Hanhu chavurata #4 (Independent minyan gossip column)

After independent minyan gossip columns #1, #2, and #3, Shavuot has inspired me to rename the column to "Hanhu chavurata" ("these chavurot"). Bonus points to the first person to identify the source.

• This past Shabbat, the minyan of choice for the chavurati was the Cambridge Minyan (in Massachusetts, not England). A certain local university attracted a number of out-of-towners for their 5th, 10th, etc. reunions, so founders of Kol Zimrah, Hadar, Tikkun Leil Shabbat, DC Beit Midrash, and of course the Cambridge Minyan itself (can anyone confirm any others? is Tehillah confirmed?) were all davening in the same room.
• Of course, the Hadar Shavuot Retreat was a smashing success as always, and Torah was received. But this year there was karaoke! After Shabbat.
• Beth Shekinah of Washington DC is disbanding, now that most of its members are involved with other Jewish groups.
  
• Techiyah of Harlem (NYC) is taking the plunge and moving from apartments to the Harlem Police Athletic League Community Center, having outgrown even the huge-by-Manhattan-standards living rooms of Harlem.
• Is B'Merkaz (Philly) changing its name and the date of its first meeting?
  
• Summer is here! What does this mean for independent minyanim? One of three options: (1) Continue operations as normal, (2) Decrease or suspend operations, or (3) Increase operations. And it's fascinating to see who chooses which of these. For example, our Boston correspondent reports that Tehillah and the Washington Square Minyan are suspending their Shabbat morning services for some or all of the summer, and meeting on Friday nights only, while the Cambridge Minyan is increasing its Shabbat mornings. Here in New York, Kol Zimrah is increasing its frequency (with more bonus services in Brooklyn), the Brooklyn Egal Minyan is going on hiatus for the summer, and everyone else (as far as I'm aware) is keeping their usual frequency. What factors go into these decisions? On the one hand, minyanim with large student populations have their regulars disappear for the summer. On the other hand, if many of the participants are on an academic schedule (students and teachers) and stick around for the summer (which may be more common in New York than in Boston?), then the summer means they have more time and energy to organize things for the minyan. Also, in cities like these, the summer exodus is offset by the influx of people who are in town only for the summer, or moving in during the summer for a longer sojourn. Each minyan has to make these calculations for itself.
  

Happy Brooklyn-Queens-Manhattan-Bronx-Staten Island Day!

Tomorrow is the little-known holiday of Brooklyn-Queens Day, aka Anniversary Day. This holiday, celebrated since 1829, commemorates the founding of the first Sunday school on Long Island in 1816, and the Brooklyn Sunday School Union will be holding its 178th annual parade. (Why don't they do it on a Sunday? For this question I was thrown out of the house of study.)

A state law requires that students in Brooklyn and Queens have the day off from school on the 1st or 2nd Thursday in June, whichever is 10 days after Memorial Day. (For our readers outside New York, no, school isn't over yet. We stick around until the end of June. High schools are in the last throes of classes before we adjourn for exams, and elementary and middle schools are still in the thick of things.)

Until this year, schools in Brooklyn and Queens were closed for Brooklyn-Queens Day, while the other three boroughs had a regular school day. Those of us teaching in Manhattan experienced nothing unusual on this day beyond our students' complaints about how their younger siblings back in the neighborhood had the day off and they didn't. Now, the new teachers' contract corrects this inequity among the boroughs, or destroys the Brooklyn/Queens cultural heritage, depending on whom you ask. Tomorrow, students in all five boroughs have the day off, and teachers in all five boroughs have to show up for "professional development". (It might actually be useful; my department is using the day to plan the curriculum for next year.)

Kenny Bruno of the Queens Ledger mourns the loss of Brooklyn's and Queens's specialness:

I suppose the single most delightful thing about Brooklyn Queens Day was that it was a day off from school for no apparent reason. Grownups had to work and therefore couldn't schedule any vacation-like activities. Unlike Christmas or Thanksgiving, there were no holiday curricula, no commercials, no traditions to uphold and no family events to attend. It came in June, during the best weather and longest days. The kicker was that no one else had this day off. You could actually go to Manhattan and see to it that your Manhattan friends, if you had any, would look enviously at you from inside their prisons.

So the students of Brooklyn and Queens keep the holiday but lose the bragging rights. Though I'm not sure Brooklyn and Queens can really claim underdog status anymore, now that they're the two largest boroughs by area and population, comprising a solid majority of the New York City population.

(On further investigation, Brooklyn and Queens have had a majority since the 1930 census, the decade that Brooklyn passed Manhattan to become the most populous borough. Queens passed Manhattan in 1960. The Bronx and Staten Island have always been 4th and 5th. But maybe the underdog mentality isn't about population, but about national and international attention, not to mention $$$$, so it still makes sense.)

[UPDATE: Correction: The Bronx was in 3rd place until Queens surged ahead of it in 1950. Ah, suburbanization.]

Meanwhile, other forces have conspired to make tomorrow likely to be a rainy day like today, lessening the possibility of a day of fun in the sun.

Whichever borough you're in, whether you're a student with a day off from school, or a teacher with a day off from teaching, take a moment tomorrow to thank Brooklyn and Queens for being who they are.

Hilchot Pluralism around the web

Mah Rabu's still-ongoing Hilchot Pluralism series, documenting and analyzing pluralistic practices in independent Jewish communities, has been making its way around the web, and even meatspace.

• Boston: Today, Knitter of shiny things reports on a "Reclaiming Mikveh" conference at Boston's liberal Jewish mikveh, Mayyim Hayyim, and discusses pluralism in the context of a mikveh that is used for Reform conversions as well as by Orthodox women observing hilchot niddah.
• Washington, DC: Tikkun Leil Shabbat links to Hilchot Pluralism in its FAQ when discussing the two-table system (which I learned about from the DC independent minyan scene in the first place), as well as under "How we think about pluralism".
• Philadelphia: ZT reports that Hilchot Pluralism was used in a mandatory workshop at the Akiba Hebrew Academy's 9th-grade shabbaton.
• New York: Later this month, I'm teaching about the Taxonomy at a session on pluralism for Hillel's CLIP interns.

Let's keep it going! With more exposure, we can continue to share ideas among our communities, and help more communities move to Stage 3. What issues belong in Hilchot Pluralism Part V?

49

...which are SEVEN WEEKS of the omer!!!!!

Peace out everyone, it's been fun. Next year may we merit to count the omer in a (figurative) rebuilt Jerusalem.

כאשר זכינו לספור אותו
כן נזכה לעשותו

Now get your rest; tomorrow night's a big night:

On the third day, as morning dawned, there was thunder, and lightning, and a dense cloud upon the mountain, and a very loud blast of the horn...

(Exodus 19:15)

...and you know the rest of the story.

It was not with our ancestors that God made this covenant, but with us, the living, every one of us who is here today.

(Deuteronomy 5:3)

We'll receive many commandments, including:

From the day on which you bring the sheaf of waving, the day after the sabbath, you shall count off seven weeks. They must be complete: you must count until the day after the seventh week--fifty days; then you shall bring an offering of new grain to God.

(Leviticus 23:15-16)

And so it continues in this recursive loop, this endlessly rising canon.

Regis Iussu Cantio Et Reliqua Canonica Arte Resoluta

48

Lost in translation?

Moses came down from the mountain to the people and warned the people to stay pure, and they washed their clothes. And he said to the people, "Be ready for the third day: do not go near a woman."

(Exodus 19:14-15)

47

...and the coal came home.

Something really big must be happening in three days.

God said to Moses, "I will come to you in a thick cloud, in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and so trust you ever after." Then Moses reported the people's words to God, and God said to Moses, "Go to the people and warn them to stay pure today and tomorrow. Let them wash their clothes. Let them be ready for the third day, for on the third day God will come down, in the sight of all the people on Mount Sinai. You shall set bounds for the people round about, saying, 'Beware of going up the mountain or touching the border of it. Whoever touches the mountain shall be put to death: no hand shall touch him/her, but s/he shall be either stoned or shot; beast or human, s/he shall not live.' When the ram's horn sounds a long blast, they may go up on the mountain."

