Friday, February 12, 2016

Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer responds to Dr. Marc Shapiro ir regards to dealing with Open Orthodoxy

Dr. Marc Shapiro recently published criticism of Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer regarding this writings against Open Orthodoxy. Seforim Blog

I posted for a day - an anonyomous response that was highly critical of Dr. Shapiro's analysis. However I removed it because it was seen as counterproductive by my readers here and Dr. Shapiro also asked it be removed.  Rabbi Gordimer published a detailed response to Dr. Shapiro's article 

What is important - aside from the issues raised - is that on a personal level Dr Marc Shapiro and Rabbi Gordimer have reached out to each other to make sure that it is understood that this exhcange is not a personal attack. Here are Rabbi Gordimer's latest comments 
-----------------------------------------------------------------

How to Disagree – My Exchange with Dr. Marc Shapiro by Avrohom Gordimer 

Yesterday was tense. It was uncomfortable. It was a day of squeezing in a lengthy reply to Dr. Marc Shapiro’s post about some of my writings, between loads of regular work and with almost no sleep the night beforehand. (I had actually drafted my entire reply overnight, anticipating a very hectic workday, only to have accidentally deleted the entire draft at 2:30 AM, and then spending close to an hour in an unsuccessful attempt to find the draft in the online black hole. It was not fun…)

I anticipated a prolonged and unpleasant back-and-forth, which would be fruitless and only cause more strife.

But last evening, when I finally again got to my email, rays of light were shining, for Dr. Shapiro had sent several kind comments and messages clarifying that the issues were not personal, graciously (and unnecessarily) apologizing for any hard feelings, and also explaining his work and his goals. I apologized for any overstatement of his identification with controversial views, and we proceeded to share our hopes that our public exchange not be perceived as reflective of any type of sinah or personal affront. Our exchange was about ideas only. My communications with Dr. Shapiro were really refreshing.

Recently, a friend suggested that I change my image and post about more positive things. I replied that I had just posted two articles about noncontroversial topics, plus two divrei Torah on the parsha, as well as four articles on Halacha – but that these articles were given little attention, they received fewer clicks and “likes”, and that people are unfortunately focused on articles that deal with controversy.

But even when dealing with controversy, and even when the discourse is heated, let it not be perceived as sinah or personal clash. It is about ideas only. My exchange with Dr. Shapiro, and his kind and classy reaching out to clarify, are a deep lesson to all.

43 comments :

  1. Why publish anything by Shapiro? He is a member of Open Orthodoxy staff, the new Conservatism that rejects Torah Shebaal Peh. Would you post articles by Conservative or Reform rabbis?

    ReplyDelete
  2. he does not subscribe to the Open Orthodox theology. You would posul all the Orthodox rabbis who are on the staff of non-Orthodox schools?!

    ReplyDelete
  3. How do you know he doesn't subscribe to some aspects of their philosophy? Do you think you would find an Orthodox person who was on the staff of the Jewish Theological Cemetery in any case?

    He has written an entire book against the yud gimel midos of the Rambam. This certainly leans strongly anti Orthodox and he was roundly criticized by Rabbi Zev Leff whose endorsement graces the entrance to your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have also suffered from accidental deletion in the past. Now I use Carbonite.

    www.carbonite.com

    ReplyDelete
  5. It depends. If his presence in the school does not clealry serve to encourage the desecration of Mitzvah observance, then he should not be possled. However, if the orthodox staff member goes out on a limb to defend and praise the unorthodox lifestyle, then yes, he deserves to be posseled.

    ReplyDelete
  6. וכן הוא אומר אל תען כסיל כאולתו פן תשוה לו גם אתה

    ReplyDelete
  7. והיינו דכתיב ענה כסיל כאולתו פן יהיה חכם בעיניו

    ReplyDelete
  8. He told me. There are many Orthodox people who have taken teaching jobs in non-Orthodox schools - so what?

    He has not written against the Rambam. He is not anti-Orthodox.

    What is the criticism from Rabbi Leff?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Teaching is not the same as being on the letterhead which implies a leadership position.

