On finding a "Rav"
May. 10th, 2006 09:38 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
theyellowhobbitI was reading this post in Beyond BT. [I really was working on the Hellerstein essay....My outline alone is onto page 3. So I might just start writing even before outlining story #2...] It asks us whether or not we*'ve been complacent in finding a Rav (a Rabbi, a spiritual guide).
I never really went on such an active search, but I think Rabbi Mike has become my "Rav," though I'm sure he would not like the title of "Rav."
Lately I've been going to him with all of my questions of faith. I think it started with the whole ethnography I did on him, [which got me an A/B, but I still got an A in that class, and it was totally worth it] which just increased the amount of respect that I have for him.
And then there was the whole discussion where he told me that my Jewish identity was more complex than could be defined by just one movement. And I didn't want to believe him, but he was right.
And then I realized that him and I have similar ideaologies and practices. Well, he davens daily and I don't [though I should], but in terms of kashrut and shabbat [he might be a bit more makil on things such as bikes...] and what type of shul would be ideal to daven in- egal with a me[tri]chitza. CJC totally needs to try the trichitza. The biggest section would be egal, but we could have a low divider making a defined women's only section and a defined men's only section. Because even when I stand in the back or on the side, males still wander past me. And then I have to stand for the entire service, and that gets tiring.
Of course, in some cases where I want the stricter answer [for whatever reason] I'll go to Seif. Like with fasting and stuff. Though of course, even he told me not to fast ta'anit esther. Bah.
So the big question:
-What would have happened if I had just stayed in the realm of Conservative and never became Orthodox? Would I be on the path to becoming a Conservative Rabbi? Would that be better than me being an Archaeologist?
I tend to think that Archaeology is the better idea. It's the only career I've found that makes me as excited as being a Reform Rabbi used to make me. I then have the flexibility of being more observant than your given Conservative congregation (covering my hair when I get married, keeping tzniut, etc...). And I like working outside, and incorporating all types of knowledge (history, forensics, art...) And I always could lead services, because you don't need to be a Rabbi, and I like shuls where different people lead on a weekly basis much better than those where only the Rabbi leads. It allows for a stronger, more Jewishly knowledgable congregation. And then there's variety. And it can be a small group of young people, like JitW. And there are no temple politics to deal with in archaeology (though there are academic politics...)
*"we" in this case meaning ba'alei teshuva
I never really went on such an active search, but I think Rabbi Mike has become my "Rav," though I'm sure he would not like the title of "Rav."
Lately I've been going to him with all of my questions of faith. I think it started with the whole ethnography I did on him, [which got me an A/B, but I still got an A in that class, and it was totally worth it] which just increased the amount of respect that I have for him.
And then there was the whole discussion where he told me that my Jewish identity was more complex than could be defined by just one movement. And I didn't want to believe him, but he was right.
And then I realized that him and I have similar ideaologies and practices. Well, he davens daily and I don't [though I should], but in terms of kashrut and shabbat [he might be a bit more makil on things such as bikes...] and what type of shul would be ideal to daven in- egal with a me[tri]chitza. CJC totally needs to try the trichitza. The biggest section would be egal, but we could have a low divider making a defined women's only section and a defined men's only section. Because even when I stand in the back or on the side, males still wander past me. And then I have to stand for the entire service, and that gets tiring.
Of course, in some cases where I want the stricter answer [for whatever reason] I'll go to Seif. Like with fasting and stuff. Though of course, even he told me not to fast ta'anit esther. Bah.
So the big question:
-What would have happened if I had just stayed in the realm of Conservative and never became Orthodox? Would I be on the path to becoming a Conservative Rabbi? Would that be better than me being an Archaeologist?
I tend to think that Archaeology is the better idea. It's the only career I've found that makes me as excited as being a Reform Rabbi used to make me. I then have the flexibility of being more observant than your given Conservative congregation (covering my hair when I get married, keeping tzniut, etc...). And I like working outside, and incorporating all types of knowledge (history, forensics, art...) And I always could lead services, because you don't need to be a Rabbi, and I like shuls where different people lead on a weekly basis much better than those where only the Rabbi leads. It allows for a stronger, more Jewishly knowledgable congregation. And then there's variety. And it can be a small group of young people, like JitW. And there are no temple politics to deal with in archaeology (though there are academic politics...)