(Exodus 19:9-13)

46

...and the coal ran out.

Happy Yom Meyuchas!

The adventure continues:

Moses went up to God. God called to him from the mountain, saying, "Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob and declare to the children of Israel: 'You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to me. Now then, if you will obey me faithfully and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all the peoples. Indeed, all the earth is mine, but you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words that you shall speak to the children of Israel." Moses came and summoned the elders of the people and put before them all that God had commanded him. All the people answered as one, saying, "All that God has spoken we will do!" And Moses brought the people's words to God.

(Exodus 19:3-8)

45

Rosh Chodesh Sivan!

This Rosh Chodesh has its own niggun, written on this date in 1999/5759.

On this day:

In the third month after the Israelites had gone forth from the land of Egypt, on that very day, they entered the wilderness of Sinai. Having journeyed from Rephidim, they entered the wilderness of Sinai and encamped in the wilderness. Israel encamped there in front of the mountain.

(Exodus 19:1-2)

43

Worst president ever.

42

What do you get if you multiply six by nine?

We will return to you, children of the city, and the web of the scroll went up to itself

We finished Masechet Megillah tonight! And not a minute too soon, since MAK and RLK are packing up their apartment and almost ready to move out of NYC. Stay tuned for a siyyum sometime this summer, at which Rav Papa's sons will be invoked, and the One who is above all blessings (le'eila min kol birchata) will be blessed.

41

The best views in town, for functions or just a great place to eat. Your first choice for news.

"Pharaoh said to Joseph: See, I have put you over the whole land of Egypt."
--Genesis 41:41

Be that as it May

The following message comes to us from LRH, all the way on the west coast. You can email your submissions to lioracle at gmail dot com.

Dear Friends,

Welcome to the 4th annual celebration of National Subjunctive Month!

Hard to believe, but it was back in 2003 when I unilaterally declared for the first time that, come what may, each May from here on out would be marked as a celebration of subjunctives in every language. Why did I do this? Well, I noted that English by and large lacks a subjunctive--that "mood" which in other languages is used to express desire, hope, or uncertainty, and is employed for various and sundry grammatical purposes. Rather, in addition to some vestigial subjunctives like "I wish I were" and "Truth be told," English sometimes uses various constructions of the word "MAY" to express what other languages might express in the subjunctive mood (come what may, be that as it may, may the force be with you). Desiring to carve out some space to honor this much negelected mood, I thought May might be fitting.

Mighty May has returned! And it is time to celebrate with what has become an annual tradition on this ever growing and ever more national (and international) list. I ask you to dig deep inside your minds and send me back some combination of the following:

--Recall your favorite examples of subjunctive usage or misusage in English or other languages. (My longstanding favorite is from a goofy ad for Clorox bleach on the top of a cab, proclaiming, "if this cab was a floor, we'd clean it.")

--Provide explanations of how the subjunctive works in your particular obscure (or non-obscure) foreign language.

--Provide your bits of subjunctive thoughts about the year behind us or the year to come.
(I define "subjunctive thoughts" broadly: Subjunctive thoughts might start like this: "If only..." "I wish..." "I wonder..." These can be subjective, subversive, sublime, and/or subpar...)

The deadline for submissions is May 31 at midnight. On June 1 (or shortly thereafter), I'll send out a compilation of our collective subjunctive wisdom of 2006 to those who decide to participate in the festivities.

Thank you and happy May,

[LRH]

Independent minyan gossip column #3

• Minyan war in the City of Brotherly Love??? After years of discontent about the lack of independent minyanim in Center City Philadelphia (that's "downtown" to everyone else), someone had the idea to start one. And someone else had almost exactly the same idea at almost exactly the same time. There is a popular trend of giving minyanim names that translate English terms associated with the locality into Hebrew: in NYC alone, Greenwich Village has Kol HaKfar ("the Village Voice"), and Harlem has Techiyah ("renaissance"). Both new Center City minyanim hopped on this nomenclature bandwagon. Minyan Merkaz ("minyan of the center") is an independent traditional egalitarian Friday night minyan that has met a few times so far. Meanwhile, B'Merkaz ("in center" or "in the center of") is an independent traditional egalitarian Friday night minyan that has announced its first service for June 9, the same time as Minyan Merkaz's next meeting. According to Mah Rabu's sources, the two minyanim arose entirely independently, and were not aware of each other's existence before this week. What will happen? Will the two minyanim join forces? Will one of them change its name? Only time will tell.
• Kol Zimrah's style of musical prayer (called "spiritual, highly idiosyncratic" by the Forward) combines a diverse set of Jewish influences. This has the benefit of bringing together a diverse community of people drawn from the union of sets A, B, and C (Note: three is an arbitrary number here and has no deeper significance), but has the complication of restricting the pool of potential self-sufficient shelichei/ot tzibbur (service leaders) to the intersection of A, B, and C. In order to expand this pool and become a more participatory community, the Funk is launching a weekly workshop this summer in which KZ participants will exchange skillsets. Experienced guitar players will teach others how to play guitar, and experienced service leaders will teach others how to lead services.
• All of these independent communities are converging in August at the National Havurah Committee Summer Institute. As many as can fit, anyway. This year's Everett Fellows Program was more popular than ever, with 33 people applying for 18 spots. Unfortunately, this means that many qualified applicants had to be turned away due to finite funding. Someone reading this post must have some money lying around; would you like to fund some more scholarships so that all these great folks can come to Institute? In the meantime, regular Institute registration is still open (and filling up faster than usual), while supplies last!
  

Let's do the time warp again

This is fabulous! Check it out before it gets fixed.

The Wikipedia article on Edward Morley (1838-1923), of the famous Michelson-Morley experiment, seems to be taken primarily from a (presumably now public-domain) biographical brief written during Morley's lifetime. From examining the article's history, it looks like the reference to 1895 at the bottom was a later addition. Otherwise, the article seems to have been written before 1887, so that it makes no mention of Morley's most notable contribution! (The 1884 collaboration with Michelson mentioned in the article was a different experiment.)

Highlights:

• "...and more recently they have experimented with a view of testing Fresnel's explanation of astronomical aberration. Their most recent work in this direction has been..."
• "At present he is engaged in redetermining the atomic weight of oxygen."
• "Professor Morley has collected a unique chemical library, and has the most complete files of chemical journals in the United States."

UPDATE: Tee hee! Someone (perhaps inspired by this post) has added the line: "It is anticipated that his studies in collaboration with Albert A. Michelson (completed in 1887) will lead to important conclusions regarding the luminiferous aether and its effects upon the velocity of light."

40

It rained and poured for 40 daysies daysies
It rained and poured for 40 daysies daysies
Drove those animals nearly crazy crazy

39

Things to do today:

• plow
• sow
• reap
• bundle sheaves
• thresh
• winnow
• sort
• grind
• sift
• knead
• bake
• shear wool
  
• whiten it
  
• comb it
  
• dye it
  
• spin it into thread
  
• stretch thread onto a loom
• make two loops
  
• weave two threads
• separate two threads
• tie
• untie
• sew two stitches
• tear in order to sew two stitches
• trap a deer
• slaughter it
• skin it
• salt it
• tan it
• scrape it
• cut it up
• write two letters
• erase in order to write two letters
• build
• demolish
• extinguish
• kindle
• hit with a hammer
• transfer from one domain to another
  

38

36

35

34

Miracle on omer street!

33

Thirty-three three-toed tree toads.

Pay no attention to the people that say the glass is half full. The glass is 2/3 full!

From last year: Why I don't observe Lag Ba'omer.

32

100000!

31

11111

29

Did you miss Pesach the first time? Tomorrow is Pesach Sheni, so you get another chance!

UPDATE: Bush at 29%!

