Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 277

Tuesday, January 11 2000

• value of Shas
• Re: Haredim and Internet
• Re: Regular Shul Attendance and Talking
• Re[4]: Is techeles m'akev a Talis Katan?
• Re: Avodah V4 #276
• Re: MO and the Rav
• Re: Chabad What went wrong?
• Re: Modern Orthodox
• Conservatives
• Re: Haredim and Internet
• Re[2]: Regular Shul Attendance and Talking
• Conservative/Reform/Orthodox/Whatever - Who cares?
• Re: Haredim abuzz about halachic ban on Internet use
• Web sites on shabes
• Re[2]: Conservative/Reform/Orthodox/Whatever - Who cares?
• standing for chatuna
• Re: Regular Shul Attendance and Talking
• Re: Fw: Avodah V4 #275-standing for the choson
• Chabad -- what went wrong?
• Techeiles
• How is Rav Soleveitchik ztzl considered modern Orthodox?
• Re[3]: Conservative/Reform/Orthodox/Whatever - Who cares?

Hi,
  I am new to this list, and have been reading the corisponding letters
about Shas. I would like to make one point. Not to put down for one moment
the value and importance of shas, both jewish philosopers (rambam, ryhal
exct) and kabalists (zohar, rav kook) make the point that machshevet
yesirael (philosophy, kabalah) is the highes form of learning and not shas.
Some even use the comparison that shas is the body and innner learning is
the soul. Rav Kook explains that you must first learn shas, and then inner
learnings, and the relationship is that of the body and the brain. the body
is the most quantity, but the brain is the most quality.

Chaim Turkel

I once heard a nice *vort* apropos to the topic. A rebbe sends 2 meshulachim
to shnorr in a certain town. They both return and report back to the
rebbe. The first is bitter: "The town is full of filth, TOEVA, and
RISH'UT". The second reports, "The town ? 20 yeshivot ! Hundreds of
balebatim who learn." The rebbe then responds, "You each find what you're
looking for !"

So too on the Internet. We each find what we're looking for.

Josh

There is a possible alternative reason for the
tendeancy to feel more comfortable talking during the
services, which, I believe, hasn't been stated yet.

Namely, the vast majority of Orthodox Jews go to shul
at least once a week... on Shabbos.  This breeds
familiarity which in turn breeds a sense of "being in
one's home", sort of a comfort level.  The synagogue
is not looked upon  in the same way a church or temple
or C synagogue is.  There isn't that type of reverence
nor do I thionk there necessarily should be.  

There are Halachos guiding permissible times for
talking and impermissible times. These Halochos,
eventhough they are more often honored in the breach
are what needs to be strengthened.  This is one reason
I daven in a Yeshiva Beis Hamedrash on Shabbos. People
know when they can talk and when they can't and,
usually,(but not always... we're only human) talking
involves Divrei Torah. 

The concept of extreme quiet that emanates from
Churches stems, I believe, from the fact that the
Christian's entire religion revolves around the
church. They look at it as THE center of their
religion and when they leave it's confines, they don't
think about their religion at all until the following
Sunday.  Religion has little to do with their lives
the rest of the week.  

Torah Judaism OTOH is a totally encompassing lifestyle
of which the synagogue is just ONE facet and not even
an obligatory one.  Indeed one can theoretically never
set foot in a synagogue and be a completely observant
Jew. So, we don't have thetype of reverence that Goyim
and 3 day a week Jews have whose only contact with G-d
is through the Church or synagogue.

Obviously this effects attitudes and explains the
difference in attitudes about Shul between them and
us.

HM

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

I heard that the Gra wore a non-wool Tallis koton in order to be davka to be 
meakeym Tzitzis BOTH midreabbonon and mid'oraiso so he made it a point to cover 
BOTH ways...

Rich Wolpoe


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________


I believe that the GRA also wore a non-Tzemer Beged for 
his Talis Katan.  It is likely that his Talis Gadol was 
woolen as is R. Aaron's.  Perhaps the answer is that 
for the relatively brief period of Tefilah a Talis 
Gadol is worn just Lephi Daas HaOmrim that Tchelis is 
not Meakev and a cotton Beged is worn as a TK because 
one wears it all day and therefore it minimizes the 
time span of issur. 