*"we" in this case meaning ba'alei teshuva
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 09:20 am (UTC)Here's my two cents on the Tri-Chizta:
Clever, but would be more applicable to an area of life and Judaism where "personal comfort" is key. The reasoning behind the mechizta has a lot to do with the Idea of the mechizta (that this is not a co-ed place of wantonness...wait a second...!), and slightly less to do with practical stuff.
Unless of course, there are girls wearing untzius clothing. One might (and many do) agree that the OCP mechizta is a valid mechizta, but is too see-through for the environment we live in. After all, girls can wear what they want to shul, be it inappropriate or not, but it's unfair to be visible to davening men, who are at times even saying kriyat shema! Shoulders, thighs, etc. are ervah (halachic nakedness), especially during the kriyat shema, according to many poskim. But this nakedness is the boys' problem for now, not yours, and its ridiculous to try to apply this to CJC. Imagine mandating a dress code! Ha.
But I digress...
The point I am trying to make here is that if you believe that men and women lead separate religious lines to such a degree, you shouldn't daven in a room without a mechizta between all of the praying men and women.
On the flip side, if you believe in mixed davening and every community member taking part, be they man or woman, why would you want to bring a mechizta into such an establishment?
If this were a matter of personal taste, like tzniut, I'd say "do what you want, and this can be done without forcing your ideals on someone else."
A mechizta of any kind in a progressive, college based, Conservative, egalitarian shul? You've got to be joking me.
But that's just my two cents.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 10:03 am (UTC)First of all, when I stand in CJC services, guys do wander right past me (including one who reads my LJ). I don't have the right to tell them "Hey, this is my personal space. Could you please stay out of it?" because that would be unfair to them. And bitchy. [Hence me not sitting down, since a guy might sit next to me. If I'm standing I can move around more...]
The original reasoning of the mechitza might be to prevent interaction, but that doesn't mean that it can't serve multiple purposes.
I don't mind seeing guys. I have no problem with the OCP see-through mechitza. I like seeing what is going on in the men's section.
However, I also believe in prayer as a more personal than a communal thing, even when done with a minyan. This is one of the purposes of separating the sexes, and not having even "family seating" like they do in Reform, for example. The point of services isn't to socialize, it's to pray to God. But at the same time, there is something to be said for everyone joining together in song. So there's a balance between space and togetherness. In the tri-chitza, this works quite well.
I neither believe nor disbelieve in mixed davening. I see nothing wrong with others doing it, but it makes me uncomfortable. Hence me wanting my little space for a women's section, while having the rest be mixed, and maybe a small men's section for men who feel the same way that I do.
So it would allow more people to feel comfortable. I personally don't think egal people would mind the tri-chitza, since there would be a GIANT mixed section where they could sitn and pray. It would be a compromise for those who think that mixed seating is wrong, but either they deal with the fact that others are sitting that way, or they daven elsewhere. That's why Jews in the Woods is self-selecting.
I think you should read this (http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2005/07/taxonomy-of-jewish-pluralism.html), this (http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2006/02/hilchot-pluralism-part-i-two-table.html), this (http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2006/02/hilchot-pluralism-part-ii-yesodei.html),this (http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2006/04/hilchot-pluralism-part-iii-macroscopic.html), and finally this (ttp://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2006/04/hilchot-pluralism-part-iv-microscopic.html). These are
And remember that trichitza and mechitza are 2 totally different things. Different ideas behind them, different goals, different messages. I think the trichitza is welcoming. It says "you might agree with some things and disagree with others, but if we can accomodate you without compromising our own beliefs, we'd love to have you." And last time I checked, I don't think Conservative Judaism ever said that people have to sit mixed...Not that I'm Conservative...
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 12:02 pm (UTC)The question, of course, is where do you put a trichitza. You could put it split in the back, but then it's discriminatory. Ditto for the two sides. And if the amud is in the middle of people, then obviously someone is going to be uncomfortable whenever they're going to the amud. And of course, if you're the only person who wants one, then you're probably going to be off in a corner or some such...which, while it might make you feel better about the personal space issue, probably will make you feel fairly isolated.