    I couldn't find Rabbi Leff's direct criticism of Shapiro's book but here is a link to Shapiro's response. http://seforim.blogspot.com/2007/07/marc-b-shapiro-response-to-rabbi-zev.html

    ReplyDelete
  10. you are simply grasping at straws. Either you have evidence or you don't.

    The response looks pretty solid. Do you have any evidence that he didn't answer Rav Leff's criticisms?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Rabbi Leff's review can be found here https://www.ou.org/jewish_action/06/2007/the_thirteen_principles_of_rambam/

    I am going to look into the arguments more closely.

    Open Orthodoxy is a radical and dangerous aberration of the Torah and belongs together with Conservatism. I don't believe any sincere Jew belongs on their letterhead.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Rabbi G, as long as "OO" is dynamic, which of course it is, you (and anyone else with your gifts) must also be dynamic. Even eschewing Sinah is incorrect under certain circumstances.

    A source for this subject is

    רמ"א או"ח סימן א' סעיף א':

    ולא יתבייש מפני בני אדם המלעיגים עליו בעבודת הש"י

    מ"ב ס"ק ה':

    מפני בני אדם. ועכ"פ לא יתקוטט עמהם מפני שמדת העזות מגונה מאוד ואין ראוי להשתמש ממנה כלל אפילו בעבודת הש"י כי יקנה קנין בנפשו להיות עז אפילו שלא במקום עבודתו ית' ועיין בבה"ל

    בה"ל ד"ה ולא יתבייש:

    דע דהב"י לא איירי כ"א במצוה שהוא עושה לעצמו ובני אדם מלעיגים עליו אז בודאי אין לחוש כלל ללעגם ולא יתקוטט עמהם אבל אם הוא עומד במקום שיש אפיקורסים המתקוממים על התורה ורוצים לעשות איזה תקנות בעניני העיר ועי"ז יעבירו את העם מרצון ה' ופתח בשלום ולא נשמעו דבריו בכגון זה לא דבר הב"י ומצוה לשנאתם ולהתקוטט עמהם ולהפר עצתם בכל מה שיוכל ודהמע"ה אמר [תהלים קלט] הלא משנאיך ד' אשנא ובתקוממיך אתקוטט תכלית שנאה שנאתים וגו'

    [ומשמע שאין לחוש שיקנה בנפשו להיות עז אפילו שלא במקום עבודתו ית' אלא אדרבה מצוה לשנאתם ולהתקוטט עמהם, או משום שמצוה לעשות כן אע"פ שיקנה בנפשו, ואולי משום שיישמר מקנין הרע הזה עדמ"ש באוהחה"ק גבי עיר הנדחת, עיי"ש]

    A source about how to react to advice that one should soften one's attack on evildoers is

    ברכות ז:

    וא״ר יוחנן משום ר״ש בן יוחי מותר להתגרות ברשעים בעולם הזה שנאמר עוזבי תורה יהללו רשע ושומרי תורה יתגרו בם תניא נמי הכי רבי דוסתאי בר׳ מתון אומר מותר להתגרות ברשעים בעוה״ז שנא׳ עוזבי תורה יהללו רשע וגו׳ ואם לחשך אדם לומר והא כתיב אל תתחר במרעים אל תקנא בעושי עולה אמור לו מי שלבו נוקפו אומר כן אלא אל תתחר במרעים להיות כמרעים אל תקנא בעושי עולה להיות כעושי עולה ואומר אל יקנא לבך בחטאים כי אם ביראת ה׳ כל היום

    ReplyDelete
  13. There were many orthodox people on the staff of JTS. Sorry to burst your bubble. Just to name one who just passed away. R Kirschenbaum. Learned and taught there. Also learned in Torah vedaas and was a close friend of R Zelig Epstein and R Yaakov Kamineztky.

    Professor Saul Leiberman was כידוע orthodox. פעלט נישט א מנחה

    ReplyDelete
  14. This goes back to a difference of views of Reb Moshe and Reb Yaakov

    ReplyDelete
  15. He gives a class on Jewish history every other year. So what?

