Tag: pluralism

Haveil Havalim: What Other Jews are Blogging About

Haveil Havalim #312 – It’s Time To Talk About The Elephant In The Room

Welcome to Haveil Havalim Edition #312!

Founded by Soccer Dad, Haveil Havalim is a carnival of Jewish blogs — a weekly collection of Jewish & Israeli blog highlights, tidbits and points of interest collected from blogs all around the world. It’s hosted by different bloggers each week and coordinated by Jack. The term ‘Haveil Havalim,’ which means”Vanity of Vanities,” is from Qoheleth, (Ecclesiastes) which was written by King Solomon. King Solomon built the Holy Temple in Jerusalem and later on got all bogged down in materialism and other ‘excesses’ and realized that it was nothing but ‘hevel,’ or in English, ‘vanity.’

This week’s host – Esser Agaroth – raises the question of whether one must include in a review of blog posts of the week, those with which one disagrees.  Quoting a previous post of his, he says:

I am not a pluralist,…from far it. Yet, I strongly believe that Jews with differing views working together is the bottom line behind HH’s success. Sometimes a particular issue will have a noticeable theme or skew to it, depending on the host. But, the following week could well provide a completely different one. It is an interesting set of relationships we have been developing here. Do I include posts from people who disagree with me? Am I compromising my principles if I do? But, if I don’t, then I sure can’t expect them to include mine, right?…Like I said, I am not a pluralist, far from it. But, if we take the time to look around and to listen (I mean REALLY listen), we can often be surprised at how much we really do have in common. Even if it’s poetry or music, or a search for the best cappuccino in Israel, it’s at least a start. As they say, “It’s a process.” I don’t know about you, but I am going to keep coming back to see how it continues to work out. 

Clearly, Esser Agaroth has a clear sense of what is appropriate and what is not. Says he:
What do I find offensive?

I find it offensive when Jews confuse Western culture and sensibilities for Jewish ones. Whether we are talking about “innocent civilians” during a milhemeth misswah (obligatory war), turning Jews into non-Jewish authorities, or a[Italian] black hat, none of these are Jewish concepts.

I find it offensive when Jews accuse other Jews of suborning mass-murder, when murder is an act which may only take place between Jews (Mekhilta, Ramba”m, Sefer HaHinukh). “Killing” is universal; “murder” is not. Please get your terminology right.

I find it offensive when Jews distort the Torah according to their pre-established beliefs and [galuti/diasporan] feelings, like when a Jew quotes the Talmud Bavli…

…that to save a life, it is as if one has saved a world.

…and neglects to mention that HaZa”L was not talking about just any old life, but rather a Jewish one.

Here I part company with Esser Agaroth (whom I don’t really know, but whom I am starting to by reading his blog).  Why? Because he sets himself – and his seemingly narrow sense of Judaism – as the sole appropriate posek (decisor/interpreter) of Judaism.  Those opinions end Jewish conversation; its an ancient, more seriously fundamentalist approach – when one party deems the others are outside the realm of legitimate Jewish belief.  
While I disagree with Esser Agaroth, I appreciate the worldview he presents as he hosts this week’s 
Haveil Havalim.  Go over and take a look at it on his blog.

At the Wall, Which Side is the Right One? The Kotel Belongs to the Entire Jewish People

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, wrote:

I am saddened and dismayed by recent events at the Western Wall. These events are a tragedy — a blow to the State of Israel and to the unity of the Jewish people.

Love of Israel unites Jews everywhere. Love of Jerusalem unites Jews everywhere. For many of these Jews, the single most important symbol of both Israel and Jerusalem is the Western Wall.

Why turn that symbol into a source of division? Why should the Wall be an ultra-Orthodox synagogue rather than a place that belongs to us all — a place where all Jews can find space to pray, to gather, and to celebrate the Jewish homeland and the Jewish people?

Twenty years ago I proposed a solution to the problem of access to the Wall, and it remains the best answer. There is ample room to divide the Wall into three areas: one for men to pray according to Orthodox custom; one for women to pray according to Orthodox custom; and one for non-Orthodox prayer and secular and civil ceremonies of various kinds.

However, instead of moving in the direction of equal access for all to one of Judaism’s most important religious and national sites, exactly the opposite has happened.

When a small group of women — traditional in observance and modestly dressed — has tried to organize occasional prayer services, which involve only those practices clearly permitted by halachah (traditional Jewish law), the women are spat upon, cursed and hustled away by the police, who generally do little or nothing to protect them from the harassers.

Ceremonies of national significance — tributes to fallen soldiers, the welcoming of new immigrants — were long held in the public areas behind the prayer section of the Wall, but they have now been curtailed or stopped altogether. The reason? Religious authorities who control the Wall have demanded that ultra-Orthodox standards be applied to such gatherings — meaning, for example, that the sexes must be segregated and that singing by women is prohibited.

Non-Orthodox religious youth groups that used to gather regularly in the same plaza area away from the Wall to enthusiastically pray and sing during their visits know that such services are no longer permitted.

When challenged, the religious authorities at the Wall talk of the “Robinson Arch” solution, which is an insult and no solution at all. Non-Orthodox Jews are permitted to pray at Robinson’s Arch, an archaeological site at a distance from the Wall that is not seen by most Jews as being part of the Wall at all.

The argument that permitting Reform and Conservative Jews to pray in the area of the Wall will lead to chanting by Catholics or Buddhists is absurd. Reasonable accommodations regarding non-Jewish religious ritual have been made at every other religious site in Israel. If anyone has been unreasonable, it has been the Jewish authorities at the Wall, who attempted to prevent Pope Benedict XVI from wearing his crucifix during his visit to the Kotel. The Pope rightly ignored them.

It may be that for now the law is on the side of those who impose these restrictions, and that others who wish to challenge them may have to accept the penalty for doing so. But it seems to me that recent events were more an attempt to intimidate and harass religious women than to enforce the law.

What is most important here, however, is that our goal in these troubled times is make Jews everywhere feel closer to Jerusalem and to the Jewish State. Driving Jews away from the Wall is self-defeating and foolish. To put it simply, the more Jews who visit the Wall — for religious, civic or national purposes — the better off we are.

And since there is not a single, universally accepted religious standard that governs Jewish religious life, we should make no attempt to impose one at the Kotel. What we need, rather, is to be respectful of each other’s choices and customs.

Throughout the generations, the Kotel has been a source of inspiration to Jews everywhere. It is a concrete symbol of our love for Jerusalem and our common Jewish destiny. The Wall belongs to the entire Jewish people; it must be a place that unifies our people, where all Jews are welcomed and all are respected.

Learn more. Take Action.