Halacha In a Nutshell
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: רַחֲמָנָא לִיצְלַן מֵהַאי דַּעְתָּא: אַדְּרַבָּה, רַחֲמָנָא לִיצְלַן מִדַּעְתָּא דִידָךְ.
[also Bava Kamma 65b and Ketubot 45b]
Rabbi Ila said to Rabbi Ḥanina: May God save us from this opinion. Rabbi Ḥanina responded: On the contrary, may God save us from your opinion!
The Incomparable Gaon of Vilna - Rabbi Moshe Meiselman (Jewish Action, Fall 1997)
In the history of the Jewish people, certain unique individuals have appeared at times of crisis and transition, whose overwhelming influence has determined all of subsequent Jewish life. These individuals shape and determine the natures of both Jewish life and learning. When the yeshivot in Babylonia began to wane and the center of Jewish life moved to Europe, Rashi appeared as the dominant individual in France and Germany. He determined the nature of all of Jewish life and learning for hundreds of years to come. In Spain, this role was assumed by Rav Yitzchak Alfasi, the “Rif.” After the Expulsion from Spain, Rav Yosef Karo emerged as that individual: his Shulchan Aruch not only determined all of Jewish practice, but also became the main focus of all Torah learning for generations.
The mid-eighteenth century stood astride two tumultuous periods in Jewish history. The latter half of the 17th century and the early 18th century were marred by the Chmelnicki massacres of 1648-1649 and by the disillusionment following the false messianic era of Shabbetai Tzvi and Jacob Frank. This sequence of events threw all of Jewish life into upheaval. [In later centuries the emancipation allowing for a greater integration of the Jewish population into the general non-Jewish society, also meant a reduction in the legal autonomy of the Jewish communities and reduced scope of the connection between the Jewish population and Jewish law. This together with the development of the haskalah philosophies, or "Jewish Enlightenment", led to a segment of the Jewish population rejecting the authority of Jewish Law.] By the end of the 18th century, the effects of modernization and emancipation would forever change the nature of the Jewish community. It was during this transitional period, that one of the most unique figures of Jewish history appeared, the Gaon of Vilna.
In the history of the Jewish people, certain unique individuals have appeared at times of crisis and transition, whose overwhelming influence has determined all of subsequent Jewish life. These individuals shape and determine the natures of both Jewish life and learning. When the yeshivot in Babylonia began to wane and the center of Jewish life moved to Europe, Rashi appeared as the dominant individual in France and Germany. He determined the nature of all of Jewish life and learning for hundreds of years to come. In Spain, this role was assumed by Rav Yitzchak Alfasi, the “Rif.” After the Expulsion from Spain, Rav Yosef Karo emerged as that individual: his Shulchan Aruch not only determined all of Jewish practice, but also became the main focus of all Torah learning for generations.
The mid-eighteenth century stood astride two tumultuous periods in Jewish history. The latter half of the 17th century and the early 18th century were marred by the Chmelnicki massacres of 1648-1649 and by the disillusionment following the false messianic era of Shabbetai Tzvi and Jacob Frank. This sequence of events threw all of Jewish life into upheaval. [In later centuries the emancipation allowing for a greater integration of the Jewish population into the general non-Jewish society, also meant a reduction in the legal autonomy of the Jewish communities and reduced scope of the connection between the Jewish population and Jewish law. This together with the development of the haskalah philosophies, or "Jewish Enlightenment", led to a segment of the Jewish population rejecting the authority of Jewish Law.] By the end of the 18th century, the effects of modernization and emancipation would forever change the nature of the Jewish community. It was during this transitional period, that one of the most unique figures of Jewish history appeared, the Gaon of Vilna.
Instructions: We will each individually study one of the eight rabbis on this source sheet. Then, we will come back together and share out what we've learned. As you prepare to share and as you listen to others, please consider the following questions:
1) What decisions, innovations, or approaches was each rabbi known for?
2) What larger pattern, stream, or movement of Jewish thought does this individual fall into? Who on this list "goes together", and who does not?
3) How/where is the center of gravity of rabbinic authority shifting throughout the modern period? What are the implications of these shifts?
The "Vilna Gaon" - Rabbi Eliyahu ben Shlomo Zalman, The Genius of Vilna (1720 present-day Belarus - 1797 Lithuania)
The Vilna Gaon – also known by the acronym G”ra (Gaon, R’ Eliyahu), or simply as HaGaon, The Genius – never held an official rabbinic position, never served as the rabbi of a city or as head of a yeshiva. He did not publish a single book in his lifetime. And yet, the scope of the Vilna Gaon’s influence, authority and fame in his lifetime and far beyond are immeasurable.
Legends about the Gaon’s sharp mind and wondrous memory abound. Although it is difficult to separate fact from hagiography, the accounts by those who had firsthand knowledge describe an unparalleled genius with an eidetic memory who had complete mastery of all Torah knowledge, and a similar command of general knowledge.
The Gaon’s primary student, Rav Chaim of Volozhin, who went on to found the famous Yeshiva of Volozhin, described his teacher’s mastery of theoretical and practical Kabbalah, to the point of being able to create a golem before his bar mitzvah (The Gaon himself stated that he abandoned this project when he sensed “Heavenly displeasure”). Another student, R’ Israel of Shklov, in the introduction to his “Pe’at Hashulchan,” recalled that on the day The G”ra concluded his commentary to Shir Hashirim, the G”ra confided to close family and students that he had mastered all of Torah, and all of human knowledge – other than pharmacology. The Gaon’s father discouraged him from studying the medical arts; he had no doubt that his son would master this subject, and would then be required – morally, ethically and religiously – to spend his days and nights ministering to the sick, rendering him unavailable to pursue Torah study.
R’ Israel recounts the events of that day in detail:
“He ordered that his room be closed, and the windows were closed during the day, and many candles were lit. When he finished his commentary, he lifted up his eyes with intense concentration, with blessing, and with thanksgiving to God’s great name for allowing him to apprehend the light of the entire Torah, both its inner and its outer elements. He said: All the sciences are necessary for our holy Torah, and are included in it,” and he knew them all perfectly. And he mentioned them – algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music, and he praised them greatly. He said then that much of the logic of the Torah, the mysteries of the songs of the Levites, and the mysteries of Tikkunei Hazohar [i.e. Kabbalah] cannot be understood without (scientific knowledge). And with (this knowledge) everyone… can resurrect the dead with the secrets that are hidden in the Torah. He explained the nature of all the sciences and said that he comprehended them all in perfect manner, except for medicine. He knew surgery and related matters, and he had wanted to study pharmacology from the doctors of his time, but his righteous father had forbidden him to do so, so as not to neglect his Torah studies. Afterwards, he said that the entire Torah that had been given at Sinai he knew to perfection.”
The centrality of scientific subjects to a deep understanding of Torah is manifest in a work on mathematics titled Ayil Meshulosh, attributed to the Gaon. R. Baruch of Shklov reports that in 5538 (1778) he visited the G”ra, who encouraged him to translate Euclid:
“I heard from his holy mouth that in accordance with what a person lacks in general knowledge, he will be lacking a hundredfold in Torah knowledge, for Torah and general wisdom are closely joined together… and he commanded me to translate into our holy language what is possible from general knowledge… so that wisdom will increase among our people Israel…
The Gaon’s sons also reported that as an eight-year-old, their father spent half an hour a day for 10 days studying astronomy – and mastered the discipline.
He lived an ascetic life, dedicating all of his physical and mental capacity to his studies and eschewing worldly pleasures, indulging in physical necessities such as food and sleep only in the minimum he deemed necessary...
