token relationship to that, for example, of the genotype and phenotype of a given species seems obvious only because we use language to describe it. Each horse is an individual, not a token in the sense that the last word of this sentence is a token of the word "horse." A genotype is an ideal construction to which each individual member of the species Equus caballus corresponds only approximately; a word-type is manifest in each token of a given word. And nothing in the natural world is analogous to the translatability of the type horse into that of Pferd or cheval while retaining essentially the same conceptual extension.

see http://www.anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw355.htm for the complete text

"In all thy ways" -- more on the tightrope

2008-02-15T10:52:00.004+01:00

In returning to Rabbi Wurzburger's work Ethics of Responsibilty this morning I found these lines:

The applicability of the norms and values of Jewish Covenantal Ethics is by no means restricted to the members of the Jewish Covenantal Community. Although at the present time the religiously committed Jewish community seems to turn ever more inward and tends to focus primarily upon the particularistic and nationalistic elements of its heritage, I believe it to be of special importance to call attention to its universalistic components. While the ritualistic elements of Judaism are completely particularistic and intended exclusively for individuals who either by birth or by conversion qualify as members of the People of the Covenant, Jewish ethical teachings are not subject to the same kind of limitation but are viewed as possessing universal relevance. p8
I look upon Halakhah as an indispensable component but not as coextensive with the full range and scope of the Jewish normative system. I deliberately avoid the term “Halakhic Ethics,” preferring to speak of “Covenantal Ethics.” In my view, Jewish ethics encompasses not only outright halakhic rules governing the area of morality, but also intuitive moral responses arising from the Covenantal relationship with God, which provides the matrix for forming ethical ideals not necessarily patterned after legal models. To use Erich Fromm’s terminology,35 Judaism provides for an “ethics of responsibility” as well as for an “ethics of duty” or an “ethics of obedience.” p15

35. Fromm, Gods, 56

There is no basis for the claim once made by a prominent Christian theologian that “Judaism recognizes no religious requirement unless one can find through ingenious interpretation of the Law the necessary rules of conduct.”36 The absurdity of this characterization becomes evident when we recall the wellknown talmudic statement that the verse “In all thy ways thou shalt acknowledge Him”37 represents the most succinct formulation of our religious ideal.38 Similarly, R. Yosei declared that “all your actions should be performed for the sake of God.”39 Acts need not be perceived as instances of a specific religious norm in order to be performed for the sake of Heaven. p15

36. Rudolf Bultmann, Jesus and the World (New York: Charles Scribner’s
Sons, 1934), 69.
37. Prov. 3:6.
38. B. Berakhot 63a. See Wurzburger, “Law as the Basis of a Moral Society.” Tradition (Spring 1981): 51.
39. Avot 2:12. See also B. Beitzah 16a, which attributes this maxim to Hillel.

What strikes me in these paragraphs and in the highlighted lines in particular is that in some way Rabbi Wurzburger is again walking the "tightrope between a 'revealed will of God' and 'intuitive judgements'" that I wrote about in this post.

It is a tightrope that seems to me to exist between the Shulchan Aruch and the Talmud. One that defines very clear religious norms and prescriptions for actions and one that welcomes one into a dialogue and discussion about those norms and much more. But both together in their attention to minute detail both are clearly paths to acknowledging Hashem in "In all thy ways." And only when that is the ultimate motivation and driving desire, it seems would one be in a position to make the "intuitive moral responses" that Rabbi Wurzburger describes.

It is this message of ultimate importance of all our actions that is important for a universal audience, because it can provide an alternative to the messages of meaningless and hopelessness that often surround us.

An 'immense world of delight'

2008-01-16T09:32:00.000+01:00

More from Rabbi Walter Wurzburger

2008-01-11T08:10:00.001+01:00

In an earlier post I began to quote from the work of Walter Wurzburger. In particular from his book Ethics of Responsibilty. I wanted to continue that today.

The pluralism of Jewish ethics manifests itself in the readiness to operate with a number of independent ethical norms and principles such as concern for love, justice, truth, and peace. Since they frequently give rise to conflicting obligations, it becomes necessary to rely upon intuitive judgments to resolve the conflict. There is, however, another dimension to the pluralism of Jewish ethics: it is multi-tiered and comprises many strands. It contains not only objective components such as duties and obligations, but also numerous values and ideals possessing only subjective validity. Moreover, the pluralistic thrust of Jewish ethics makes it possible to recognize the legitimacy of many alternate ethical values and ideals. p5

I love Rabbi Wurzburger's humanity that comes through in his writing. In every word I sense his conern for the reader and his hope that his writings will enhance the reader's understanding and practice of ethics.

What I find fascinating is the juxtaposition in one paragraph of these phrases:

"pluralism of Jewish ethics"
"rely upon intuitive judgments to resolve the conflict"
"multi-tiered and comprises many strands"
"legitimacy of many alternate ethical values and ideals"

Certainly these phrases aren't how the Halakhah or orthodox Judaism are portrayed in the media, or I would argue even in the discussions that I read in blogs like Hirhurim Musings or in most shiurim from YU. Perhaps I am missing something, or I wonder if Rabbi Wurzburger's ideas and writings aren't within the mainstream anymore. I know that he was a student of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik and a professor at Yeshiva University, but as is clear from the field of discussion about Rav Soloveitchik, there are a wide, wide range of opinions about him and his legacy.

I would love to hear from someone at YU about the how Rabbi Wurzburger's work is seen today.

Of course, this paragraph does not make Rabbi Wurzburger into some liberal, anything goes reformer as this next paragraph shows:

For me, Halakhah represents the revealed will of God. The positions of classical Reform as well as of Conservative Judaism and Reconstructionism are the very antitheses of my approach. For them, the promptings of the autonomous human conscience constitute the highest court of appeals in all ethical matters. p5

It is this fascinating tightrope between a "revealed will of God" and "intuitive judgements" that Rabbi Wurzburger walks that attracts me, because it is one that reveals a profound truth that I believe holds value for a far broader audience than would traditionally read Rabbi Wurzburger's work.

Why I write this blog

2008-01-06T10:57:00.000+01:00

As should be clear to anyone spending time on this blog, I have a deep interest in Orthodox Judaism and its teachings, even though I am not part of the tradition. On various pages I have tried to explain my attraction, my interest and hopefully I have offered some insight.

I think that at the heart of my writing are three intentions:

To capture and express insights and ideas -- Often in my readings and listenings I am struck by something that moves me so much that I want to share it with others. This blog gives me that opportunity to share some of those insights with a broader audience, who may find some light and inspiration from them as well.
Expand the message -- I truly feel that Modern Orthodoxy has valuable and inspirational insights not just relevant for Orthodox Jews or even non-observant Jews, but for all people, and especially for all spiritual seekers of meaning and purpose. This type of "universal" message is something that I first found in the writings and shiurim of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik and just recently in Chofetz Chaim's writings on lashon hora. True, at times it takes translating and expanding of "Jew" to "person," which the writers might object to. But I believe that if it helps me and hopefully others lead more respectful, more peaceful, more God-fearing lives, then I think it is a worthwhile expansion.
To find a study partner -- while in various locations within the Talmud have read a number of warnings about studying by oneself, sadly at this point that is what I have been doing. Luckily, I have the amazing resources that are present online and in book form, but I would enjoy being able to discuss and study with one or more individuals. As more people come to the blog, perhaps one or two might be interested in studying with me, for example someone from Rabbi Rosensweig's shiur (though I know I am like a kindergarten student in comparison). I know that I would be an unusual partner, but one never knows what could come of it. If you are interested please leave a comment or email me.

A celebration of itself and all creation . . .

2008-01-03T10:22:00.000+01:00

This is a paragraph that I read the other day from "Kenneth Koch's Seasons on Earth," an article following Koch's death in 2002. I thought it was beautiful and I wanted to share it.

That is one of the things that Koch — who died on July 6, succumbing to the leukemia he had fought for a year — had figured out for himself and his students long ago: Anger is useless, but you can transmute it into something beautiful or charming or funny or true. Not that therapy is the primary goal; it is just a beneficial byproduct of the process. The primary goal is poetry, which can be written anywhere, by anyone, and is properly understood as a celebration of itself and all creation. Poetry was what happened when you liberated the imagination. Poetry was joy, and what’s more — and contrary to some highly publicized cases of suicidal, despondent or deranged poets — you didn’t need to be in agony in order to write it, and you didn’t need to show a solemn face to the world.

Rav Rosensweig resources

2007-12-25T18:03:00.000+01:00

As should be clear to anyone reading this blog, I deeply respect the work of Rav Michael Rosensweig. In this post I simply want to point out where those interested can find his audio shiurim and his writings.

One place of course is YU Torah Online. Rav Rosensweig teaches at Yeshiva University in New York City and his regular Talmud shiurim are stored at http://www.yutorah.org/. The most direct way to find his shiurim is to go to the Advanced Search page and on the right of the page select him as the Teacher you are looking for and press "Search" -- you will then be taken to a page of over 500 shiurim!

For a more managable selection of his shiurim, which were given to the public, you can also go to Torahweb -- http://www.torahweb.org/. By clicking on Rav Rosensweig's picture on the home page, you will be taken to a list of his essays, as well as a link to audio and video shiurim. If you had time for only one, I would recommend "The Hashkafic Framework of Social Change" recorded in 2003, it is a wonderful description of the uniqueness of the halachic law system and its vitality and ability to face change.

Rav Rosensweig's latest essay on Torahweb can be found here. It is a reflection on the centrality of "Yirat Shamayim As An Approach to Life and As A Legacy."

