Showing posts with label Judaism: Talmud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Judaism: Talmud. Show all posts

Monday, January 6, 2014

Controversial Talmud

I expect to participate in a panel discussion next week on "Controversial Talmud" - dealing with three talmudic passages which seem to be in direct conflict with modern western ethics. It should be fun.

Here are the selections; I'd be very interested in your thoughts:

1.       Berachot 20a – Freedom of Religion
אמר ליה רב פפא לאביי: מאי שנא ראשונים דאתרחיש להו ניסא, ומאי שנא אנן דלא מתרחיש לן ניסא?...
אמר ליה: קמאי הוו קא מסרי נפשייהו אקדושת השם, אנן לא מסרינן נפשין אקדושת השם. כי הא דרב אדא בר אהבה חזייה לההיא כותית דהות לבישא כרבלתא בשוקא, סבר דבת ישראל היא, קם קרעיה מינה; אגלאי מילתא דכותית היא, שיימוה בארבע מאה זוזי...
Rav Pappa said to Abbaye: Why were the early ones different, such that miracles happened for them, and why are we different, such that miracles don't happen for us?...
He replied: The early ones gave their lives for the sanctity of the Name; we do not give our lives for the sanctity of the Name. As in the time when Rav Ada bar Ahavah saw a non-Jewish woman wearing a karvalta in the market, and he thought she was Jewish, and he tore it from her. It turned out that she was not Jewish, and restitution was set at 400 zuz.

Question: Modern western society believes in freedom of religion. How do we reconcile that with the Talmud's advocation of coercion to comply with our religious sensibilities?



2.      Sanhedrin 76b – Non-Discrimination
אמר רב יהודה אמר רב: המשיא את בתו לזקן, והמשיא אשה לבנו קטן, והמחזיר אבידה לנכרי - עליו הכתוב אומר למען ספות הרוה את הצמאה לא יאבה ד' סלח לו.
Rav Yehudah said, citing Rav: Regarding one who marries off his daughter to an elderly man, one who marries off a [mature] woman to his young son, and one who returns a lost object to an outsider, the Torah says, 'To join the quenched with the thirsty, G-d will not forgive him.' (Devarim 29:18)

Question: Modern western society prohibits discrimination between one human being and another on the grounds of race, gender, religion, etc. How do we reconcile that with the Talmud's apparent favouring of discrimination?



3.      Talmud Yerushalmi Shekalim 5:4 – Economic Freedom
דלמא רבי חמא בר חנינה ורבי הושעיא רבה הוו מטיילין באילין כנישתא דלוד אמר ר' חמא בר חנינה לר' הושעיא כמה ממון שיקעו אבותי כאן אמר ליה כמה נפשות שיקעו אבותיך כאן לא הוה אית בני נש דילעון באורייתא?
רבי אבון עבד אילין תרעייה דסדרא רבא אתא ר' מנא לגביה א"ל חמי מאי עבדית א"ל [הושע ח יד] וישכח ישראל את עושהו ויבן היכלות לא הוה בני נש דילעון באורייתא?
Once Rabbi Chama bar Chanina and Rabbi Hoshia Rabbah were strolling among those synagogues of Lod. Rabbi Chama bar Chanina said to Rabbi Hoshia, "How much money my ancestors sank here!" He replied, "How many lives your ancestors sank here! Were there no people exhausting themselves in Torah?"
Rabbi Avun decorated the gates of the great study hall. Rabbi Mana came to him, and Rabbi Avun said, "See what I have done!" He replied, "'And Israel forgot its Maker, and built palaces.' (Hosheia 8:14) Were there no people exhausting themselves in Torah?"

Question: Modern western society licenses every individual to decide how to spend his money, and what causes to support. How do we reconcile that with the Talmud's condemnation of someone's spending, which was actually for a mitzvah?


Thursday, October 17, 2013

Reclaiming Israeli history, this Sunday

Every 7.5 years, this one-word question arises in Jewish communities all over the world: "Yerushalmi?!"

