Sunday, January 16, 2022

Why Rav Goren Matters: The Legacy of the Langers

 https://mida.org.il/2015/02/06/rav-goren-matters-legacy-langers/

Few embodied the idea that Jewish Law and the State of Israel can and should be one than Rabbi Shlomo Goren · What Haredi lawmakers saw the famous “Status Quo” agreement as a pragmatic arrangement, Rabbi Goren and his Religious Zionist allies saw potential for a true welding of religion and state · The result was the shambles that was the Langer case and the present impasse on personal status · A plea for true religious freedom – for everyone’s sake

 

Rabbi Goren’s vision was programmatic, consisting of distinct elements necessary to making it a reality. For one thing, religious Jews would have to see themselves not as a separate group but as an integral part of the whole Jewish people. When he was appointed the first chief rabbi of the Israel Defense Forces, many in the religious community and the military brass would have been perfectly content for religious soldiers to be segregated into their own “ghettoes” where their religious needs would be met. However, he insisted that the entire military become kosher, that training exercises be minimized on Shabbat, and that there be a synagogue on every base, so that religious soldiers could be fully integrated. Prime Minister Ben-Gurion, whose mamlakhti (state-centered) outlook dictated that the military be a melting pot that effaced sectoral, communal, religious, or ethnic allegiances, backed him on this, against opposition within the military. However, for Rabbi Goren, a completely kosher army was goal in itself, whereas for Ben-Gurion it was the price to pay for a “people’s army.”

Next, Halakha would have to be substantially revised in order to seamlessly integrate with the governing of the Jewish state. To that end, Rabbi Goren would offer unprecedented halakhic rulings, arguing that the Jewish state is a sui generis situation in which prior accepted rulings do not apply. For instance, though Halakha long forbade autopsies on Jewish corpses, Rabbi Goren permitted them on the grounds that:

It is inconceivable that the Jewish state would base its health system, which is vital for the nation and the state, on gentile corpses… It is inconceivable that we cannot find a halakhic way to maintain a high level of modern medicine by conducting autopsies on corpses of our own, as is done throughout the world.

Finally, in order to implement his vision, Rabbi Goren would need power—not merely the rabbinic authority accumulated by great rabbis in every generation, but the enforcing power of the state. To this end, the Chief Rabbinate was of paramount importance as a rabbinic body with state-sanctioned power. This is the body that would gradually revise and adapt Halakha to the realities of a modern state. And it was thus crucial to assess and forestall any political threat to the Chief Rabbinate’s power.

30 comments :

  1. Incredible Haskama from Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer on one of Rav Goren's first Sefarim


    https://winners-auctions.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/1-1979.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  2. So? it simply is relevant to a particular time
    I an sure Acher could have received a great haskoma or even Korach

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's relevant to show the level of learning achieved at a young age. A moderately chareidi rav in a litvish yeshiva told me that rav Goren was the greatest lamdan in E'Y.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You can't accept that because it goes against your belief system

    ReplyDelete
  5. you can't accept it because it goes against your belief system!

    ReplyDelete
  6. True, i have a haskama from the Gaon and tzaddik to support those beliefs.

    ReplyDelete
  7. No you don't
    It was never meant as an absolute approval of everything Goren might do - it was specifically about one thing he did at one point in history,

    You are basically claiming this is a certificate for infallibility - there is no such thing
    It is like claiming that once a factory is certified Kosher it no longer needs to be checked

    ReplyDelete
  8. There is no infallibility, until it's your own gadol.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's not just one thing he did, it's also about mastery of the sources.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So a goy or heretic or computer needs to be viewed as an authentic authority?!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wow so you are claiming your heroes to be infallible?

    ReplyDelete
  12. nonsense

    ReplyDelete
  13. nope, that's what I find, - everyone I have spoken to will accept that those outside their own camp are fallible, and there is usually no infallibility, except when it comes to their own Rebbe.