The final resource that I would recommend is Rav Rosensweig's essay "ELU VA-ELU DIVRE ELOKIM HAYYIM: HALAKHIC PLURALISM AND THEORIES OF CONTROVERSY," which can be found here. He concludes this insightful essay with these words:

Finally, it should be stated emphatically that elu va-elu divre Elokim hayyim (these and these are the words of God -- my translation) should never be used as an excuse for complacency or mediocrity. Even as we encounter equal truths we must aspire to pursue our own conviction of ideal truth culled from and on the basis of insights that we form from the wealth of legitimate perspectives that we confront. Our pursuit should be intensified and enhanced by these exposures. In this way we will hopefully emerge with the concept of pluralism beautifully depicted by the Arakh ha-Shulhan in his introduction to Hoshen Mishpat:
"The debates of Tanaim and Amoraim and Geonim in fact represent the truth of the living God. All of their views have merit from a halakhic perspective. In fact, this diversity and range constitute the beauty and splendor of our holy Torah. The entire Torah is called a song whose beauty derives from the interactive diversity of its voices and instruments. One who immerses himself in the sea of Talmud will experience the joy that results from such rich variety."
Torah, then, is to be perceived as a harmonious symphony enriched by the diversity of its instruments and variations and bearing the singular message of devar haShem.

Every time I read these closing words I am inspired to study harder and to immerse myself in the sea of Talmud in order to hear one or two notes of the diverse and harmonious symphony that is the halacha.

The importance of our words

2007-12-23T18:09:00.000+01:00

As I began to write this, I realized that just yesterday I was writing about how the Jewish tradition and the halacha helped me see the importance of each of my actions and today with the start of a new tractate in the Daf Yomi cycle, I wanted to write about the importance of words. Seeing and recognizing the importance of our actions and our words -- two pretty fundamental topics.

A few years ago I signed up for the daily email that one can receive from the Chofetz Chaim Heritage Foundation that shares the Chofetz Chaim's insights and writing about Loshon Hora -- forbidden speech. I even bought the book Chofetz Chaim: A Lesson A Day from Artscroll. The teachings are truly an amazing collections of insights and recommendations on how to see the power of language for good and for bad.

This is the definition of Lashon Hora from the first day of these teachings:

Loshon Hora (lit. evil talk) is defined as information which is either derogatory or potentially harmful to another individual. A derogatory statement about someone is loshon hora, even if it will definitely not cause that person any harm. To focus on the shortcomings of another person is itself wrong.

A statement that could potentially bring harm to someone – be it financial, physical, psychological or otherwise – is loshon hora, even if the information is not negative.

(It should be noted that the term loshon hora refers even to true statements which are derogatory or harmful. Negative statements that are untrue or inaccurate are termed hotzaas shem ra, slander.)

I remember when I read this for the first time, I couldn't help but think that nearly EVERYTHING I read in the newspaper or on the news would seemingly fall in this category. And when I looked at myself, I was astonished to recognize how often the things I would say about someone were negative or somehow drawing attention to shortcomings. The teachings in this area from the entire tradition, which the Chofetz Chaim relied on, are a powerful antidote to all the angry and mean and hurtful language that surrounds us.

Another important issue regarding speech is addressed in the tractate Nedarim, which as I mentioned above was begun today by those following on the daf yomi cycle. The tractate is about vows (nedarim).

Recently, I have slacked off on keeping up with the cycle, but thought I would make a new start with this tractate and as I was listening to the shiur from DVDShas the rabbi made the point that one of the messages of the tractate is about the simple power of our words to commit one to certain actions and prohibitions. I look forward to learning all I can from Chazel on this topic.

Each of our actions is important

2007-12-22T15:30:00.000+01:00

The other day I was reading one of Rabbi Gil Student's posts on his terrific blog -- Hirhurim Musings. It is about the halacha regarding brushing one's teeth on Shabbat, which was an issue raised when his young son had a friend spend the night on Shabbat. I will let you read it, but I have to admit that while I was reading all the detail that R' Student went into about the prohibition of causing bleeding and squeezing on Shabbat, I could not help but think "Unbelievable, this is legalism at its worst!"

BUT the next day as I was listening to a lecture by Hubert Dreyfus on Martin Heidegger's Being and Time, professor Dreyfus was describing sense of the worldhood of the world, but the important thing for this post, is that professor Dreyfus in discussing one of Heidegger's points (I can't even remember the exact point at this time), made the distinction that for the discussion Heidegger was really focusing only on the "important" types of actions that we perform (such as teaching or being a parent -- something that defines us), and not unimportant actions like washing our hands, etc.

On hearing him say this I couldn't help but think about how hard R' Student had worked to describe the issue of brushing one's teeth on Shabbat! Now that is an unimportant issue (except of course for the health of your teeth -- though one day probably doesn't hurt one's dental hygiene much), if I ever heard of one. However, instead of treating in as unimportant the halachic tradition took it very seriously and put much energy into understanding what Chazel and the tradition said on the topic.

A bit later in the day I was listening to Rav Soloveitchik's shiur "Al Hanisim Chanuka" from Boston 1971, which can be found on the http://www.bcbm.org/ website. In it Rav Soloveitchik discusses the dialectic between the importance of the individual and the community within Judaism and while I have yet to finish the shiur and probably couldn't summarize it, even if I did, the one message that came through clearly on it and through much of the other works I have listened to and read from the Rav, was how much and how deeply valued the individual is within the halacha.

The final piece of this puzzle, which brings together many strains of thought I have recently had, comes from Rav Michael Rosensweig's recently posted shiurim on the Pirkei Avos. In the first few shiurim Rav Rosensweig is discussing the first mishnah in the second parek, which reads:

Rebbe said: Which is the straight path that a person should choose for himself?
Whatever is honorable for him and gains him people's respect. Be as careful in performing a slight mitzvah as a weighty mitzvah--because you do not know the reward for mitzvos. Consider the loss caused by a mitzvah in contrast to its reward, and the gain of a sin in contrast to its loss.
Contemplate three things, and you will not come to sin. Know what is above you: An eye that sees, an ear that hears, and all of your actions are written in a book. (translation from Rav Lau on Pirkei Avos from Artscroll)

Again, there is no way for me to try to capture what Rav Rosensweig says, but at the heart of it seems to me the message that while there may truly be a hierarchy within the mitzvot, it is most important for a person to treat each mitzva with the same level of honor and respect. Or as Rav Rosensweig might say, even though I don't think he does in shiurim, a person should treat each mitzva with a "maximalist" level of love, respect and thoroughness.

While this mishnah in Pirkei Avos brings to mind images of God as a strict taskmaster watching and judging every one of our actions, on the other hand it also depicts Hashem as a listening and guarding parent who pays close attention to us and is fundamentally and profoundly concerned about our welfare.

In closing while I am sure that the Orthodox focus on strict interpretation of all mitzvot may at times be used as more of a badge of who is the most frum (most observant), what I do appreciate is that with all that R' Student writes about brushing (and there is a second part to come) at the end of the day, the two boys had different practices (one brushed and the other didn't)! For all the scrupulousness of the halacha this recognition that in some situations there can be differences and that one should respect the tradition that one is raised up in, seems to be an important, if not essential, counter weight to a overly legalistic view of the world.

For myself what I find most inspiring is that sense of importance that this discussion gives to my actions. While the world may be interested in the day-to-day activities of celebrities, politicians or reality show contestants, the message from the halacha seems to be "Everyone of us is important and essential, and each of our actions shapes us and our future and has seemingly infinite depth and significance."

This is a message that I think many, many people need these days. Since today it is easy to feel unimportant, to feel like a number or to define one's value only in what we consume. When I combine this vision regarding our actions with the importance of study, of Torah lishmah (studying Torah for its own sake), it helps see my life with a sense of depth and meaning that is difficult create on one's own within the often time's far too shallow, superficial and fast-paced world in which we live.

In closing, I am grateful to the Orthodox Jewish tradition for providing such an enormous array of online material and beautiful books in translation, like Artscroll's Schottenstein Babylonian Talmud, to help one become engaged in a conversation that began thousands of years ago and will continue for thousands of years in the future . . . What could be more important and exciting than that?

Wonderful article -- "The Twisted Wick: Talmud Study as Spiritual Practice for Post-Modern Jews [Seekers]"

2007-12-03T18:20:00.000+01:00

I read this article many months ago and want to share it as widely as possible. It is called, "The Twisted Wick: Talmud Study as Spiritual Practice for Post-Modern Jews." I would change the title to read, ". . . Post-Modern Seekers," because I obviously believe that the Talmud is a spiritual document that can be valuable for all spiritual seekers.

Here is the link to it http://www.zeek.net/print/707talmud/

One excerpt:

Talmud study as spiritual practice teaches me to pay close attention to the world that surrounds me. A page of Talmud is not just filled with other people. It is also filled with things: twisted wicks, insignificant rags, millstones, willow branches, animal skins, scattered fruits, freshly laid eggs, pickled fish and precious stones. In order to understand a page of Talmud I must be paying close attention to the world: to the angle that willows grow in, the shape of a twisted lamp wick and the moment when a rag is no longer useful. This is the stuff of Jewish sacred text and Jewish sacred living, the everyday details that surround us. Talmud study as spiritual practice is not just about being in the present and listening to other people, it is also about the sanctity of the mundane. The holiness that resides in dirty rags and infant feces!

Another excerpt:

Although God is rarely discussed explicitly in the Talmud, the texts are filled with holiness: the holiness of the moment; the sacredness of everyday objects; the sanctity of the voice of another person; the divinity within our encounters with infinity. Each time I open my Talmud I learn to see more holiness in the people and things that surround me. I find God in a twisted wick, in a tattered rag, in the opinions of my teachers and study partners and in the voices of the street filtering in through the window of my study all.

The gift(s) of the Talmud

2007-11-24T09:33:00.001+01:00

Not being able to sleep last night, I thought much about my interests and direction. Recently, I have been reading much from the Benedictine tradition, in particular commentaries on the Rule of Benedict -- a still vibrant document from around 600 CEcontaining rules about living in a monastery and elsewhere. It is a beautiful work that holds many messages for today.

