The
Modern Orthodox (MO) movement is something I knew well, since I was
part of it for some time. It is different from ultra-orthodoxy, since
it welcomes the combination of academic studies in any field, and
Torah + Talmud studies. It does not object to modern dress, although
rabbis would frown on the wearing of denim for example.
It
claims to adhere to the oral law - talmud, shulchan aruch etc, and
many of its proponents are believers in the Kabbalah.
Here
lies the first paradox of Modern orthodoxy. Unlike the rationalist
rabbis such as Maimonides and Saadia Gaon, who blasted kabbalah and
mysticism, most modern orthodox rabbis are not rational, other than
in a very limited boundary. They prefer to model themselves upon Rav
Kook, who was a genius and a great thinker, but also a kabbalist.
The Yeshiva University rabbis in general are Zoharists, and this is
not the same as the Dor Deah movement of Rav Yachye Kapach, which
rejected the falsehoods of kabbalah.
The
next issue is that there is greater emphasis on individuals, and on
possible lenient views on certain halachic issues. This might
involve for example, the permission to consume dairy products that
are not from kosher supervised dairies (chalav Yisroel).
However,
MO is still faithful to the Shulchan Aruch. They do not question the
absurdities or the contradictions of rabbinic law. They keep the
mourning period associated with the Omer, as well as the false notion
of counting it from the 2nd day of Hag Hamatzot. Within MO, there
have been some radical thinkers, who wish to modernize halacha, and
have even discussed abolishing certain rabbinic laws which are no
longer “relevant” such as the observance of an extra day for
every holiday outside of Israel. However, the basis for this kind of
leniency, which is never practical, but only a theoretical
discussion, is that there may be some rabbinic sources that would
support such a move.
Some
of the radicals, such as the late Chief rabbi of Israel, Shlomo Goren
suggested that building the Temple and setting up sacrifices would
be possible today. He also was open to questioning certain statements
of rabbis, based on contradictions with empirical reality. Thus, for
example, the rabbinic blessing for the new moon includes a verse
which suggests that man cannot touch the moon. Maimonides said the
moon was not physical matter but an intelligent essence. Rabbi Goren
argued that since the moon landings of NASA, these notions have been
proven wrong, and hence are obsolete and require change or updating.
It should not come as a surprise that the MO are despised by the
Ultra orthodox, and they save their greatest hatred for people like
Goren.
The
logic of great thinkers like Goren and Kapach is very healthy. It is
also a threat to real phariseeism, since it exposes the fallacies of
infallibility, and omniscience
ascribed to the rabbis.
Once the door is opened, then it threatens all the fallacies of the
Talmud to be exposed. Unfortunately, no MO rabbi has ever done this
and remained orthodox. Some have instead gone the way of reform, and
deconstructed the Written law instead.
Another
good example is Jonathan Sacks, who whilst he held the position of
Chief Rabbi was to afraid to do anything radical, but now that he is
no longer in any position of authority, he occasionally writes
something that sounds remotely rational.
The
MO are too afraid of Hareidi Ultra orthodox, and do not wish to be
totally banned from orthodoxy. It is quite possible to find
professors of secular subjects, who are MO, but they do not and
cannot question Talmudic Judaism.
A
positive characteristic of many MO people is they are less
judgemental than their ultra- brothers. This may well be because many
of them have secular friends and relatives, and they are involved in
the secular world on a daily basis. Whilst, for example, they might
take leniencies with certain things, eg wearing a kippa all the time,
there still seems to be an inability to question whether the rabbis
have got it right or not.
Despite
these positive attributes, it should be noted that a MO Yeshiva is
still an oppressive and dishonest place, where they present what they
intellectually know to be false, as facts. One interesting little
caveat, is a recording I heard of Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet, who is from
Yeshiva University and now heads the Gruss Kollel in Jerusalem. In a
training session for young rabbis, they discussed the presentation of
Talmud/Halacha as a great humane body of work. This is often the
promotion that Talmud and halachic lifestyle is given by the
marketing men of orthodoxy. Rakeffet said to his young rabbinic
students, that there are a lot of things in the Talmud which are not
so nice or humane! This is a valuable admission. However, it was not
said in a manner of openness or a desire for true representation. He
was not suggesting that the dark side of the Talmud is also presented
to congregations where the Rabbis will serve. It was rather his fear
that the cat may be let out of the bag, if they were to present the
Talmud as a perfect and just law, when in fact it is a tyrannical
mind control system, whose brutal proprietors would stop at nothing
to dispose of the rightful leaders of Israel – The Sadducee
Priests.
No comments:
Post a Comment