    ReplyDelete
  14. an authority is only so if he has a following, either amongst his flock, or amongst others in his "aguda".
    Very few in the Hareidi world would rely on the Tzitz Eliezer or Rav J.B. Soloveitchik. Very few on the MO/RZ world would rely on the Eidah, satmar, or Ponovezh. No one in the Eidah would accept a Rabbanut Hescher.
    Misnagdim don't accept anything from Lubavitcher rebbe or Steinsaltz, and vice versa. It probably extends to other Hassidic groups too.
    Even MIshnagdim have a schism now between the yerushalmi faction and Bnei Brak -

    ReplyDelete
  15. a good example of what I'm describing, in its earlier incarnation, is rav YY weinberg ztl of montreux.
    Although hareidim recognise him as a great talmid chacham and gadol, they have effectively rejected his psak halacha. Because he was from previous generations and close to gedolim in Europe, the rejection is very polite. " He was great but we don't accept him " . Rav soloveitchik suffered much more, he was admittedly great, but totally off the derech. Rav kook the same.
    But soloveitchik suffered much hatred, so hareidim descending a degree or 2 more in their cauldron of sinnah towards rav Goren is no surprise whatsoever.

    ReplyDelete
  16. what psak im have chareidim rejected? likewise for the others
    mice soundbites but simply not true

    ReplyDelete
  17. Mixed singing, Kol isha.

    Rav soloveitchik was attacked and blamed for destroying a generation. The 80s /90s was a time when he was totally rejected. In fact, Rav Cardozo used to be hareidi and taught at ohr somayach. He was employed to teach Jewish philosophy until they found him to be teaching Rav soloveitchik s thought. Rav soloveitchik didn't publish much if any psak, but he was not ever cited, and his views were generally rejected, unless he forbade hearing shofar in a conservative service.
    Rav kook is well known to have been attacked by various groups.
    It's true that Rav elyashiv ztl was close to both Rav kook and Rav herzog, so they have have fared better in recent decades.

    Thanks for the compliment, maybe I should go into the PR business.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Try again
    he posken based primarily on cultural issues - it was not a difference in pure halacha

    ReplyDelete
  19. Oh, but halacha reaches out to all parts of life, so can't delegate certain parts of halacha to "cultural " issues.

    ReplyDelete
  20. You are pontificating on your own assumptions he clearly stated in his tshuvos - which you obviously never read - that he thought that the German society needed these leniencies

    ReplyDelete
  21. and Western society today is any different?

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Although
    R. Weinberg
    adopts an important aspect of R. Moshe’s ruling, the difference between these
    two rabbinic titans is quite stark.
    R. Moshe conveys a negative attitude to the Bat Mitzva ceremony (and to
    Bar Mitzva ceremonies) and grudgingly allows such events outside the
    shul. R. Weinberg encourages these
    ceremonies and explains the great need for such an innovation. The difference between them does not stem
    form divergent interpretations of a halakhic source but rather from different
    evaluations of societal needs, as well as other hashkafic divisions. Thus, the difference between these two
    teshuvot reveals the significance of social and philosophical concerns in
    rabbinic decision-making.
    R.
    Weinberg frequently brought such factors to bear, and these
    factors reveal the worldview of an important modern rabbinic thinker."


    -from the Etzion article.


    These are factors nonetheless. There are many such factors, eg shaas Dachak, darchei shalom, etc. That he employed some, but other poskim don't, does not mean they are not halachic factors.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Did yoyu ever read his tshuvas or just rely on other people to inform you what he meant

    ReplyDelete
  24. I've read citations in other halachic discussions

    ReplyDelete
  25. The pattern I have describeD does represent how people are distanced from the mainstream Hareidi world. The question is how one interprets this and whether it's a good thing or not.
    There's obviously a function to it to preserve traditional parameters, or maintain the illusion of what those parameters are.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Reminds of the time Rabbi Friefeld was interviewing a new student
    When he asked him about his Jewish education he replied "I am knowledgeable about Kabbalah and the Zohar because I have read several books by Prof Gershon Sxhulem

    ReplyDelete
  27. he put kabbalah back on the map, have to credit him for that

    ReplyDelete
  28. "Reminds of the time Rabbi Friefeld was interviewing a new studen.."
    Actually, one of the sources I was referring to was a book by Rabbi Getsel Ellinson ztl. There he cites the responsa of many poskim, including the Sridei Eish. Rav Weinberg states he was initially shocked when he arrived in Berlin, but was told that they relied on a heter from Rav SR Hirsch and Rav Azriel Hildesheimer. He says under the circumstances, he cannot forbid what they permitted, and as a case of eis Laasot, he permitted eg mixed singing.

    I note that Rav Friefeld was close with Bob Dylan...

    ReplyDelete

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