I have also been exploring the poetry of Kenneth Koch, who I mentioned earlier -- his optimistic, creative and playful texts are also quite inspiring and freeing.

But in thinking about this blog and a viewpoint that that I can provide that perhaps others cannot, I returned to the Talmud as a source of meaning and understanding for me to continue to explore. While the Rule of Benedict has been and is being interpreted by a wide range of folks within and outside the monastery, even inside and outside Christianity, and the poetry of Kenneth Koch certainly can inspire, it is meant to be enjoyed and not analysed, the Talmud seems to thrive on analysis, to grow and grow and become richer from every question asked of it, every angle explored.

Therefore, since I do believe I provide a rather unusual perspective on this ancient and current text, I decided that I needed to renew my reading of, listening to and writing about this text that is certainly a gift from Hashem given us through Chazal and all following commentators. But it itself offers us the gift of providing infinite meaning to each action of our lives that often times can seem to lack much significance, much importance.

The Talmud breathes life into each moment by giving us the task of study and learning "day and night" and by focusing on every aspect of our lives it challenges us to see the importance, the beauty, the depth in each of those moments as well.

People die every day / for lack / of what is found there

2007-10-26T19:36:00.001+02:00

In one of William Carlos Williams poems he wrote:

It is difficult
to get the news from poems
yet men die every day
for lack
of what is found
there

When I think about how I feel when I am at my best and listening to Rav Michael Rosensweig's shiurim, this poem rings true.

In many, many ways it is difficult for me to get clear information or specific "spiritual" ideas or concepts from Rav Rosensweig's shiurim (i.e. "news"). What I can get from them is something far more important. Something that I would argue "people are dying for every day" -- dying, metaphorically from a loss of meaning, from a loss of creativity and passion.

At their best, poems help us focus on the particulars of our lives and find meaning within them, but we are not supposed to find answers in those poems. Only appreciation and perhaps more questions, but most importantly love -- love of the life we are given.

A few lines from another poem come to mind here. They are from Rilke's Ninth Duino Elegy:

. . . Perhaps we are only here in order to say: house,
bridge, fountain, gate, pitcher, fruit-tree, window—
at most: column, tower … But to say them,
you must understand, oh to say them more intensely than the Things
themselves ever dreamed of existing. (translated by Stephen Mitchell)

Perhaps it is this type of intensity that Rav Rosensweig means when he writes about:

the "maximalist man of destiny" from his essay "The Spiritual Legacy of Noah and Avraham" or
a "maximalist halachic lifestyle" from his essay "Chanukah as a Holiday of Idealism and Maximalism"

For Rav Rosensweig it is never a desire to find ways around the halakhah, but only a constant search to understand the "maximalist halachic lifestyle" ever more deeply and broadly. This, I believe, is why his shiurim range throughout the entire range of the Talmud. He is not simply focused on a daf or a mishnah or a gemara, but instead the entire Talmud and all commentaries on in conversation and Rav Rosensweig is always trying to find something new, to discover, a new chiddush, a new creation . . . it is this creativity and intensity that I believe on can connect to the art of poetry.

Rav Rosensweig's writings can be found at http://www.torahweb.org/rosensweig.html

More on saying "Yes" to life, even an "unexciting" one

2007-10-24T21:02:00.000+02:00

In the last entry I wrote about how rabbis Singer and Rosensweig and their intense love of the Talmud, Hashem and the Halakhah represent for me individuals and a tradition that profoundly says "Yes" to all that life brings.

This fundamental position is the one that inspires me the most and one that I look for in any tradition or practice that I explore.

Just recently I discovered a new poet, Kenneth Koch. He was a friend and colleague of John Ashbery and part of the so-called New York School of Poetry of which he once said “Maybe you can almost characterize the poetry of the New York School as having as one of its main subjects the fullness and richness of life and the richness of possibility and excitement and happiness.”

To this line I want to say, "Amen."

Yes life is so full and so rich, even if is An Unexciting Life, as the title of one of my favorite books describes it. The book is on Benedictine spirituality and its Introduction begins:

Some years ago I read a quotation from a letter of Gustave Flaubert, creator of Madame Bovary, which could easily serve as a summary of one aspect of the spirituality that stems from the Rule of St. Benedict. As I remember it, the text ran: "Be regular and ordinary in your life, like a bourgeois, so that you may violent and original in your work." What he seems to be be saying is that the price paid for the release of the inner spark of creativity is low impact living: the renunciation of superficial excitement, passive entertainment and mindless celebrity. In other words, exterior dullness is a condition of inner excitement. To describe this happy state I coined the phrase "creative monotony."

For us who live in a sensate society dominated by an appetite for excitement, no matter how vacuous its source, the preferential option for a quiet life may seem a little peculiar. No doubt in the midst of the helter skelter of a busy life, the idea of an oasis of silence has a certain appeal, but relatively few of us seriously consider building into our lives the values by which Benedict lived.

This reluctance derives, in part, from a misunderstanding of the nature of the unexciting life. The serenity envisaged by the Benedictine motto pax (peace) is not the deathly stillness of a stagnant swamp where nothing ever happens, nor is it the lassitude resulting from the abandonment of all ideals and the dodging of every challenge. The outward call, the nurtures inward growth is the fruit of a well disciplined life pursued through many years, and of battle-scarred victory in many struggles."

While everything I know and read about and listen to in regard to a Yeshiva is that they are not places of quiet or serenity, but they are places that offer something very different from the "sensate society dominated by an appetite for excitement, no matter how vacuous its source."

In future posts I will explore what Michael Casey says in An Unexciting Life, as well as other views that say a powerful Yes!

Saying "Yes" to life

2007-10-13T18:30:00.000+02:00

While I regularly fight my decision to spend time studying the Talmud. because there are times that I question why I should focus on something so particular, so specific, so Jewish?

Listening to my teachers, Rav Michael Rosensweig and Rav Shlomo Singer, I have a profound respect for who they are and how they conduct their shiurim, however, their focus is entirely on the Jewish community.

Whether it is Rav Singer tirelessly learning Succah with those in his yeshiva or Rav Rosensweig using the Brisker Derech to create innovative interpretations (chiddushiim), I do not fit into their audience, nor do all the problems and struggles of those outside the Jewish community.

But . . . when I listen carefully; when I listen between the words, I can hear a profound "Yes" being shouted and lived by each man:

a "Yes" to Hashem,
a "Yes" to Torah lishmah (studying Torah for its own sake),
a "Yes" to a "maximal religious aspiration" as Rav Rosensweig likes to describe the halachic challenge that the Torah presents,

which together create for me a strong and deep, "Yes" to life and all that life offers -- good and bad.

Super blog -- Hirhurim Musings

2007-10-12T13:19:00.000+02:00

A new resource that I found a few months ago is a blog written Rabbi Gil Student. The blog is called "Hirhurim Musings" and can be found at http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/

It is truly an amazing blog that at this moment is adding a variety of new features such as a Parashah Roundup -- a weekly collection of commentaries on the parashah (weekly Torah reading). Rabbi Student is a graduate from Yeshiva University and his audience is an Orthodox one. While I, of course, am not Orthodox, whenever I read his words, I sense a true warmth and humility, as well as a fundamental desire to love Hashem through study and sharing his study.

R' Student describes an "important policy" for his site as "This blog is intended only for the interchange of ideas for the purpose of Torah study, promoting enlightened public policy and/or the refinement of character." In particular, I sense this focus on a refinement of character his work.

The traffic on the site is also amazing -- it is not uncommon for there to be over 100 comments per entry, some from such well known Orthodox writers as Lawrence Kaplan and Arnie Lustiger.

I cannot recommend this blog highly enough.

I am back. I hope for a while

2007-10-12T10:15:00.000+02:00

In a comment to my last post from February 2007, anonymous asked, "are you ever coming back?"

Since blogging doesn't come simply to me, especially about a topic such as the Talmud, it is much easier for me to not blog, than to blog. But just knowing that someone is reading these words energizes me to pick up where I left off.

Thanks to all who read these pages . . .

Why I Study the Talmud

2007-02-10T11:14:00.000+01:00

It seems like I ask myself every day, "Why am I studying the Talmud?"

I currently am keeping up with the Daf Yomi process, reading a daf (page) a day. This is a simple morning ritual for me, sometimes reading in depth, sometimes skimming the daf for the day. One important thing that it has offered me is an overview of Jewish tradition and ritual that don't have, since I am not Jewish. While at times the topics can be obscure or seemingly repetitive, there are often wonderful, inspirational gems as well.

In addition to this for that last four months I have been trying to keep up with the class of Rav Michael Rosensweig as he covers parek Meruba of Bava Kamma. Here is a link to all the shiurim the Yeshiva University offers, which I discussed in my last post.

Rav Rosensweig's classes are extremely in-depth discussions of the Mishnah, Gemara and seemingly all the commentaries on a specific topic covered in either the Mishnah or Gemara. The difference between the Daf Yomi level of study and Rav Rosensweig's couldn't be clearer. Since September when I discovered the Rav Rosensweig's shirium, the Daf Yomi has covered over 150 daf, while Rav Rosensweig has covered 6 daf in over 50 separate shiurim each approximately 90 minutes long!

While I don't understand everything Rav Rosensweig discusses, because he uses an enormous amount Hebrew/Aramaic, over time (I have listened to 39 classes so far -- I am still 16 behind where he currently is) I have gathered more and more familiarity with the Hebrew/Aramaic.

But now to the basic question -- "Why?"

I am not Jewish and so I am not obligated to talmud Torah (studying the Torah) like traditional Jews are. The individuals to whom I am drawn like Rav Rosensweig don't represent a universalistic vision of the Talmud (for example, like Emmanuel Levinas), but a clearly orthodox and traditional vision of the Talmud and its study.

