Teaching Torah to non-Jews . . . a dilemma

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

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

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

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.

Amazing Bava Kamma Resources

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.

Adam Muad L'Olam

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:

1. Shein -- The act of damage that an animal does in the case of normal self-gratification.
2. Regel -- The act of damage that an animal does in the course of normal movement.
3. 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.

Love is wanting questions not answers . . .

It seems like I spend some time everyday listening to Rabbi Shlomo Singer, who is the Rosh Yeshiva of the Passaic Torah Institute. While I must admit that there is much I don't understand, because his shiurim (classes) are quite advanced discussions of the Bava Kama (one of the tractates of the Bavli (Babylonian Talmud)), I love listening to him. He has such a passion for learning and teaching the Talmud that it is quite infectious.

One of the messages that he makes often, but particularly in his shiur from April 10, 2005 is that when we have answers we don't have love. He says, "An answer isn't a relationship. The answer is the finalization of a relationship. You are through. Good Bye."

But a question says that I want to learn more, to spend time with Hashem. The Rosh Yeshiva (the teacher) is not there to give answers, but to stimulate interest and passion to learn more, because from a question one gets more life. A question is a tool to understand the Gemara, because with an answer we stop, we think we are finished -- a question keeps us going. And as Rabbi Singer says, in the study of the infinite Torah of Hashem there are no answers. Hashem does not give us a test, but wants us to strive more and more to understand. With answers we close the door -- the only thing that answers are good for is that they can help us go deeper.

Wanting to spend time with Hashem's Torah, with Hashem, with God is what is important, not answers. Here is a poem I wrote a few years ago that strives to express a fraction of this idea. What is interesting is that I wrote this before discovering the Talmud, which as should be clear by now, I feel captures this sense of eternal, infinite questioning.

Being is a Question

Rilke encourages us to
“Live the questions now”
so that we will perhaps
“live along some distant day into the answer.”

These lines
I have loved
for many years.

Yet, today they seem
too focused on an answer,
even if that answer lies in the distant future.

Instead, what would our lives be like if
we saw each day
as simply a question
without an answer
other than the question itself?

No, I am not
talking about
the meaninglessness
of nihilism.

Rather I speak of a “questionfulness”
that colors each day with
new possibilities,
new insights,
new opportunities
to ask,
to ponder,
to explore
ourselves and our world around us.

A questionfulness
that never stops
and can not be stopped
with an answer,
because it may be only
questions themselves
that drive the sun to rise,
the world to turn,
birds to sing,
and people to awaken.

Questions as Rilke warned
that have to be lived and
not covered over with answers,
solutions and certainties.