Independent minyan gossip column #2

This week's big story comes to us from the colony of Washington DC. (That's right, this is the story from outside the fifty states that we hinted at last time.) I believe Mah Rabu is the first to break this story on the blogosphere. Tikkun Leil Shabbat and DC Reform Chavurah are merging! The new super-havurah will combine Tikkun Leil Shabbat's name, DC Reform Chavurah's space at the Religious Action Center, and both groups' passion for social justice activism and ruach-filled prayer. This is no shotgun marriage; the two minyanim have co-sponsored services in the past, including a combined service the weekend of the Darfur rally that attracted 115 people, beating out Kol Zimrah's 108 that same Friday night (or, more to the point, combining with KZ for a total of 223). In fact, there was so much overlap between DCRC and TLS that they decided that there was no point in having one group of people run two minyanim, inside sources say. The new TLS juggernaut will meet monthly or more, and will alternate between two "aesthetics": (1) musical instruments, sitting in a circle; (2) no instruments, facing east.

Why this is big news:

• The new TLS combines two (and possibly more) styles of services, in series rather than in parallel. This means that individuals can go only on the weeks that their preferred style is happening, or they can go every time. It sounds like many will opt for the latter. This bimodal distribution will allow each style of prayer to be fully actualized, rather than averaging the two styles for a half-assed "compromise". It also creates an environment for built-in cross-fertilization. The diverse community will be a laboratory for Stage-3 pluralism.
• The TLS juggernaut, with its increased size and frequency, instantly challenges the hegemony of DC Minyan (which, despite its website's uncanny similarity to the Kehilat Hadar website, isn't fully egalitarian) as flagship minyan of DC's young Jewish transient scene. The appearance of this second duumvir will lead to a healthier DC independent minyan scene all around, as the constellation of minyanim comes to more accurately reflect the Jewish identities of their constituent population.
• Kol Zimrah has a sister minyan on this continent!
  
• Self-identified Reform Jews are finally building up the confidence and social capital to join in the reindeer games of the funky pluralistic post-denominational Jewish world, rather than being the tiny invisible outcast minyan that the rest of Hillel never hears about. Sure, DCRC is dropping the "Reform" from its name so that the combined DCRC/TLS can appeal to people across denominational lines, but through this merger (which happened entirely naturally as a result of the strong connections between TLS and DCRC) the Reform influence will continue to be felt by people from a wide range of Jewish backgrounds, and through this merger the people from specifically Reform backgrounds can experience a broader understanding of what a Reform Jewish community can be.
  

The news from New York:

• The Hadar Shavuot Retreat is sold out. In other news, the sun rose this morning, and Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead. It's nice to see the universe following its natural order.
• The solid and growing Brooklyn delegation to Kol Zimrah has pulled off a benevolent coup. After three years of dedicated trekking to the Upper West Side, this March they invited the whole community to a bonus Brooklyn edition of Kol Zimrah, with assistance from the Park Slope Minyan. It was such a success that the Funk hasn't seen the last of Kings County. This summer, KZ will return to its usual stomping grounds in Riverside Park (hoping to decrease its historical rain-out rate of 36%), but there will also be special Brooklyn Funks in July and August. Which borough is next?
  
• Jew It Yourself is going to revolutionize the independent Jewish world when it goes live. But I can't say any more until then.

Keep the tips coming!

28

28 is the second perfect number, a number that is the sum of its factors!

1+2+3 = 6
1+2+4+7+14 = 28

Google is not AskJeeves

Yes, there really is a book called Google for Dummies. This is because not everyone knows how to use Google, and not everyone understands that you don't actually ask it questions or feed it complete sentences or clauses. I know this because, thanks to the good people at Site Meter, I can find out what search terms are leading people to Mah Rabu. Here is a sampling, all from Google, and all (obviously) not in quotes:

• Can you have a funeral on Purim?
• What does Reuven mean?
• What is an unaffiliated Jew?
• why can't jewish people turn on and off their stove on sundays
• is God really talking when there's thunder?
• does duane reade sell their chametz
• what is the difference between zav and
• why do action and reaction pairs of forces never cancel each other?
• how to compromise on issue of gender identity
• is arne duncan jewish
• about rav shimon ben lakish also known as reish lakish
• why was Nisan 27 chosen as Yom Hashoah
• articles about keeping a kosher kitchen what it means and how to implement it

27

"Do it, Lisa! You'll be greater than or equal to boys."
"Even though you're only 8, your possibilities are infinite."
"27!"

Self-sufficient prayer

Tonight on Jewschool, the Rooftopper Rav has an eloquent and thorough defense of stage-direction-free prayer, which started as a response to a comment on the Hilchot Pluralism series. Go read it.

In related news, I've been reading Douglas Rushkoff's Nothing Sacred.

Nano-review so far: I like the big ideas, but the small factual errors are driving me batty.

But here's an insightful excerpt that dovetails with Rooftopper Rav's post, about what went wrong with Classical Reform:

Traditionally, the rabbis' main function was educational. They spoke to the congregation in the synagogue only twice a year, before Passover in order to remind Jews of specific rules and again before Yom Kippur to explain the meaning of repentance. Otherwise, their job was to teach Torah study in a classroom around a big table. Occasionally, their knowledge of Jewish law would enable them to resolve a local dispute. Religious services were led by the cantor, who stood at a table in the middle of the room, surrounded by congregants and other laypeople.

By changing the role of rabbi to that of a minister and putting him on what amounted to a stage in front of the room, reformers inadvertently led congregants to think about their own role in services very differently. Rabbis were now intermediaries between Jews and the God and laws with which they had always enjoyed personal relationships. Instead of focusing on the community of congregants with whom they were worshiping, Jews faced a stage and listened to the words of their rabbi, engaged in responsive reading, or followed along in rabbi-led rituals.

Congregants couldn't help but regress into a more childlike relationship to their rabbi and the religion he ministered. They transferred parental authority onto the rabbi and expected him to exemplify the piety to which they themselves could only strive. This served only to isolate rabbis from the spiritual communities on whom they could once depend for comfort and support.

Relieved of personal, adult responsibility for their religious practices, Jews tended to perform rituals and observances in a more perfunctory fashion. The religion became less participatory and more talismanic. Traditions like the mezuzah on the doorpost or a skullcap on one's head now served not as a point of mental focus, but as a hollow, rote performance or compulsive superstition. Religious education stressed how to behave, but very rarely delved into why.

"Talismanic" is the best description I've seen for the approach to physical ritual in some Reform (and other) Jewish communities. The Classical Reform leaders tried to be iconoclastic by eliminating tefillin and such, but the masses still had a need for ritual objects, so they ended up fetishizing things like the Torah trimmings (we spent lots of time in Sunday school learning about the crowns, the belt, etc.). So the result, after this attempt at iconoclasm, is the same reliance on physical objects, but the situation has worsened, because the ritual objects are now up on a stage in the front of the synagogue, rather than wrapped around one's arm and between one's eyes.

Of course, Orthodox communities are no better. Some new minhagim surrounding kiddush seem to border on transubstantiation. I've seen people make kiddush on a cup of wine, then pour that cup back into the bottle, mix it up, then pour for everyone from that bottle, to make sure everyone gets some of the wine that had been "blessed". And there are other variants that also ensure that the transubstantiated wine makes its way to everyone. This is unnecessary! Jews don't bless the wine; we bless the creator of the wine. The blessing does not change the status of the wine; it changes the status of the person who makes the blessing (or the people who respond "amen" to it), so that s/he becomes permitted to consume the wine. Therefore, there's no non-superstitious reason against someone making kiddush on his/her own cup and everyone else responding "amen" and drinking from their own cups.

It is not in heaven, to say "Who will go up for us to heaven and get it for us and tell it to us so that we may do it?" And it is not across the sea, to say "Who will cross the sea for us and get it for us and tell it to us so that we may do it?" The thing is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, to do it.

26

Next time, won't you sing with me?

25

With your past and your future precisely divided
Am I at that moment? I haven't decided

24

What do you do between the hours of the day?

22

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle. 'That's some catch, that Catch-22,' he observed. 'It's the best there is,' Doc Daneeka agreed.

21

You must have been born on or before today's date in 5745.

Leviticus 18:22 according to Rabbi Ishmael

This Shabbat we read the portions of Acharei Mot and Kedoshim, containing the famous verse Leviticus 18:22:

וְאֶת זָכָר לֹא תִשְׁכַּב מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה תּוֹעֵבָה הִוא

"A male do not lie the lyings of a woman; it is an abomination."