Just speculation.

HM

In a message dated 01/11/2000 10:26:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
owner-avodah@aishdas.org writes:
<< Wasn't this thread discussed about 2 months ago? Rich Wolpoe >>

Was it? If yes I can check the back issues. I obviously missed it at the time 
& the issue has (unfortunately) arisen.
Yitz Weiss

On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 11:19:21PM -0500, Zuckerman, Jeffrey I. wrote:
: 	2.  MO sees religious significance in the establishment of the State
: of Israel -- reishit tzmichat geulateinu; RW does not.

While RYBS taught that the Medinah had religious significance, he did NOT
define that significance in terms of any messianic notions. See "Kol Dodi
Dofek". Also, you'll note in the last essay in Hashkafas haRav, that RYBS
was quite pessimistic about our generation's ability to bring the ge'ulah,
which is why, he explains, he tended not to speak about mashiach.

The messainic version of Religious Zionism is R' Kook's.

RYBS saw the state's value in terms that gave "Kol Dodi Dofeik" its title.
Hashem is knocking on our door, it's literally a cheit not to answer. It's
an opportunity unparalleled since churban Bayis in terms of both Jewish
survival and kiyum hamitzvos.

One of the list's chaveirim translated KDD. I invite him to correct my
oversimplification.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 11-Jan-00: Shelishi, Bo
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 97b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 10:12:50AM -0500, richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:
: May I suggest that this topic be handled off the list lest soome people
: might say CV, Avodah - what went wrong?!

As the ba'al habayis, I second the notion. I had a hard enough time
extinguishing the flames after the last time we discussed meshichtzin.
(Tip: your answer may be in the archives already.)

One comment that must be made birabbim: the majority of Lubavitch are not
meshichtzin. I'm not a poseik, but I'm pretty sure it's motzi shem ra to
imply otherwise.

If you disagree with any points made in this email, please reply in private.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 11-Jan-00: Shelishi, Bo
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 97b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

--- Eli Turkel <turkel@post.tau.ac.il> wrote:
> 
> What makes you think modern orthodox is against
> mesoarh?

Wasn't it Dr. Lamm who objected to the phrase MO? 
Didn't he want to redfine it as "Centrism"?

If Dr. Lamm and YU are defined as Centrist, what
defines MO? Actually how WOULD one difine Centrism?

HM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

I wrote:

>>Where is the Conservative movement headed?  Unfortunately, my answer is a
>>sad one.  Since the mid-1950's, the Conservative elite have moved
>>progressively left, embracing egalitarianism, questioning the halakhic
>>perspective on homosexual relations, softening halakhic restrictions, etc.
>>And, on the communal level, those rabbis who oppose this trend are in a
>>bind.

To which R. David Finch replied:

>These trends cannot be usefully grouped together as a single phenomenon. Some
>of those Conservatives embracing egalitarianism have also been in the
>forefront of the movement -- a strong movement, by the way -- to make
>stricter day-to-day halachic observance more commonplace. There may be those
>in favor of softening halachic restrictions, but typically only those
>restrictions are related to such politically-hot topics as women, gays, etc.
>These same people have successfully spread the word on kashruth, Shabbos
>observance, regular attendance at minyanim, etc.

I do not believe we disagree about the empirical reality, but perhaps we
differ on the interpretation.  The majority of the Conservative laity
has no grounding in Jewish sources and, for this reason, tends to import
its views on women, homosexual activity, intermarriage, etc. from the
general American culture.  Hence, they press their rabbis to liberalize
congregational policy on these issues.  This is sad, but unsurprising.
More pernicious, to me, are the actions of the Conservative elite,
people who can read a Gemara with Tosafot and Rishonim, who know what
Halakhah is and what it states, yet engage in all kinds of dubious
interpretations and tenedentious argumentation in order to justify an
official movement policy in favor of egalitarianism, homosexual
activity, etc.  My point was, however, that these two trends are
converging, and the dwindling number of uncompromising traditionalists
are feeling squeezed.