The worldwide Daf Yomi program studies a single page of the Babylonian Talmud each day - but after studying approximately 450 pages, the program veers into Talmud Yerushalmi, the Jerusalem Talmud, for a single volume: Masechet Shekalim. Students ask themselves: Why are we studying a volume from the Jerusalem Talmud?

The question is sharpened when students open the first page and realize they are not in Pumbeditha anymore. Basic vocabulary, sentence structure, even the format and flow of discussion change when you open the Jerusalem Talmud. We don't even have a commentary by Rashi to make everything clear! So why are we putting ourselves through this? Wasn't the Babylonian version hard enough?

Further: Mainstream Jewish practice follows the rulings of the Babylonian Talmud; only when the Babylonian Talmud is silent do we adopt the view of the Jerusalem Talmud. (Kesef Mishneh, Hilchot Terumot 8:15) So why are we learning the Jerusalem Talmud?

There is a technical reason for learning Yerushalmi Shekalim: Adding this volume of the Jerusalem Talmud completes the seder [order] of Moed. However, another possible benefit of studying the Jerusalem Talmud is that we reclaim a key piece of Israeli history.

The Jerusalem Talmud was written and canonized by Jews who lived under late Roman rule in the land of Israel, in the first centuries of the common era. Despite terrible persecution and the threat of painful execution for the crime of studying Torah, they maintained a powerful commitment to Torah and kept Jewish life in our land alive. Rabbi Yochanan. Rabbi Ami. Rabbi Zeira. And so on.

Their language, challenging as it is, is our language. Their voice is our voice. Their Torah is our Torah. These are heroes of Jewish history, and they are our ancestors, and in studying their words we connect to them.

This Sunday, the Daf Yomi program will begin its study of the Jerusalem Talmud, with the volume of Shekalim. Consider joining a Daf Yomi shiur, or pick it up yourself - you can find audio shiurim on-line at YUTorah.org and on other sites. Alternatively, study another work from an Israeli sage - Rabbi Yosef Karo's Shulchan Aruch, the Alshich's biblical commentary, or the writings of Rav Kook, perhaps. Together, we, as a nation, can reclaim Israeli history.

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Wanted: A Modern Orthodox Talmud

[Post I'm contemplating: Why does mussar have such bad street cred? at Modern Uberdox]

Many of my friends take umbrage when “Modern Orthodoxy” is challenged by those who consider themselves more traditional. They argue that our claim to Torah-loyalty is made no less serious and no less legitimate by our kippot srugot, embrace of the State of Israel and universalist tendencies.

Fair enough. But, at the same time, I think that our claim to Torah-loyalty is less clear, so long as we don’t state what, exactly, we mean by Torah.

Open up your gemara to Berachos 6a, and read about trapping sheidim in a lead pipe. Then read the Modern Orthodox Jew say that he prefers the alternative view of Rav Hai Gaon and others, that sheidim may not be real.

Turn to Yevamos 118b and learn the suggestion that a woman will be satisfied with any marriage, even a quarrelsome one, because she is better off married than alone. Then read the Modern Orthodox Jew say that he wishes to extend Rav Moshe Feinstein’s ruling from Igrot Moshe Even haEzer 1:180 to permit re-marriage without a get where the husband exhibits certain flaws.

There are many other passages of gemara we could cite –
Declarations regarding physical reality that are very difficult to support in light of our observations of physical reality;
Assertions of biological differences between Jews and non-Jews;
Lessons predicated on readings of pesukim which vary from our own editions;
and so on.

Many of these passages are challenged by many Jews today, people who identify themselves with YU or YCT or Rabbi Riskin or Gush Etzion. Granted that they accept the vast, vast majority of gemara, but there are quite a few passages of concern.

This post is not designed to weigh in on whether a Jew should trust certain challenging passages, or what mechanisms should be employed to determine that trust. That is an important issue, but it’s not the point of this post.