Yet, I just can't get enough of Rav Rosensweig's teachings (in other postings I will include links to his writings and other audio shiurim). There is a seriousness, clarity and yet lightness in his presentation, along with a seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of the sources that draws me in.

When I turn to other traditions that I have been drawn to in the past: Catholicism, Buddhism, philosophy and poetry -- while they offer a seemingly more universal message of love or emptiness or creativity or attention, which are clearly useful and helpful, these discussions now seem so abstract, so mystical that they don't appeal at this time.

This reminds me of what Rav Joseph Soloveitchik wrote in Halakhic Man:

It is here, in this world, that halakhic man acquires eternal life! “Better is one hour of Torah and mitzvoth in this world than the whole life of the world to come,” stated the tanna in Avot [4:17], and this declaration is the watchword of the halakhist. 30

The Halakhah is not at all concerned with a transcendent world. The world to come is a tranquil, quiet world that is wholly good, wholly everlasting, and wholly eternal, wherein a man will receive the reward for the commandments which he performed in this world. However, receiving of a reward is not a religious act;
therefore, halakhic man prefers the real world to a transcendent existence because here, in this world, man is given the opportunity to create, act, accomplish, while there, in the world to come, he is powerless to change anything at all. 32

What can be more exciting, more challenging, more inspiring than this?

Nothing!

And it is this sense of dedication and drive that I find in Rav Rosensweig's shiurim, and it is why I listen to his classes nearly every day. They help me get in touch with the "ideal of halakhic man [which] is the redemption of the world not via a higher world but via the world itself, via the adaptation of empirical reality to the ideal patterns of Halakhah." 37-38

To me the parek, Meruba, that YU has been covering -- which basically discusses the issue of stealing (gezeilah -- robbery and geneivah -- thievery) is a perfect example of looking at "empirical reality" through the "ideal patterns of Halakhah," which for myself certainly help me see my day-to-day reality with new eyes.

Amazing Bava Kamma Resources

2006-09-21T10:02:00.000+02:00

As you all know I try to spend some time each day exploring and swimming in the sea of the Talmud. Since the beginning of the latest Daf Yomi cycle, have been keeping up with it as best I can. It currently is reading the Succah tractate, which covers the festival of Succah that occurs a few days after Yom Kippur, in which traditional Jews build a succah (booth) and are supposed to eat and sleep in it for the week of the festival. I have included some excerpts in the blog.

The Talmud passages spend a LOT of time on the dimensions and measurements and materials of a succah, so it can seem rather esoteric to someone like myself who won’t be building a succah, any time soon.

However, there are other tractates of the Talmud that deal with more “real world” topics. In particular there is the order called Nezikim (damages) and within that are the Bavas (gates) – which deal with civil law.

Since I bought my Ipod in November, I have been listening to talks by Rabbi Shlomo Singer from the Passaic Torah Institute on the first chapter (of ten) of Bava Kamma (he has taken over a one and a half years of two to three per week 40-minute lectures to cover the first chapter). They are really quite wonderful and he does a wonderful job of making them relevant to our day-to-day lives.

For a nice introduction to Bava Kamma -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bava_Kamma

Now it turns out that Yeshiva University – the leading Modern Orthodox university in the States, is covering Bava Kamma this year. And that means that there are a number of lecturers presenting on the topic and they will be presenting ALL YEAR on it.

You can listen to them here – Bava Kamma lectures

There are at least 5 different Rabbis speaking about the same Perek (chapter) – that is Meruba (chapter 7), which deals with stealing and robbery. I am still trying to figure out which one I can follow most easily, since some use more Hebrew than others.

The first Mishnah of Meruba reads:

Mishnah: The rule of twofold payment is more inclusive than the rule of fourfold or fivefold payment. For the rule of twofold payment applies to both living things and to inanimate things, whereas the rule of fourfold and fivefold payment applies only to an ox or sheep alone, as it is stated: “If a man shall steal an ox or a sheep, and he slaughters it or sells it, etc. [he shall pay five cattle in place of the ox, and four sheep in place of the sheep] [Exodus 21:37]. One who steals after a thief does not pay the twofold payment, nor does one who slaughters or sells after a theif pay the fourfold or fivefold payment.

There is also an ongoing lecture by Rabbi Rothwachs, who is presenting on chapter 3 (Hamaniach) which with types of damages (for some reason they are not labeled on the search page, but can be found by clicking on the ":" near the bottom of the list. The opening Mishnah of Hamaniach reads:

Mishnah: If one places a kad in the public doman, and another person comes along and stumbles over it and breaks it, he [the pedestrian] is not liable to pay for it. And if he [the pedestrian] was damaged by it, the owner of the chavis is liable to compensate him for the damage.

A couple notes might help here: a kad is usually a jug or a pitcher, while chavis, usually means barrel. However, they are used interchangeably here and elsewhere (which of course, leads to much discussion). Also note that there is a basic premise in Bava Kamma, called adam muad l’olam, which basically means that “humans are always responsible for their actions” – to read more about it, Google “adam muad l’olam” and the first selection that comes up is my entry on my blog Talmudic Questionings!

------------------

While at times I wonder about why I am so drawn to the Talmud, but it is the nitty-gritty, real world nature of these discussions that are also completely interwoven with a sense of the transcendent that draws me back again and again.

Perhaps these new series of lectures may be just the invitation to enter this world as well.

Succah 5ab -- Can we ascend to God? Can God descend to us?

2006-09-14T08:53:00.000+02:00

Here is a fascinating back and forth discussion on whether humans can ascend to God's heavenly realm AND whether God can descend to ours -- the answer seems to be that there must always be a ten tefachim (ten handbreadth) separation of the two realms.

Let's listen to what the Sages say:

[4b] The Holy Ark was nine tefachim tall and the thickness of the Ark-cover was one tefach; we have here ten. And it is written: It is there that I will set My meetings with you, and I shall speak with you from atop the Cover.

[5a] And it was taught in a Baraisa: R’ YOSE SAYS: THE DIVINE PRESENCE HAS NEVER DESCENDED BELOW into the human domain., AND MOSES AND ELIJAH NEVER ASCENDED TO THE HEAVENS, AS IT IS STATED: AS FOR THE HEAVENS, THE HEAVENS ARE GOD’S; BUT THE EARTH HE HAS GIVEN TO MANKIND [Psalms 115:16]

And the Shechinah never descended below? But it is written: God descended upon Mount Sinai! [Exodus 19:20]

The Gemara answers: The Shechinah remained above ten tefachim from the mountaintop.

The Gemara persists: But it is written: On that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives! [Zechariah 14:4]

And Moses and Elijah never ascended to the Heavens?! But it is written: And Moses ascended to God! [Exodus 19:3]

The Gemara answers: Moses remained below ten tefachim from the Heavens.

Commentary: That is, the purely human domain is the airspace up to ten tefachim from the ground, while the purely Godly domain extends down to the ten tefachim below the lower limit of the Heavens. The intervening area is sometimes called Earth and sometimes called Heaven, and may accommodate either the Shechinah or man. (Chasam Sofer [Machon Chasam Sofer ed.]; Menachem Meishiv Nefesh, quoting Yad David; see also HaKoseiv in Ein Yaakov).

The Gemara persists: But it is written: And Elijah ascended to Heaven in the whirlwind.

The Gemara answers: Elijah remained below ten tefachim.

The Gemara again asks: But it is written: He allows him to grasp the face of the Throne; He spreads upon him His cloud.[Job 26:9] And R’ Tanchum said regarding this verse: It teaches that the Almighty spread some of the radiances of His Presence and His cloud upon [Moses].

The Gemara here, too, answers: Moses remained below ten tefachim.

The Gemara persists: Nevertheless, it is written: He allows him to grasp the face of the Throne.

The Gemara answers: The Throne was lowered for [Moses] until it reached ten tefachim, and [Moses] grasped it there. Hence, Moses did not leave the earthly domain.

. . . .

[5a2] THE TZITZ WAS A SORT OF GOLD PLATE, TWO FINGERBREADTHS WIDE AND ENCIRCLING the Kohen Gadol’s forehead FROM EAR TO EAR. AND INSCRIBED ON IT, on TWO separate LINES, were the words “HASHEM” (i.e. the Tetragrammaton) ON THE UPPER line AND “HOLY TO” ON THE LOWER. AND R’ ELIEZER THE SON OF R’ YOSE SAID: I SAW [THE TZITZ] IN THE CITY OF ROME, AND “HOLY TO HASHEM” WERE all INSCRIBED ON ONE LINE.

Commentary: [the Tetragrammaton] – the full four-letter Name of God [yud, kei, vav, kei] (Rashi to Shabbos 63b). The Baraisa, however, mentions only the first two letters to avoid spelling out the entire Name. And although these first two letters themselves form a Name [yud, kei], which also should not be spelled out, here it is permitted because the Baraisa mentions the two letters only as an allusion to the full four-letter Name.

Chasom Sofer [Machon Chasam Sofer ed.] derives from Tosafos that the prohibition against pronouncing the four-letter Name includes even stating its individual letters in order; this Tosafos, then, is the source of the custom of saying, yud, kei, vav, kei, wherein the two kei letters are replaced.
. . . .
[It is interesting to note that even though R’ Eliezer gave an eyewitness account that contradicted the Sages’ opinion, the Sages still relied on their tradition. This is because the Sages concede that a tzitz is valid “after the fact” if both words are inscribed on one line. The Sages felt that the tzitz observed by R’ Eliezer was just such a case, and therefore did not disprove their insistence that “in the first instance” the words appear on two lines.]
. . . .
[5b1] And what is the meaning of the word k’ruv [cherub]? R’ Abahu said: “like a child,” for indeed in Babylonia they call a child “ravya.”