The Gaon’s approach to Jewish law was, in many ways, radical – and in many ways, strikingly conservative. He considered the Talmud the ultimate arbiter of Jewish law, and was not afraid of disregarding opinions and interpretations of post-Talmudic authorities in favor of a close adherence to the Talmudic discussion. To his mind, later commentaries were only valid to the extent that they clarify the Talmud. R’ Chaim of Volozhin quoted him as stating that one should not be afraid to hand down a ruling – even if one’s conclusions contradict those of the Shulchan Aruch. This approach, which was not universally accepted, effectively sets aside generations of post-Talmudic discussion and argument. Disciples of the Gaon consider him a singular throwback, ascribing to him a stature parallel to the earlier authorities who lived a millennium ago. While they generally adhere to his rulings, they do not generally follow his lead by ruling independently against the Shulchan Aruch, which has been the accepted, mainstream codification of Jewish Law for centuries.
Sefaria:
He may be best remembered as one of the leaders of the "Misnagdim," the opponents of the newly emergent Hasidic movement. He declared that the Hasidic belief in miracles and visions were lies and delusions. In response, he advocated a more rational approach to Torah observance that emphasized the traditional obligations of Torah study and fulfillment of the commandments.
The Vilna Gaon – also known by the acronym G”ra (Gaon, R’ Eliyahu), or simply as HaGaon, The Genius – never held an official rabbinic position, never served as the rabbi of a city or as head of a yeshiva. He did not publish a single book in his lifetime. And yet, the scope of the Vilna Gaon’s influence, authority and fame in his lifetime and far beyond are immeasurable.
Legends about the Gaon’s sharp mind and wondrous memory abound. Although it is difficult to separate fact from hagiography, the accounts by those who had firsthand knowledge describe an unparalleled genius with an eidetic memory who had complete mastery of all Torah knowledge, and a similar command of general knowledge.
The Gaon’s primary student, Rav Chaim of Volozhin, who went on to found the famous Yeshiva of Volozhin, described his teacher’s mastery of theoretical and practical Kabbalah, to the point of being able to create a golem before his bar mitzvah (The Gaon himself stated that he abandoned this project when he sensed “Heavenly displeasure”). Another student, R’ Israel of Shklov, in the introduction to his “Pe’at Hashulchan,” recalled that on the day The G”ra concluded his commentary to Shir Hashirim, the G”ra confided to close family and students that he had mastered all of Torah, and all of human knowledge – other than pharmacology. The Gaon’s father discouraged him from studying the medical arts; he had no doubt that his son would master this subject, and would then be required – morally, ethically and religiously – to spend his days and nights ministering to the sick, rendering him unavailable to pursue Torah study.
R’ Israel recounts the events of that day in detail:
“He ordered that his room be closed, and the windows were closed during the day, and many candles were lit. When he finished his commentary, he lifted up his eyes with intense concentration, with blessing, and with thanksgiving to God’s great name for allowing him to apprehend the light of the entire Torah, both its inner and its outer elements. He said: All the sciences are necessary for our holy Torah, and are included in it,” and he knew them all perfectly. And he mentioned them – algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music, and he praised them greatly. He said then that much of the logic of the Torah, the mysteries of the songs of the Levites, and the mysteries of Tikkunei Hazohar [i.e. Kabbalah] cannot be understood without (scientific knowledge). And with (this knowledge) everyone… can resurrect the dead with the secrets that are hidden in the Torah. He explained the nature of all the sciences and said that he comprehended them all in perfect manner, except for medicine. He knew surgery and related matters, and he had wanted to study pharmacology from the doctors of his time, but his righteous father had forbidden him to do so, so as not to neglect his Torah studies. Afterwards, he said that the entire Torah that had been given at Sinai he knew to perfection.”
The centrality of scientific subjects to a deep understanding of Torah is manifest in a work on mathematics titled Ayil Meshulosh, attributed to the Gaon. R. Baruch of Shklov reports that in 5538 (1778) he visited the G”ra, who encouraged him to translate Euclid:
“I heard from his holy mouth that in accordance with what a person lacks in general knowledge, he will be lacking a hundredfold in Torah knowledge, for Torah and general wisdom are closely joined together… and he commanded me to translate into our holy language what is possible from general knowledge… so that wisdom will increase among our people Israel…
The Gaon’s sons also reported that as an eight-year-old, their father spent half an hour a day for 10 days studying astronomy – and mastered the discipline.
He lived an ascetic life, dedicating all of his physical and mental capacity to his studies and eschewing worldly pleasures, indulging in physical necessities such as food and sleep only in the minimum he deemed necessary...
The Gaon’s approach to Jewish law was, in many ways, radical – and in many ways, strikingly conservative. He considered the Talmud the ultimate arbiter of Jewish law, and was not afraid of disregarding opinions and interpretations of post-Talmudic authorities in favor of a close adherence to the Talmudic discussion. To his mind, later commentaries were only valid to the extent that they clarify the Talmud. R’ Chaim of Volozhin quoted him as stating that one should not be afraid to hand down a ruling – even if one’s conclusions contradict those of the Shulchan Aruch. This approach, which was not universally accepted, effectively sets aside generations of post-Talmudic discussion and argument. Disciples of the Gaon consider him a singular throwback, ascribing to him a stature parallel to the earlier authorities who lived a millennium ago. While they generally adhere to his rulings, they do not generally follow his lead by ruling independently against the Shulchan Aruch, which has been the accepted, mainstream codification of Jewish Law for centuries.
Sefaria:
He may be best remembered as one of the leaders of the "Misnagdim," the opponents of the newly emergent Hasidic movement. He declared that the Hasidic belief in miracles and visions were lies and delusions. In response, he advocated a more rational approach to Torah observance that emphasized the traditional obligations of Torah study and fulfillment of the commandments.
The "Alter Rebbe", or the "Ba'al haTanya" - Shneur Zalman of Liadi (Ukraine/Russia, 1745 - 1812)
Wikipedia
Shneur Zalman of Liady was the founder of Chabad (Lubavitch) Chassidut. He was a leading disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch [who himself was the successor to the Baal Shem Tov, the founder of Chassidic Judaism], who sent him to Lithuania to spread Chassidut and assigned him the task of composing an updated Shulchan Aruch which reflected the many new decisions that had been rendered since the original work by R' Joseph Karo had been published some two hundred years earlier. [Concise, conclusive and accessible for contemporary chasidic Jews, it is considered an authoritative halakhic text outside of chasidic circles as well, and is frequently cited by later authorities like the Mishnah Berurah and the Ben Ish Chai.] This highly respected work, known as "Shulchan Aruch HaRav", is considered the primary code of law for Chabad Chasidim as well as many other Chasidic groups. His best-known work is the vastly influential Likkutei Amarim, better known as the "Tanya", a systematic presentation of Chasidic philosophy, considered to be a core Chasidic text. ...At the height of the dispute between Chassidim and Mitnagdim, he was falsely accused of fomenting rebellion against the Czar and imprisoned as a result. His release from prison is celebrated by Chabad Chassidim to this day.
Hasidism (Jewish Virtual Library)
The Hasidic movement started in the 1700's (CE) in Eastern Europe in response to a void felt by many average observant Jews of the day. The founder of Hasidism, Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov (referred to as the "Besht," an acronym of his name) was a great scholar and mystic, devoted to both the revealed, outer aspect, and hidden, inner aspect of Torah. He and his followers, without veering from a commitment to Torah, created a way of Jewish life that emphasized the ability of all Jews to grow closer to Gd via everything that we do, say, and think. In contrast to the somewhat intellectual style of the mainstream Jewish leaders of his day and their emphasis on the primacy of Torah study, the Besht emphasized a constant focus on attachment to Gd and Torah no matter what one is involved with.