If this English translation is less than lucid, then it faithfully transmits the clarity of the Hebrew original. Whether one agrees with Ben Azzai that the central principle of the Torah is Genesis 5:1 ("When God created humankind, God made it in God's image") or agrees with Rabbi Akiva that it is Leviticus 19:18 ("Love your neighbor as yourself"), one way or the other it is incumbent upon us to read Leviticus 18:22 in a way that is consistent with these Torah principles. Many such readings of this verse have already been proposed, often taking into account the historical context of the Torah text and/or our contemporary understanding of human nature. In this post, I will supplement these with a new reading that I believe to be consistent with the methodology of midrash halachah, the process by which the rabbis established a correspondence between the mitzvot as written in the Torah and the mitzvot as observed.

Rabbi Ishmael, the second-century tanna, listed 13 hermeneutical principles by which the Torah can be interpreted. Of course, little original work has been done in this area for the last 1800 years, but I'm going to try. I won't be so arrogant as to propose a new gezeirah shavah (R. Ishmael's 2nd principle: connecting the contents of two apparently unrelated verses because they share a common word), since classically a gezeirah shavah must come from a received tradition. However, the other 12 principles are fair game.

R. Ishmael's 6th principle is kelal ufrat uchlal i atah dan ela che'ein ha-perat ("general, specific, general - you can only infer [items that are] similar to the specific [items]"). As The Practical Talmud Dictionary explains:

When a general term is followed by a specific term (or terms) that is in turn followed by a second general term, the halakha neither includes the whole general class (since a specific term has been stated) nor is it restricted to the specific item(s) (since general terms have been stated), but it applies to all items that are similar to the specific term(s) stated in the Biblical text.

Let's apply this principle to the overall structure of Leviticus 18. The chapter contains a series of commandments regarding forbidden sexual relationships. All of the commandments are given in the second-person masculine singular, but all agree that these prohibitions apply to both men and women. For example, 18:9 forbids the male addressee from having sexual relations with his sister, but if such an action were carried out, both the brother and the sister would be culpable. (Leviticus 20:17 prescribes the punishment of kareit for both of them.)

Kelal (general): Leviticus 18:6 says אִישׁ אִישׁ אֶל-כָּל-שְׁאֵר בְּשָׂרוֹ לֹא תִקְרְבוּ לְגַלּוֹת עֶרְוָה -- "None of you shall come near anyone of his own flesh to uncover nakedness."

Perat (specific): Verses 18:7-20 list a series of specific sexual prohibitions, all referring to relations between a man and a woman. A man may not have sex with any of his close female relatives by blood or by marriage, or with another man's wife.

Kelal (general): Leviticus 18:22 says וְאֶת זָכָר לֹא תִשְׁכַּב מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה תּוֹעֵבָה הִוא -- "A male do not lie the lyings of a woman."

According to the principle of kelal ufrat uchlal, the general terms ("kol she'eir besaro / anyone of his own flesh" and "mishkevei ishah / the lyings of a woman") only apply to items that are similar to the specific items on the list, viz. incestuous and adulterous relationships. However, the general terms extend the reach of the specific list so that it includes some additional prohibited relationships in the same general category. Leviticus 18:22 says that the male addressee should not lie these mishkevei ishah with a male. Therefore, just as a man is forbidden from having sex with his mother, his sister, or a married woman, he is also forbidden from having sex with his father, his brother, or a married man. Likewise, since all of these commandments apply to women as well, we can derive an equivalent category of forbidden relationships between two women.

The other verse to address is Leviticus 20:13:

וְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב אֶת-זָכָר מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה תּוֹעֵבָה עָשׂוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם מוֹת יוּמָתוּ דְּמֵיהֶם בָּם
A man who lies a man the lyings of a woman, they have committed an abomination. Both of them shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Rabbi Ishmael's 3rd principle is binyan av (constructing a prototype). In particular, we'll use binyan av mikatuv echad, constructing a prototype from one verse. A classic example is Deuteronomy 22:11, which forbids clothing of sha'atnez, a combination of wool and linen. This verse constructs the prototype that sha'atnez refers specifically to wool and linen, so that Leviticus 19:19 (which also refers to sha'atnez, with no further details) is also understood to refer only to wool and linen, rather than any arbitrary mixture of fabrics.

Likewise, Leviticus 18:22 (by way of the kelal ufrat uchlal that we have explained above) constructs the prototype that mishkevei ishah refers specifically to the incestuous and adulterous relationships of the sort listed in Leviticus 18, so that Leviticus 20:13 can also be understood to refer only to these categories of same-sex relationships.

***

Leviticus 19:2, at the center of the Holiness Code, commands "Kedoshim tihyu / You shall be holy", and a long list of positive and negative commandments, including the arayot (prohibited relationships) in Leviticus 18 and 20, explains precisely how to do this. The first part of the marriage ceremony, in which two individuals become consecrated to each other, is called kiddushin, sanctification. The blessing over kiddushin begins "...asher kideshanu bemitzvotav vetzivanu al ha'arayot" -- "...who has made us holy with commandments, and commanded us about forbidden relationships." Why are the arayot invoked in the blessing for marriage? Because just as the Torah's prohibition of certain foods sanctifies the act of eating, the Torah's prohibition of certain relationships emphasizes that the relationship between the two people getting married is not only permitted, but sanctified.

The juxtaposition of the arayot with Kedoshim tihyu and with kiddushin has long been understood to show that some heterosexual relationships are forbidden while others are sacred. Likewise, by reading Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 to refer to similar classes of same-sex relationships that are forbidden, we see that this sanctity applies to two people of the same sex who consecrate themselves to each other.

Independent minyan gossip column #1

• Mah Rabu's attempt to enumerate the independent minyanim of New York City fell short by at least two. The list should be expanded to include two minyanim that (unlike everything on the list so far) are neither in Manhattan nor in parts of Brooklyn that might as well be Manhattan. The Tehillah Minyan is a new monthly Friday night "partnership minyan" in Forest Hills, Queens. Brooklyn Experimental Tefilah has been listed in the NHC's havurah directory for a long time, but I hadn't heard hide or hair about it in almost 4 years in New York, so I figured it was defunct. Not so! This "Renewal havurah" is still meeting for Shabbat morning services in homes in Brooklyn neighborhoods such as Kensington, which I hadn't heard of before. Any more minyanim to add?
  
• Which minyan has become the unofficial NYC Jewish blogger hangout? Kol Zimrah! This past Friday's service and potluck included a large chunk of the Jewschool team (yours truly, shamirpower, Ruby K, EV, and Rooftopper Rav), as well as a small contingent from Jewlicious (Esther), plus Ariel from Blogs of Zion, General Anna from Live the Questions, Drew from The Last Trumpet, Ahavatcafe, and probably more that I'm leaving out.
• Also, Kol Zimrah has been Shteeblehopped!
  
• Registration has been open for the Kehilat Hadar Shavuot Retreat for over a week, and it still isn't sold out! Does this mean that Hadar has jumped the shark? Or that people aren't interested in receiving Torah anymore?
  
• Hardly. Hadar celebrated its 5th anniversary this past Shabbat. They did a show of hands to see how many people were present at that first service in an apartment 5 years ago on the same auspicious parsha of Tazria-Metzora. I certainly wasn't. (Kol Zimrah and Darkhei Noam might be the only minyanim whose first meetings I have attended.) I saw two hands (though maybe there were more). One belonged to a Hadar founder who no longer lives in NYC and was back to visit, and the other belonged to someone who is moving away this summer. The haters will allege that this high rate of turnover indicates that the new independent minyanim aren't building sustainable communities. To that I say, humbug. The turnover is almost entirely geographic. [Anecdotal evidence: All of Hadar's founders, and most people I can think of who used to go to Hadar and don't anymore, no longer live in NYC. Most people I know who were in the room and didn't raise their hand didn't live in NYC five years ago.] People have been moving into NYC, staying less than 5 years, and moving away for a long time, long before independent minyanim existed, and will continue to do so regardless of the independent minyanim's fate. But these independent minyanim are finally creating meaningful Jewish communities that meet the needs of these thousands of transients, and should be commended for this. If anything, Hadar's continued successful operation in the face of almost 100% turnover is a sign of its strength, just as the fact that I probably contain none of the same carbon atoms that I contained 5 years ago is a sign that I am alive. I wish Hadar another 5 great years, regardless of whether I'm living anywhere near NYC for the 10th anniversary.
  