Abaye said to [R’ Ababu]: But then, how do you explain that which is written: the one face, the face of the Cherub; the second face, the face of a man. [Ezekiel 10:14]. Now, if the word “cherub” (k’ruv) means “like a child,” then the face of the Cherub is the same as the face of a man! Since, however, the verse separates “cherub” and “man” into two categories, it would seem that the word “cherub” does not refer to a child.
. . . .
Rather, according to R’ Yehudah, [the Sages] learned an oral tradition that a succah requires walls ten tefachim tall. For Rav Chiya bar Ashi said in the name of Rav: Measures, interpretations and partitions are oral laws given to Moses at Sinai that have no Scriptural basis. Hence, according to R’ Yehudah, the minimum height requirement of a legal wall including a succah wall, is a Halachah LeMoshe MiSinai.

Succah 4ab

2006-09-14T08:40:00.000+02:00

If [the succah] was taller than twenty amos and the leaves of the palm branches that comprise its s’chach were dangling within twenty amos of the floor, if their shade is greater than their sunlight [the succah] is valid. But if not, [the succah] remains invalid.

. . . .

Where [the succah] was taller than twenty amos and one built a platform in its middle—If there is from the edge of the platform until the wall four amos in each direction, [the succah] is invalid. But if the distance is less than four amos, [the succah] is valid.

. . . .

If [the succah] was taller than twenty amos and one built in it a pillar that is ten tefachim tall, and it contains the minimum required area for a succah, Abaye thought to say extend and raise the partition on each of the pillar’s sides to the s’chach above, creating a valid succah on the pillar top. However, Rava said [to Abaye]: We need noticeable walls and there are none.

The Rabbis taught – ONE DROVE FOUR POLES into the roof of a house AND PLACE S’CHACH ACROSS THEM without building walls between the poles, R’ YAAKOV RULES VALID AND THE SAGES INVALIDATE.

. . . .

Teiku – Let [the question] stand unresolved.

Succah 3ab

2006-09-14T08:37:00.000+02:00

And [a succah] that accommodates only one’s head and most of [his body], Beis Shammai rule invalid, while Beis Hillel rule valid.

Who taught this Baraisa that the Rabbis taught? A HOUSE THAT DOES NOT CONTAIN FOUR AMOS BY FOUR AMOS IS EXEMPT FROM THE MEZUZAH AND FROM FENCE; AND IT IS NOT CONTAMINATED BY tzaraas AFFLICTIONS; AND IT IS NOT IRREDEEMABLY SOLD AS ARE THE HOUSES OF WALLED CITIES; AND WE DO NOT RETURN ON ITS ACCOUNT FROM THE WARRIORS; AND WE DO MAKE AN ERUV WITH [SUCH A HOUSE], NOR DO WE MAKE A SHITUFEI WITH IT; AND WE DO NOT PLACE AN ERUV chatzeiros IN IT; AND WE MAY NOT MAKE [SUCH A HOUSE] A PROTRUSION BETWEEN TWO CITIES; AND BROTHERS AND PARTNERS DO NOT DIVIDE [SUCH A HOUSE].

For the next number of lines the Gemara explains the reasons behind this Baraisa.

. . . .

What follows are related rulings to the issue that a succah more than 20 amos high is invalid.

If [a succah] was more than twenty amos high and one came to reduce [its height] by mattresses and cushion, it is not a valid reduction.

Excerpts from the Succah Tractate

2006-09-14T08:30:00.000+02:00

I am no Talmud expert. But I do love it and have been keeping up with reading a "daf" a day now for about one and a half years. A little over a week ago, we started the Succah tractate.

To help me with my reading, I often type in small sections of the text that I find interesting or descriptive of the ongoing discussion. I will begin sharing some of those from this point on. Note that all text comes from the magnificent Artscroll translations.

Today, I will share a few passages from Succah 2ab:

Mishnah: A succah above twenty amos high is invalid. However, R’ Yehudah rules valid. And [a succah] that is not ten tefachim high, or that does not have three walls, or whose sunny area is great than its shaded is invalid.

Gemara: We learned there in a Mishnah (Eruvin 2a): A MAVOI IS HIGHER THAN TWENTY AMOS ONE MUST LOWER. R’ YEHUDAH SAYS: HE NEED NOT.

What is unique about succah, where [the Tanna] states “invalid,” and what is unique about mavoi, where [the Tanna] states a remedy for a korah higher than twenty amos? Why did the Tanna employ dissimilar language when ruling on the same type of disqualification?

The Gemara answers: succah is Biblical, the Tanna can state “invalid.” However, mavoi is Rabbinic, [the Tanna] can state only a remedy.
. . . .
Now, until twenty amos a person is aware that he is dwelling in a succah. However, higher than twenty amos, a person is not aware that he is dwelling in a succah, because the eye does not notice [the s’chach].

second opinion – until twenty amos a person sits in the shade of the succah. However, higher than twenty amos, a person is not sitting in the shade of succah, but in the shade of the walls.

third opinion – the Torah tells: for all seven days leave fixed dwelling and sit in a temporary dwelling. Now, until twenty amos a person can make his dwelling a temporary dwelling. However, above twenty amos a person cannot make his dwelling a temporary dwelling; rather, a fixed dwelling.
. . . .
for everyone the legal fitness of a succah is one’s head, most of [his body] and his table.
. . . .
But more than four amos, the opinion of all [the succah] is valid.

R’ YEHUDAH SAID: AN INCIDENT INVOLVING QUEEN HELENA IN LOD, THAT HER SUCCAH WAS HIGHER THAN TWENTY AMOS, AND THE ELDERS WERE ENTERING AND LEAVING THERE AND THEY DID NOT SAY A WORD TO HER. [THE SAGES] SAID TO HIM: A PROOF FROM THERE?! [HELENA] WAS A WOMAN, AND IS EXEMPT FROM THE mitzvah of THE SUCCAH!

Shiur on idol worship

2006-08-27T10:06:00.000+02:00

Online shiur from the Dafyomi Advancement Forum on Idol Worship

Torah as a drug

2006-08-18T09:43:00.000+02:00

I came across these words today in my Daf Yomi reading (Yoma 72b):

And this is reflected by that which Rava said: Where one uses [the Torah] skillfully, it is a drug of life, but where one uses it unskillfully, it is a drug of death.

I think we can see the reality of these words being played out all around us today in how religion is being abused to create hatred and death, instead of love and life.

Adam Muad L'Olam

2006-07-18T13:05:00.000+02:00

The phrase "adam muad l'olam" is one of the most important phrases within the Talmudic Bava Kamma tractate. Bava Kamma means "First Gate" and covers civil and criminal law.

A basic translation would be that "man is always a muad." To begin to understand this idea we first need to learn what a muad is.

The basic focus of Bava Kamma is on damagers and their penalities. The Sages use an ox to represent one's property and then they explore innumerable ways that this property (the ox) can cause damage. In fact, they delineate three specific ways an ox can cause damage: shein, regel and keren. Shein (lit.tooth) represents possible damage that an ox does when it eats. Regel (lit. foot) represents damage caused when the ox walks. And keren (lit. horm) represents damage caused when the ox gores something with its horn.

Within the Bava Kamma each of these types are determined to represent a more general type of damage:

Shein -- The act of damage that an animal does in the case of normal self-gratification.
Regel -- The act of damage that an animal does in the course of normal movement.
Keren -- The act of damage that an animal does with destructive intent and which is unusual for animals and their species.

Within keren there is another distinction between a tam and a muad. When an ox causes damage by goring another animal, it is considered a tam (lit. ordinary) for the first three times it gores. After the third time, it is considered a muad (lit. warned one). For the first three gorings, the owner of the ox is obligated to pay only half the damages done. When the ox becomes a muad, the owner must pay full damages from his best property.

So, if we return to the phrase -- adam muad l'olam -- and know that adam means "man or humankind" and l'olam means "always," we see that the phrase can be interpreted to mean that "humans are always warned ones." Another way of saying this is that we are "always responsible." In fact, in the Mishnah on daf 26a in Bava Kamma where this phrase is used, it goes on to say that humans are liable for damages they do whether awake or asleep, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

While the Talmudic Sages discuss this issue in amazing depth and detail, it is the online shiurim (lectures) on Bava Kamma from Rabbi Shlomo Singer from the PTI Yeshiva that have brought the importance of this idea most clearly home. As he stresses over and over and over again, if it is true that adam muad l'olam, then we have to be ever vigilant about each of our actions and each of our words -- we are responsible for the consequences. We are muad. We have been warned, so we have to focus much energy on our improving our character (our midos) to ensure that we do not hurt others with our actions or words.

Rabbi Singer does a wonderful job throughout his shiurim in bringing the often complicated Talmudic analysis into our everyday lives. And I believe that the phrase -- adam muad l'olam -- is a wonderful reminder to keep in our minds as we move about in the world and touch the lives of so many people.

Texts and creativity -- a response to a comment

2006-06-25T14:06:00.000+02:00

I recently received an interesting comment that I would like to share with you along with my response:

Comment:
I find your comments asserting the elevated status of a Jew in sanctifying the physical world a glaring contradiciton to your earlier reflections on creativity and dogma. To suppose that any made [sic] made text, be it Talmud, Torah, New Testatment, Koran, or Vedas, confers any special power to imbue mundane reality with spiritual fullness seems absurd at best.

Response:
Perhaps I agree with you more than you think. In looking back at the quotation your comments are connected to, it clearly is a very Jewish-centric position that I am quoting, which does inflate the value of the Torah.

What I hear you saying is that no "man made" text can do that. First, I do agree that these texts, particularly the Oral Torah (i.e. the Talmud and all its ongoing commentaries) is man made (what else could they be, since as the Talmud says, "The Torah is not in heaven" -- meaning it has been give to humanity to interpret and extend.