Early on, a schism developed between the Hasidic and nonHasidic (i.e., Misnagdim, lit. "opponents") Jewish movements, primarily over real or imagined issues of halachic observance. The opposition was based on concern that the Hasidim were neglecting the laws regarding appropriate times for prayer, and perhaps concern about the exuberance of Hasidic worship, or a concern that it might be an offshoot of false messiahs Shabbtai Zvi or Jacob Frank. Within a generation or two, the rift was closed. Since then, many Hasidic practices have influenced the Misnagdim, while the Misnagdim, in turn, moderated some of the extremes of early Hasidism. Nevertheless, the dispute between particular groups of Hasidim and Misnagdim continues to this day, especially in Israel.
Today, Hasidim are differentiated from other Orthodox Jews by their devotion to a dynastic leader (referred to as a "Rebbe"), their wearing of distinctive clothing and a greater than average study of the inner aspects of Torah.
There are perhaps a dozen major Hasidic movements today, the largest of which (with perhaps 100,000 followers) is the Lubavitch group headquartered in Brooklyn, NY. Other groups include the Bobov, Bostoner, Belzer, Gerer, Satmar, Vizhnitz, Breslov, Puppa, Bianer, Munkacz, and Rimnitz. In Israel, the major Hasidic groups besides the Lubavitch include: Gor (Gerer), Viznitz and Bealz (Belzer).
Wikipedia
Shneur Zalman of Liady was the founder of Chabad (Lubavitch) Chassidut. He was a leading disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch [who himself was the successor to the Baal Shem Tov, the founder of Chassidic Judaism], who sent him to Lithuania to spread Chassidut and assigned him the task of composing an updated Shulchan Aruch which reflected the many new decisions that had been rendered since the original work by R' Joseph Karo had been published some two hundred years earlier. [Concise, conclusive and accessible for contemporary chasidic Jews, it is considered an authoritative halakhic text outside of chasidic circles as well, and is frequently cited by later authorities like the Mishnah Berurah and the Ben Ish Chai.] This highly respected work, known as "Shulchan Aruch HaRav", is considered the primary code of law for Chabad Chasidim as well as many other Chasidic groups. His best-known work is the vastly influential Likkutei Amarim, better known as the "Tanya", a systematic presentation of Chasidic philosophy, considered to be a core Chasidic text. ...At the height of the dispute between Chassidim and Mitnagdim, he was falsely accused of fomenting rebellion against the Czar and imprisoned as a result. His release from prison is celebrated by Chabad Chassidim to this day.
Hasidism (Jewish Virtual Library)
The Hasidic movement started in the 1700's (CE) in Eastern Europe in response to a void felt by many average observant Jews of the day. The founder of Hasidism, Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov (referred to as the "Besht," an acronym of his name) was a great scholar and mystic, devoted to both the revealed, outer aspect, and hidden, inner aspect of Torah. He and his followers, without veering from a commitment to Torah, created a way of Jewish life that emphasized the ability of all Jews to grow closer to Gd via everything that we do, say, and think. In contrast to the somewhat intellectual style of the mainstream Jewish leaders of his day and their emphasis on the primacy of Torah study, the Besht emphasized a constant focus on attachment to Gd and Torah no matter what one is involved with.
Early on, a schism developed between the Hasidic and nonHasidic (i.e., Misnagdim, lit. "opponents") Jewish movements, primarily over real or imagined issues of halachic observance. The opposition was based on concern that the Hasidim were neglecting the laws regarding appropriate times for prayer, and perhaps concern about the exuberance of Hasidic worship, or a concern that it might be an offshoot of false messiahs Shabbtai Zvi or Jacob Frank. Within a generation or two, the rift was closed. Since then, many Hasidic practices have influenced the Misnagdim, while the Misnagdim, in turn, moderated some of the extremes of early Hasidism. Nevertheless, the dispute between particular groups of Hasidim and Misnagdim continues to this day, especially in Israel.
Today, Hasidim are differentiated from other Orthodox Jews by their devotion to a dynastic leader (referred to as a "Rebbe"), their wearing of distinctive clothing and a greater than average study of the inner aspects of Torah.
There are perhaps a dozen major Hasidic movements today, the largest of which (with perhaps 100,000 followers) is the Lubavitch group headquartered in Brooklyn, NY. Other groups include the Bobov, Bostoner, Belzer, Gerer, Satmar, Vizhnitz, Breslov, Puppa, Bianer, Munkacz, and Rimnitz. In Israel, the major Hasidic groups besides the Lubavitch include: Gor (Gerer), Viznitz and Bealz (Belzer).
The "Chatam Sofer" - Moshe Sofer (Schreiber) (1762, Frankfurt –1839, Pressburg)
Sefaria:
Moses Sofer (Schreiber), better known by the name of his work "Hatam Sofer", was one of the leading Orthodox rabbis of Austrian - Hungarian Jewry in the first half of the nineteenth century. He was a teacher to thousands and a powerful opponent to the Reform movement in Judaism, which was attracting many people from the Jewish communities in the Austrian Empire and beyond.
Wikipedia:
For Sofer, Judaism as previously practiced was the only form of Judaism acceptable. In his view, the rules and tenets of Judaism had never changed — and cannot ever change. This became the defining idea for the opponents to Reform, and in some form, it has continued to influence the Orthodox response to innovation in Jewish doctrine and practice.
Sofer applied a pun to the Talmudic term chadash asur min haTorah, "'new' is forbidden by the Torah" (referring literally to eating chadash, "new grain", before the Omer offering is given) as a slogan heralding his opposition to any philosophical, social or practical change to customary Orthodox practice. He did not allow the addition of any secular studies to the curriculum of his Pressburg Yeshiva.
Sefaria:
Moses Sofer (Schreiber), better known by the name of his work "Hatam Sofer", was one of the leading Orthodox rabbis of Austrian - Hungarian Jewry in the first half of the nineteenth century. He was a teacher to thousands and a powerful opponent to the Reform movement in Judaism, which was attracting many people from the Jewish communities in the Austrian Empire and beyond.
Wikipedia:
For Sofer, Judaism as previously practiced was the only form of Judaism acceptable. In his view, the rules and tenets of Judaism had never changed — and cannot ever change. This became the defining idea for the opponents to Reform, and in some form, it has continued to influence the Orthodox response to innovation in Jewish doctrine and practice.
Sofer applied a pun to the Talmudic term chadash asur min haTorah, "'new' is forbidden by the Torah" (referring literally to eating chadash, "new grain", before the Omer offering is given) as a slogan heralding his opposition to any philosophical, social or practical change to customary Orthodox practice. He did not allow the addition of any secular studies to the curriculum of his Pressburg Yeshiva.
The "Aruch haShulchan" - Yechiel Michel Epstein (1829 - 1908, Belarus)
Sefaria:
The Arukh HaShulchan (“The Table is Set”) is a comprehensive halakhic digest following the order of the Shulchan Arukh, first published in 1884. It traces the origins of laws and customs to their source and discusses the views of legal authorities who wrote after the Shulchan Arukh. It is known for its lenient rulings and is considered an authoritative work; some later authorities give the work preference because its author, Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein, was the rabbi of a congregation and therefore was able to combine abstract considerations with a practical understanding of human needs.
Wikipedia:
In Aruch HaShulchan, Epstein cites the source of each law as found in the Talmud and Maimonides, and states the legal decision as found in the Shulchan Aruch with the glosses of Isserles. When he deems it necessary, Epstein also mentions the views of other Rishonim (early, pre-1550 authorities), and especially Acharonim (later authorities), occasionally disagreeing with the latter.
Epstein tends to take a lenient view (le-kula) but decidedly without compromising in any form on the power and rule of Jewish law. When established custom is in conflict with theoretical halacha, Epstein tends to side with local custom, to a greater extent than is the case in works such as the Mishnah Berurah.