I still suggest, incidentally, that you try at set up a Shira Chadasha style davening at some point next year, as I think you'd get a decent group of people from both communities.
I've read the stuff you linked to above before, and while some of it's quite interesting, I'm not a big fan of some of it. The "two table system" makes sense...unless you then want a third table (or more restrictive second table) for food that's cooked in a kosher kitchen that's all kosher ingredients by someone who keeps kosher and keeps shabbat. Which then is presumably not acceptably pluralistic (or, if you add the third table, it is).
My ultimate problem is that I've realized I don't like pluralism much in a davening sense. That is, I'll daven how I want, you daven how you want, and if in order to accomplish that we need separate rooms, so be it.
As for Conservative judaism and having to sit mixed- it's never been said, to my knowledge, but I'm not familiar with any "Conservative" synagogues that don't permit it (actually, before I stick my foot in my mouth, I don't remember what the non-egal minyan at JTS does visa vis this issue). I AM familiar with "traditional" or "traditional Conservative" or "Conservadox" shuls that permit mixed seating but don't permit women to carry out various functions.
Finally, for those interested- CJC at Penn is not technically fully "Traditional Egalitarian." There is one function that women are not allowed to carry out. Can anyone name which function this is?
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 12:34 pm (UTC)What's the difference between this and the existing Table 2? Just that the food wasn't cooked on Shabbat? That can be added to the Table 2 description without difficulty (and if it's a Friday night event that starts before sundown, then it's probably not necessary).
I'm guessing shofar?
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 12:45 pm (UTC)I was thinking more of a table for those who only trust food when the cook is both shomer shabbat and shomer kashrut. I'm not sure whether that fits into a pluralistic setting, though I guess it would, so long as such people didn't object to other people eating from tables one and two. Or it might not, because it's restricting who can cook (i.e. in the original, the person doing the cooking wouldn't actually hae to keep kosher to serve on table two, they could just cook in a kosher kitchen, if I'm reading things right).
"I'm guessing shofar?"
Nope. Note that the bracha for shofar is "lishmoa kol shofar," and therefore that the person blowing it doesn't really matter, per se, regardless of anything else.
Anyone else have a guess?
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:07 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:08 pm (UTC)otherwise, possibly giving a get, bris milah, conversion...
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:26 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:36 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:39 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:42 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:42 pm (UTC)I think I get what you're saying, and I sympathize.
Last year I asked a teacher if it would be okay for me to sit and see what conservative services were like, even if I didn't participate, sat aways from the group, etc, and of course she said "absolutely not."
It's assur. I'm an Orthodox Jew(ess) and co-ed seating during davening is assur, at the moment.
Now the question is, will I stay Orthodox? Will some faction of Orthodoxy change its freaking mind? Who knows? It's a mystery today.
>And last time I checked, I don't think Conservative Judaism ever said that people have to sit mixed...Not that I'm Conservative...
Not my point. Are you going to suggest putting a mechitza (boy v. girl) in CJC next week? VERY NO. Therein lies the rub. Aye.
I take issue with the fact that you say you're "personally uncomfortable" with mixed seating during davening. Like on a personal level, whether its: (a)kind of like if you were going swimming and you didn't want guys around. or (b) you don't want to get distracted, personally. I'd guess you're thinking (a).
Mixed swimming != davening. There's nothing not-tznius about davening, or personal that a man can't see or be around for. If you wanted to daven b'yachid (by yourself, to yourself), you could halachically do it out on locust walk, on a bus with a guy sitting next to you, etc.
It's the institution of mechizta that is important. Separate the men and the women in a place where socializing is inappropriate.
It's perfectly within your rights (who am I to say what is or isn't?) to say you're "uncomfortable" with a guy walking past you in CJC minyan, but do you fully realize how self-betraying davening there in the first place probably would be if you were really pro-mechitza?