>I know more than a few young Conservative Jews who wear kippot and tzitzit to
>work. One wears these items while arguing jury cases in court. Another (not
>me) wears them in the locker room while changing into his hockey gear. At the
>same time, the majority of those who pay dues to Conservative shuls show up
>once or twice a year, and display little interest in anything religious
>beyond Federation charities.

Yes, well.  Here the real issue is numbers.  While you know more than a
few "serious" Conservative Jews, as do I, I'll wager you no less than a
lot.  And that is the problem.  Proportionally, the number of
Conservative Jews who observe Shabbat, kashrut, and taharat
ha-mishpahah, daven three times a day, etc. is tiny.  You will find
pockets of them in large metropolitan areas like New York and Chicago,
but precious few in the hinterlands.  The nominal Conservative Jews you
describe as the majority, are what the Gemara calls "rubba de-rubba"  --
the overwhelming majority.  Just read the latest surveys.  I believe a
generous estimate of observant Conservative Jews would be less than five
percent of the membership.  Forgive me, but I cannot describe such a
movement as "strong" nor do I think they have been "successful" at
"spreading the word" about observance.

The more prominent voices I hear come from parents whose children,
educated at fine public and private (but not parochial) schools and
prestigious universities, with upwardly mobile professional careers, are
now romantically involved with a non-Jew who is not interested in
converting.  In many cases, the parents are upset, but not appalled, and
they want their rabbi to officiate.  Putting the parents aside, I
believe the number of young people who grew up Conservative who fall
into that category far outstrip the number of young people you describe
as active and interested.  And it breaks my heart.

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 05:39:00PM +0200, BACKON@vms.huji.ac.il wrote:
:        The first is bitter: "The town is full of filth, TOEVA, and
: RISH'UT". The second reports, "The town ? 20 yeshivot ! Hundreds of
: balebatim who learn." The rebbe then responds, "You each find what you're
: looking for !"

: So too on the Internet. We each find what we're looking for.

The story, complete with quotes from the menaheil of the local Yeshiva K'tana,
made the front page of our local paper. He's for the ban, and the paper is
clearly trying to portray chareidim as "backward" for trying to keep their
school OFF the net when so many schools are bragging about being on it.

I agree with Dr. Backon on this. Think of all the chareidi ba'alei batim
who could have otherwised grabbed some divrei Torah to read in their spare
time. Not to mention venues like this one. Mi shebeirach lists. Instructions
for building a succah. There is a web site notifying of events, shiurim,
davening times, house sales and other "bulletin board notices" of the frum
kehillah of my neighborhood. Vi'od, vi'od... My commute home was spent with
a teshuvah (in Hebrew, PDF) that I downloaded while waiting for the car
service. It's sad to think that people will miss out.

I wonder what would have happened had we taken the same approach in the
Guttenburg's day. And no one ever invented a BookNanny or ReadWatch.

Seriously, though, I can understand banning TV. It's not just the medium,
but the truth is there is next-to-nothing actually on it anymore that
wouldn't have been censored 20 years ago. The same can not be said here.
Tzaruch iyun, and I'd appreciate any help you people can offer. Albeit anyone
here is clearly giving an outsider's view...

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 11-Jan-00: Shelishi, Bo
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 97b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

I seem to vaguely recall someone mentioning the concept of "familiarity breeds 
contempt", Is this along the same lines <big grin>

Rich Wolpoe 


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Regular Shul Attendance and Talking 

Namely, the vast majority of Orthodox Jews go to shul at least once a week... on
Shabbos.  This breeds familiarity which in turn breeds a sense of "being in 
one's home", sort of a comfort level.  
<snip>
Obviously this effects attitudes and explains the 
difference in attitudes about Shul between them and 
us.

HM

R. Shlomo Godick asks:

>Are you saying that sociologically pre-19th-century European
>Jewish society was somewhat like the Sephardim today?
>As one Sephardic scholar once described it to me,
>Sephardic society can be viewed as concentric circles of ever
>increasing observance  - unlike the rigid division into
>"movements" characterizing the Ashkenazim.