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein once said that the decisions of the Aruch HaShulchan — who was a full-time rabbi — take precedence over many poseks [halachic decisors] who were not active rabbis. A rabbi takes into consideration more than just the abstract and black-and-white concepts of the law when rendering a legal opinion.
The Aruch HaShulchan is often quoted alongside the Mishnah Berurah, a work partially composed earlier by Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan... Indeed, the Aruch HaShulchan refers in a number of places to the Mishnah Berurah. Due to the latter's popularity in the Haredi world, the Mishnah Berurah is often considered authoritative over Aruch HaShulchan by Haredi Jews. However, many people (including Rabbi Yosef Eliyahu Henkin and Rabbi Yehuda Pearl) have famously held that the Aruch HaShulchan is more authoritative, since its author was the rabbi of a community, and since it was printed after the Mishnah Berurah. Also, Aruch HaShulchan has a much wider scope than the Mishnah Berurah.
Epstein also wrote a similar work entitled Aruch HaShulchan he'Atid (Laying the Table of the Future), a parallel work to Aruch HaShulchan summarising and analysing the laws that will apply in Messianic times. Some of the laws discussed, such as those relating to agriculture and farming, apply today for those living in the Land of Israel.
Sefaria:
The Arukh HaShulchan (“The Table is Set”) is a comprehensive halakhic digest following the order of the Shulchan Arukh, first published in 1884. It traces the origins of laws and customs to their source and discusses the views of legal authorities who wrote after the Shulchan Arukh. It is known for its lenient rulings and is considered an authoritative work; some later authorities give the work preference because its author, Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein, was the rabbi of a congregation and therefore was able to combine abstract considerations with a practical understanding of human needs.
Wikipedia:
In Aruch HaShulchan, Epstein cites the source of each law as found in the Talmud and Maimonides, and states the legal decision as found in the Shulchan Aruch with the glosses of Isserles. When he deems it necessary, Epstein also mentions the views of other Rishonim (early, pre-1550 authorities), and especially Acharonim (later authorities), occasionally disagreeing with the latter.
Epstein tends to take a lenient view (le-kula) but decidedly without compromising in any form on the power and rule of Jewish law. When established custom is in conflict with theoretical halacha, Epstein tends to side with local custom, to a greater extent than is the case in works such as the Mishnah Berurah.
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein once said that the decisions of the Aruch HaShulchan — who was a full-time rabbi — take precedence over many poseks [halachic decisors] who were not active rabbis. A rabbi takes into consideration more than just the abstract and black-and-white concepts of the law when rendering a legal opinion.
The Aruch HaShulchan is often quoted alongside the Mishnah Berurah, a work partially composed earlier by Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan... Indeed, the Aruch HaShulchan refers in a number of places to the Mishnah Berurah. Due to the latter's popularity in the Haredi world, the Mishnah Berurah is often considered authoritative over Aruch HaShulchan by Haredi Jews. However, many people (including Rabbi Yosef Eliyahu Henkin and Rabbi Yehuda Pearl) have famously held that the Aruch HaShulchan is more authoritative, since its author was the rabbi of a community, and since it was printed after the Mishnah Berurah. Also, Aruch HaShulchan has a much wider scope than the Mishnah Berurah.
Epstein also wrote a similar work entitled Aruch HaShulchan he'Atid (Laying the Table of the Future), a parallel work to Aruch HaShulchan summarising and analysing the laws that will apply in Messianic times. Some of the laws discussed, such as those relating to agriculture and farming, apply today for those living in the Land of Israel.
The "Ben Ish Chai" - Yosef Hayyim (Baghdad, 1835 – 1909)
Sefaria:
Composed in Baghdad, Iraq (c.1894 - c.1898 CE). Ben Ish Chai (“Son of a Living Man”), is a collection of sermons on the Torah blended with mystical insights and Sephardic legal rulings, based on sermons that the author delivered to his congregation. It is studied extensively and is a standard reference work for many Sephardic Jews, much like its Ashkenazi counterpart, the Kitzur Shulhan Arukh. It is known for its strict rulings, many of which are based upon kabbalistic teachings.
[A similar layman-oriented work of halacha was the Kitzur Shulhan Arukh of Rabbi Shlomo Ganzfried (Hungary 1804–1886), a "digest", covering applicable Halakha from all four sections of Shulchan Aruch, and reflecting the very strict Hungarian customs of the 19th century. It became immensely popular after its publication due to its simplicity, and is still popular in Orthodox Judaism as a framework for study, if not always for practice].
Notable Rulings
Bicycles are permitted to use on shabbat.
It's permissible to recite the Shema in front of a nursing mother.
Sefaria:
Composed in Baghdad, Iraq (c.1894 - c.1898 CE). Ben Ish Chai (“Son of a Living Man”), is a collection of sermons on the Torah blended with mystical insights and Sephardic legal rulings, based on sermons that the author delivered to his congregation. It is studied extensively and is a standard reference work for many Sephardic Jews, much like its Ashkenazi counterpart, the Kitzur Shulhan Arukh. It is known for its strict rulings, many of which are based upon kabbalistic teachings.
[A similar layman-oriented work of halacha was the Kitzur Shulhan Arukh of Rabbi Shlomo Ganzfried (Hungary 1804–1886), a "digest", covering applicable Halakha from all four sections of Shulchan Aruch, and reflecting the very strict Hungarian customs of the 19th century. It became immensely popular after its publication due to its simplicity, and is still popular in Orthodox Judaism as a framework for study, if not always for practice].
Notable Rulings
Bicycles are permitted to use on shabbat.
It's permissible to recite the Shema in front of a nursing mother.
The Mishna Berurah, authored by the "Chafetz Chaim"- Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan (1838 - 1933, present-day Belarus)
Sefaria:
Composed in Radun (c.1875 - c.1905 CE). Mishnah Berurah (Clarified Teaching) is a work of halakhah by Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan also colloquially known by the name of another of his books, Hafez Hayyim (Desirer of Life). His Mishnah Berurah is a commentary on Orah Hayyim, the first section of the Shulhan Arukh which deals with laws of prayer, synagogue, Shabbat and holidays, summarizing the opinions of the post-Medieval rabbinic authority. It is widely used as a reference and has mostly supplanted the Hayyei Adam and the Arukh HaShulhan as the primary authority on Jewish daily living among Ashkenazi Jews. He displays a tendency towards stringency though he does include lenient opinions.
Wikipedia:
The Mishnah Berurah's "literary style can be described as follows: In relation to a given law of the Shulhan Aruch, he raises a particular case with certain peculiarities that may change the law; then, he enumerates the opinions of the Ahronim (the later authorities, of the 16th century and on) on that case, from the most lenient to the most stringent ; and finally, he decides between them.... Having displayed what we may call the "leniency-stringency spectrum", [he] actually offers the reader an array of conduct options from which he may pick the one that seems right for him. This choice is not altogether free, since [he] shows a clear inclination to one side of the spectrum - the stringent - and encourages the reader to follow it, but still, the soft language of the ruling suggests that if one follows the other side of the spectrum, the lenient, he will not sin, since there are trustworthy authorities that may back his choice."
...Mishnah Berurah has come to play a significant role in the study and practice of contemporary Ashkenazi Orthodox Jews. According to some, it is the "posek acharon" whose rulings are the last word on halachic issues it addresses. As such, the "yeshivish" community tends to follow its rulings almost exclusively. However, R' Yosef Eliyahu Henkin ruled that the Aruch haShulchan should be regarded as more authoritative for a number of reasons: it is the later of the two codes; it covers the entire Shulchan Aruch and not just Orach Chaim; it takes Jewish custom into account; it was written by a practicing rabbi who thus had more experience with halachic dilemmas. R' Moshe Feinstein also preferred the Aruch Hashulchan, for the last of these reasons. Indeed, on a number of key issues, common Orthodox practice does not follow the Mishnah Berurah's stringencies.