    ReplyDelete
  16. "at Young Israel, "Open Ortho­doxy" seeped into a few branches. While some brunches opposed any punitive action against the branch with the female president, almost all continued to follow YI's guidelines. But most rabbanim were, and are, reluctant to directly address "Open Orthodoxy."
    Open Orthodoxy is everyone's problem. It has even crept into the chareidi community......
    If a YI branch permits women to read the Megillah, all rab­banim - whether they affiliate with YI, the RCA, the Agudah, a chassidic court, or any other rabbinic stream - must loudly pro­claim that the shul has violated a well-known YI halachic guideline." (Former YI President Shlomo Z. Mostofsky, Mishpacha, Issue 587, 20 Kislev 5776, Dec. 2, 2015, page 37)


    From the Young Israel of Sharon website (http://www.yisharon.org/tefilat-nashim.html): Two other special davenings we have are on Purim and Tisha B'Av. We [the women of the Tefilat Nashim group] lain Megilat Esther on Purim morning and Eicha on Tisha B'Av evening. New lainers are always welcome.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Is that the extent of his involvement with YCT?

    ReplyDelete
  18. As far as he claims. I have never been there so I cannot personally confirm that.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I am no expert, but it sounds to me that the quote from Mishpacha is about a woman reading in the general minyan, not for women alone.

    ReplyDelete
  20. He is indeed talking about women leyning Megilah in a Women's Only group. Earlier in the article Shloimy references women's prayer groups. He doesn't say it directly because he was informed about the Tefilat Nashim group at the Young Israel of Sharon several years ago, even before the incident at the Syracuse branch with the woman shul president. The article he wrote is hypocrisy because he allowed YI of Sharon and YI of Las Vegas to function as Young Israel branches despite their Open Orthodox policies.

    ReplyDelete
  21. What difference are you referring to?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Why is he on their letterhead if he doesn't advocate their views? He doesn't need the money so that he can ignore the apikursus.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Saul Lieberman was a great talmin chochom whose accomplishments are lost in the rubble of Conservative garbage. Others who got involved there also succumbed to the lure of lucre. What would they answer to those innocent Jews who were attracted to JTS due to their influence?

    ReplyDelete
  24. I don't understand, do you have a problem with women only Tehillim groups? Or the Bais Yaakov high school girls Davening together with a "Chazzanis"? Why is it a problem for women to have their own Eicha reading if it makes it more meaningful? Is that considered Open Orthodox, or just being sensitive to orthodox women who want to feel more connected on Tisha B'Av and in general? How do we distinguish between what is labelled as OO and MO and Chareidi progressive (oxymoron?)? Do Chassidim who see Charedi orthodox women driving think they are OO or MO?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I was told Rav Moshe didn't like the idea whereas Rav Yaakov did not have a problem with it.

    See Igros Moshe Y.D. II #107

    ReplyDelete
  26. An important consideration is whether the Megilla reading is being done for the sake of being "equal" to men or if it is truly to be, as you put it, more connected? I seriously doubt the latter even though many claim it as a way to justify it.
    I am reminded of an incident that happened at a Conservative temple in NJ about 30 years ago. A woman there was an activist to getting women counted as part of the "minyan". This particular temple was somewhat traditional and had an early morning daily minyan. One winter morning they were short 1 man. The gabbai called this woman and said "We need a tenth for the minyan." Her response was "I wanted it for equality! I didn't mean you should call me for minyan at 6am!"

    ReplyDelete
  27. Well, then you fall into the trap of judging peoples' motivations, instead of their actions. How are you to know "why" they want to do it?