That is not a bad image, but it would be simplistic to insist that it
describes "pre-19th-century European
Jewish society" in toto.  One model will not suffice to describe the
Austro-Hungary of Maharal and the Germany of Maharam of Rothenberg.
Some communities were very homogeneous religiously, others tolerated a
great deal of laxity at the margins.  Social and economic factors were
also important, as the wealthy, then as now, were usually accorded more
freedom.

Even the concentric circles image is a bit deceptive, I think.  For
example, Ashkenazic Jewry in the early Middle Ages generally lived
scattered in tiny communities numbering fewer than 100.  In a town with
12 Jewish families, how meaningful is it to speak of concentric circles?
 Note too that there was often no local rabbinic authority and no
central authority for a region.  Consequently, there was little attempt
to supervise or regulate private behavior.  Indeed, as a general rule,
the community would accept you as long as you adopted the outward
trappings of community members in terms of dress and comportment.  (As
we might say today, "as long as you could walk the walk and talk the
talk.")  What people did in private was rarely more than a matter of
gossip, unless the activity had some impact on others.

And even when the community did adopt a standard, there was no guarantee
that standard would reflect the Halakhah.  The gap between communal
practice and textual norms (what readers of Dr. H. Soloveitchik's
article know as the mimietc vs. text traditions) is an old one, as any
student of Halakhah can attest.

Finally, if we focus on the "doxus" in Orthodox, then we assuredly
confront the total lack of theological uniformity in the pre-modern
Ashkenazic community.  Among the hamon am, superstition was rampant and
theological sophistication virtually nonexistent.  Sadly, this was true
of many rabbis as well.  Just consider this: If the community had been
organized along denominational lines as it is today, could you imagine
someone being able to introduce Kabbalah?

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

From what I heard Rav Ovadiah refused to sign until he has seen what the
problem is rather than rely on reports while the Gerer rebe refused to
impose a blanket ban as there are many educational benefits to be had
and suggested hekhseyrim instead. I am not sure if he was referring to
CD roms or the internet.

Dovid Herskovic

Is a business that takes on line orders allowed to be 'open' on shabes?
I suppose the same question applies to vending machines in public places
whether they are allowed to function on shabes.

Dovid Herskovic

Summarizing Going from right to left...

RW to MO, learning anything from society is dangerous and will ineveitably 
cause one to assimilate non-Jewish values and perhaps to incorporate 
non-jewish mores into Torah

MO to C, we can selectively choose those value-neutral or value positive 
elements of culture and reject those that do not meat the standards of halacha 
and machshova. However we do not bend Torah to society, rather we attempt to 
influence society to confrom more to Torah. 

C to R, while we mold halahca to conform to the contemporary mores of society, 
we do not discard out morally neutral rituals, and we encourage rituals and 
observance except where it may conflict with contemporary ideals.

R to non-affiliated:  While we dicard all ritual, we still adhere to the 
concepts and ideas of Judaismwithou acting upon them in a ritualistic manner.

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: re: Conservative/Reform/Orthodox/Whatever - Who cares? 


REClark wrote: <<
But the idea (some
would say myth) of an unchanging Orthodoxy dating from Sinai to the 
present day was essentially born in the 19th century in response to 
Reform.  >>

Are you saying that sociologically pre-19th-century European 
Jewish society was somewhat like the Sephardim today?
As one Sephardic scholar once described it to me,
Sephardic society can be viewed as concentric circles of ever 
increasing observance  - unlike the rigid division into 
"movements" characterizing the Ashkenazim.

Kol tuv,
Shlomo Godick

I thought one needed a minyan for chupa-kidushin; and therefore, one would
stand as one would [if one does?] for kadish,barche etc.

