tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post5835000587084875454..comments2023-12-27T03:40:39.548-05:00Comments on Mah Rabu מה רבו: Limmud NY: Reform halakhah panelBZhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-86961601275461354862008-09-21T00:23:00.000-04:002008-09-21T00:23:00.000-04:00I'm coming into this discussion late, but I have a...I'm coming into this discussion late, but I have a suggestion to answer the "what is the baseline halakhah" question: that of the community. If in a given community it is uncommon to lay tefillin, one should have a good reason to do so, and vice versa.<BR/><BR/>(Ironically, even though no Orthodox Jew would be likely to advocate this position, it's actually very Orthodox...)Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02196401009454414996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-39119629774494114502007-02-08T00:53:00.000-05:002007-02-08T00:53:00.000-05:00"LM asked about individuals giving up some of thei..."LM asked about individuals giving up some of their autonomy for the sake of creating community. He gave the example of a community agreeing to adhere to some practice, even something that isn't when the community is all together, e.g. everyone agrees to daven mincha every day wherever they are, to connect them to the rest of the community.<BR/><BR/>I said that the Reform model of halakha should be not the Shulchan Aruch (a set of rules), but the Talmud (a conversation, where Rabbi X says this and Rabbi Y says that and they talk about their reasons). I think if the entire community in this example were engaged in a discourse about mincha, that would bring the community together just as effectively as everyone deciding to do it."<BR/><BR/>This one hits the nail on the head. I don't think it's possible to have an entire community engage in a discourse, for a variety of reasons -- different intellectual abilities, economic factors (time, money, etc.), life situations, etc. -- but you _can_ have a community (be-gadol) engage in a ritual practice. I also think engaging in uniform ritual practices is a different kind of experience, and fulfills a different set of very important human needs, than a discourse. I find my rebbe's argument that one has a _moral_ obligation to engage in such rituals for the sake of other's needs quite compelling. (Hata'i ani mazkir hayom -- I'll send you those articles ASAP!)Willhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03408188386145570365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-31979109305872744172007-01-26T16:48:00.000-05:002007-01-26T16:48:00.000-05:00BZ: In some sense, yes, there's no difference how ...BZ: In some sense, yes, there's no difference how the one rabbi publishes his teshuvah. And perhaps the CJLS would be a more effective body if they only debated and never voted.<br /><br />But it's also the case that the CJLS <i>does</i> vote, and that they have some designation (however artificial and a priori meaningless) that a particular vote has "passed" or "not passed" (or, in the passed, "passed in the minority" or whatever). And it's the case that a vote's designation holds meaning for some people, perhaps above and beyond the circumstances that led to that vote. So whether ploni's sole "yes" vote is enough for a teshuvah to pass or not can have some sort of effect, even if the vote isn't actually binding on anyone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-3473488831887100932007-01-26T16:07:00.000-05:002007-01-26T16:07:00.000-05:00Desh-
If CJLS teshuvot are really just advisory op...Desh-<br />If CJLS teshuvot are really just advisory opinions signed by people recognized (through their membership on the committee) to be knowledgeable, then there should be no difference between the CJLS passing a teshuva with only one rabbi voting in favor of it (and clearly indicating that Rav Ploni was the only signatory), and that same rabbi self-publishing the same teshuva on his blog (or whatever the equivalent was back then - mimeographed pamphlets, let's say) with a bio saying "Rav Ploni is a member of the CJLS".BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-70186119385500760272007-01-26T16:01:00.000-05:002007-01-26T16:01:00.000-05:00Interesting. In the original post I wrote the dis...Interesting. In the original post I wrote the disclaimer "This is about the movement ideologies on paper, not necessarily about how people actually practice", to distinguish e.g. between Reform Judaism in theory (in which <i>kulanu chachamim, kulanu nevonim</i>, and everyone autonomously interprets halacha) and in practice (in which "we're <a href="http://djsinger.blogs.com/home/2007/01/reformed.html">Reformed</a>, so we don't do x").