Please forgive the relative silence.
For the past couple of days I have been involved a a complicated back and forth discussion with Michael Broyde about this posting. Read through the comments. You will see some of my public replies. Rabbi Broyde and I have also been involved with an extensive and difficult email conversation.
This has been exhausting. It makes me sad that some people are intent on re-writing history. It makes me sad that some people read Jewish law in a narrow limited and limiting way.
One of the great things I learned studying Talmud at Maimonides School is what a dynamic flexible and thoughtful thing halacha/Jewish law is. How it is the easy way out to just say no to innovation, and how the truly great Talmudic minds were committed to answering the hard questions in creative ways that were true to the Talmudic method.
Another fabulous thing about halacha is that is it's very DNA assumes that the world is a complicated place and mathematically simple rules do not always apply. That two diametric opposites can exist at the same moment.
Elu v'elu divrei Elohim Chayyim
Two opposing opinions can both be the word of the living God.
Shabbat Shalom, Shalvah u M'nucha
Was it Hillel who added tztiz to the aprons of all women in his household? In what way can my wearing of a talliot reduce the worship experience? The answer is no is not an adequate response to a request for greater involvement and will eventually extinguish the practice now known as orthodox. You cannot force a person (men) to be involved in the community by denying another (women) their opportunity to be involved.
ReplyDelete