I don't know what to tell you, and I also don't think that what I have to say should have any bearing on you. I just think it's important to figure out why a guy walking past you is reason for discomfort. You're in an egal (at least to some degree) shul, with no mechitza. This isn't about pluralism, making people of different denominations and thoughts comfortable. This is about what the mechitza means to you. Are you saying a guy is beneath you, to the extent that he can't walk past you while you are having a holy moment, but a girl can? Is a girl better than a guy? Do you trust her more?
On that note, Rachel, what does the mechitza mean to you? I'm not sure I even know what it means to me. I think that's food for thought.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:43 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:47 pm (UTC)Ok yeah, I think such a table has no place in a pluralistic community, because it says that some people can be trusted to read directions and accurately represent their food, and other people can't. Any pluralistic community has to be built on a foundation of trust. (Is there some halachic basis for only eating food cooked by people with certain practices? I've never heard of such a thing.)
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 02:48 pm (UTC)By the way, there's no mixed dancing allowed on my LJ. Any guys who want to do an assur dance must start their own thread.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 03:05 pm (UTC)There's actually a t'shuva about this from the CJLS, which can be found at http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/teshuvot/docs/19861990/pollak_foods.pdf. Basically, it says that it should be prepared under reliable supervision (meaning someone to whom kashrut is second nature or who has deep knowledge of it, so not necessarily someone who keeps it but certainly someone who knows it well), on the theory that most people in the Conservative world don't really know kashrut very well. So if the people attending your pluralistic minyan are known to be knowledgeable in kashrut, then it'd be ok, whereas if they don't know much, then there'd be problems.
As for shabbat and kashrut, I'm not entirely sure. Presumably it comes from the idea of those two as defining "shomer mitzvot," as opposed to not.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 03:23 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 03:25 pm (UTC)And I doubt the reason she reacted that way was the mechitza. There are a lot of other things to take exception to in a Brovender's environment. It's the give them an inch, tehy'll take a mile thing.
However, that's not to say that tefila without a mechitza is seen as ideal.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 03:26 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 03:29 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 04:38 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 04:40 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 04:41 pm (UTC)In the dungeons?
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 05:09 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 05:37 pm (UTC)Care to rephrase that one for me?
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 05:40 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 06:20 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 06:32 pm (UTC)Fair warning for the rest of this: the tshuva I'm disagreeing with was written by Meir Rabinowitz, who I generally look for as the "side I'm disagreeing with indicator" whenever there are two positions. The side I support was voted for by, among others, Joel Roth, who I generally look for as my "the side I'm going to support indicator." Now that you're familiar with my general position on things, please proceed.
The reasoning for the not allowing women to do it in the Conservative movement (at egal shuls) runs essentially to the idea that it is practiced as was said in the torah and that it's directly descended from the Temple, and that therefore only those who would have been eligible in the temple should do it. The other side essentially says that it's not carried out as it originally was, that the Torah never states explicitly that the commandment was to be carried out in the Temple, and that therefore any association with the Temple is d'Rabbanan and can be overruled, and that "banav" can apply to females in some circumstances. Which is idiotic on several levels, because it's applying kal v'chomer v'kal in an improper way, and makes some very bold claims in terms of the CJLS's authority that I tend to disagree with.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 06:35 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-10 06:44 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 06:19 am (UTC)its not always logistically possible, but its a lot more fun that everyone cooking alone, and reduces the likelihood of kashrus slip-ups, without having to cross-examine people about knives and cold onions being hot.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 06:23 am (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 07:41 am (UTC)It's no secret that people talk during services everywhere. I hear churches are pretty quiet, though.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 07:46 am (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 07:49 am (UTC)Real question, why didn't you ask R' Klitsner your kabbalat shabbat question?
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 09:41 am (UTC)It's always obvious who the nonJews are at Bar and Bat Mitzvahs...they show up on time and don't talk.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 02:38 pm (UTC)I grew up Orthodox. Nobody ever tried to present a uniform front about anything! That was like the *Definition* of Orthodoxy -- we have halacha, so we have sanctioned diversity. 70 panim latorah and all that.
Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 03:02 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 04:04 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 07:44 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 07:46 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 07:53 pm (UTC)Re: Trichizta
Date: 2006-05-11 08:00 pm (UTC)