However, most interstingly, what I do find incredible is that at its best this Oral Torah is actually a source great of creativity and an antidote to dogma, as a recent shiur on Halakha and Technology reminded me, when it made clear that a 2000 year-old document can be used to define laws for situations unimaginable when it was first written. If that isn't creativity, I don't what is.

I profoundly believe that the creativity that has been at the heart of the Talmudic project has in fact provided a level of "spiritual fullness" for those who believe and follow it. The spiritual fullness only comes from commitment and dedication and is not something that magically occurs. Whether this text "imbues mundane reality with spiritual fullness" for someone outside that group is not really the point.

Overall, I just marvel at the power of texts and those individuals and communities that interpret them to create ever new visions of life and reality.

Warmly,
Jeff

A New Halakha .. a poem

2006-06-12T16:06:00.000+02:00

finding a home, a place to rest, a place to act
but there is no home for me here
no place to simply rest

the loneliness is intense,
the depressed feelings of why I don’t do more,
why don’t I contribute more

the world cries in pain
and I sit and read the Talmud
and Rav Soloveitchik

deeply felt traditions, but
isolated, limited,
not expansive enough for me

perhaps that is what I desire
is something to hold me in,
to reign in my wild ride of exploration

yet with the understanding
that love of God, love of the infinite IS everything.
but the word “love” does nothing
to change things

what can change
all levels, all lines, all
scales of magnitude?

they are all changing all the time anyway
must we do anything,
or must we do nothing?

I sometimes feel that everything
rests on me, everything waits for me
to create something new,

don’t we need something new,
but not simplistic, not utilitarian,
but prayerful, hopeful, wonder-full

yet demanding,

demanding faith, devotion, conviction,
passion

passion of love and acceptance and dedication
not the passion of exclusion, isolation, righteousness

perhaps it is this passion, this devotion, this dedication
that I find within the pages of the Talmud and in
words of the Rav and in the restrictions of halakha

but can we create new halakha
that are not simply our own desires,
our own pleasures

but in some way honor
and demand a total commitment
of love and dedication?

a halakha that

“believes that there is only one world –
not divisible into secular and hallowed sectors –
which can either plunge into ugliness and hatefulness,
or be roused to meaningful, redeeming activity,
gathering up all latent powers into a state of holiness."

Copyright (c) Jeff Wild, 2006

Yes and No -- a poem

2006-06-12T12:48:00.000+02:00

As simple as “Yes” and “No.”
Each moment asks a question:
Love or hate?
Hope or despair?
Possibility or stagnation?
Life or death?

Our choices create the world.
At times it is easier to side
with “No,” with despair, with hate.

But this easy path only leads
to more of the same,
more darkness, more death,
more night.

The path of saying “Yes” to life
may be hard, but it is the only way out –

out to the Light, to Life, to Hope, to Love,
to a future for us all.

With Mary we can say, “Yes” to Love,
to Love that is God,
to a God who is Love,
to the resurrection of Love within us and
a “No” to the crucifixion of Love.

Love will rise only if it rises with us.
We are responsible.
We have the choice
with each interaction,
with each breath,
with each “Yes.”

We are one.
We are held in God’s Love,
we are all expressions of that Love,
needing love, living love.

Humility calls us to love all God’s creation –
God help us, guide us, become us?

God becomes us . . .
Each moment held in God’s hand we have life.

God becomes us at each moment.

Copyright (c) Jeff Wild, 2006

Brightening our faces

2006-05-31T14:12:00.000+02:00

from Shekalim 8b

A certain noblewoman once perceived that [R’ Yehudah bar Il’ai’s] countenance was radiant. She said to him: Old man, old man! One of the following three things is true about yourself: Either you are drunk with wine, or you are a usurer, or you are a pig breeder. He said to her: Let the spirit of that woman suffer agony! For not one of these three things is true about myself. Rather, my countenance shines because my Torah learning is accessible to me. For it is written thus: A man’s wisdom brightens his face. [Ecclesiastes 8:1]

R’ Abahu once came to Tiberias, and the students of R’Yochanan who were there perceived that his countenance was radiant. The students told R’ Yochanan: R’ Abahu has apparently found a treasure! [R’ Yochanan] approached him, and asked him: What new Torah teaching have you heard? [R’ Abahu] responded to him: I heard an ancient Tosefta. [R’ Yochanan] applied to him the verse: A man’s wisdom brightens his face.

The question I want to ask here is what wisdom brightens your face and the face of those around you?

Today, with so much anger and hatred within the world the searching for wisdom powerful enough to “brighten” our face seems either forgotten or lost in the onrush of horrible news. I love and admire those that study tirelessly the Talmud with the hope that their face will be brightened by this wisdom. But I also wonder, how this wisdom can be used to brighten the face of those in agony around us?

Clearly, the Talmud holds great wisdom that has maintained the Jewish people for thousands of years. What truths can we find within it for today's world and not just the Orthodox Jewish community?

Making This World Holy

2006-04-30T12:33:00.000+02:00

One the strongest things that draws me to study the teachings of Rav Joseph B. Solovetichik and the Talmud as a whole is the focus on this world and making this world holy. The focus on embracing the possiblities, opportunities and blessings of this world, as well as creating and discovering a level of holiness that is so easily overlooked.

Within a shiur entitled "The Infinite Value of Human Life" by Rav Yitzchak Blau in the course on Understanding Aggada from Yeshivat Har Etzion, I found these words that I think express this point beautifully.

[Within the Halakhic Man] Rav Soloveitchik argues that the man of science shows interest only in this world of physics and biology, while the standard man of religion would like to escape this limited world and move on to a transcendent plane. Unlike the above two figures, Halakhic Man attempts to realize transcendence in this world, employing Halakha as a means for such realization.

According to Rav Soloveitchik, this explains why tumat meit , impurity caused by a human corpse, is the most severe form of ritual defilement. This halakha conveys the strongly negative attitude of halakha towards death. Unlike Socrates, we do not look forward to death as a golden chance to be released from the limiting shackles of the body. Instead, we treasure every day of life as a precious chance to engage in Torah and mitzvot. The world to come may be the place to receive our final reward, but "the receiving of a reward is not a religious act" (Halakhic Man, p. 32). It is only this flesh-and-blood world that is the world of spiritual toil and accomplishment.

Here are couple more quotes from Halakhic Man on this point:

It is here, in this world, that halakhic man acquires eternal life! “Better is one hour of Torah and mitzvoth in this world than the whole life of the world to come,” stated the tanna in Avot [4:17], and this declaration is the watchword of the halakhist. 30

However, receiving of a reward is not a religious act; therefore, halakhic man prefers the real world to a transcendent existence because here, in this world, man is given the opportunity to create, act, accomplish, while there, in the world to come, he is powerless to change anything at all. 32

Halakhic man, on the contrary, longs to bring transcendence down into this valley of the shadow of death—i.e., into our world—and transform it into a land of the living. 40

Every day, at every moment, with every person we meet this is the challenge -- how can I hallow this moment, this person?

WITT? -- Thinking and Living

2006-04-28T11:19:00.000+02:00

In keeping with the Internet world's love of acronyms -- I have decided to create one "WITT?," which stands for "What is the Talmud?" :-)

In a recent comment, Rabbi Gluskin, stated that the “Talmud then is ultimately about helping people to think in order to figure out how to behave.”

The key to me in this sentence is the idea that Talmud is something (the Oral Torah, a conversation, a scripture, etc.) that helps us and teaches us how to think in order to help us understand how to “live.” I would use “live” instead of “behave,” because I think it is a more open and flexible word than “behave,” which to my ear, at least, has a lot of baggage.

What is essential is the connection between thinking and living. Obviously from a traditional Jewish perspective this “living” has to do with keeping the mitzvot, the halachah of the Torah. Yet, if we open ourselves to the overall perspective of dialogue, debate, preservation of differing opinions and love of Hashem within the Talmud, then I would argue one can find within the Talmud universal hints and methods for living a more vibrant and open life. A life that embraces the differences that exist and continually strives to find the best, the most holy way to act in a specific moment, within a specific situation.

What is the Talmud? (3)

2006-04-26T10:25:00.000+02:00

As a follow-up to the story of Akiva and Moses, I first want to share some of the traditional commentary that Artscroll includes in its Schottenstein Edition of the Talmud Bavli:

Commentary to tagin:
Rambam writes in the introduction to his commentary on the Torah that all the world's wisdom, physics and metaphysics, science and mysticism, are contained in the words and letters of the Torah, in their standard and anomalous shapes, in their tagin and points, and in their allusions.

Generally speaking, the Talmud and Midrash do not cite expositions of tagin. However, there is a Midrashic work, Midrash R' Akiva ben Yosef (found in Otyar HaMidrashim), that contains many such teachings, of both Aggadic and halachic natures.

Commentary to "[Moses'] strength ebbed"
Moses did not recognize the mode of Torah discussion that was taking place between R' Akiva and his students. Although the premises of the discussion were based on traditions from Moses, as the Gemara makes clear immediately, yet R' Akiva and Moses approached knowledge of the Torah in fundamentally different ways: Moses grasped the Torah through prophecy and an internal comprehension that was a result of cleaving to the Divine, not through an external intellectual analysis, which is the lot of later generations. Any novellae that R' Akiva, and his students arrived at were known to Moses, but they were in a different language of the mind and heart. Hence, they were unintelligible to Moses.

Commentary to "[Moses'] mind was relieved"
Moses was relieved when he realized that what R' Akiva was saying was based on a tradition handed down from him (even though Moses had not, in fact, received this tradition yet. This was not an issue of pride; Moses was the humblest of all men (Numbers 12:3). Rather, he was relieved when he realized that R' Akiva's external mode of Torah study leads back to the same internal understanding of Torah that he had received from God.