Sefaria:
Composed in Radun (c.1875 - c.1905 CE). Mishnah Berurah (Clarified Teaching) is a work of halakhah by Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan also colloquially known by the name of another of his books, Hafez Hayyim (Desirer of Life). His Mishnah Berurah is a commentary on Orah Hayyim, the first section of the Shulhan Arukh which deals with laws of prayer, synagogue, Shabbat and holidays, summarizing the opinions of the post-Medieval rabbinic authority. It is widely used as a reference and has mostly supplanted the Hayyei Adam and the Arukh HaShulhan as the primary authority on Jewish daily living among Ashkenazi Jews. He displays a tendency towards stringency though he does include lenient opinions.
Wikipedia:
The Mishnah Berurah's "literary style can be described as follows: In relation to a given law of the Shulhan Aruch, he raises a particular case with certain peculiarities that may change the law; then, he enumerates the opinions of the Ahronim (the later authorities, of the 16th century and on) on that case, from the most lenient to the most stringent ; and finally, he decides between them.... Having displayed what we may call the "leniency-stringency spectrum", [he] actually offers the reader an array of conduct options from which he may pick the one that seems right for him. This choice is not altogether free, since [he] shows a clear inclination to one side of the spectrum - the stringent - and encourages the reader to follow it, but still, the soft language of the ruling suggests that if one follows the other side of the spectrum, the lenient, he will not sin, since there are trustworthy authorities that may back his choice."
...Mishnah Berurah has come to play a significant role in the study and practice of contemporary Ashkenazi Orthodox Jews. According to some, it is the "posek acharon" whose rulings are the last word on halachic issues it addresses. As such, the "yeshivish" community tends to follow its rulings almost exclusively. However, R' Yosef Eliyahu Henkin ruled that the Aruch haShulchan should be regarded as more authoritative for a number of reasons: it is the later of the two codes; it covers the entire Shulchan Aruch and not just Orach Chaim; it takes Jewish custom into account; it was written by a practicing rabbi who thus had more experience with halachic dilemmas. R' Moshe Feinstein also preferred the Aruch Hashulchan, for the last of these reasons. Indeed, on a number of key issues, common Orthodox practice does not follow the Mishnah Berurah's stringencies.
Rav Moshe Feinstein (1895, near Minsk, Belarus – 1986, NYC)
Sefaria:
Leading decisor of Jewish law of the 20th century and Rosh Yeshiva of Mesivta Tiferet Jerusalem in New York [on the Lower East Side]. Born in Uzda, Belarus, and served as rabbi in Luban for 16 years. After suffering from oppression under the Soviet regime, he moved with his family to New York City in 1937 where he lived for the remainder of his life. He authored the multivolume responsa "Igrot Moshe", as well as novellae on Talmud entitled "Dibrot Moshe".
Wikipedia:
Widely acclaimed in the Orthodox world for his gentleness and compassion, Feinstein is commonly referred to simply as "Reb Moshe" or "Rav Moshe".
Feinstein was revered by many as the Gadol Hador (greatest Torah sage of the generation), including by Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky, Yonasan Steif, Elyah Lopian, Aharon Kotler, Yaakov Kamenetsky, and Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, even though several of them were far older than he. Feinstein was also recognized by many as the preeminent Torah sage and posek of his generation, and people from around the world called upon him to answer their most complicated halachic questions.
Owing to his prominence as an adjudicator of Jewish law, Feinstein was asked the most difficult questions, in which he issued a number of innovative and controversial decisions. Soon after arriving in the United States, he established a reputation for handling business and labor disputes. For instance, he wrote about strikes, seniority, and fair competition. Later, he served as the chief Halakhic authority for the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists, indicative of his expertise in Jewish medical ethics. In the medical arena, he opposed the early, unsuccessful heart transplants, although it is orally reported that in his later years, he allowed a person to receive a heart transplant (after the medical technique of preventing rejection was improved). On such matters, he often consulted with various scientific experts, including his son-in-law Moshe David Tendler, who is a professor of biology and serves as a rosh yeshiva at Yeshiva University.
As one of the prominent leaders of American Orthodoxy, Feinstein issued opinions that clearly distanced his community from Conservative and Reform Judaism. He faced intense opposition from Hasidic Orthodoxy on several controversial decisions, such as rulings on artificial insemination and mechitza. In the case of his position not to prohibit cigarette smoking, though he recommended against it and prohibited second-hand smoke, other Orthodox rabbinic authorities disagreed. Even his detractors, while disagreeing with specific rulings, still considered him to be a leading decisor of Jewish law. The first volume of his Igrot Moshe, a voluminous collection of his halachic decisions, was published in 1959.
Feinstein's greatest renown came from a lifetime of responding to halachic queries posed by Jews in America and worldwide. He authored approximately 2,000 responsa on a wide range of issues affecting Jewish practice in the modern era. Some responsa can also be found in his Talmudic commentary (Dibrot Moshe), some circulate informally, and 1,883 responsa were published in Igrot Moshe.
Feinstein is known for writing, in a number of places, that certain statements by prominent rishonim which Feinstein found theologically objectionably were not in fact written by those rishonim, but rather inserted into the text by erring students.
According to Rav Dovid Cohen of Brooklyn, Feinstein attributed such comments to students as a way of politely rejecting statements by rishonim while still retaining full reverence for them as religious leaders of earlier generations.
Notable Rulings
Permitted artificial insemination (with the awareness and consent of her husband).
Sefaria:
Leading decisor of Jewish law of the 20th century and Rosh Yeshiva of Mesivta Tiferet Jerusalem in New York [on the Lower East Side]. Born in Uzda, Belarus, and served as rabbi in Luban for 16 years. After suffering from oppression under the Soviet regime, he moved with his family to New York City in 1937 where he lived for the remainder of his life. He authored the multivolume responsa "Igrot Moshe", as well as novellae on Talmud entitled "Dibrot Moshe".
Wikipedia:
Widely acclaimed in the Orthodox world for his gentleness and compassion, Feinstein is commonly referred to simply as "Reb Moshe" or "Rav Moshe".
Feinstein was revered by many as the Gadol Hador (greatest Torah sage of the generation), including by Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky, Yonasan Steif, Elyah Lopian, Aharon Kotler, Yaakov Kamenetsky, and Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, even though several of them were far older than he. Feinstein was also recognized by many as the preeminent Torah sage and posek of his generation, and people from around the world called upon him to answer their most complicated halachic questions.
Owing to his prominence as an adjudicator of Jewish law, Feinstein was asked the most difficult questions, in which he issued a number of innovative and controversial decisions. Soon after arriving in the United States, he established a reputation for handling business and labor disputes. For instance, he wrote about strikes, seniority, and fair competition. Later, he served as the chief Halakhic authority for the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists, indicative of his expertise in Jewish medical ethics. In the medical arena, he opposed the early, unsuccessful heart transplants, although it is orally reported that in his later years, he allowed a person to receive a heart transplant (after the medical technique of preventing rejection was improved). On such matters, he often consulted with various scientific experts, including his son-in-law Moshe David Tendler, who is a professor of biology and serves as a rosh yeshiva at Yeshiva University.
As one of the prominent leaders of American Orthodoxy, Feinstein issued opinions that clearly distanced his community from Conservative and Reform Judaism. He faced intense opposition from Hasidic Orthodoxy on several controversial decisions, such as rulings on artificial insemination and mechitza. In the case of his position not to prohibit cigarette smoking, though he recommended against it and prohibited second-hand smoke, other Orthodox rabbinic authorities disagreed. Even his detractors, while disagreeing with specific rulings, still considered him to be a leading decisor of Jewish law. The first volume of his Igrot Moshe, a voluminous collection of his halachic decisions, was published in 1959.