The point of this post is: One of the reasons why many traditional groups challenge the legitimacy of Modern Orthodoxy is that it’s hard to pin down what, exactly, Modern Orthodoxy accepts and rejects.

This is relevant regarding Talmud as well as midrash, and it’s relevant regarding the centuries of commentary and responsa that build on both.
It’s relevant when the Rashba rejects observed reality that contradicts the gemara.
It’s relevant when the Tashbetz supports the idea of learning in kollel.
It’s relevant when Rav Yosef Karo describes personal conversations with angels.
It’s relevant when Rashi, building on midrash, reads apparently-strained hints into the text of the Torah.
And so on.

Several years ago, I did research on the Conservative position on homosexuality in Judaism, and found that some Conservative rabbis believe that the pasuk in Vayyikra condemning homosexuality was Moshe’s own thought, based on his environment, and not from Gd. Aside from the interesting questions this generated in my mind (such as why would Gd select a herald who would get a law so wrong, with such great repercussions for so many) it also forced me to ask what other biblical passages those Conservative writers might similarly downgrade.

The same question, though, may fairly be asked of the Jew who self-identifies as Modern Orthodox.

Remember the old line, "Orthodox is crazy, Reform is lazy, Conservative is hazy?"

While it’s legitimate to say that these are gray areas, and that the vast, vast majority of passages are accepted by all, the bottom line is that until this question is answered clearly – until one knows what “Modern Orthodoxy” believes, until there is a “Modern Orthodox”-approved version of Talmud and masorah - I believe it’s legitimate for those outside of our camp to feel that we are hazy, too.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Completing the Daf Yomi cycle - what it means to me

Tomorrow, I expect to complete my first “cycle” of teaching the Daf Yomi here in Allentown. I started teaching the second chapter of Kiddushin in the early summer of 2001, shortly after arriving here, and we are slated to begin that chapter again tomorrow.

I would not have expected it, but this is a very exciting moment for me.

It’s not the issue of completing another round of shas; I know quite well that there is no such thing, at least for a human intellect like mine, as completing shas. Besides, I have had substitutes for 100-150 of the daf along the way, so this can’t really count as a completion.

Part of it, I suppose, is that learning by teaching is so much deeper than learning personally. Certainly, I understand the gemara much better now, for having had to explain it.

And part of it is the simple fact that I showed up every day for so long, consecutively, to do this.

But what really moves me is the group, the Daffies, my guys. (And women, of course; we have a couple of women who attend daily as well. But they’re all “my guys” to me.) Learning Torah with anyone creates a unique link, learning Gemara moreso, and learning daily much more. (Frankly, this makes me somewhat uncomfortable with the co-ed aspect of it, but that’s a topic for another post.)

And through that link, I can see growth.

I always have mixed feelings about encouraging people to attend classes. In my student days, I learned much more through chavruta (partner) study than through shiurim (classes); I emerged from personal study with rich understanding, but I usually emerged from shiurim with a set of notes. So it’s hard for me to encourage people to come to classes; I tend to push private study more.

But Daf Yomi is different. Here, through the day after day after day, I actually see the change in people. I’m not talking about a change in religiosity, or a change in knowledge; I’m talking about a change in their approach to gemara, a maturity and sophistication so that when people say gemara or talmud, my Daffies comprehend what those words mean. It’s not about the words or the pages or the volumes, it’s about the system as a whole. My crew may not get every shiur, we may not understand every page, but we emerge with a greater respect for the analytic methods, for the commitment, for the expertise, of the sages who compiled the gemara.

And that’s what moves me, on the eve of completing the cycle and beginning again. It’s the knowledge that I am playing a role in helping Jews come to a real appreciation for this essential part of our heritage, this mass of knowledge and thought and hope and analysis which is lengthier than the land and broader than the sea.

Their appreciation for our heritage, their grasp of the spectrum of Jewish intellectual tradition, their comprehension of what it means to be heir to Judaism’s great repository of wisdom – this is their reward for participating in the Daf, and it is my reward as well.