[It is clear from R' Akiva's reply that all of the halachos that he was teaching indeed derived from the Torah received by Moses. Those who would deliberately misinterpret the Gemara and attribute Moses' lack of understanding to "innovations" that were supposedly made by R' Akva are not only heretics, but are proven wrong by a careful reading of this very passage.]

Commentary to "meat market"
R' Akiva was tortured to death by having his flesh combed with iron dombs (Rashi) [As a final indignity, the Romans sent the combed flesh to the butcher shops to be sold there.]

Commentary to "This is of My part"
Moses' inability to understand R' Akiva's torah is related to his inablity to understand R' Akva's fate. The Gemara states elsewhere that fifty gates of understanding were created and forty-nine were given to Moses, but the fiftieth gate was not. The decisions to give the Torah through Moses and not through R' Akiva and to ordain this death for R' Akiva were in the realm of the fiftieth gate, in the realm of God's thoughts. ["Thought" in this context refers to ideas that cannot be expressed in mere speech.] God tells Moses, "Quiet!" because a person is not allowed to explore intellectually that which he is constitutionally incapable of understanding (see BT Chagigah 11b-12a, 13a). This boundary varies for each person and a person can broaden his intellectual horizon, but there is always a point beyond which a person will force himself into mental desolation. For Moses, this point was the fiftieth gate, and God reproached him to probed no further.

What is the Talmud? (2)

2006-04-22T15:32:00.000+02:00

In reviewing the first entry in on What is the Talmud?, I thought that I might use some more of my own reflections, along with links and citations as needed, to give a sense of what the Talmud is, and what it is to me.

If I try to find one word to describe the Talmud, it would be "conversation" -- an incredibly wide-ranging and timeless conversation in which the Chazal (the Sages from the Talmud), plus the various commentators Rashi, Rashbam, Rambam, the Gra, etc., plus the current melamed (teachers of Talmud) and the students (each of us) all sit together and have an unbelievably lively discusion, debate -- conversation.

The topics for those conversations can be about anything from what time one can say the evening Shema, to how to keep the Sabbath, to what you should do if you find money in a store, to what happens if your property damages another's property, etc. The topics are seemingly infinite and the conversation that has gone on for over 2,000 years will clearly continue without end into the future.

One of the basic distinctions within the Talmud is between halachah (laws) and aggadah (stories). While I clearly find the aggadah, on the surface, more interesting, Rav Soloveitchik has proven there is an enormous reservoir of creative and interesting insights that one can find or create from the halachahs as well.

To end this post, I will share one of the Talmud's most famous and most beloved stories. It is story that does much to prove that the Talmud and the Jewish tradition itself is one rich with creativity!

Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: When Moses ascended to the Heavenly Heights, he found the Holy One, Blessed is He, as He was sitting and attaching crowns to some of the letters. That is, although the Torah was completely written, He was still adding tagin to certain letters. [Moses] said to Him, "Master of the Universe, who is holding You back from giving the Torah as it is?" [God] said to him, "There is one man who is destined to exist at the end of many generations, Akiva ben Yosef is his name, and it is he who will expound upon each and every point heaps and heaps of halachos." [Moses] said before [God] , "Master of the Universe, show him to me!" [God] said to him, "Turn around and see what is behind you." He found himself in R' Akiva's class. Moses went and sat at the end of eight rows of students, but as he listened to the give-and-take between R' Akiva and his students, he did not understand what they were saying. Disheartened [Moses'] strength ebbed. However, once they reached a certain matter that required a source. [R' Akiva's] students asked him, "Teacher, from where do you know this?" and [R' Akiva] replied to them, "It is a halachah transmitted orally to Moses at Sinai."

Upon hearing this, [Moses'] mind was relieved. He returned and came before the Holy One, Blessed is He. [Moses] said before Him, "Master of the Universe, You have someone like this and You give the Torah through me?! Give it through R' Akiva!" [God] said to him, "Quiet! Thus has it arisen in the thoughts before Me; this is part of My greater plan to which you are not privy." [Moses] said before Him, "Master of the Universe, You have shown me his Torah, now show me his reward." [God] said to him, "Turn around and see what is behind you." [Moses] turned around and saw that people were weighing the flesh from [R' Akiva's body] in the butcher's meat market in order to sell it. [Moses] said before Him, "Master of the Universe! This is Torah and this is its reward?!" [God] said to him, "Quiet! This is part of My greater plan to which you are not privy."

This translation comes from the Schottenstein Edition of the Talmud Bavli from Artscroll.

From the mountain to the table

2006-04-15T10:57:00.000+02:00

Pesachim 88a

And R’ Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: Many peoples will go and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of Hashem, to the House of the God of Jacob etc.? [Isaiah 2:3] Why does the verse specify the God of Jacob? Is the Temple only the house of the God of Jacob, and not also the house of the God of Abraham and Isaac?! Rather, the verse teaches that the Temple is not like the description found in the context of Abraham, concerning whom it is written “mountain,” [Genesis 22:14] as it is stated: like it is said today, “On the mountain Hashem is seen.” And it is not like the description found in the context of Isaac, concerning whom it is written “field,” – as it is stated: Isaac went out to pray in the field. [Genesis 24:63] Rather, it is like the description found in the context of Jacob, who called it “house,” – as it is stated: He named that place “the House of God.” [Isaiah 28:19]

One of the many interpretations of this aggadah (story) is that each of the patriarchs and their images (mountain, field and house) symbolize their own paths, their own ways, their own places of communing with Hashem/God. As the Rabbis say, at first Abraham’s path was one like a mountain – very difficult to follow for most people. Isaac made things more accessible by making this place to meet God like a field, but it was still not close to everyone. It was only Jacob who made the path focused on the house, thus bringing this path, this spiritual journey right into the home, into a far more accessible and secure location.

What if we placed Jesus into this story and ask, “How did Jesus make this path, this journey even more accessible and universal?” Perhaps the image for Jesus would be the “table” – which is even more accessible and universal than a house, since it is not just for those who are within the house, but for anyone who sits down at the table and shares a meal.

Perhaps we can learn from this that the spiritual journey, which is so often described esoterically as a path up the mountain (many paths, of course, up this mountain), is just as easily found at the table, at the moment we share a meal and break bread with another. Clearly, there is something so exciting and thrilling about seeing the path to God as a long and challenging journey up a mountain, while imagining our vision and understanding expanding and getting “closer” to God as we progress higher and higher. And while seeing the place of meeting God as the table, which Jesus shared with so many, certainly has a different feeling of “importance” and “exclusivity,” it may be a path that is even more challenging than a lonely climb up the mountain.

What is the Talmud? (1)

2006-04-07T14:43:00.000+02:00

What I realize is that I am sure many of you reading this blog know little about the Talmud, so I am going to start a series of entries providing some background and resources to begin to offer a glimpse at the "sea of the Talmud" -- this is a tradition expression of the size and depth of the Talmud.

Below is some text from the introductory lecture of an online class on learning to study the Talmud. The class itself is offered by the Virtual Beit Midrash. This is a wonderful site that provides an enormous amount of in-depth, traditional classes on all topics of Judaism.

The specific text comes from a Introduction to the Study of the Talmud class. All classes are downloadable. I think it provides a helpful place to begin to learn more about the Talmud

Talmud consists of two distinct primary texts, the Mishna and the Gemara. Surrounding these two, there exists a huge literature, spanning 1800 years and thousands of books, of commentaries, summations, and extended discussions, which continues to this day.
When we study Talmud, we are in fact addressing that entire literature, though obviously much of it must wait for advanced levels of learning. But even on the beginning level of this course we are not studying a BOOK, but rather a literature, which in fact precedes the actual Talmud, and of course extends beyond it. From a literary point of view, the Talmud is the basis and core text, most importantly because it is authoritative, and hence is the starting-point for any subsequent discussion.
The Mishna is printed as a distinct work, and often studied separately. In editions of the Talmud, the Mishna is printed together with the Gemara as a unit, and that is the way we shall be studying.
The Mishna is a halakhic code. It presents a set of rulings on all halakhic matters, in all areas of life. True to the nature of the Oral Law, it is not generally written in a monolithic manner, but rather preserves controversies and disagreements, hundreds of them, from the authorities of the Mishnaic period, roughly the first century and a half of the Common Era. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, the head of Palestinian Jewry, compiled the present form of the Mishna and thereby summarized and codified the halakhic rulings of the previous centuries. This was the first code of Jewish law.
The Gemara is the record of two centuries of discussion, argument, elucidation, and controversy surrounding the text of the Mishna, first in the land of Israel, and subsequently in the great Torah centers of Babylonia.
Unlike the Mishna, the Gemara is not a code. It is more like the protocol of a debate, spanning several hundred years and more, where the basic literary form is question and answer, and the most common conveyor of meaning is disagreement.
It is impossible to READ Gemara; you have to join the discussion in order to grasp the meaning of what is going on. In order to understand an answer, you have to understand the question, and that understanding is far more important than summarizing the conclusion. It would be quite accurate to say that Gemara is more about halakhic reasoning than about halakha itself, though obviously the goal is halakha.
In fact, in most cases, the halakhic conclusion is not explicit in the Talmudic text itself, but will be found only in later rabbinic works. It is quite common to find an extensive rabbinic discussion of the "hava amina," the opening and ultimately rejected understanding, for the fact that this position did not survive the scrutiny of the Talmudic discussion does not make it unimportant. It is often correct to state that only by understanding the "hava amina" can we understand the conclusion, the "maskana."

If there are any questions about this text or anything else on this blog, please ask it in a comment.