On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 11:55:53AM -0500, richard_wolpoe@ibi.com wrote:
: I seem to vaguely recall someone mentioning the concept of "familiarity
: breeds contempt", Is this along the same lines <big grin>

To be fair, Harry raises an aspect of the issue that I didn't. In "Ish
haHalachah" (the lengthy footnote 5, on ch. 1) RYBS discusses the
assimilation of the "cathedral" idea into non-O "Judaisms". A cathedral
has spires drawing the eye upward, stained glass, impressiveness, all
giving a sense of other-wordliness. Western religion is about providing
man with a religious retreat from the world.

Yahadus, OTOH, is about providing a religious way of living within the
world. We are very consciousnly NOT creating such partitions.

(I recently repeated this idea to a non-religious co worker. She wanted to
know what then about Shabbos and havdalah. They, and Yom Kippur, may actually
be about an other-wordliness, retreat, kind of concept... but only so that
you can reassess what it is you're aiming for as you fuse things the rest
of the week. We also got into R' Kook and the illusoriness of the separation
to begin with.)

While not having a partition between the religious and the day-to-day allows
one to sanctify the day-to-day, it also has the unfortunate side-effect of
requiring more vigilence not to secularize the religious. To put it in more
down-to-earth terms: Because everything is halachah, it takes more effort
to see shul as different from other venues as it should be.

About earlier posts of mine on this subject: I wasn't claiming that O makes
it impossible to daven with proper decorum, just that it poses challenges
that others don't face. Yes, many do overcome these challenges. But I don't
think we should be ostriches about the fact that many more of us do not than
in other communities.

I also don't mean to accuse anyone in particular, other than myself of
this flaw. My personal problem is one of "lakol z'man va'eis"... I'm often
bursting with this compulsion (meant in the technical sense) to repeat this
great d'var Torah I heard/read/though of. I'm also repeatedly getting up to
chase kids who are attending 2-1/4 hours of shul so that they sit down and
say the 20 min of davening that they know.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 11-Jan-00: Shelishi, Bo
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 97b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

In a message dated 00-01-11 12:25:50 EST, you write:

<<  It is my recollection that  the minhag of standing for choson and kallah
 > > (a) is only about 20 years old, and (b) is apparently to
 > > America--I haven't seen it practiced in Israel at the few weddings I've
 > > attended there. I have been searching for a valid reason for it.
 > >>
Rav Shachter has quoted the Rov as saying that we stand for tyhe choson 
because he is on his way to do a mitzvah.The Yerushalmi in Bikkurim says that 
we learn from the halacha of ba'alei umniyos standing for those who bring 
bikkurim that we should stand for somewone who is doing a mitzvah.
I have also heard that it is customary at non-Jewish weddings to stand for 
the bride,but I ave never een to a non-Jewish wedding soI don't really knw if 
this is true and if there is any influence on our practice from such weddings.

In terms of the yiddishkeit of most Lubavitchers, nothing did go wrong with 
Chabad -- the Chabad of your local Chabad shaliach is the same Chabad of 20 
or 50 years ago for that matter -- and part of that Chabad is the 
possibility that the Rebbeim of Chabad in each generation is a CANDIDATE to 
be Moshiach even after they are no longer physically with us.  What did go 
wrong, in my opinion, was somewhere along the line this possibility did 
become a matter of faith in some circles to the point that this relatively 
minor issue became the defining feature of Chabad Chassidus -- and normative 
Judaism, including previous generations within Chabad were always skeptical 
at best of making a certain person's messianic qualifications the sole 
reason to do torah and mitzvos -- things like Moshiach and how to be zokeh 
to receive Moshiach, etc. is not lightweight stuff and shouldn't be 
trivialized through pamphlets, slogans,  and Yechi yarmulkes.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

When explaining R' Herzog's objection to Radziner techeiles I have often
phrased it as "If you had started with maple syrup and otherwise followed
the same recipe, you'd get the same dye." Because the recipe destroys the
original biochemical, freeing up potassium (I was mistaken before when I said
nitrogen) which with the other ingredients makes Prussian Blue, a well known
dye.