• Finally, Mah Rabu is sitting on a big big story from outside the five boroughs (outside the fifty states, in fact) that is still embargoed. We'll be right here with the story as soon as we obtain permission.

Send your tips and leaks to mahrabu at gmail, and we'll be back with more!

20

Happy 58th birthday Israel!

Last year's posts:

• Israel at 57: the geeky side
• Israel at 57: the political side
• Israel at 57: the religious side
• Israel at 57: the personal side
• Israel at 57: the culinary side
• Israel at 57: the political side vs the religious side

Since then:

• Disengagement
• Realignment
• Incapacitation
• Election

19

Tonight the State of Israel mourns all of its fallen soldiers, many of whom were only 19 at the time of their tragic deaths. Yehi zichram baruch.

18

We could have us a chai time, living the good life.

17

That's 119 to you and me.

15

Chodesh tov!

Tonight is Rosh Chodesh Iyar, as is this Shabbat. The molad is tonight, at 6 days 9 hours 1027 chalakim (Friday 3:57:03 AM Jerusalem local time, or Thursday around 10 PM EDT). The astronomical new moon was today (Thursday) at 3:44 PM EDT.

14

The word fortnight derives from the Old English feowertiene niht, meaning "fourteen nights".

Everett Fellowship application deadline May 1

Register TODAY for the NHC Summer Institute!

I've blogged about it here and here and lots of other places, and it's the triumphant conclusion to this article. And I'm co-chairing this year's Institute.

In a nutshell:
Jews have been creating independent grassroots communities ever since Abram and Sarai left Haran. But there has been particularly rapid proliferation of these communities over the last few decades, with a spike over the last 5 years that shows no signs of slowing down. For almost 30 years, the National Havurah Committee has run an annual week-long Summer Institute, a week of Jewish living and learning where grassroots communities from across the continent can gather and learn from each other, where individuals can become empowered to start their own grassroots communities, and where individuals can experience a model of what a truly participatory and egalitarian Judaism can be.

See more about "What is the NHC?", and read the full list of amazing courses.

If you're in your 20s (post-college-age) to mid-30s, you can apply for the Everett Fellows Program and go for under $18 a day!!! But the application deadline for the Everett Fellowship is MAY 1, so get cracking on that application right now.

Of course you can still register for the Institute after that (while space is still available), but the price will go up. However, don't let the price keep you away; there are scholarship and work-study opportunities available, and there is a generous subsidy this year to make it possible for families with children to attend.

Everyone's coming to New Hampshire this August! Don't let yourself be outside the "everyone"!

13

Today I am an omer.

12

A year ago, I posted "Why I don't observe Yom Hashoah", one of the first real posts on Mah Rabu. I guess this means that Mah Rabu is one year old on the Hebrew calendar. Happy blogversary!

For more Yom Hashoah thoughts, see these posts by Yossi Abramowitz.

In the meantime, let's prevent the next genocide.

11

This omer goes to 11.

Endorsements

I got my ballot in the mail to vote for the Harvard University Board of Overseers (or, as it says on my diploma, "the Honorable and Reverend the Board of Overseers", with the classy double definite article). Usually I throw these out, but this year I was seized with the spirit of democracy and decided to send it back. Since some Mah Rabu readers are also eligible to vote, I'm putting together a list of endorsements, based entirely on the candidate bios provided with the ballot.

There are eight candidates, of which one can vote for up to five.

Sandra Moore Faber - Definite YES. She's an astrophysicist who studies dark matter and the formation of galaxies. We like all these areas of study. We also like the Hubble Space Telescope. Also, physics needs more women (and women need more physics).

Ricardo Hinojosa - Definite NO. "After graduating from Harvard Law School, he returned to his native South Texas where he has served nearly 23 years as a federal judge." By my calculations, 2006 - 23 = 1983, which makes him a Reagan appointee. No thanks!

Leila T. Fawaz - Historian of the Middle East. Wants "to foster cross-cultural dialogue and to promote tolerance among people of different backgrounds." Sure, I support that. YES.

Henry W. McGee III - President of HBO Video. I don't get HBO, but I know that their videos and DVDs bring happiness to other people. He has also "worked to redevelop seven historic theaters and a studio providing low-cost rehearsal space in Times Square." YES.

Robert N. Shapiro - This is not the famous Robert L. Shapiro who defended O.J. Simpson, but he's also a lawyer, working at Ropes & Gray in Boston. His bio on the firm website says that he clerked for Judge Jon O. Newman, who was appointed by both Nixon (to the District Court) and Carter (to the Second Circuit), so there's not enough information to guess Newman's politics, let alone someone who clerked for him almost 30 years ago. So that's a wash. However, there's nothing else in his bio that jumps out, and I can only vote for five, so I'll have to go with NO.

Arne S. Duncan - CEO of the Chicago Public Schools. We like Chicago, and we like public schools. YES.

Ann S. Moore - CEO of Time, Inc. Time sucks! Like other newsmagazines, they're complicit in dumbing down the news and parroting Bush-administration frames and talking points. The top story on their website right now is "Can Josh Bolten Rescue the Bush Presidency?". How about rescuing the United States? Also, they interviewed me extensively and then I didn't even get in the story. NO.

Emily Rauh Pulitzer - Widow of Joseph Pulitzer Jr., and chair of the Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts, as well as a former curator of Harvard's Fogg Art Museum and the St. Louis Art Museum. Responsible for lots and lots of money going to the arts. Who can argue with that. YES.

In conclusion, Mah Rabu's endorsements are Fawaz, McGee, Faber, Duncan, and Pulitzer. Comment if you see any reason to change this before I send it in.

10

There are 10 types of people: those who count the omer in binary, and those who don't.

Hilchot Pluralism, Part IV: Microscopic prayer issues

Prerequisites:

• Taxonomy of Jewish pluralism
• Hilchot Pluralism, Part I
• Hilchot Pluralism, Part II
• Hilchot Pluralism, Part III

Please read the series in order, so that the terminology will make sense. Thanks!

This ongoing series documents and analyzes the pluralistic practices that independent Jewish communities are developing. Part III addressed some macroscopic issues related to prayer (egalitarianism, musical instruments, separate vs. mixed seating), the types of issues that come up more often in the one-sentence (or even one-word) descriptions of minyanim, and that people use more often for advance screening of which minyan they attend. Part IV will zoom in on microscopic issues, focusing on the minute-by-minute experience of prayer.

***

Again, we'll start with the low-hanging fruit.

First up: the question of what people (whether civilian participants or prayer leaders) are wearing during prayer. Kipah? Black hat? Snood? Sombrero? Nothing on their heads? Tallit? Tefillin? And does the person's gender affect the answers to these questions?

The answer: WHO THE **** CARES? Worry about yourself, and let other people wear what they want, as long as they're not naked.

Peshita, mahu d'teima? (Aramaic for "Well duh, that's obvious, why did you have to bring it up in the first place?")

I think it's a generation gap. Previous generations saw more of a need for uniformity and making sure that everyone is doing the same thing, while our generation has more of a sense of e pluribus unum, recognizing that our differences make the community what it is, and are not a threat.

Thus, in the older generations, there were Classical Reform synagogues that insisted that people not cover their heads, and on the flip side, there are other synagogues (including some that claim to be egalitarian) that ask men to wear kipot, and even have a kipah patrol to enforce this. I hear that at Camps Ramah, there are separate minyanim that define their differences primarily based on whether girls (over age 13) are wearing tallit and tefillin. In our generation, these are much more likely to be non-issues; we don't understand why there should be any problem at all with praying with people who are wearing different things.

Ka mashma lan. (Aramaic for "That's why you might have thought otherwise. But no.")