Feinstein's greatest renown came from a lifetime of responding to halachic queries posed by Jews in America and worldwide. He authored approximately 2,000 responsa on a wide range of issues affecting Jewish practice in the modern era. Some responsa can also be found in his Talmudic commentary (Dibrot Moshe), some circulate informally, and 1,883 responsa were published in Igrot Moshe.
Feinstein is known for writing, in a number of places, that certain statements by prominent rishonim which Feinstein found theologically objectionably were not in fact written by those rishonim, but rather inserted into the text by erring students.
According to Rav Dovid Cohen of Brooklyn, Feinstein attributed such comments to students as a way of politely rejecting statements by rishonim while still retaining full reverence for them as religious leaders of earlier generations.
Notable Rulings
Permitted artificial insemination (with the awareness and consent of her husband).
Joseph Ber Soloveitchik - "The Rav" (1903, Belarus - 1993, Boston)
Wikipedia
Joseph Ber Soloveitchik was a major 20th Century American Orthodox rabbi, Talmudist, and modern Jewish philosopher. He was a scion of the Lithuanian Jewish Soloveitchik rabbinic dynasty. As a rosh yeshiva of Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary at Yeshiva University in New York City, The Rav, as he came to be known, ordained close to 2,000 rabbis over the course of almost half a century. He served as an advisor, guide, mentor, and role-model for tens of thousands of Jews, both as a Talmudic scholar and as a religious leader. He is regarded as a seminal figure by Modern Orthodox Judaism.
In his major non-Talmudic publications (The Lonenly Man of Faith, Halakhic Man, and Halakhic Mind), which altered the landscape of Jewish philosophy and Jewish theology, Soloveitchik stresses the normative and intellectual centrality of the halakhic corpus.
During his tenure at Yeshiva University, in addition to his Talmudic lectures, Soloveitchik deepened the system of "synthesis" whereby the best of religious Torah scholarship would be combined with the best secular scholarship in Western civilization. This later became known as the Torah Umadda - "Torah and secular wisdom" philosophy - the motto of Yeshiva University. Through public lectures, writings, and his policy decisions for the Modern Orthodox world, he strengthened the intellectual and ideological framework of Modern Orthodoxy.
RAV JOSEPH B. SOLOVEITCHIK AS POSEK OF POST-MODERN ORTHODOXY (Tradition magazine, 1994)
What differentiates the approach of Rav Soloveitchik from that of Haredi poskim [halachic decisors] and makes him the authority figure of so-called “Modern Orthodoxy” is his endorsement of secular studies, including philosophy, his espousal of religious Zionism, and his pioneering of intensive Jewish education for women. Although these policies are not logically connected, they are closely related to each other, because they arise from the conviction that a Torat Hayyim [a "living Torah"] addresses the realities of the world rather than seeks an escape from them. It is this religious philosophy, which engenders a unique approach to halakha, which has made him into the posek par excellence of Modern Orthodoxy.
Notable Rulings
Women can engage in the learning of Talmud.
Parameters for interfaith dialogue.
You can brush your teeth on shabbat.
Wikipedia
Joseph Ber Soloveitchik was a major 20th Century American Orthodox rabbi, Talmudist, and modern Jewish philosopher. He was a scion of the Lithuanian Jewish Soloveitchik rabbinic dynasty. As a rosh yeshiva of Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary at Yeshiva University in New York City, The Rav, as he came to be known, ordained close to 2,000 rabbis over the course of almost half a century. He served as an advisor, guide, mentor, and role-model for tens of thousands of Jews, both as a Talmudic scholar and as a religious leader. He is regarded as a seminal figure by Modern Orthodox Judaism.
In his major non-Talmudic publications (The Lonenly Man of Faith, Halakhic Man, and Halakhic Mind), which altered the landscape of Jewish philosophy and Jewish theology, Soloveitchik stresses the normative and intellectual centrality of the halakhic corpus.
During his tenure at Yeshiva University, in addition to his Talmudic lectures, Soloveitchik deepened the system of "synthesis" whereby the best of religious Torah scholarship would be combined with the best secular scholarship in Western civilization. This later became known as the Torah Umadda - "Torah and secular wisdom" philosophy - the motto of Yeshiva University. Through public lectures, writings, and his policy decisions for the Modern Orthodox world, he strengthened the intellectual and ideological framework of Modern Orthodoxy.
RAV JOSEPH B. SOLOVEITCHIK AS POSEK OF POST-MODERN ORTHODOXY (Tradition magazine, 1994)
What differentiates the approach of Rav Soloveitchik from that of Haredi poskim [halachic decisors] and makes him the authority figure of so-called “Modern Orthodoxy” is his endorsement of secular studies, including philosophy, his espousal of religious Zionism, and his pioneering of intensive Jewish education for women. Although these policies are not logically connected, they are closely related to each other, because they arise from the conviction that a Torat Hayyim [a "living Torah"] addresses the realities of the world rather than seeks an escape from them. It is this religious philosophy, which engenders a unique approach to halakha, which has made him into the posek par excellence of Modern Orthodoxy.
Notable Rulings
Women can engage in the learning of Talmud.
Parameters for interfaith dialogue.
You can brush your teeth on shabbat.
Ovadia Yosef (1920, Baghdad - 2013, Jerusalem)
Sefaria
Ovadiah Yosef was the Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel from 1973 to 1983 and the greatest halachic authority for Sephardic Jewry in the modern era. He was born in Baghdad and made aliyah to Jerusalem with his family at the age of four. In 1950 he was appointed dayan to the rabbinical court of Petach Tikva, where he issued the first of many bold and innovative rulings that marked his career. In 1984 he became a notable figure in Israeli politics by founding the ultra-Orthodox Sephardi party Shas, serving as its spiritual leader until his death in 2013.
Jerusalem Post (2013) and Wikipedia
One of the principle pathways Yosef adopted in his approach to Jewish law was leniency, which he believed was preferable to stringency. He noted in particular that in the modern generation, ruling stringently could have the effect of discouraging any compliance with Jewish law, and that lenient rulings were therefore advisable.
Yosef adopted the Talmudic dictum that, "The power of leniency is greater". Therefore, one of his fundamental principles of halakhic ruling is that lenient rulings should be preferred over [strict]. Yosef saw this as one of the distinguishing characteristics of the Sephardic approach to Halakha, compared to the Ashkenazi approach.
Yosef regarded ruling with severity as especially harmful in the current generation ("the generation of freedom and liberty"), since strict ruling might lead individuals not to comply with the Halakha. Writing in Yabia Omer, he says: "And truly, the growth of chumrot [stringencies] leads to leniency in the body of the Torah."
Ovadia Yosef is often regarded as the pivotal force behind bringing Ethiopian Jews to Israel. In the 1970s, Yosef ruled that Ethiopian Jews were halachically Jewish and campaigned for the Ethiopian aliyah to Israel.
Some of his more famous legal rulings include:
Sefaria
Ovadiah Yosef was the Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel from 1973 to 1983 and the greatest halachic authority for Sephardic Jewry in the modern era. He was born in Baghdad and made aliyah to Jerusalem with his family at the age of four. In 1950 he was appointed dayan to the rabbinical court of Petach Tikva, where he issued the first of many bold and innovative rulings that marked his career. In 1984 he became a notable figure in Israeli politics by founding the ultra-Orthodox Sephardi party Shas, serving as its spiritual leader until his death in 2013.
Jerusalem Post (2013) and Wikipedia
One of the principle pathways Yosef adopted in his approach to Jewish law was leniency, which he believed was preferable to stringency. He noted in particular that in the modern generation, ruling stringently could have the effect of discouraging any compliance with Jewish law, and that lenient rulings were therefore advisable.