<br /><br />But it seems from this discussion that in the Conservative movement, the CJLS does not have the authority to make binding halachic decisions either in theory (as KRG says) or in practice (since the average Conservative-affiliated or -identified Jew doesn't recognize that authority), but <b>does</b> have that authority on some intermediate level in between (through individual institutions and rabbis who give it such authority, as EAR says).BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-7561445725153408092007-01-26T11:33:00.000-05:002007-01-26T11:33:00.000-05:00Kol Ra'ash Gadol says:The CJLS itself has that fun...Kol Ra'ash Gadol says:<i>The CJLS itself has that funny two tiered system of a majority and a minority (6) votes pass.</i><br /><br />As far as I understand (having sat through more than a year and a half CJLS meetings recently) there is no longer a system of majority and minority votes. As noted in the Rabbinical Assembly document,<i>A Brief History of the CJLS</i>, "positions accruing six or more votes are validated official positions of the RA. V'zeh hu.<br /><br />BZ asks: <i>If CJLS rulings aren't binding, then why couldn't JTS have admitted gay and lesbian rabbinical students before the most recent set of teshuvot? What was significant about these teshuvot passing?</i><br /><br />Because they felt equal ordination was a controversial issue, both American seminaries agreed to be bound by a CJLS decision on the issue. Both agreed not to admit openly gay and lesbian students until the CJLS issued a teshuvah saying it was okay. <br /><br />While Kol Ra'ash Gadol is technically right that regular CJLS decisions are not binding on Conservative rabbis, I have encountered a fair number of rabbis in the field who will not act against a CJLS teshuvah.RRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05044207755047605659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-31300123081386764352007-01-26T09:46:00.000-05:002007-01-26T09:46:00.000-05:00I'm told that the CJLS used to have a 1 vote minim...I'm told that the CJLS used to have a 1 vote minimum for minority opinions, rather than 6. The rule was changed after some member several decades ago asserted his intention to vote in favor of...something. I think it was patrilineal descent, but I could be wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-41777843018137336872007-01-26T00:47:00.000-05:002007-01-26T00:47:00.000-05:00And if it's just an encyclopedia with no legal for...And if it's just an encyclopedia with no legal force, then why require 6 votes for a minority opinion? Why not just 1 (Rabbi X says ____ for this reason)? That's good enough for a Supreme Court dissenting opinion (which also has no legal force).BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-36023773405731849412007-01-25T23:00:00.000-05:002007-01-25T23:00:00.000-05:00If CJLS rulings aren't binding, then why couldn't ...If CJLS rulings aren't binding, then why couldn't JTS have admitted gay and lesbian rabbinical students before the most recent set of teshuvot? What was significant about these teshuvot passing?BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-32425934955186092312007-01-25T22:56:00.000-05:002007-01-25T22:56:00.000-05:00Since I'm not a Reform Jew in any way at all (alth...Since I'm not a Reform Jew in any way at all (although I grew up Reform) I shall refrain from any comment whatsoever on that part of the content; but since you did ask for comments, I have to note that the description of authority in Conservative Judaism is incorrect. <br />The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards does not make halakha for the movement. <br />In fact, NOTHING that the CJLS undertakes to study and either pass or not pass has any effect whatsoever on rabbis in the movement - they are actually only a resource - like keeping an encyclopedia around for when you don't have the time to do the scientific proofs on your own time. <br /><br />CJ rabbis are mara d'atra - master of the place- for their own establishments. They make halachic rulings which may or may not be based upon CJLS rulings. The CJLS itself has that funny two tiered system of a majority and a minority (6) votes pass. The reason this works is because they're only recommendations by those we consider learned in the movement(That's why it was such a big deal for Joel Roth to resign from the CJLS after the last er, upheaval).<br />There are actually only four rulings that are binding on every rabbi in the movement, and these were subject to a vote of all the member rabbis, not simply of the CJLS (Those four are all continuity matters. Drumroll: no patrilineal descent; conversion must have mikveh -and milah as well, for males; a person who was previously married must have a get - a Jewish halachic writ of divorce; no rabbi may officiate at or attend an intermarriage - which to our great and ongoing discomfort, often means that we cannot officiate at the marriages of Jews who grew up or were converted Reform in the USA).Kol Ra'ash Gadolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15990368493440225799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-72748840061720757432007-01-21T14:50:00.000-05:002007-01-21T14:50:00.000-05:00BKE-