From "Ethics of Responsiblity" by Walter Wurzburger

2006-04-03T21:44:00.000+02:00

from Ethics of Responsibility: Pluralistic Approaches to Covenantal Ethics, by Walter Wurzburger

From my perspective, Halakhah represents not merely “the way of God”—that is, a divinely revealed body of laws; it also functions as a way to God, leading not necessarily to mystical union with Him, but to a life dedicated to responding to Him through obedience to His commandments and imitation of His ways. p3

One the ideas that first drew me to the work of Rabbi Soloveitchik was his emphasis on what he described as the "democratic" nature of the Halakhah. In the sense that anyone can perform the various mitzbvot (commandments) and can find God through those actions. One does not have to have some special mystical or contemplative ability. I find this immensely important because I think very few individuals truly have a mystical side to them. Therefore, finding some way to make our everyday actions and life "holy" is key.

The applicability of the norms and values of Jewish Covenantal Ethics is by no means restricted to the members of the Jewish Covenantal Community. Although at the present time the religiously committed Jewish community seems to turn ever more inward and tends to focus primarily upon the particularistic and nationalistic elements of its heritage, I believe it to be of special importance to call attention to its universalistic components. While the ritualistic elements of Judaism are completely particularistic and intended exclusively for individuals who either by birth or by conversion qualify as members of the People of the Covenant, Jewish ethical teachings are not subject to the same kind of limitation but are viewed as possessing universal relevance. p8

I will share more quotes from this work over time. One of the reasons I am drawn to Judaism is the "democratic," this-worldly focus and its emphasis on ethics. However, I must admit that at times I feel, as Rabbi Wurzburger alludes to, that their vision and interests are far too focused on either Israel or simply Jews as a whole. There are very few "universal" messages presented. In some ways, we should be happy that the Jews are not trying to convert everyone and have always had belief in the righteousness of the righteous from other traditions. But with the world in so much pain these days, I do believe that there are universal qualities within Judaism that can be of support and service to believers of other traditions, or simply those seeking to learn more and be closer to God.

Two "yous" and omnibenevolence

2006-04-01T10:08:00.000+02:00

From a discussion of the weekly Torah portion within Jerusalem Post, comes these words from Shlomo Riskin:

I believe the meaning [about why God often calls Moses' name twice] will become clear when we take note of a time-honored mystical concept . . . that there are two images for every individual: the image of the person as he/she is, and the image of the person as it appears on the ethereal chariot. As Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik once explained, there are in reality two yous: you as you are in this world, and the you who you have the potential to become as engraved on God's throne of glory. Ultimately, we are judged in terms of how great a distance there is between these two yous - between who we are in reality and who we could have been.

I find this idea of the "two yous" to hold much truth -- in that I would agree that it is healthy and beneficial that we constantly challenge ourselves to live up to our "potential." But the BIG QUESTION is what we see that potential as? Do we interpret it as some type of career or sports or health or financial "potential"? Or do we try to see it as the potential that God expects of us?

If it is God that we look to, then what is expected of us? Each tradition would seem to have its own answer. However, what if we asked ourselves with the light and understanding of the traditions behind us, what does it mean to "walk in ways of Lord"?

Rabbi Walter Wurzburger, a current favorite commentator of mine, states that the laws of the nature and the laws of ethics "are grounded in the omnibenevolent will of God. The link between the real world of nature (the is) and the ideal world of ethics (the ought) is expressed in Psalm 19. After proclaiming that 'The heavens declare the glory of God . . . ,' the Psalmist turns to the normative sphere and continues with 'The law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul.'"

What if we could believe that this idea of "omnibenevolence" [I love that word!] is not simply a description of God's will, but our own potential? Then we would have a challenge before us that I would claim is worthy of each of us who was "created in the image of God."

The Mahayana Buddhists would describe this "omnibenevolence" as a wish and a commitment to help every sentient being find happiness and reach enlightenment. While one talmudic opinion tells us, “it is preferable to throw oneself into a burning furnace rather than embarrass another person publicly.” And of course, Jesus' own giving up of his life for others is another example of this omnibenevolence,

An "omnibenevolent you" -- that is a potential to strive towards.

Doctrine versus social convention

2006-03-31T14:13:00.000+02:00

In a comment on a recent posting, one reader wrote about their own Mormon traditon and how the basic tenets of the faith embraced or reconciled "individual creativity with spirituality," but how the social convention made it "easy to overlook."

I believe that this description is true for perhaps all religious faiths and even many, many intellectual movements. The original source (you could call it revelation) often holds and encourages much individual creativity, and in fact, strives to nurture our freedom and spirituality.

Yet, over time as faiths and movements grow and develop, it is easy for them to become more rigid and controlled. That initial entrance of the divine into our world and the wonder and awe it can draw from us, can very easily be bottled up and tamed.

One of the things I love about the Talmud (please realize that I am not Jewish, but simply have a deep affection for the tradition as I read it) is that it seems to do its best to not bottle up God's revelation, but instead to strive to find Hashem in places and situations, one would never normally look. And by keeping the dissenting opinions alive within it, the Talmud does much to allow the Divine to continue to reveal Herself through our study and exploration.

The late Rabbi Walter Wurzburger from an article in Tradition magazine volume 3.1 from 1960 adds these lovely lines about the Talmudic tradition:

Halakhic questions call for a creative approach; they can not be answered by some electronic calculator which grinds out its answers the way an electrical brain finds the solution to a complex differential equation. It is precisely this creative aspect of the halakhic process that led the sages to the remarkable statement "both these and these are the words of the living God," that at times even conflicting halakhic opinions represent, in the final analysis, legitimate elucidations of the word of God.

The Torah "is not in Heaven"; it must be interpreted by the proper authorities [perhaps by each individual] of each generation.

When, according to the Aggadah, Rabbi Akiba found in the Torah meanings that had eluded Moses, he was not creating a new Torah. What he did was something altogether different. Reading the Torah in the light of the conditions of an entirely different age, he discovered chidushei Torah, new meanings of the Torah. Yet, in spite of their manifest novelty, there were implicitly contained in the Torah as received by Moses on Mount Sinai.

To employ the well know rabbinic simile, just as different sparks are emitted when a hammer breaks a rock into pieces, so does the word of God yields numerous meanings. And it is the function of the Halakhah scholar, employing creative halakhic processes, to unravel the specific meaning which the timeless message of Sinai holds for his own time.

Rabbi Wurzburger alludes to a number of very famous Talmudic stories that I will try to share in the next few days. His words also remind me of the stories I have heard and read about Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, who was one of the leading Orthodox thinkers and leaders of the 20th century.

There are innumerable stories about him that often have him present in very different lights (sometimes from the Right, sometimes from the Left and even the Center). But one thing seems clear -- he rarely decided specific individual halakhic or legal questions for people. If you came to him with a question, he would encourage you to read the texts yourself and come up with a decision. He did not want to make the decision for the person. This perspective seems to fit perfectly with his lifelong desire to encourage creativity in his students.

And it is this creativity that is so important for an individual, for a community and for an entire faith to keep alive.

The importance of creativity in the Rav’s thought

2006-03-28T20:14:00.001+02:00

At times when one views an Orthodox tradition – whether that is Orthodox Judaism, Christianity, Islam or Buddhism, to name a few – one usually doesn’t think of “creativity” as an important quality. One instead views it as dogmatic, stagnant and repressive. And if anything, frightened of creativity and change.

Well, I would contend that Orthodox Judaism and in particular the thought of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, does embrace creativity and even places creativity at the center of its thought.

Here are a number of quotations from Walter Wurzburger’s article in Tradition, volume 30.4 1996 entitled, “The Centrality of Creativity in the Thought of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik.”

According to the Rav, human beings, as bearers of the image of God, are mandated to imitate the Creator. In view of the fact that the commandment, ve-halakhta bi-drakhav (imitatio Dei) refers exclusively to the divine moral attributes, the Rav treats creation as a moral category. . . .

R. Chaim of Volozin, a forebear of the Rav, [defined] the human task as the realization of one’s potential for spiritual creativity. In his view, that human beings bear the image of God implies that they are charged with imitating His creativity. . . .

He [R. Chaim of Volozin] goes so far as to assert that the bliss of the Hereafter can be enjoyed only by those who actually create their own immortality. The World-to-Come is not a pre-existing domain to which God dispenses visas of admission to meritorious individuals. Everyone must by his own good deeds create his own spiritual domain in the World-to-Come. . . .
According to the [Rav] individual providence extends only to those human beings who by dint of their intellectual and spiritual development have become genuine individuals and are no longer merely members of the human species. When a person creates himself, ceases to be a mere species (“man”), and becomes a man of God, then he has fulfilled that commandment which is implicit in the principle of providence. . . .
What matters for us is that, basing himself on Rambam, the Rav unequivocally declared that striving for ever higher rungs of moral perfection and participating as a partner with God in overcoming the imperfections of the universe is the pre-eminent approach to imitatio Dei. . . .
According to Rav Soloveitchik the extremist enjoys the advantage of being self-assured. But whoever has deeper insight and perceives different aspects of issues must forego the satisfaction of dogmatic certainty.

Rav Soloveitchik points to the dialectical tension within human beings as demanding the balancing of hesed and emet. In his interpretation, hesed mandates involvement in the world to transform it and create conditions conducive to human welfare. Emet, on the other hand, refers to the eternal values of the covenantal community, which transcend the world of temporal flux and which alone can provide us with a sense of meaning and purpose and enable us to overcome our existential loneliness. Since, according to halakhic Judaism, it is our task to seek to encounter God’s Presence primarily in the lower realms of being (ikkar Shekhina ba-tahtonim), we must not try to escape from this world by a flight into transcendental spheres. The human task is to create an abode for God in this world.

This is a vision of human creativity that I find quite beautiful and meaningful, especially in our world that seems so caught up in simplistic visions of good and bad, right and wrong, us and them. This is a profound challenge to each of us to create ourselves and to create a world that are truly fit for God, a world and a self full of love, care and hope.