One might think that the standards should be more stringent for the sheli(a)ch(at) tzibbur (prayer leader, or literally "representative of the community"), because s/he is a, well, representative of the community. To that I respond, what is the community? And I refer back to the axioms in Part II that define a Stage-3 pluralistic community. If the community in question is a Stage-3 community that includes both Reuven and Shimon, then both Reuven's and Shimon's practices are representative of (a slice of) the community, and therefore either Reuven and Shimon, when serving as sheliach tzibbur, can follow his own practices and still be faithfully representing the community. If Reuven wears a bowtie and Shimon doesn't, then when Reuven is sha"tz, his bowtie-wearing doesn't interfere with Shimon's prayer, except insofar as Shimon feels that he can't be in a community with bowtie-wearers. But if Shimon really does feel that way, then (by the definitions in Part II) Reuven and Shimon can't be in a community together that is Stage-3 pluralistic on this issue. Divisions happen (though in my opinion, this is a rather stupid thing to divide on, and it would be better for Shimon to rethink the issue).

Perhaps some exceptions should be made, where it is reasonable for a community to establish boundaries for what the sheliach tzibbur is wearing. Mishnah Megillah chapter 4 (also known as chapter 3 in the Gemara - don't ask) establishes some 2nd-century guidelines for this: if someone insists on wearing all white (refusing to lead prayers in colored clothes), or insists on being barefoot, then they shouldn't be allowed to be sha"tz. The reason for this is explicit -- it's to screen out members of some heretical sect. (Essenes? Jewish-Christians? Historians, help!) What are the 21st-century equivalents? Wearing a cross? A Yechi kipah? Perhaps. So I can see putting restraint on this type of speech. In that case, the Stage-3 boundaries of the community don't extend to include people with Christian or Meshichist beliefs, but that's a common place to draw a line anyway.

Even in this case, the restraint should only apply to the sha"tz and not to civilians. See axiom #3 in Part II. If you disagree with what someone is doing, tell them why and have a conversation about it; don't legislate it.

***

Next slam-dunk issue: Choreography of prayer. Some people have minhagim about when to stand and sit during the service. Others don't, and just follow what the people around them are doing. Among those who have personal minhagim, there are differences among these (Artscroll's attempts at homogenization notwithstanding).

The solution seems obvious: Don't tell people what to do! Abolish "Please rise" and "You may be seated", as well as the visual versions of these directions. "But then how will people know when to sit and stand?" You just have to have enough trust that people (if not everyone, then at least a critical mass) are sufficiently educated and intrinsically motivated that they'll make appropriate choices without instructions. This, in turn, requires that people actually be sufficiently educated and intrinsically motivated to make those choices. This is what I meant when I wrote (way back in "Taxonomy of Jewish pluralism"):

In order to make this kind of pluralism [Stage 3] possible, it is necessary for the various Jewish identities to be robust and confident. The insecurity and ignorance in some parts of the Jewish world would make those parts be swallowed alive under this model, which is one reason that this stage is not so widespread yet.

There is an irony in the fact that this particular type of pluralism (regarding prayer choreography) is more common in Orthodox congregations (which are supposed to be, um, orthodox) than in Reform congregations (which are supposed to be pluralistic). If you go into an Orthodox synagogue and stand when other people are sitting, or vice versa, then no one will look askance at you; they'll be too absorbed in their own prayers. I double-dog-dare you to attempt the same thing in a Reform synagogue. The source of the difference is that Orthodox communities can assume that people are intrinsically motivated, whereas Reform communities assume that people are only going to do what they're told to do. Liberal Jews need to find intrinsic motivations, so that this assumption will cease to be accurate. It's a chicken-and-egg problem: the leaders assume that the participants are dependent on directions (so that they provide directions), and the participants assume that the leaders will provide directions (so that they remain dependent). In case you haven't guessed, standing and sitting during prayer is only a microcosm of a larger issue. I challenge the Reform movement to come up with a vision of what Reform prayer services would look like, and what Reform communities would look like, if all participants were self-sufficient.

***

Liturgy (the words).

First of all, each individual can say whatever words s/he wants in his/her personal prayers. This is not a normative statement of how I think things should be; it's a statement of fact, since this is masur lalev (entrusted to the heart) and any rules would be impossible to enforce (whether by policies or by social norms). In a future blog post (outside of the Hilchot Pluralism series), I'll post about my own choices in what I say and don't say, in order to open up a conversation about the content, pursuant to axiom #3 of Part II.

So the pluralism question here is about what the sha"tz (leader) does. I'll discuss Kol Zimrah's practice as one example of a pluralistic approach to liturgy, but there are other approaches out there too.

Kol Zimrah's policy is that the service adheres macroscopically to the traditional structure of the liturgy, but the leader may make microscopic changes to the traditional text (at the word or phrase level).

What does this mean?

Macroscopic structure:

KZ has no "official" siddur. Any participant is free to bring whichever siddur s/he wants, or no siddur at all. Our community includes people who say every word of the liturgy, people who sing along with the parts that are being sung together but reflect silently during the non-sung parts, and people who don't say any of the words but hum along with the music. Maintaining the full macroscopic structure of the liturgy provides maximal freedom for all these people to participate, as long as everyone understands that they can individually opt out of any prayer. If Plonit (a participant) is opposed to saying Psalm 96, then while the community is singing Psalm 96, she can substitute another prayer in its place, or meditate silently. If Plonit is leading the service, then she doesn't have to sing Psalm 96 out loud, but she should still leave time between Psalms 95 and 97, so that those who want to say Psalm 96 can still do so. If the leader had the option of skipping straight from Psalm 95 to 97, then (a) someone who wanted to say Psalm 96 would be asymmetrically inconvenienced (compared to Plonit's inconvenience of waiting while others are saying Psalm 96), and (b) the macroscopic variations from one time to the next would make the participants much more dependent on paying attention to what the leader is doing, and would make it more difficult for them to find their own groove. KZ's rule of thumb is that a person familiar with the liturgy should be able to follow the service without directions, and the requirement to follow the macroscopic structure without deletions is for the purposes of inclusivity and clarity, not to make a unified communal statement that all of these prayers are required.

Microscopic changes:

Plonit may not skip Psalm 96, but she may say "mechayei hakol" or "mechayei hameitim" or "mechayei kol chai" as she chooses, or may include or exclude "v'al kol yoshevei teiveil" as she chooses. This may be more contentious than the other issues discussed above, but the principles underlying this practice have already been laid out in this post.

As discussed above, it is assumed that each participant is intrinsically motivated in his/her prayer. Therefore, if Plonit (leader) says one version of a prayer, this does not preclude Reuven (participant) from saying another version at the same time. With one exception, the leader never has exclusive responsibility for ensuring that participants fulfill their individual obligations.

[The exception is the shofar on Rosh Hashanah. Individual participants aren't blowing their own shofarot, so the only way they can fulfill the mitzvah of shofar is by hearing the communal blasts. Therefore, our current practice is about covering all the bases.]

Anyone who believes in an individual obligation for prayer can fulfill that obligation on his/her own, even when praying with a community. Rather, the leader's role is to ensure that the community fulfills its communal obligation (in whatever way we understand that obligation). If Reuven believes that Plonit's version of the prayer is invalid, then the result is (according to Reuven) that Reuven is yotzei (= "has fulfilled his obligation") and Plonit is not yotzeit. (Meanwhile, according to Plonit, either Plonit is yotzeit or she doesn't have the concept of "yotzei(t)" in her system. And Plonit has no opinion on whether Reuven is yotzei, because he hasn't done anything in public, so she has no way of knowing.) However, according to axiom #2 of Part II, Reuven has no basis to object to this, because it's not his business whether or not Plonit is yotzeit.

Therefore, Reuven's only possible basis for objection is if he believes that the community is not yotzei. To address this, we'll ask again: What is the community? If the community includes both Reuven and Plonit in a Stage-3 way, then both Reuven's prayer and Plonit's prayer are valid expressions of prayer coming from the community (albeit not necessarily valid for each individual in the community). There just needs to be an explicit understanding that the prayer leader is praying on behalf of him/herself as a representative of the community, but does not necessarily represent every individual in the community. (This is no different from an individual giving a d'var torah that some people disagree with.) Afterwards, Reuven and Plonit can argue freely about why they disagree. If Reuven can't be in a community where Plonit's version of the prayer can be expressed, then he doesn't actually want to be in a Stage-3 community with Plonit (once again, not that there's anything wrong with that).