I think you might be arguing with a straw ma...BKE-<br /><br />I think you might be arguing with a straw man. Where did I say that I was "rejecting the concept of tradition in a larger sense"? On the contrary, the idea of "standing on the shoulders of giants" demands an engagement with tradition, both ancient and modern.<br /><br />I agree that one should "seriously consider" ideas and practices from anywhere in the Jewish historical continuum, whether from the Torah, the majority opinion in the Talmud, the minority opinion in the Talmud, some obscure geonic manuscript, the minhag of our grandparents, or something we read about on a blog. I never said that someone who grew up not wearing tefillin <b>shouldn't</b> start wearing tefillin, or shouldn't consider it.<br /><br />What I reject (which may be a straw man in itself, since no one has said this explicitly) is the idea of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_in_exile">Torah-in-exile</a> - the idea that there exists a specific moment when Jewish tradition is/was in pristine form, such that we can determine our personal practices in reference to that moment. And in the absence of such a moment, the only moment we can use as a reference point is the present. Of course, we can change things from where they are in the present, but the present is the starting point. And because we weren't making fully independent decisions as children, what we did in our parents' household was our original starting point. But that's just the beginning, not the end. From that starting point we can study traditions from the past, present, and future, and make informed decisions. I don't think I'm being inconsistent or "selective".<br /><br />Also, in saying "Falling back on a family tradition because there's something you don't want to do", you're suggesting that this is just done out of convenience or kula. This is false. I don't eat kitniyot on Pesach. I maintain this restrictive practice even though I think it's ridiculous for a number of reasons, and even though there is a longstanding tradition of eating kitniyot during Pesach (mentioned in rabbinic sources, observed until medieval times by Ashkenazim, and observed through the present by Sephardim). In this case, my family tradition wins out for now (though that doesn't mean it always will). And yes, I'm taking personal responsibility for that decision.BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-36262594107286710402007-01-20T18:04:00.000-05:002007-01-20T18:04:00.000-05:00My point was that a Reform Jew who does not wear t...<i>My point was that a Reform Jew who does not wear tefillin SHOULD feel that he or she is rejecting something. I think that would be evidence of the kind of autonomy that you and I are hoping (waiting?) for in the Reform movement.</i><br /><br />Right. If Reform is about personal, informed choice, then one is obliged to seriously consider a practice like laying tefillin regardless of his/her grandparents' rejection of it. You can't have it both ways. Either you're personally responsible for making these decisions, or you're not. Falling back on a family tradition because there's something you don't want to do, but rejecting the concept of tradition in a larger sense, is selective reasoning.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-23102119249128863972007-01-19T12:15:00.000-05:002007-01-19T12:15:00.000-05:00And because practices like tefillin "have been obs...<i>And because practices like tefillin "have been observed throughout the ages and ... pose no contemporary ethical objection", I would place the burden of proof for renewed (not continued) observance very low.</i><br /><br />Don't be so quick to dismiss the existence of contemporary ethical objections around tefillin. I know a not-insignificant number of ethical vegetarians/vegans who believe that wearing tefillin violates tzaar baalei chayim. (A shopkeeper on the Lower East Side once spent 15 minutes ranting at me just because someone had come into his store earlier in the day asking for vegan tefillin or tefillin made out of ribbons or something like that.) In any case, some people have developed a solution (similar to what some do vis-a-vis diamond engagement rings) of only purchasing or wearing tefillin that once belonged to someone else and for which no new animal was killed. Just an interesting FYI...RRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05044207755047605659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-46869268060405233722007-01-19T11:17:00.000-05:002007-01-19T11:17:00.000-05:00More questions:
How long does a practice have to ...More questions:<br /><br />How long does a practice have to be in disuse before it ceases to be the default (to be accepted or rejected)?<br /><br />Can the baseline halacha ever be amended?<br /><br />Would your stance on tefillin and "rejection" be any different if <b>all</b> Jews had stopped wearing tefillin in the 19th century and then a few people (like you and me) decided to bring it back in 2007?BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-1775698017128786932007-01-18T12:06:00.000-05:002007-01-18T12:06:00.000-05:00My point was that a Reform Jew who does not wear t...My point was that a Reform Jew who does not wear tefillin SHOULD feel that he or she is rejecting something. I think that would be evidence of the kind of autonomy that you and I are hoping (waiting?) for in the Reform movement. <br /><br />I love your question about where the baseline halakhah is? I need to think about that. If I said that baseline is the Torah itself, then I am a Karaite. If the baseline is the Mishnah, I miss out on the wider range of interpretations that the Gemarra provides. If I say the Gemarra, then there is no way I can understand it without the Rishonim. Ein l'davar sof (there is no end to this).Leon Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12231293105227085084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-49906330903202203662007-01-18T07:54:00.000-05:002007-01-18T07:54:00.000-05:00And because practices like tefillin "have been obs...And because practices like tefillin "have been observed throughout the ages and ... pose no contemporary ethical objection", I would place the burden of proof for renewed (not continued) observance very low. Perhaps that's all the justification that's necessary. But it still requires an active decision.BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-51284129881594608542007-01-18T00:43:00.000-05:002007-01-18T00:43:00.000-05:00Leon-
Thanks for writing in, and thanks for modera...Leon-<br />Thanks for writing in, and thanks for moderating the panel (though I also wish you had been on it). I agree that tefillin aren't inherently "Orthodox". [I wear tefillin, at least in theory. In practice not so often, because I'm not a morning person, but if I were already at a weekday shacharit service as in your example, I'd be wearing tefillin.] My comment that "we shouldn't assume that in the state of nature everyone is Orthodox" wasn't just in regard to things like tefillin (which go way back), but also in response to questions I've been asked (by people who were just curious, not accusatory) along the lines of "Why do you do X on Shabbat?" (where X is one of various technologies invented after the Reform/Orthodox split, so the classical sources say nothing directly about it) or "Why do you play musical instruments on Shabbat?" (which was done in the mikdash, and wasn't considered so problematic until the backlash to Reform). I'm not ascribing this view to you, but in these questions, the path chosen by contemporary Orthodox Judaism tends to be privileged as the default. But you're right that tefillin doesn't belong in this category.<br /><br />However, I take issue with the idea that a Reform Jew (raised in the Reform movement) who doesn't wear tefillin is "rejecting" something. This rejection already took place several generations ago. Someone who doesn't wear tefillin today isn't rejecting them anew (any more than s/he is actively rejecting korbanot or <a href="http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2006/10/rejoicing-in-and-about-law.html">targum</a>), but is maintaining the practices of his/her parents and grandparents. Since I'm not <a href="http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2006/06/my-soul-hates-your-new-moons-and-your.html">Classical Reform</a> (which may have developed a <i>yeridat hadorot</i> attitude of its own, but placing the time of revelation in the 19th century, rather than Sinai or Yosef Caro), I think this person would be entirely justified if s/he decided to reject his/her parents' tradition and to start wearing tefillin. But <b>this</b> would be a change and perhaps a discontinuity, not a "continued observance".