Perhaps a Radziner chassid could argue that the gemara means something similar
when it warns against false dyes based on "kaleh ilan". Not, as the murex
techeiles camp assumes, that the kaleh ilan specifies a single dye of similar
make-up, but that "kaleh ilan" is an example of something very different than
chilazon, much like my use of "maple syrup". (Or R' Mordechai Avraham Katz's
mention of apple juice in his article in "Kobeitz Or Yisrael", vol 10.)

BTW, note that the Tif'eres Yisra'el, in arguing that any color-fast sky-blue
dye is kosher for techeiles (an opinion also followed by R' ZH Kalisher),
argues that the pesul in kaleh ilan is that it fades. If nothing else,
this shows that kaleh ilan need not to be understood as something chemically
identical to true techeiles, just similar enough to the eye to fool a shopper
who hasn't even taken it home yet.

This is an important point, as the Aruch's identification of "kaleh ilan"
with the indigo plant, and therefore associating techeiles with the chemical
indigo and its variants, plays a strong role in the pro-murex argument. The
murex techeiles is dibromide indigo. It would seem that they (perhaps I should
say we, although I'm just among the hoy-paloy on this) make an assumption of
similarity to an extent not required by the gemara. The Aruch saying that
it's similar to a blue dye made from indigo is satisfied by any dye that
has the same color when new.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 11-Jan-00: Shelishi, Bo
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 97b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

Aviva Fee (I think it was) asked about the association of R.
Soloveitchik with modern Orthodoxy.  I was surprised at some of the
answers I read on the list.  Actually, this issue came up once before on
Avodah, in the context of a discussion of a letter to the editor of the
Forward written by my rebbe, R. Aharon Lichtenstein, a son-in-law and
talmid muvhak of the Rav.  Among people who were close to the Rav, R.
Lichtenstein's view of the Rav is considered reliable and accurate; the
same cannot be said for every person who has written an article about
the Rav.

I quote my post from Vol. 2, no. 190:

A Forward article asserted that R. Soloveitchik (the Rav) was the
"quintessential Modern Orthodox figure" and therefore Edah-affiliated
rabbis can view the Rav as founder of their movement.  R. Lichtenstein's
response is, yes and no.  If MO is defined purely as engagement with
culture, yes.
Philosophically the Rav was committed to cultural, social and political
engagement.  But to the degree MO -- and Edah -- has an agenda, the Rav
cannot be
associated with some of that agenda.  Beyond his philosophical
positions, the Rav was committed to a rigorous halakhic discipline
rooted in Brisk.  As such, he was very conservative regarding the "text
and context" of tefillah, rejected historicist analysis of Halakhah,
emphasized the centrality of lamdut and the authority of Hazal.  One who
claims the legacy of the Rav must ask himself whether he shares these
positions.
The Rav often criticized the shallowness he found in MO, which, while
not unique to that community, he saw as afflicting MO more than the
anti-modernists.

Finally, the Rav was unique and cannot be fit conveniently into a label,
MO or otherwise.  He transcended many of the communal divisions within
Orthodoxy and did so by choice.

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

I have been cautioned off list that this might be construed some how as a flame

No flame was intended, they were just my honest impressions.

I have friends and relatives in all camps, I would say that this pretty well 
summarizes their views from my subjective perspective

Rich Wolpoe




______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re[2]: Conservative/Reform/Orthodox/Whatever - Who cares?  
Author:  <avodah@aishdas.org> at tcpgate
Date:    1/11/2000 12:45 PM


Summarizing Going from right to left...

RW to MO, learning anything from society is dangerous and will ineveitably 
cause one to assimilate non-Jewish values and perhaps to incorporate 
non-jewish mores into Torah

MO to C, we can selectively choose those value-neutral or value positive 
elements of culture and reject those that do not meat the standards of halacha 
and machshova. However we do not bend Torah to society, rather we attempt to 
influence society to confrom more to Torah. 

C to R, while we mold halahca to conform to the contemporary mores of society, 
we do not discard out morally neutral rituals, and we encourage rituals and 
observance except where it may conflict with contemporary ideals.

R to non-affiliated:  While we dicard all ritual, we still adhere to the 
concepts and ideas of Judaismwithou acting upon them in a ritualistic manner.

Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

*********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]