Yosef adopted the Talmudic dictum that, "The power of leniency is greater". Therefore, one of his fundamental principles of halakhic ruling is that lenient rulings should be preferred over [strict]. Yosef saw this as one of the distinguishing characteristics of the Sephardic approach to Halakha, compared to the Ashkenazi approach.
Yosef regarded ruling with severity as especially harmful in the current generation ("the generation of freedom and liberty"), since strict ruling might lead individuals not to comply with the Halakha. Writing in Yabia Omer, he says: "And truly, the growth of chumrot [stringencies] leads to leniency in the body of the Torah."
Ovadia Yosef is often regarded as the pivotal force behind bringing Ethiopian Jews to Israel. In the 1970s, Yosef ruled that Ethiopian Jews were halachically Jewish and campaigned for the Ethiopian aliyah to Israel.
Some of his more famous legal rulings include:
- That it is legitimate and permissible to give territory from the Land of Israel in order to achieve a genuine peace. He had previously ruled that the principle in Jewish law of pikuah nefesh – saving a life, which overrides almost all other laws – permitted the return of the Sinai Peninsula, captured during the Six-Day War of 1967, to Egypt. When the Oslo Accords were followed by an intifada, this opinion was later retracted.
- Supported the sale of the land during the Sabbatical year, following the Sephardic tradition.
- Ordered the Shas political party to vote in favour of a law recognizing brain death as death for legal purposes. The Ashkenazi Haredi political party United Torah Judaism voted against the law on instructions from their spiritual leader Rabbi Yosef Shalom Eliashiv.
- Allowing the wives of Israel Defense Forces soldiers who have been missing in action for a long time to remarry, a verdict which is known as "the release of agunot" (התרת עגונות).
- That a woman should not wear a wig (sheitel) as a form of hair covering, but should wear headscarves (or snoods / hats / berets) instead.
Conservative Movement
The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards is the central authority on halakha within Conservative Judaism.
The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards sets halakhic policy for Rabbinical Assembly rabbis and for the Conservative movement as a whole. Its membership consists of twenty-five rabbis who are voting-members, as well as five non-voting lay representatives of the United Synagogue and one non-voting cantor representing the Cantors' Assembly. The Committee discusses all questions of Jewish law that are posed by members of the Rabbinical Assembly or arms of the Conservative movement. When a question is placed on the agenda, individual members of the Committee will write teshuvot (responsa) which are discussed by the relevant subcommittees, and are then heard by the Committee, usually at two separate meetings. Papers are approved when a vote is taken with six or more members voting in favor of the paper.
Approved teshuvot represent official halakhic positions of the Conservative movement. Rabbis have the authority, though, as marei d'atra, to consider the Committee's positions but make their own decisions as conditions warrant. Members of the Committee can also submit concurring or dissenting opinions that are attached to a decision, but do not carry official status.
When reviewing teshuvot, it is important to remember that each of these papers was written in response to a specific question posed by a Conservative rabbi. Questions about religious practice should be brought to your local Conservative rabbi. Each rabbi is the mara d'atra, or local religious decisor, of a particular community. While the teshuvot on this website provide an invaluable source of learning, they are not meant to, nor can they, substitute for the opinions of a local rabbi.
A key practical difference between Conservative and Orthodox approaches to halakhah is that Conservative Judaism holds that rabbis in our day and age are empowered to issue takkanot (decrees) modifying Biblical prohibitions, when perceived to be necessary.
Of the criticism of the Committee are its voting methods. Currently, as stated, a position must garner 6 votes to be held as legitimatized view. In times past, it was one. This has caused many to claim that Committee is very waved by popular opinion and creates inner fractions instead of attempting to making a conclusive ruling. As well, there is also a more extreme criticism that that Committee is a failure in being able to balance modernity and traditional practice, [as well as] an overemphasis of modern political and philosophical thought over traditional Jewish thought.
Notable Rulings
It is permissible to drive to synagogue on shabbat.
It is permitted for a Kohen to marry a divorced Jewish woman.
Women may be counted in a minyan (1973) and as witnesses in all areas of Jewish law.
Jews who are homosexuals may be ordained as rabbis and cantors (2006).
The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards is the central authority on halakha within Conservative Judaism.
The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards sets halakhic policy for Rabbinical Assembly rabbis and for the Conservative movement as a whole. Its membership consists of twenty-five rabbis who are voting-members, as well as five non-voting lay representatives of the United Synagogue and one non-voting cantor representing the Cantors' Assembly. The Committee discusses all questions of Jewish law that are posed by members of the Rabbinical Assembly or arms of the Conservative movement. When a question is placed on the agenda, individual members of the Committee will write teshuvot (responsa) which are discussed by the relevant subcommittees, and are then heard by the Committee, usually at two separate meetings. Papers are approved when a vote is taken with six or more members voting in favor of the paper.
Approved teshuvot represent official halakhic positions of the Conservative movement. Rabbis have the authority, though, as marei d'atra, to consider the Committee's positions but make their own decisions as conditions warrant. Members of the Committee can also submit concurring or dissenting opinions that are attached to a decision, but do not carry official status.
When reviewing teshuvot, it is important to remember that each of these papers was written in response to a specific question posed by a Conservative rabbi. Questions about religious practice should be brought to your local Conservative rabbi. Each rabbi is the mara d'atra, or local religious decisor, of a particular community. While the teshuvot on this website provide an invaluable source of learning, they are not meant to, nor can they, substitute for the opinions of a local rabbi.
A key practical difference between Conservative and Orthodox approaches to halakhah is that Conservative Judaism holds that rabbis in our day and age are empowered to issue takkanot (decrees) modifying Biblical prohibitions, when perceived to be necessary.
Of the criticism of the Committee are its voting methods. Currently, as stated, a position must garner 6 votes to be held as legitimatized view. In times past, it was one. This has caused many to claim that Committee is very waved by popular opinion and creates inner fractions instead of attempting to making a conclusive ruling. As well, there is also a more extreme criticism that that Committee is a failure in being able to balance modernity and traditional practice, [as well as] an overemphasis of modern political and philosophical thought over traditional Jewish thought.
Notable Rulings
It is permissible to drive to synagogue on shabbat.
It is permitted for a Kohen to marry a divorced Jewish woman.
Women may be counted in a minyan (1973) and as witnesses in all areas of Jewish law.
Jews who are homosexuals may be ordained as rabbis and cantors (2006).
Reform Movement
Rabbi Mark Washofsky. Jewish Living: A Guide to Contemporary Reform Practice (2001).
First and foremost, Reform responsa are not "authoritative": the answers they reach are in no way binding or obligatory upon those who ask the questions, upon other Reform Jews, or upon the movement as a whole. Our responsa do not claim this sort of authority because, however important it may be to the definition of our religious practice, we do not regard halakhah as a process which yields mandatory conclusions.
In Reform Judaism, religious decisions are arrived at by individuals or communities who take into account all the factors that seem relevant to them and then choose accordingly. Decisions are not imposed upon individuals or communities "from the outside," whether by rabbis or lay leaders. Thus, our responsa writers have always described their work as "advisory," emphasizing the right of its readers to reject or to modify the answers as they see fit.
...We do not, however, identify halakhah as a set of crystallized rules or as the consensus opinion held among today’s Orthodox rabbis. We see halakhah as a discourse, an ongoing conversation through which we arrive at an understanding, however tentative, of what God and Torah require of us. As far as we are concerned, this conversation cannot be brought to a premature end by some formal declaration that "this is the law; all conflicting answers are wrong."
We hold, rather, that a minority opinion in the halakhic literature, a view abandoned long ago by most rabbis, or a new reading of the old texts may offer a more persuasive interpretation of Jewish tradition to us today than does the “accepted" halakhic ruling. We therefore assert our right of independence in halakhic judgment, to reach decisions in the name of Jewish law which, though they depart from the "Orthodox" position, make the best Jewish religious sense to us.