<br /><br />Ok, this person is me. If it weren't for the Judaism passed on to me by my parents and grandparents, I wouldn't be here having this conversation. So I owe it to them to engage their Jewish practice seriously (even if I ultimately arrive at a different conclusion), alongside engaging "normative Jewish practices which have been observed throughout the ages".<br /><br />Also, there are people who "take mitzvot seriously" and don't wear tefillin; they might understand the mitzvah of "bind them as a sign upon your hand" metaphorically (which is probably the <i>peshat</i>).<br /><br />If I understand you correctly, are you proposing a two-tiered halachic system, where there is a baseline halacha that is observed by default (in the absence of individual amendments), which can be autonomously amended by individuals who object to parts of it? If so, from what point in Jewish history would you derive this baseline halacha? The Torah? The Talmud? The Shulchan Aruch? The eve of the Reform/Orthodox split? The practices of Orthodox Jews today? The decisions of the CCAR Responsa Committee? And why?BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-69659097519420315252007-01-17T15:11:00.000-05:002007-01-17T15:11:00.000-05:00Ben contributed a great deal to this panel, and al...Ben contributed a great deal to this panel, and although we don't agree (or especially because we don't) it was great to engage in this conversation with you. I wished I had been a panelist instead of the moderator, because there was a lot I wanted to say in response to some of his comments. Thank Gd for Jewschool and MahRabu. <br /><br />I totally agree that informed autonomy has not yet been implemented. My "throwaway" comment was really intended as a critique on the way in which this so-called "autonomy" that is being practiced bears little resemblance to what the theologians of Reform Judaism had (and have) in mind. Autonomy is, for better or worse, an inescapable aspect of our (post-)modern lives. <br /><br />While I agree with Ben that "the tradition" is neither static nor monolithic, I chose Tefillin in my example because this has been part of the normative Jewish practice for thousands of years (they even found Tefillin in the Dead Sea caves used by sectarian Jews). I think it is highly problematic to call practices such as these "Orthodox." I was suggesting a "default" position which takes mitzvot seriously. When a Reform Jew encounters normative Jewish practices which have been observed throughout the ages and which pose no contemporary ethical objection, the burden of proof should not be on the tradition to prove itself worthy of continued observance, but rather on the individual who rejects it. This was my point.Leon Morrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12231293105227085084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-77072845478688280502007-01-17T13:50:00.000-05:002007-01-17T13:50:00.000-05:00woah-
anonymous, I've got a solid 13 years of for...woah-<br /><br />anonymous, I've got a solid 13 years of formal ortho education under my belt, including a post high school year learning in Israel. So yes, I'm fairly aware of what gets taught. <br /><br />You also seem to be arguing against points I did not make, but perhaps I was unclear. So here goes.<br /><br />I was deliberately differentitating between a concept of "standing on the shoulders of giants" that has<br /><br />(1) practical implications in halacha (e.g. "now that we understand LGBTQ issues more fully than before, the halacha must change accordingly") <br /><br />vs. <br /><br />(2)hashkafic implications ("wow, it's so cool that we can have such a fuller, richer, view of judaism than previous generations because we can draw upon all their cumulative teachings")<br /><br />I have encountered (2) but not (1) in ortho circles. So we aren't disagreeing; I'm just interested in the nafka mina [practical implications].<br /><br />Also, what statements regarding "orthodox people or processes [that] result in the despicable things that they often result in" are you referring to?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-4469504895447168742007-01-17T12:10:00.000-05:002007-01-17T12:10:00.000-05:00The goal of that part of the post wasn't to talk a...The goal of that part of the post wasn't to talk about "why orthodoxy sucks", but just to highlight differences between Orthodox and Reform ideologies. I was attempting to do this somewhat objectively (though it's clear which position I hold). I was avoiding canards like "Orthodox halacha is completely static, while liberal halacha is open to change" or "Orthodox halacha is monolithic, while liberal halacha is open to diversity", since I know that's an inaccurate portrayal of Orthodoxy (outside of Artscroll).<br /><br />If anyone is the recipient of a tochecha in this post, it's the Reform movement, for failing to live up to their own ideals.BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-54016838878651726522007-01-17T11:56:00.000-05:002007-01-17T11:56:00.000-05:00Rebecca M -