    ReplyDelete
  28. You don't. That's why it is generally not permitted. My girl relatives are all Bais Yaakov and even some Modern and they understand this. They feel no need to attend a playacting minyan (which is all a Tefilat Nashim group is) and while they do sometimes find it hard to listen to the Megilla from the Ezras Nashim, they prefer it to be at a minyan where they can answer amein to the shliach tzibbur for davening. My great-grandmother DID lein Eicha for women but out of necessity for women who could not get to shul, not at a separate service at the shul.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Do you always feel women are activists or feminists when they are looking for equality in their Avodas Hashem? Why can't they be sincere? Havey Es kol Adam lekaf zechus? Do nashim get Dan Lekaf Zechus too? My observation is that many women have that sincerity.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Is there a source to find Rav Yaakov's view elaborated?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Equality is not a Jewish value.

    ReplyDelete
  32. My mistake, Equality is the wrong word here, since by nature men and women are not equal. I'm searching for the right word, more like a balance in also being able to express themselves. I just don't see the problem if it's done sincerely, modestly, and respectfully. Why should it bother anyone if women want to have their own private space to daven, say Tehillim, read Eicha and so on? I don't see it as feminism, unless it is done loudly and to make a political statement, then it becomes feminist. Otherwise it's just sincere devotion.

    ReplyDelete
  33. If they are sincere then they wouldn't need to flaunt it or get belligerent when it is denied to them on a halachic basis. They should be dan lkaf zechus the poskim like Rav Nisson Alpert, who gave halachic reasons why certain activities are not proper Avodas Hashem by women.
    Nobody stops women from coming to early weekday minyanim but the only one I ever heard of who did was the widow the moser pretending to be rabbi in Young Israel of Las Vegas had arrested for trespassing.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I don't understand your response. You claim that if women want to hold some sort of service, the determining factor in whether it is permitted or prohibited is "whether the Megilla reading is being done for the sake of being "equal" to men or if it is truly to be, as you put it, more connected." How do you propose to settle that without judging peoples' motivations?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Politically IncorrectFebruary 16, 2016 at 1:29 PM

    Bam! Hit the nail on the head! We are any things, but equal. That means, you are either a drop (or a lot), either more or less than me, the fellow next to you or anybody else. Perhaps to put it differently, E. efshar l'tzamtzem! Everybody is unique!
    (Please let me know if I am clear.)

    (I wonder if one can at least say that we are all equally unequal. .....)

    ReplyDelete
  36. You see how they announce it. Sometimes it is very clear what the motivations are. When my great-grandmother read Eicha for women, it was a group that got together at a home because they couldn't get to shul for the reading. When the men came home and could watch the kids then the women went to hear it If you read about the Tefilat Nashim group at the YOUNG ISRAEL of Sharon they clearly do it at the same time as the main shul. Therefore they clearly would rather NOT daven with a minyan.

    ReplyDelete
  37. What does wanting to daven with a minyan have to do with anything? My daughters (Beis Ya'akov girls) prefer davening together so that they could sing hallel than davening with a minyan. What is wrong with that. If women claim that the megilla reading is more meaningful and a more spiritual experience for them when hearing it from a woman, who in the world are you to tell them that they are lying?

    ReplyDelete
  38. I didn't say they are lying. That doesn't mean it is preferable. And to Shlomo Mostofsky it doesn't make any difference. At a Young Israel it is not permitted, but they do it anyway at the YI of Sharon. You gotta wonder why they take such a strong stance in Mishpacha Magazine. Seems hypocritical.

    As to Hallel, they may be singing together but it is not a minyan.

    Here are two sources you may want to review. https://www.nishmat.net/Uploads/files/R_Henkin_Women_Megilla_Reading.pdf and http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/english/tfila/frimer2.htm

    ReplyDelete
  39. I don't know who Shlomo Mostofsky is, and I really couldn't care less about internal Young Israel issues.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Depends how you define Jewish. The Torah says we should not fear or recognize faces - that means in legal cases we are all equal, subject to evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Since most of the criticism of the Open "Orthodox" discussed here is their views regarding gender equality and since your example is a legal case, are you aware that the testimony in a Jewish Court by a woman is not equal to the testimony in a Jewish Court by a man?

    ReplyDelete
  42. and judgement of a woman?

    ReplyDelete
  43. Judgement of a woman according to Jewish Law can only be judged by male judges in a Jewish Court. Women aren't qualified per Jewish law.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.