In so doing, we follow the opinion, held by the some of the greatest teachers of Jewish law, that the "correct" halakhic ruling is not determined by the weight of precedent or by "what all the other rabbis say," but by the individual scholar’s careful and honest evaluation of the sources.
...A third difference lies in our history as a liberal Jewish religious community. Our experience has led us to see that Torah, if it is to serve us as a sure source of religious truth, cannot exist in the absence of certain essential moral and ethical commitments. These commitments are discussed and elaborated in the great theological statements issued by our movement and in the writings of our prominent religious thinkers.
Reform Judaism is committed to gender equality. Our history teaches us that the ancient distinctions between the ritual roles of men and women are no longer justifiable on religious, moral, or social grounds. We reject any and all such distinctions in our responsa process.
Reform Judaism affirms the moral equality of all humankind. Distinctions between Jews and non-Jews are appropriate in the area of ritual behavior, for it is by means of these rituals that we express our exclusively Jewish identity. We reject them as most inappropriate, however, in the arena of moral conduct.
We are open to the possibility and the desirability of religious innovation and creativity. We do not believe that existing forms of ritual observance are necessarily the only "correct" forms of observance from a Jewish perspective. We believe that the tradition permits us to adopt new ritual and ceremonial expressions which serve our religious consciousness better than those we have inherited from the past... Yet while we should innovate carefully and respectfully, and while we should not abandon the standards of traditional practice without good reason, our responsa will not say "no" to new ideas merely because they are new or because they depart from familiar forms of practice.
Finally, while our responsa seek to uphold traditional halakhic approaches whenever fitting, we reserve to ourselves the right to decide when they do not fit. When even the most liberal interpretations of the texts and sources yield answers that conflict with our moral and religious commitments as liberal Jews, we will modify or reject those interpretations in favor of others that better reflect our religious mind and heart.
Notable Rulings
Patrilineal Descent - a child is considered Jewish if either the mother or father is Jewish (so long as the child of such an interfaith couple is raised with a continuing and positive association with Judaism).
Conversion does not require a bris or immersion in a mikveh (ritual bath).
Observance of mitzvot is a choice rather than obligatory.
The "Oral Law" is not seen as divinely given at Sinai, but rather as a reflection of Judaism's historic development and encounter with God in each succeeding generation.
See also: Reform Judaism: History and Overview
Rabbi Mark Washofsky. Jewish Living: A Guide to Contemporary Reform Practice (2001).
First and foremost, Reform responsa are not "authoritative": the answers they reach are in no way binding or obligatory upon those who ask the questions, upon other Reform Jews, or upon the movement as a whole. Our responsa do not claim this sort of authority because, however important it may be to the definition of our religious practice, we do not regard halakhah as a process which yields mandatory conclusions.
In Reform Judaism, religious decisions are arrived at by individuals or communities who take into account all the factors that seem relevant to them and then choose accordingly. Decisions are not imposed upon individuals or communities "from the outside," whether by rabbis or lay leaders. Thus, our responsa writers have always described their work as "advisory," emphasizing the right of its readers to reject or to modify the answers as they see fit.
...We do not, however, identify halakhah as a set of crystallized rules or as the consensus opinion held among today’s Orthodox rabbis. We see halakhah as a discourse, an ongoing conversation through which we arrive at an understanding, however tentative, of what God and Torah require of us. As far as we are concerned, this conversation cannot be brought to a premature end by some formal declaration that "this is the law; all conflicting answers are wrong."
We hold, rather, that a minority opinion in the halakhic literature, a view abandoned long ago by most rabbis, or a new reading of the old texts may offer a more persuasive interpretation of Jewish tradition to us today than does the “accepted" halakhic ruling. We therefore assert our right of independence in halakhic judgment, to reach decisions in the name of Jewish law which, though they depart from the "Orthodox" position, make the best Jewish religious sense to us.
In so doing, we follow the opinion, held by the some of the greatest teachers of Jewish law, that the "correct" halakhic ruling is not determined by the weight of precedent or by "what all the other rabbis say," but by the individual scholar’s careful and honest evaluation of the sources.
...A third difference lies in our history as a liberal Jewish religious community. Our experience has led us to see that Torah, if it is to serve us as a sure source of religious truth, cannot exist in the absence of certain essential moral and ethical commitments. These commitments are discussed and elaborated in the great theological statements issued by our movement and in the writings of our prominent religious thinkers.
Reform Judaism is committed to gender equality. Our history teaches us that the ancient distinctions between the ritual roles of men and women are no longer justifiable on religious, moral, or social grounds. We reject any and all such distinctions in our responsa process.
Reform Judaism affirms the moral equality of all humankind. Distinctions between Jews and non-Jews are appropriate in the area of ritual behavior, for it is by means of these rituals that we express our exclusively Jewish identity. We reject them as most inappropriate, however, in the arena of moral conduct.
We are open to the possibility and the desirability of religious innovation and creativity. We do not believe that existing forms of ritual observance are necessarily the only "correct" forms of observance from a Jewish perspective. We believe that the tradition permits us to adopt new ritual and ceremonial expressions which serve our religious consciousness better than those we have inherited from the past... Yet while we should innovate carefully and respectfully, and while we should not abandon the standards of traditional practice without good reason, our responsa will not say "no" to new ideas merely because they are new or because they depart from familiar forms of practice.
Finally, while our responsa seek to uphold traditional halakhic approaches whenever fitting, we reserve to ourselves the right to decide when they do not fit. When even the most liberal interpretations of the texts and sources yield answers that conflict with our moral and religious commitments as liberal Jews, we will modify or reject those interpretations in favor of others that better reflect our religious mind and heart.
Notable Rulings
Patrilineal Descent - a child is considered Jewish if either the mother or father is Jewish (so long as the child of such an interfaith couple is raised with a continuing and positive association with Judaism).
Conversion does not require a bris or immersion in a mikveh (ritual bath).
Observance of mitzvot is a choice rather than obligatory.
The "Oral Law" is not seen as divinely given at Sinai, but rather as a reflection of Judaism's historic development and encounter with God in each succeeding generation.
See also: Reform Judaism: History and Overview
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, quoted in an article by Israel L. Shenker, “Responsa: The Law as Seen by Rabbis for 1,000 Years,” New York Times, May 5, 1975 – Authority in Jewish law is by dint of mutual consensus.
“You can't wake up in the morning and decide you're an expert on answers,”’ he [Moshe Feinstein] said recently as disciples clustered round. “If people see that one answer is good, and, another answer is good, gradually you will be accepted.”
“A rabbi who replies to people's questions works harder than a doctor dealing with a case of life and death,“ Rabbi Feinstein said. “The doctor is responsible only to his patient, but the rabbi is responsible to God.”
Blu Greenberg (1936-present, USA) - keynote speak at the first National Jewish Women's Conference (1973), founder and 1st president of JOFA (Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance), author of On Women and Judaism: A View from Tradition (1981)
"Where there's a rabbinic will, there's a halachic way."
"Where there's a rabbinic will, there's a halachic way."
Further reading:
Responsa: The Law as Seen By Rabbis for 1,000 Years. New York Times, May 5, 1975. Re: Moshe Feinstein, distinctions between denominations regarding halacha.
Conservative Assembly Votes to Admit Women as Rabbis. New York Times, February 14, 1985.
Responsa: The Law as Seen By Rabbis for 1,000 Years. New York Times, May 5, 1975. Re: Moshe Feinstein, distinctions between denominations regarding halacha.
Conservative Assembly Votes to Admit Women as Rabbis. New York Times, February 14, 1985.