That said, perhaps a line can be drawn for prayers that are actually idolatrous. But I can't think of any practical examples of this that have come up (with the possible exception of Yechi, depending on one's view). In almost all cases, the variations that come up just represent different ways of praying to the One. We may disagree on whether it is permissible to include the phrase "Elohei Sarah" in the Amidah, or on (if it is permissible) whether it is desirable, but I don't think anyone disagrees that God was in fact the God of Sarah (whatever we mean by "God" and whatever we mean by "Sarah").

***

Coming in Part V: ???

What other problems and solutions should be documented? The line is open for requests.

8

Shmonah yemei shabta.
--The Beatles

7

One, two, three, four, five, six, LEAVEN!

Hilchot Pluralism, Part III: Macroscopic prayer issues

Prerequisites:

• Taxonomy of Jewish pluralism
• Hilchot Pluralism, Part I
• Hilchot Pluralism, Part II
  

This series documents and analyzes the pluralistic practices that independent Jewish communities are developing. After a long delay (from February break to April break), here is the long-awaited Part III, focusing on communal prayer.

To end the suspense now, I'm not going to solve any major unsolved problems in this post.

As far as I know, there is still no way to have a minyan that is both gender-egalitarian (meaning that people are not classified by gender) and compatible with a version of halacha that requires that prayer leaders be of a particular gender. (Maybe Jews in the Woods will figure it out someday; they haven't yet, but not for lack of trying.)

Contrary to popular belief, minyanim in the style of Shira Hadasha (where men are poreis al shema and oveir lifnei hateivah (i.e. men lead shacharit/musaf/mincha/ma'ariv), and women lead peripheral services such as kabbalat shabbat and pesukei dezimrah, and people can read Torah and have aliyot without regard to gender) do not accomplish this. And generally they don't claim to. These minyanim are meeting a real need for a particular set of people (and, in some cases, providing a sufficiently high-quality prayer experience that people outside that set are willing to compromise their principles and pray there), but they're not providing a permanent solution that will make it possible for everyone to pray together in Stage-3 harmony. And again, they're not claiming to. The reason they don't provide this solution is because they're not actually egalitarian (nor, generally, do they claim to be). The set of public roles that one can have in the community is still prescribed by one's gender. I can't ever lead kabbalat shabbat, my female friend can't ever lead shacharit, and 10 Jewish adults (of whatever gender) can't count themselves as a minyan. Yes, a service led by men and women is better (from the perspective of greater inclusion) than a service led only by men. But it is no more egalitarian. Being "mostly egalitarian" is like being "a little pregnant". That's not to say that these minyanim don't have an important place among all the other types of minyanim. But they are not a Stage-3 solution that includes people who seek to be in a community that is fully egalitarian.

I'm also not going to solve the issue of instruments on Shabbat. A service either uses instruments on Shabbat or it doesn't; I can't think of any other options. Some people attend minyanim like Kol Zimrah, where the leader is playing instruments, even though they personally wouldn't use instruments. But I can see how that wouldn't work for everyone. I suggested a "live and let live" approach in Part II using the example of writing on Shabbat, but I can see how hearing instrumental music as an integral part of the communal prayer that you're participating in would be much more conspicuous and harder to ignore than being in the same room as someone who is writing.

In Stage 1 and Stage 2, some people insist that they "can't" pray or "aren't comfortable" praying in a service where instruments are used on Shabbat. Therefore, it appears that the pluralistic solution is no instruments on Shabbat. The people who want instruments on Shabbat are then backed into a corner, so we respond that we "need" to have instruments in order to pray, and make fools of ourselves in the process. Of course we don't "need" instruments, and shame on Stage-1 discourse for twisting us into making ridiculous statements like that. In limited circumstances, having a Shabbat service/event without instruments is a perfectly reasonable way to accommodate everyone. In Stage 3, the problem arises when looking at the long view. While it may be acceptable for everyone to go without instruments for any one particular instance, it becomes unacceptable (from a Stage-3 identity perspective) if people are forced to never pray with instrumental music. So the best achievable solution is what we already have: pray together (without instruments) some of the time, and pray separately (with and without instruments) some of the time. In my world, this is achieved by attending multiple independent minyanim that meet on different weeks.

That's as good as we can do, but maybe that's not so bad; maybe Stage 3 means having lots of options, and identifying with the big picture, not necessarily identifying with every option.

***

Now that I've listed the issues that I don't think can be pluralistically solved at the present time, let's start picking the low-hanging fruit.

The trichitza* should have appeared in the Year In Ideas. I'm not being sarcastic. It's an elegant idea that didn't exist, and then someone came up with it, and everyone said "Why didn't I think of that before?"

[Linguistic excursus on the word trichitza: Some have suggested that this word is problematically constructed, because the "tri" means 3, and the "chitza" means "half", so "trichitza" suggests three-halves or one-sixth, when a meaning of one-third is desired. This doesn't bother me, because chatzi can refer to any fraction less than a whole, not necessarily a half, so "trichitza" can still mean "dividing in three". Some have suggested meshlisha as an alternative. This also successfully carries the connotation of "three" while sounding like the source word mechitza. However, as I have discussed elsewhere, it runs into grammatical problems, because a Hebrew word cannot start with two shevas. This problem might be avoided with the word mashlisha, with a patach, which can be understood as a participle of the nonexistent hif'il verb l'hashlish, to divide into thirds. The word meshalesh(et) might also mean the same thing ("something that divides something into thirds"), using a verb form that already exists, but lacks the assonance to mechitza. Finally, some have suggested meshlitza as a hybrid. I don't really understand this one. In addition to the two-sheva problem, a shoresh (particularly one that is shelamim) can't really be split like that; a shoresh is an indivisible morpheme.]

I think the trichitza may have originated at Jews In The Woods, but don't know for sure; can anyone confirm the origin? (Disclaimer: I've never been to JITW, and never been to a minyan with a trichitza.)

The idea is simple: divide the prayer space into three sections, one non-gendered, one women-only, and one men-only. If people want to pray in a space where they are not classified by gender, they can do so, and if they want to pray in a single-gender space for whatever reason (because they believe that this is required by halacha, or because they would be distracted by the presence of the opposite sex, or because they believe in masculine/feminine "energy"), then they can do so. There's something for everyone, and no one is coerced.

The beauty is that it automatically shifts in response to consumer demand: if everyone wants mixed seating, then *poof*, the single-gender sections cease to exist (since no one is sitting there), and if everyone wants separate seating, then *poof*, the mixed section ceases to exist. And if Reuven feels lonely because he's the only person in his section, then, well, he's still getting the best outcome that he can reasonably hope for in the context of that community: the alternatives are either that Reuven prays in a way that he doesn't want to, or the rest of the community is coerced into praying in a way that they don't want to, both of which are suboptimal outcomes. If Reuven's loneliness outweighs his reasons for being in his section, then he can always switch to the other section. And if not, then he can either stay where he is and deal with it (knowing that he is in a community where his choice is respected albeit not shared), or find another community with more like-minded people. Life is about making choices, and taking responsibility for one's choices.

Now that the trichitza idea is out there, there's no going back. Any minyan that has constituents who prefer separate seating and constituents who prefer mixed seating, and that takes no official stance that one of the options is invalid, should have a trichitza. In particular, the minyanim [N.B. not the same as the Shira Hadasha-style minyanim discussed above] that combine egalitarian prayer leadership with separate seating (despite the preferences of many people in their communities for non-gendered seating) have no excuse. They may have started out with separate seating as a "compromise" (hello, Stage 2), but such compromise is unnecessary now that the trichitza option exists. It's possible for these minyanim to move to Stage 3 on this issue if they want to.

It distresses me that some supporters of these minyanim refer to them, tongue in cheek, as "separate but egal". This is no laughing matter. Comparing one's community to Jim Crow segregation should create some serious cognitive dissonance. If one believes that the two situations are analogous (full disclosure: I actually sort of do, and Brown v. Board of Education has taught us that "separate but equal" is inherently unequal) then one should strive to rectify this rather than accepting it cheerfully, and if one believes that they're not analogous, then the comparison to historical hatred and oppression isn't appropriate even as a joke.