the point about the way one views the ...Rebecca M -<br />the point about the way one views the halchik process that is being discussed in these comments isn't about whether one says "this halacha changes previous halcha" or whether one says "this halacha is simply a different case than what was addressed by previous halacha." The difference is how one's view of what occurs in the development shapes a movement's ability to do either of the above. BZ contended that all of orthodox halacha is informed by an idea of yeridat hadorot. Those of us here challenging that are simply pointing out that in many orthodox day schools and schools of thought, that is not how the process is taught. We have been taught on the one hand that the halachick process can be viewed as a yerida, and that each generation gets farther from the "TRUTH," or, on the other hand, for example, that Rabbi Soleveitchik's teshuvot, whether or not they seem to "change" or "re-explain" a halchik idea or rule are not necessarily rejections of, or SMARTER than, the rabbis that came before, but rather a result of the fact that R. Soleveitchik had the benefit of reading Rashi, Maimonides, and R. Moshe, etc. etc. but Rashi couldn't have read Maimonides, R. Soleveitchik or R. Moshe!<br />This being said, the practical and resulting differences BZ chronicles in this post are, in my opinion, accurate, telling, and insightful (not to mention a good tochacha), but the sweeping statements made (and which he often erroneously makes) about why orthodox people or processes result in the despicable things that they often result in, simply allow those orthodox people reading this blog to dismiss his wonderful posts for lack of knowledge (when many times those statements are tangential, and most of his points about why orthodoxy sucks are right on without them).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-86491054379828325392007-01-16T22:36:00.000-05:002007-01-16T22:36:00.000-05:00BZ- not surprised as in didn't believe it; just ha...BZ- not surprised as in didn't believe it; just hadn't thought of it that way, and fascinated by what is either a parallel development, or more interdenominational sharing of ideas than I'd expected.<br /><br />here's my question: could someone give a concrete example of a modern halachic issue/ relatively recent psak, from on ortho source, that changes halacha based on some form of the idea of "standing on the shoulders of giants"?<br /><br />my understanding is that if these changes happen, they do so in the format of "well we aren't actually changing anything; it's just that this isn't really a case of X".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-73695938096886993462007-01-16T13:29:00.000-05:002007-01-16T13:29:00.000-05:00I'm glad to see that Reb Chaim HaQoton doesn't spe...<i>I'm glad to see that Reb Chaim HaQoton doesn't speak for all Orthodox Jews</i><br /><br />find me the one who does :)ADDeRabbihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11749876612695930184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-56549857848609749152007-01-16T12:59:00.000-05:002007-01-16T12:59:00.000-05:00there's also the halakhic concept of halakha ke-ba...there's also the halakhic concept of <i>halakha ke-batrai</i>, that decisors closer to you in time have more weight than those farther back.Steg (dos iz nit der šteg)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07694556690190505030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12610610.post-62448841396432639902007-01-16T08:03:00.000-05:002007-01-16T08:03:00.000-05:00ADDeRabbi and Anonymous-
That's good to hear. I h...ADDeRabbi and Anonymous-<br />That's good to hear. I had heard the oven of Akhnai understood by Orthodox (and possibly Conservative) people to canonize chaza"l while disempowering our generation, in effect putting the Talmud and some gedolim "bashamayim".<br /><br />I'm glad to see that <a href="http://mahrabu.blogspot.com/2006/10/why-im-benching-lulav-this-shabbat.html#c116016402960120604">Reb Chaim HaQoton</a> doesn't speak for all Orthodox Jews. :)BZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18242965196421853025noreply@blogger.com