***

Ok, this post has gone on long enough that it's time to publish, and there are lots of prayer-related issues that haven't been touched yet. This post hit some macroscopic prayer issues; Part IV (coming soon) will focus on microscopic prayer issues, such as liturgy. What topics do you want to see in Part V and beyond?

5

When I was Five, I was just alive.

4

Arba imahot,
sheloshah avot,
shnei luchot haberit,
echad Eloheinu Eloheinu Eloheinu Eloheinu Eloheinu shebashamayim uva'aretz

3

Shavua tov!

For the record

I just sent a letter to the New York Times newsroom:

A photo caption on page A3 of Thursday's Times says "Jews around the world last night opened the centuries-old holiday, which lasts eight days." In fact, all Jews in Israel (where the picture was taken) and Reform Jews around the world observe Passover for seven days.

Only a short, short letter

Mah Rabu's response time to its readers has been abominable. Sure, we can say that we have a day job plus two (unpaid) night jobs, but that's no excuse. It's been almost a month since we received this letter from Mah Rabu reader Jo. Now that it's vacation and we're in the old country with no distractions (including no email from all the people, Jews and Christians alike, who think today is yom tov), we have time to respond.

Here's the letter (dated March 20, 2006):

On last week's "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me!" NPR News quiz, Peter Sagal reported that when Senator Russ Feingold stood up to censure the president, "The Democratic senator from Wisconsin went down to the Senate floor to introduce a resolution censuring President Bush for what he called 'his illegal wiretapping' of American citizens. All of his Democrat colleagues ran away so fast that -- as per Einstein's theory of relativity -- they ceased to age. When the smoke cleared, the only thing behind Senator Feingold was a Ted Kennedy-shaped hole in the wall."

Can you explain the physics behind this joke? And why didn't more Democrats join in to censure the president? And are they continuing to age now that the censure is over?

The response:

In the classical mechanics of Galileo and Newton, space and time are understood to be absolutes. This means that observers in different inertial reference frames might disagree on the velocity of an object that they're both observing. If I'm on a train platform and you're on a train, I might observe the train to be moving at 20 meters per second (and I observe you to be moving at 20 meters per second along with it), while you observe the train not to be moving at all. Likewise, I might observe a beam of light to be traveling at 300,000,000 meters per second, but if you're moving toward it at 100,000,000 m/s, then you'll observe the light to be traveling toward you at 400,000,000 m/s.

Einstein's special theory of relativity postulates that the speed of light has the same value for all observers. In order for this to be logically consistent (given the paragraph above), something has to give. Turns out it's space and time. Objects traveling at speeds near the speed of light undergo time dilation and length contraction, meaning that we would observe them to be shorter in the direction of their motion, and aging at a slower rate. (They would make the same observation about us, but they underwent acceleration to get to where they are, and we didn't, so the two situations are not symmetric.) (This happens for objects traveling at any speed, but the effect is sufficiently negligible at low speeds. Something would have to go at 14% of the speed of light, or 42 million m/s, in order for you to notice a 1% difference in its length or its rate of aging.)

Therefore, NPR's news reporting is mostly correct. These senators would in fact age more slowly as a result of their high velocity, and they'd be thinner as well. Length contraction only occurs along the axis of motion, so they would only get thinner from front to back, not from left to right. Therefore, the hole in the wall of the Capitol should indeed be Ted Kennedy-shaped and -sized, and is unaffected by length contraction.

However, in order for them to cease entirely to age, they would have to be traveling at the speed of light. This is impossible, because unlike photons of light, senators have mass, and it would therefore take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate them to the speed of light. The Bush administration may have thought they would obtain an infinite amount of energy by invading Iraq, but their incompetent handling of the war has placed this beyond our grasp.

Perhaps "ceased to age" is an exaggeration. In order to make 3 years (the duration of the Iraq war so far) seem like 6 weeks (the time from the initial invasion until "Mission Accomplished"), one need only be traveling at 99.926% of the speed of light, which is possible with a finite amount of energy, costing only the amount that the federal government has lost by cutting taxes on incomes above the 99.926th percentile.

Yes, the senators should begin aging normally as soon as they come to a stop, but they are traveling so fast that they will be far beyond the Beltway by the time they can finish decelerating. Everyone outside should exercise caution, since the Democratic senators will need very large turn radii at these relativistic speeds. A collision could be fatal, allowing the governor (in many cases, including Ted Kennedy's state, a Republican) to appoint a replacement senator until the midterm election.

Other paradoxes may arise in explaining this anomalous behavior (e.g. "why didn't more Democrats join in to censure the president?"). When paradoxes come up in special relativity, the resolution is often that the object in question ceases to act as a rigid body. And there are few bodies less rigid than the spines of the Democratic senators who fear the political consequences of censuring a president with a 33% approval rating. Sen. Feingold, on the other hand, has a strong spine, thanks in part to all the calcium he has ingested in his home state of Wisconsin, America's dairyland.

Readers, keep the letters coming, and keep planting those carob trees! Your letter will be answered eventually.

The one-day-yom-tov person's guide to the second seder

I do one day of yom tov, and so does my family, but we still had a seder on the second night, because why not. There's no reason not to have a festive meal during chol hamo'ed Pesach, and eat matzah and maror and sing songs and tell the story of the Exodus. (Likewise, I've been to a number of great meals on the second night of Sukkot, when I considered it chol hamo'ed.) In addition to the required seder on the first night, a seder can happen on any night of Pesach. The Hillel haggadah, On Wings of Freedom, recognizes the reality that sedarim often happen during chol hamo'ed, and includes the omer counting text for all the nights of Pesach, as well as a note before kiddush saying "On the first or second night, say:".

The whole extended family has the big seder on the first night, but my parents want to host a seder too, so they've been having one on the second night for the last few years. And I think second seders can be useful for solving all kinds of dilemmas - e.g., having the seder with one side of the family each night, or having a different style of seder each night. That said, I would also be fine with one seder, since the second night has no special status.

While there are reasons that having two seders is beneficial, the second seder should perhaps ideally take place on the 7th night, when (a) it is yom tov, and (b) it is more feasible to be in an entirely different city than one is in on the first night. I have long lamented that I'll never get to have a seder with my non-Chicago friends, because we're all in our respective ancestral homes for the beginning of Pesach. But, in theory, (once I start actually kashering for Pesach rather than taking the easy way out) we could have sedarim with our families on the 1st night, and a seder in the city where we live on the 7th night. I'm not sure how well this would work in practice, because I'm not sure anyone (including me) has the energy for a seder after 6 days of this. But it's a thought.

What changes should a one-day-yom-tov person be aware of when attending a seder on the second night?

• For the first cup, I just say "borei p'ri hagafen" and don't say the rest of kiddush, since it's not the beginning of a yom tov.
• I (silently and inconspicuously) say havdalah for the end of yom tov (hamavdil bein kodesh l'chol) with whichever cup is appropriately timed. This year, the first and second cup happened while it was still light out, so this should have happened with the third or fourth cup. Except that it slipped my mind, so I did it after the seder.
• I'm ok with saying the blessing ga'al Yisrael with the second cup. We always need redemption.
• I don't say al achilat matzah or al achilat maror, since it's only a commandment on the first night.
• I don't say yom shekulo tov in birkat hamazon. (However, ya'aleh v'yavo is still said during chol hamo'ed.)
• There's no requirement about eating nothing else after the afikoman (other than the third and fourth cups), since it's not a "real" seder. So I noshed on the leftovers while we were cleaning up.
• Otherwise, everything else, from "Arise My Love" to "Chad Gadya", is pretty much the same.

This year, for the first time, we used A Different Night on both nights, finally putting the old CCAR haggadah to rest. I endorse A Different Night, but note that it is Unix to other haggadot's Windows. The old haggadah was linear, so it was easy to pick up and go straight through, and do the same seder every year. The new haggadah can do much more, and there are opportunities to have varied seders each year with the same haggadah, but the leader should be cautioned that advance preparation is necessary in order to use it effectively. Not that there's anything wrong with that; I know which one I prefer.

1

It begins!

7 weeks until revelation!